Chinese Aircraft Carrier Challenges US's Pacific War Strategy
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 continues to challenge the United States' maritime containment strategy in the Pacific Ocean by sending an aircraft carrier to contested waters near Japan, a key Washington ally.
Mao Ning, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said at a news conference on Wednesday that China's naval activities "are entirely in accordance with international law and international practice" and also urged Japan to view the matter "objectively and rationally."
Newsweek has contacted the Chinese Defense Ministry for comment by email.
Why It Matters
Under the U.S.'s island chain strategy, three defensive lines are established by leveraging U.S.-aligned territories to restrict China's access to the Pacific Ocean. The closest one to the East Asian power is the first island chain, consisting of Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines.
China has the world's largest navy by hull count, according to a Pentagon report, with more than 370 ships and submarines, including two aircraft carriers in active service. This naval fleet enables China to expand its military presence and reach within and beyond the island chains.
The recent deployment of the Chinese aircraft carrier comes as the U.S. Navy has sent a pair of aircraft carriers to different waters in the western Pacific Ocean this week: the USS Nimitz, operating in the South China Sea, and the USS George Washington, operating near Japan.
What To Know
The Chinese aircraft carrier CNS Liaoning, previously spotted in the East China Sea north of Japan's southwestern Senkaku Islands, passed through the Miyako Strait southeast toward the Philippine Sea on Tuesday, the Joint Staff of the Japanese Defense Ministry announced.
The Liaoning was operating in waters southeast of Japan's southwestern Miyako Island eight hours after sailing through the strait. It was joined by the Chinese Type 055 destroyer CNS Nanchang and the Type 052D destroyer CNS Qiqihar, both identified by their hull numbers.
Prior to its strait transit, the Chinese aircraft carrier was observed conducting flight missions while underway in the East China Sea from Sunday to Monday, the Japan Joint Staff added. Its fighter jets and helicopters carried out 90 and 30 takeoffs and landings, respectively.
According to a map provided by the Japan Joint Staff, the Chinese naval ships were tracked outside Japan's territorial waters—which extend up to 13.8 miles from the coastline—but have remained within Japan's 230-mile-wide exclusive economic zone since Monday.
The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force dispatched ships and aircraft to surveil and gather intelligence on the Chinese naval task group, while Japanese fighter aircraft were scrambled in response to the flight operations of the Liaoning's fighter jets, the Japan Joint Staff said.
A J-15 fighter jet landing on the flight deck of the Chinese aircraft carrier CNS Liaoning during a drill in the South China Sea on April 8, 2021.
A J-15 fighter jet landing on the flight deck of the Chinese aircraft carrier CNS Liaoning during a drill in the South China Sea on April 8, 2021.
VCG/VCG via AP
Earlier this month, a group of five Chinese naval vessels was detected transiting the Miyako Strait toward the Philippine Sea. This waterway is one of the key gateways along the first island chain that the Chinese navy uses to access the broader western Pacific Ocean.
What People Are Saying
The Joint Staff of the Japanese Defense Ministry said on Wednesday: "Yesterday, there was a risk of airspace violation in the East China Sea and the Pacific Ocean, so fighter jets from the Western Air Defense Force of the Air Self-Defense Force were scrambled to respond."
The Chinese Defense Ministry previously commented: "Japan has been closely tracking, monitoring, and interfering with Chinese vessels and aircraft for a long time, jeopardizing the safety of Chinese vessels and aircraft and easily causing maritime and air security problems."
