logo
Map Shows Where China Is Imposing Fishing Ban on Neighbors

Map Shows Where China Is Imposing Fishing Ban on Neighbors

Newsweek06-05-2025

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
China has begun its annual moratorium on fishing in bordering seas in a move likely to inflame territorial tensions with multiple countries.
Beijing says the unilateral fishing ban, which lasts up to four and a half months in some waters, is meant to allow fisheries to recover and benefits the entire region. But some neighbors maintain it is a violation of their sovereignty in shared maritime zones where contested boundaries have yet to be delimited.
Why It Matters
China claims most of the South China Sea in defiance of a 2016 arbitral ruling that had dismissed its assertions as excessive and unlawful. Chinese maritime forces have recently advanced claims in the contested Spratly Islands, which are claimed by the Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally. Beijing also controls the Paracel Islands claimed by Vietnam, with which it has a separate dispute in the Gulf of Tonkin.
In the East China Sea, China contests the uninhabited Senkaku Islands with Japan and claims waters in the Yellow Sea against South Korea. And in the Taiwan Strait, Taipei-controlled islets off the mainland Chinese coast have also seen confrontations.
Newsweek's map shows the extent of the sweeping ban in the surrounding seas, which are home to fertile fishing grounds, including those that fall within the legally claimed exclusive economic zones (EEZ) of neighboring countries.
Newsweek reached out to the Chinese and Japanese foreign ministries and South Korean embassy in the U.S. with emailed requests for comment.
What To Know
All fishing activities, except tackle fishing, must be suspended during the moratorium, according to the Chinese regulations. Major commercial fishing operations such as trawling and netting must halt, and vessels must return to their home ports to allow marine populations to recover.
Although fishermen take a financial hit during this period, they can take advantage of government subsidies to learn new skills and pursue other forms of employment, according to state-run Sanya Daily newspaper.
China's neighbors are unlikely to comply with the ban, and even China's massive coast guard—which was empowered last year to detain "trespassing" vessels and crews for up to 60 days—would be hard-pressed to enforce the ban over such a vast area.
Last year, the Philippines condemned the China's moratorium, expressing strong opposition to "illegal actions" that violated Philippine sovereignty in its EEZ.
Vietnam, which typically conducts tactful diplomacy with China, rebuked Beijing for disregarding international maritime law and reaffirmed its sovereignty claims over the Paracel archipelago, which China seized from then-South Vietnam after a naval battle in 1974. Hanoi also issued a separate complaint in September after Chinese authorities boarded a Vietnamese fishing boat and allegedly assaulted the crew.
Fishing boats are seen in Tailu village, on the Chinese coast opposite Taiwan's Matsu islands, in China's southeast Fujian province on May 25, 2024.
Fishing boats are seen in Tailu village, on the Chinese coast opposite Taiwan's Matsu islands, in China's southeast Fujian province on May 25, 2024.
Greg Baker/AFP via Getty Images
What People Have Said
Pham Tu Hang, Vietnamese Foreign Ministry spokesperson at a previous press conference: "China's fishing ban not only violates Vietnam's sovereignty in the Paracel Islands but also violates Vietnam's sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the exclusive economic zone defined under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
"Vietnam requests China to respect Vietnam's sovereignty over the Paracel Islands, sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction over Vietnam's waters; to not complicate the situation, contributing to the maintenance of peace, stability and order in the South China Sea region."
Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs in a previous statement: "The Philippines called on China to cease and desist from the conduct of illegal actions that violates the Philippines' sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction in its maritime zones; comply with its obligations under international law, particularly the 1982 UNCLOS and the final and binding 2016 Arbitral Award; and, adhere to its commitments under the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea."
What's Next
China's Agriculture Ministry last updated its fishing moratorium regulations in 2023, placing a ban on fishing in the Bohai Sea and parts of the Yellow Sea from May 1 to September 1 each year.
Further south, the ban applies to parts of the Yellow Sea and the East China Sea from May 1 to September 16, while about half the South China Sea is covered by the moratorium from May 1 to August 16.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ukraine Destroys 13 Russian Tanks, 100 Armored Vehicles as Locomotive Hit
Ukraine Destroys 13 Russian Tanks, 100 Armored Vehicles as Locomotive Hit

