Chinese Aircraft Carrier Breaches Pacific Island Defense Line
A Chinese navy aircraft carrier has breached a second Pacific island defense line that is intended to keep the East Asian power's forces at a distance.
Newsweek has emailed the Pentagon and the Chinese Defense Ministry for comment.
The United States has established three island chains across the Pacific Ocean. The first, closest to China, is formed by three U.S. allies and partners—Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines. The second, centered on Guam—America's westernmost territory—stretches from Japan to New Guinea, just north of Australia. The last one links Alaska's Aleutian Islands with New Zealand via Hawaii.
While the U.S. maritime containment strategy aims to restrict China's naval access to the broader Pacific Ocean during wartime, the Chinese navy—the largest in the world by hull count—has repeatedly breached the First Island Chain as it expands its reach and presence, including a high-profile, long-range mission that circumnavigated Australia earlier this year.
The Chinese aircraft carrier CNS Liaoning has been underway since late May, when it was first spotted in the East China Sea, west of the First Island Chain. It then passed through the Miyako Strait in Japan's southwestern waters and entered the Philippine Sea. It was previously tracked on May 30 while sailing southward in waters east of the Philippines.
A Chinese naval task group—consisting of the Liaoning and three other vessels—was tracked operating about 186 miles southwest of Minamitorishima (with shima meaning "island" in Japanese) on Saturday, the Japanese Defense Ministry said in a press release.
Minamitorishima is Japan's easternmost territory, located over 1,200 miles southeast of the country's capital, Tokyo. It has valuable mineral resources, including rare earth elements, according to the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, which administers the remote island.
Japanese media reported that, for the first time ever, Japan's Defense Ministry had confirmed and announced the presence of a Chinese aircraft carrier in waters near Minamitorishima and on the eastern side of the Second Island Chain. The Liaoning has been operational since 2012.
A map provided by the Defense Ministry shows that the Chinese naval task group was sailing outside Tokyo's territorial waters—which extend up to 13.8 miles from the coastline—but within its 230-mile-wide exclusive economic zone around the island.
According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, all countries enjoy freedom of navigation within an exclusive economic zone, while the coastal state—Japan in this case—holds sovereign rights to explore and exploit natural resources in the area.
The Liaoning was tracked moving southwest on Sunday, away from Minamitorishima, while its fighter jets and helicopters conducted takeoffs and landings, the Japanese Defense Ministry said, adding that the naval task group has expanded to a total of eight vessels.
The Liaoning task group was last detected 600 miles northeast of Guam, a Newsweek map shows.
According to hull numbers provided by Japan's military, the Liaoning was sailing alongside two Type 055 destroyers, two Type 052D destroyers, one Type 054A frigate, one Type 901 fast combat support ship, and one Type 903A replenishment ship.
The Joint Staff of the Japanese Defense Ministry said on Monday, according to the Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun: "China appears to be trying to improve the operational capabilities of its aircraft carriers and its ability to conduct operations in distant seas and airspace."
Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Chinese Defense Ministry, said on May 29: "[T]he task fleet led by [People's Liberation Army Navy Ship] Liaoning conducted training in relevant waters, which does not target any specific country or entity and is in line with international law and practice. I think the Japanese side overreacted."
Mao Ning, spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said on May 28: "What I can tell you is that China's military vessels' activities in relevant waters are fully consistent with international law and international practice. We hope Japan will view this from an objective and reasonable perspective."
It was not clear whether the Liaoning-led naval task group is on its way back to China. The Chinese Defense Ministry may disclose mission details after the deployment concludes.