What Happens Next
It was not immediately clear whether the Liaoning would carry out any military drills while operating in waters east of Taiwan, a self-governed island claimed by China.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
10 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Ten Activities That State Farm Says Are Too Risky to Insure
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. Following State Farm's recent rate hike requests in California, policyholders in the state can expect higher premiums when their policies are renewed in 2025 and 2026—that is, if they are lucky enough not to be dropped by the carrier under its new underwriting guidelines. According to documents filed earlier this year, first reported on by the San Francisco Chronicle, State Farm requested a 39 percent rate increase for its Personal Liability Umbrella Program in the state, which provides policyholders with extra protection beyond a basic personal liability policy. It also created a new list of activities and conditions which are considered "unacceptable" for the carrier to insure, as the risk would be too high to take on. Newsweek reached out to State Farm for comment via email on Tuesday. Why It Matters State Farm has been among several major insurers in California that have cut coverage across the state in recent years, citing rising costs and growing catastrophe exposure. When they have not stopped renewing policies or accepting new ones, they have instead asked for dramatic rate increases, challenging strict state regulations that have kept premiums artificially low for years. The company is currently seeking rate hikes for its homeowners' policies as well as for its umbrella liability policies, citing that more frequent accidents in recent years have been spiking medical bills and increasing costs for the company. California regulators face a difficult dilemma: either they approve of drastic rate hikes such as the ones requested by State Farm, or they risk facing shrinking availability for their residents, an issue that has already laid bare the fragility of the Golden State's home insurance market. What To Know State Farm's Personal Liability Umbrella Program offers a minimum of $1 million to policyholders for costs arising from a wide range of situations—from medical bills triggered by an injury in the home or a car accident, to attorney's fees for defamation lawsuits or cases of libel and slander. According to the document filed by State Farm in January, existing customers can renew their maximum limit of liability for no more than $10 million, with the exception of those who already have limits above $10 million, who can maintain them. The carrier, which is the biggest home insurer in California, blocked applications to the program in late May 2023 with "no exceptions," so the new guidelines about who can be insured by the carrier and who cannot apply to renewals only. While some descriptions of "unacceptable" behaviors detailed in the filing are expected, for example, a person who has had a major conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs won't be eligible for the program, others are more outlandish. Here are some of the most unusual behaviors and conditions that are too risky to be insured under State Farm's California Personal Liability Umbrella Program: Providing child care services where more than six children are cared for Being a person with high visibility, including professional entertainers, athletes, coaches, political office holders, broadcasters, authors, or columnists who have received unfavorable publicity via any communication avenue Owning property outside of the continental U.S., including in Hawaii and Alaska Having hog breeding operations on a farm Having a commercial dog kennel operation on a farm Having children's activities in a farm, such as corn mazes, haunted barns, hayrides, and similar activities, for a fee Spraying or dusting crops with aerial products as a policyholder Allowing public access for Pick-Your-Own operations on farmland Co-owning a farm with people who are not their relatives Offering guided hunting, lodging for hunters, or exotic animal hunting with dedicated employees on a farm People navigate one of the world's largest corn mazes at Cool Patch Pumpkins in Dixon, California, on October 17, 2024. People navigate one of the world's largest corn mazes at Cool Patch Pumpkins in Dixon, California, on October 17, 2024. JOSH EDELSON/AFP via Getty Images Janet Ruiz, a spokesperson for the Insurance Information Institute (or Triple-I) told the San Francisco Chronicle that it is normal for carriers to write highly specific underwriting guidelines and add new "unacceptable" conditions over time. What People Are Saying State Farm justified its request to increase rates for the Personal Liability Umbrella Program, citing that "personal liability costs have risen dramatically across the industry due to more accidents, escalating medical bills and larger legal settlements." What Happens Next Californians who are already covered by State Farm's Personal Liability Umbrella Program could be disqualified under the new underwriting guidelines when their policies are renewed. They are also likely to face higher premiums. If approved, State Farm's requested 39 percent hike on its Personal Liability Umbrella Program policies would be effective as of August 1, 2025. The increase would come on top of a 29 percent hike that has been in force since March.
Newsweek
15 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Red Bull Slams FIA's Lack of Response After Verstappen–Russell Controversy