Newsweek

time2 hours ago

  • Newsweek

Ukraine Destroys 13 Russian Tanks, 100 Armored Vehicles as Locomotive Hit

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Ukraine has struck a Russian train carrying military equipment, destroying 13 tanks and more than 100 armored vehicles The Southern Defense Forces of Ukraine posted about the Saturday attack, along with multiple others, on social media. Why It Matters Ukraine's attack marks a significant tactical gain as it continues to pressure Russian logistics and supply chains. The strike on a Russian freight train transporting military equipment—particularly locomotives hauling armored units—deals a substantial blow to Moscow's ability to reinforce its front-line positions quickly. An M113 armored vehicle camouflaged with anti-drone netting during a training exercise by the Ukrainian military at an undisclosed location in Ukraine on June 6, 2025. An M113 armored vehicle camouflaged with anti-drone netting during a training exercise by the Ukrainian military at an undisclosed location in Ukraine on June 6, 2025. FLORENT VERGNES/AFP via Getty Images What To Know Kyiv also had to "repel" multiple Russian assaults, the Southern Defense Forces of Ukraine said, with five taking place near Malynivka and toward Poltavka. Two Russian attacks near Piatykhatky and toward Pavlivka "on the position of our defenders" were described as "useless." In the 24 hours leading up to Saturday, Ukraine recorded more than 800 Russian attacks using different types of kamikaze drones and had itself carried out more than 350 drone strikes, dropping around 450 munitions. In the southern region, Russian forces carried out 12 airstrikes in the past 24 hours with a total of 47 guided bombs hitting settlements in the Zaporizhzhia region. Front-line towns and villages in the Mykolaiv, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk regions were hit by artillery and drone attacks. In total, 41 attacks were recorded in 22 different places. In the Kherson region, two people were killed and 10 others were injured due to the shelling, according to Kyiv. In the past 24 hours Russian losses have included the following: 114 personnel One railway locomotive 23 tanks Seven artillery systems 103 units of automobile and armored equipment 10 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) used for reconnaissance or tactical support 10 motorcycles One radio-electronic warfare item Nine UAV-related antenna systems Five communications antenna Five generators Four ammunition storage spaces Kyiv has also released a map showing what it says are Russia's plans to seize half of Ukraine by the end of next year. The Ukrainian Presidential Office deputy head, Colonel Pavlo Palisa, made the claims, and they were followed by President Donald Trump warning that he would use further sanctions against Moscow if the war dragged on. What People Are Saying The Ukrainian Presidential Office deputy head, Colonel Pavlo Palisa, said Thursday: Russia's "plan for next year is to occupy the whole part of Ukraine which is situated on the left bank of the Dnieper River," and "occupy the Odesa and Mykolaiv regions to cut Ukraine's access to the Black Sea." President Donald Trump said about U.S. sanctions: "If I think Russia will not be making a deal or stopping the bloodshed…I'll use it if it's necessary." He added: "I'm OK with it. I haven't decided to use it." What Happens Next All eyes will likely be on what Trump does with regard to the U.S.' reaction to continued Russian attacks in Ukraine.

LA Protests: Trump's National Guard Move Sparks Legal Concerns
LA Protests: Trump's National Guard Move Sparks Legal Concerns