Related Articles
FBI Working With India to Disrupt Chinese Fentanyl Network-Kash PatelThe Surprising Impact of Trump's Tariffs On American FarmersTrump Announces New Trade Negotiations With ChinaG7 Invite for Modi Signals India's Growing Weight for Democratic Alliance
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
32 minutes ago
- Newsweek
The Scholar Who Predicted America's Breakdown Says It's Just Beginning
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. Fifteen years ago, smack in the middle of Barack Obama's first term, amid the rapid rise of social media and a slow recovery from the Great Recession, a professor at the University of Connecticut issued a stark warning: the United States was heading into a decade of growing political instability. It sounded somewhat contrarian at the time. The global economy was clawing back from the depths of the financial crisis, and the American political order still seemed anchored in post-Cold War optimism — though cracks were beginning to emerge, as evidenced by the Tea Party uprising. But Peter Turchin, an ecologist-turned-historian, had the data. "Quantitative historical analysis reveals that complex human societies are affected by recurrent—and predictable—waves of political instability," Turchin wrote in the journal Nature in 2010, forecasting a spike in unrest around 2020, driven by economic inequality, "elite overproduction" and rising public debt. A protestor holds up a Mexican flag as burning cars line the street on June 08, 2025 in Los Angeles, California. Tensions in the city remain high after the Trump administration called in the National... A protestor holds up a Mexican flag as burning cars line the street on June 08, 2025 in Los Angeles, California. Tensions in the city remain high after the Trump administration called in the National Guard against the wishes of city leaders following two days of clashes with police during a series of immigration raids. More Photo byNow, with the nation consumed by polarization in the early months of a second Donald Trump presidency, institutional mistrust at all-time highs, and deepening political conflict, Turchin's prediction appears to have landed with uncanny accuracy. In the wake of escalating protests and the deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles under President Trump's immigration crackdown, Turchin spoke with Newsweek about the latest escalation of political turbulence in the United States—and the deeper structural forces he believes have been driving the country toward systemic crisis for more than a decade. Predicting Chaos In his 2010 analysis published by Nature, Turchin identified several warning signs in the domestic electorate: stagnating wages, a growing wealth gap, a surplus of educated elites without corresponding elite jobs, and an accelerating fiscal deficit. All of these phenomena, he argued, had reached a turning point in the 1970s. "These seemingly disparate social indicators are actually related to each other dynamically," he wrote at the time. "Nearly every one of those indicators has intensified," Turchin said in an interview with Newsweek, citing real wage stagnation, the effects of artificial intelligence on the professional class and increasingly unmanageable public finances. Turchin's prediction was based on a framework known as Structural-Demographic Theory (SDT), which models how historical forces—economic inequality, elite competition and state capacity—interact to drive cycles of political instability. These cycles have recurred across empires and republics, from ancient Rome to the Ottoman Empire. Turchin's forecast is based on a framework known as Structural-Demographic Theory (SDT), which models how historical forces—economic inequality, elite competition, and state capacity—interact to drive cycles of political instability. Turchin's forecast is based on a framework known as Structural-Demographic Theory (SDT), which models how historical forces—economic inequality, elite competition, and state capacity—interact to drive cycles of political instability. Courtesy Peter Turchin "Structural-Demographic Theory enables us to analyze historical dynamics and apply that understanding to current trajectories," Turchin said. "It's not prophecy. It's modeling feedback loops that repeat with alarming regularity." He argues that violence in the U.S. tends to repeat about every 50 years— pointing to spasms of unrest around 1870, 1920, 1970 and 2020. He links these periods to how generations tend to forget what came before. "After two generations, memories of upheaval fade, elites begin to reorganize systems in their favor, and the stress returns," he said. One of the clearest historical parallels to now, he notes, is the 1970s. That decade saw radical movements emerge from university campuses and middle-class enclaves not just in the U.S., but across the West. The far-left Weather Underground movement, which started as a campus organization at the University of Michigan, bombed government buildings and banks; the Red Army Faction in West Germany and Italy's Red Brigades carried out kidnappings and assassinations. These weren't movements of the dispossessed, but of the downwardly mobile—overeducated and politically alienated. "There's a real risk of that dynamic resurfacing," Turchin said. A 'Knowledge Class' Critics have sometimes questioned the deterministic tone of Turchin's models. But he emphasizes that he does not predict exact events—only the risk factors and phases of systemic stress. While many political analysts and historians point to Donald Trump's 2016 election as the inflection point for the modern era of American political turmoil, Turchin had charted the warning signs years earlier — when Trump was known, above all, as the host of a popular NBC reality show. President Donald Trump takes part in a signing ceremony after his inauguration on January 20, 2025 in the President's Room at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. President Donald Trump takes part in a signing ceremony after his inauguration on January 20, 2025 in the President's Room at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. Melina Mara-Pool/Getty Images "As you know, in 2010, based on historical patterns and quantitative indicators, I predicted a period of political instability in the United States beginning in the 