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. Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has targeted Formula One's governing body, the FIA, and its race director, Rui Marques, for the lack of clarity on regulations. An incident between Max Verstappen and George Russell in the final stage of the Spanish Grand Prix sparked controversy, prompting Horner to address the challenge. Verstappen held third spot in Barcelona until a safety car period pushed him to swap to hard tires due to the unavailability of other options. The rival drivers, meanwhile, were on soft tires. This put the four-time world champion in a tricky situation, and his frustration was evident over the team radio. Verstappen struggled for traction after the safety car restart, leading Charles Leclerc to overtake him at Turn 1. George Russell, who was sat behind Leclerc, also tried to gain an advantage by squeezing himself on the inside line, but that led to contact with Verstappen. Max Verstappen of the Netherlands and Oracle Red Bull Racing prepares to drive on the grid prior to the F1 Grand Prix of Spain at Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya on June 01, 2025 in Barcelona, Spain. Max Verstappen of the Netherlands and Oracle Red Bull Racing prepares to drive on the grid prior to the F1 Grand Prix of Spain at Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya on June 01, 2025 in Barcelona, avoid major damage, Verstappen took the exit road and found himself behind Leclerc and in front of Russell. Fearing a penalty for gaining an advantage off the race track, Verstappen's race engineer Gianpiero Lambiase asked him to give back P4 to Russell. After much protest, Verstappen gave in to his team's demands, but soon after Russell passed him, Verstappen took the inside line and made contact with the Mercedes. While the damage wasn't severe, the incident raised eyebrows. The FIA handed Verstappen a 10-second penalty, leading him to finish the race in P10. Three penalty points were also added to his Super License, and now he remains just one point away from a potential race ban. After the race, Horner explained the logic behind handing back the place to Russell and also addressed the need for clarity pertaining to the rules. He told the media: "He was obviously upset because, first of all, he had Leclerc take a swipe at him on the straight, and then he's got dive bombed at Turn 1 by George. "The way that these regulations are, it's all about where that front axle is. The drivers know the rules, and they're the rules that they're playing to. "Now, the argument is, was George under control at that point in time? Would he have made the corner? It was 50-50. He looked like he would have made it. "We've seen so many occasions this year where penalties have been given. We've seen it noted, it's gone to the stewards, and the next thing is, you're expecting to get a penalty. "That's why it was, 'Okay, we're going to have to give this place up'." He added: "That's where it would be nice, as the referee, as a race director, to either say, 'Play on', or 'You need to give it [the place] back'. "I think it's very hard for the team, subjectively, to try and make that call because you're going on historical precedents. You're looking at what you have in front of you, and you're trying to preempt what the stewards and the race director are thinking. "It would be beneficial to the teams, in that instance, for the race director to make that call and say, 'You either give it back or you get a penalty', rather than having to try and second-guess what the stewards are going to do." When Horner was asked about the race director's response when he was approached for clarity, he said: "You get nothing back. You ask the question, but you get nothing back." Horner didn't hold back, stating that the matter would be taken up with the Sporting Advisory Committee. He said: "It's something that should be discussed in the SAC."
Newsweek
20 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Red Bull Fires Back at Schumacher Over Verstappen Exit Clause Comments
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. Red Bull team principal Christian Horner has hit back at former Formula One driver Ralf Schumacher for his comments on Max Verstappen at the Spanish Grand Prix. Schumacher criticized the four-time world champion for the incident with George Russell and suggested that he was looking to activate an exit clause in his Red Bull contract that would pave the way to his exit from the team. There has been much talk about Verstappen leaving Red Bull in the past few seasons, especially considering his interest in other forms of motorsports and the challenges he faced with the RB21. An incident during the race in Barcelona last weekend prompted Schumacher to suggest a theory that could see Verstappen part ways with the Milton Keynes outfit. The race saw the 27-year-old driver maintain a healthy third position in the final leg of the race, but the safety car led him to switch to the only tires he had left - hard tires. This proved to be a huge disadvantage, especially since the other cars were running on soft tires. Verstappen struggled for traction as soon as the race resumed, leading Ferrari's Charles Leclerc to capitalize on the situation and secure the last spot on the podium. Russell also tried his best to pass Verstappen at Turn 1, but made contact in the process. Christian Horner, Team Principal of Oracle Red Bull Racing and Max Verstappen of the Netherlands and Oracle Red Bull Racing in the garage during practice ahead of the F1 Grand Prix of Spain at Circuit... Christian Horner, Team Principal of Oracle Red Bull Racing and Max Verstappen of the Netherlands and Oracle Red Bull Racing in the garage during practice ahead of the F1 Grand Prix of Spain at Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya on May 30, 2025 in Barcelona, Spain. MoreIn response, Verstappen swerved into the run-off area and got back on the track in front of Russell and behind Leclerc. Soon after, Verstappen's race engineer Gianpiero Lambiase advised him to hand the position back to Russell. Verstappen appeared furious on the team radio but adhered to the request. However, he made contact with Russell soon after he was allowed to overtake. This move caused a significant uproar. The FIA stewards penalized Verstappen with a ten-second penalty and added three penalty points to his Super License. The time penalty meant he finished the race in P10, scoring just a single point. The incident garnered considerable attention, and several pundits, including Schumacher, criticized Verstappen for his actions. Speaking to Sky Deutschland, he said: "His behavior is a pity, he doesn't need that as a four-time world champion. "I don't know what got into him. It is clear that frustration is on the way, but that should not be the case. I think he realised today that it's not going as hoped and that the update didn't work so well." Revealing Verstappen's Red Bull exit theory, Schumacher added: "You have to pay attention to why things like this happen and why he gets an unnecessary penalty if there is a clause. "It's a critical phase." Responding to Schumacher's comments, Horner dismissed his theory. He told BILD: "This theory is the biggest nonsense possible. I haven't heard anything so stupid for a long time. "Max is a racer through and through. He always wants to win and would never act like that."