Newsweek

time2 hours ago

  • Newsweek

LA Protests: Trump's National Guard Move Sparks Legal Concerns

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's announcement of the deployment of the National Guard in California to quell protests against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions has raised legal concerns. Why It Matters Federal immigration enforcement operations sparked protests across California for a second day in a row on Saturday. ICE carried out raids in Paramount, Los Angeles County, following similar actions at several locations throughout other parts of city on Friday. Governor Gavin Newsom criticized the move, saying that local law enforcement was already mobilized and the presence of the National Guard was "purposefully inflammatory," would "escalate tensions" and "erode public trust." What To Know On Saturday, the White House ordered the deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles under a provision called Title 10 to "temporarily protect ICE and other United States government personnel who are performing federal functions." The National Guard is a state-based military force that serves as both a state and federal reserve branch of the U.S. Army and Air Force. It typically operates under state command and is funded by the state. However, in some cases, troops may be assigned to federal missions while still under state control, with funding provided by the central government. The law referenced in Trump's proclamation allows National Guard troops to be placed under federal command, and permits this under three conditions: if the U.S. is invaded or faces the threat of invasion; if there is a rebellion or imminent rebellion against federal authority; or if the president is unable to enforce federal laws using regular forces. A protester stands on a burned car holding a Mexican flag at Atlantic Avenue on June 7, 2025, in Paramount, Los Angeles County, California. A protester stands on a burned car holding a Mexican flag at Atlantic Avenue on June 7, 2025, in Paramount, Los Angeles County, California. Apu Gomes/GETTY The memorandum from the White House reads: "To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States." However, the law also stipulates that such orders should be "be issued through the governors of the states." It is not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. Newsweek contacted the White House for clarification via email outside of regular working hours. "President Trump's deployment of federalized National Guard troops in response to protests is unnecessary, inflammatory, and an abuse of power," said Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's National Security Project. The Trump administration has not invoked the Insurrection Act, according to anonymous U.S. officials who spoke to Reuters this weekend. The act of 1807 serves as the primary legal authority allowing a president to deploy the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or civil unrest. A memo issued by the White House on the matter specifies that the National Guard has been deployed to "temporarily protect ICE and other United States government personnel who are performing federal functions, including the enforcement of federal law, and to protect federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations." This means that National Guard troops will not be permitted to aid local law enforcement—they will be used to protect and provide logistic support to federal ICE agents. "There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves," Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, wrote in a blog post. "There is the obvious concern that, even as they are doing nothing more than 'protecting' ICE officers discharging federal functions, these federalized troops will end up using force—in response to real or imagined violence or threats of violence against those officers. In other words, there's the very real possibility that having federal troops on the ground will only raise the risk of escalating violence—not decrease it." What People Are Saying A White House memo reads: "Numerous incidents of violence and disorder have recently occurred and threaten to continue in response to the enforcement of federal law by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other United States government personnel who are performing federal functions and supporting the faithful execution of federal immigration laws. In addition, violent protests threaten the security of and significant damage to federal immigration detention facilities and other federal property." Border czar Tom Homan on Fox News: "We're already mobilizing. We're gonna bring the National Guard in tonight and we're gonna continue doing our job. This is about enforcing the law." He continued: "American people, this is about enforcing the law, and again, we're not going to apologize for doing it." California Governor Gavin Newsom on X, formerly Twitter, following the National Guard announcement: "The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers. That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions. L.A. authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment's notice. We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need." Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU's National Security Project: "By taking this action, the Trump administration is putting Angelenos in danger, creating legal and ethical jeopardy for troops, and recklessly undermining our foundational democratic principle that the military should not police civilians." Newsom's office also told Newsweek on Friday: "Continued chaotic federal sweeps, across California, to meet an arbitrary arrest quota are as reckless as they are cruel. Donald Trump's chaos is eroding trust, tearing families apart, and undermining the workers and industries that power America's economy." Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, told the Los Angeles Times: "It is using the military domestically to stop dissent. It certainly sends a message as to how this administration is going to respond to protests. It is very frightening to see this done." What Happens Next After Trump announced he was deploying National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton, south of Los Angeles, were on "high alert" and could also be mobilized "if violence continues."

Trump might be the most accessible president ever — for spies or scammers
Trump might be the most accessible president ever — for spies or scammers

Axios

time2 hours ago

  • Axios

Trump might be the most accessible president ever — for spies or scammers

President Trump reportedly picks up when his cell rings even if he doesn't know who's calling. Senior members of his team also love chatting on their personal devices. That makes the administration uniquely vulnerable to basic scams like spoofed calls and impersonation attempts. Why it matters: If Trump is willing to answer unknown numbers, as The Atlantic reported this week, there's no guarantee a scammer, impersonator, or even a foreign intelligence operative couldn't have a chat with the president. There's no evidence that has actually happened. But recent reports involving Trump and other top officials have raised red flags about the security of their communications. Driving the news: Federal authorities are investigating a scheme where someone spoofed the phone number of White House chief of staff Susie Wiles to impersonate her in calls to senators, governors, and CEOs, per the Wall Street Journal. Meanwhile, Chinese hackers reportedly penetrated U.S. telecom networks as early as summer 2023, according to Bloomberg — a year earlier than previously known. That access has been used by China-backed group Salt Typhoon to spy on Trump, Vice President Vance, and other officials, the NYT reported. Then there are the series of Signal-related scandals involving former national security adviser Mike Waltz, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and others. Between the lines: Eavesdropping on world leaders isn't new — but it's a lot easier if the leader in question is using a personal phone and eschewing standard cybersecurity practices. Flashback: In 2017, Trump had two phones — one issued through the White House and only capable of making phone calls, and a less secure phone equipped just for social media. At the time, he was urged to swap out his Twitter phone at least once a month. Politico reported he'd instead go months without security checks. It's unclear how many of those security protocols were brought back in this time around. "I think people gave up on that years ago," one adviser told The Atlantic. In a written statement, White House communications director Steven Cheung said the administration would "not discuss or disclose security measures regarding the President." "President Trump is the most transparent and accessible President in American history," Cheung said. "World leaders, heads of state, elected officials, and business titans all reach out to him because they know America is back under President Trump's leadership. "Whereas, Joe Biden was hidden and sheltered by his handlers because he was a total embarrassment and bumbling idiot during his time in office," Cheung added. The big picture: Since returning to office, the Trump administration has: Ignored basic security norms, including heavy reliance on Signal and personal numbers. Gutted existing federal cybersecurity leadership, with one-third of CISA's staff already gone. Empowered security-weakening tech initiatives through Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has been pursuing projects like using a buggy AI tool to crawl sensitive government data. Threat level: AI tools can clone a voice using just a few seconds of audio, and the FBI warned last month that scammers are already using them to impersonate senior officials.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store