2020s," Turchin said to Newsweek. "The structural drivers behind this prediction were threefold: popular immiseration, elite overproduction, and a weakening state capacity." According to his model, Trump's rise was not the cause of America's political crisis but a symptom—emerging from a society already strained by widening inequality and elite saturation. In Turchin's view, such figures often arise when a growing class of counter-elites—ambitious, credentialed individuals locked out of power—begin to challenge the status quo. "Intraelite competition has increased even more, driven now mostly by the shrinking supply of positions for them," he said. In 2025, he pointed to the impact of AI in the legal profession and recent government downsizing, such as the DOGE eliminating thousands of positions at USAID, as accelerants in this trend. This theory was echoed by Wayne State University sociologist Jukka Savolainen, who argued in a recent op-ed in The Wall Street Journal that the U.S. is risking the creation of a radicalized "knowledge class"—overeducated, underemployed, and institutionally excluded. "When societies generate more elite aspirants than there are roles to fill, competition for status intensifies," Savolainen wrote. "Ambitious but frustrated people grow disillusioned and radicalized. Rather than integrate into institutions, they seek to undermine them." Peter Turchin forecasted a spike in unrest around 2020, driven by economic inequality, elite overproduction, and rising public debt. Peter Turchin forecasted a spike in unrest around 2020, driven by economic inequality, elite overproduction, and rising public debt. Courtesy of Peter Turchin Savolainen warned that Trump-era policies—such as the dismantling of D.E.I. and academic research programs and cuts to public institutions—have the potential to accelerate the pattern, echoing the unrest of the 1970s. "President Trump's policies could intensify this dynamic," he noted. "Many are trained in critique, moral reasoning, and systems thinking—the very profile of earlier generations of radicals." Structural Drivers Turchin, who is now an emeritus professor at UConn, believes the American system entered what he calls a "revolutionary situation"—a historical phase in which the destabilizing conditions can no longer be absorbed by institutional buffers. Reflecting on the last few years in a recent post on his Cliodynamica newsletter, he wrote that "history accelerated" after 2020. He and colleague Andrey Korotayev had tracked rising incidents of anti-government demonstrations and violent riots across Western democracies in the lead-up to that year. Their findings predicted a reversal of prior declines in unrest. "And then history accelerated," he wrote. "America was slammed by the pandemic, George Floyd, and a long summer of discontent." A police officer points a hand cannon at protesters who have been detained pending arrest on South Washington Street in Minneapolis, May 31, 2020, as protests continued following the death of George Floyd. A police officer points a hand cannon at protesters who have been detained pending arrest on South Washington Street in Minneapolis, May 31, 2020, as protests continued following the death of George Floyd. AP Photo/John Minchillo, File While many saw Trump's 2020 election loss and the January 6 Capitol riot that followed as its own turning point in that hectic period, Turchin warned that these events did not mark an end to the turbulence. "Many commentators hastily concluded that things would now go back to normal. I disagreed," he wrote. "The structural drivers for instability—the wealth pump, popular immiseration, and elite overproduction/conflict—were still running hot," Turchin continued. "America was in a 'revolutionary situation,' which could be resolved by either developing into a full-blown revolution, or by being defused by skillful actions of the governing elites. Well, now we know which way it went." These stressors, he argues, are not isolated. They are systemwide pressures building for years, playing out in feedback loops. "Unfortunately," he told Newsweek, "all these trends are only gaining power."
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US Army, FAA, NTSB to brief senators on recent near miss incidents involving helicopter
By David Shepardson WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Senior U.S. officials will answer questions from senators Wednesday about a May 1 incident in which two passenger airline flights were forced to abort landings at Reagan Washington National Airport because of a nearby Army helicopter. Brigadier General Matthew Braman, director of Army Aviation, Acting Federal Aviation Administration head Chris Rocheleau and National Transportation Safety Board chair Jennifer Homendy will appear at a closed-door roundtable meeting with a Senate Commerce subcommittee on aviation to discuss the recent near miss incident, said a spokesperson for Senator Jerry Moran who chairs the panel. On January 29, a Black Hawk helicopter collided with an American Airlines passenger jet near Reagan, killing 67 people. Separately, two dozen U.S. senators on Monday asked the inspector generals for the Pentagon and Transportation Department to open audits in response to the collision and ongoing coordination issues between the Army and air traffic control at Reagan (DCA). Moran's office said senators will also receive "an updated status on military helicopter operations in and around the DCA airspace." Rocheleau said last week the agency had barred the Army from training or priority transport flights after the incident. "We've shut those down until such time as we're comfortable with kind of what we call new rules of the road," Rocheleau said. The NTSB confirmed Homendy would take part. The FAA and Army did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Last week, a group of seven Democratic senators on Thursday introduced sweeping air safety legislation after the fatal collision. The Army told the Associated Press last month that military air traffic controllers lost contact with the helicopter for about 20 seconds as it neared the Pentagon on the May 1 flight. Delta Air Lines Flight 1671, an Airbus A319 that had originated in Orlando, and Republic Airways Flight 5825, an Embraer 170 that had departed from Boston, were both forced to perform go-arounds due to the nearby Army helicopter. The U.S. Army on May 5 suspended helicopter flights in the vicinity of the Pentagon after the incident. The FAA separately disclosed last month a hotline connecting the Pentagon and air traffic controllers at Reagan has been inoperable since March 2022.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Despite military purges, China's next war ‘could be imminent' and spread fast
'There's no reason to sugarcoat it,' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on May 31 at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia's premier security conference. 'The threat China poses is real. And it could be imminent.' Hegseth is right: America needs to urgently prepare for war. War is coming to East Asia, and Taiwan — to which Hegseth was referring — is a target of Chinese aggression. Chinese President Xi Jinping, after all, has staked his personal legitimacy on annexing it as China's 34th province. Yet the U.S. and its partners have to be ready for anything at any place and at any time. Why? The Chinese regime, which is mobilizing all of society for war, is now unstable. It is not clear who, if anyone, is in charge. Therefore, the regime could take us by surprise. One thing we know: Xi's most senior loyalist in uniform has disappeared from public view. Gen. He Weidong, a vice chairman of the Communist Party's Central Military Commission and the second highest-ranked uniformed officer, was last seen in public on March 11, at the end of the Communist Party's major political event of the year, the so-called Two Sessions. Many report that Xi sacked He. It's true that Xi, since being named general secretary of the party in November 2012, has purged many military officers, ostensibly for 'corruption,' and restructured the People's Liberation Army. Both moves resulted in his taking firm control of the military. Some have therefore assumed that Xi, for some reason, turned on his most important supporter in the military in March. However, it is not likely that Xi took down He. On the contrary, it is much more probable that Xi's adversaries removed that general. While Xi loyalists were being removed from public view, PLA Daily, the Chinese military's main propaganda organ, ran a series of articles praising 'collective leadership,' a direct rejection of Xi's continual calls for unity, centralization of control and complete obedience to his rule. These articles, which began appearing last July, were written by people aligned with the top-ranked uniformed officer, Central Military Commission Vice Chairman Gen. Zhang Youxia. The propaganda pieces could not have appeared if Xi were in complete control of the military. Moreover, He's disappearance was followed by the disappearance of another Xi loyalist, Gen. He Hongjun. Rumors started that both generals had died by suicide in May at the military's 301 Hospital in Beijing. Whether they are alive or not, they are out of the way, so their disappearance spells trouble for Xi. 'Gen. He Weidong was instrumental in Xi's earlier purges in the military, so his disappearance could indicate a great threat to Xi's authority,' Charles Burton of the Sinopsis think tank noted in comments to me this month. The recent disappearances follow the sackings of, among others, Gen. Li Shangfu, a defense minister, Gen. Wei Fenghe, one of Li's predecessors and perhaps as many as 70 in the Rocket Force, the branch responsible for the country's nuclear weapons. Given all the turmoil in the Chinese military, America and its partners need to focus on more than just Taiwan. In fact, the main island of Taiwan might be the least likely target. To start hostilities by attacking Taiwan's main island, China would need to launch a combined air-land-sea operation. To do that, Xi would have to give a general or admiral almost complete control over the military. The appointed flag officer would thereby become the most powerful figure in China. Even in the calmest of times, Xi would be reluctant to create such a rival for power, but this is by no means a calm moment in Beijing. China's leader seems to have lost substantial influence recently — so much so that there is speculation he could be pushed out of power in the coming months. Whoever is controlling the purges — Xi or his political enemies — the Chinese military does not look ready to launch a complex operation such as a Taiwan invasion. Either Xi does not have the power to order an invasion because the military no longer answers to him, or Xi does not trust the most senior officers, a precondition for such a complex undertaking. Despite all the turmoil in the leadership ranks, Hegseth was right to talk about an imminent war. The disruptive leadership moves in China have not prevented the Chinese military from engaging in low-level but especially provocative actions in the last couple of months against countries to China's south and east. We do not know whether China's regime has made the decision to go to war, but its series of dangerous actions clearly reveals it has made the decision to risk war. And war, if it begins somewhere, will likely spread. For one thing, the Chinese leadership will not be able to deal with incidents responsibly. In senior Communist Party circles these days, only the most hostile answers are considered acceptable. Another factor is the existence of alliance and semi-alliance networks in the region. Four of China's targets, South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia, are U.S. treaty allies, and one, Taiwan, is protected by the United States. China, for its part, could bring in its friends. Moreover, the U.S. should be prepared for conflict with the world's most destructive weapons. 'China has spent the last five decades investing in building nuclear proxy forces in Pakistan, North Korea and Iran to create nuclear crises to divert Washington's attention away from the Taiwan Strait,' Richard Fisher of the International Assessment and Strategy Center told me this month. 'China's investment in Russia's war in Ukraine is in the same vein.' As Blaine Holt, a retired U.S. Air Force brigadier general, said after Hegseth's comments, 'Millions of lives now hang in the balance.' Gordon G. Chang is the author of 'Plan Red: China's Project to Destroy America' and 'The Coming Collapse of China.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
