US Ally Keeps American Missiles at Choke Point Near China
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.
The Philippines, a mutual defense treaty ally of the United States, said that an American missile system capable of sinking warships will remain in the country for training purposes.
Newsweek reached out to the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command for comment via email. The Chinese defense and foreign ministries did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Why It Matters
The Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System, or NMESIS, is a ground-based launcher equipped with two missiles designed to target enemy ships. It is part of the U.S. Marine Corps' maritime strategy in the Pacific, where China is expanding its naval presence.
The American anti-ship missile system was first deployed to the Philippines in late April for Exercise Balikatan 2025 and remained in the country for Exercise KAMANDAG 9 in late May. It participated in the drills from the Philippines' Batanes Islands in the Luzon Strait.
The waterway located north of the Philippines serves as a key gateway through the First Island Chain for China's naval deployments into the broader Pacific. The island defense line, comprising Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines, is designed to keep China's navy in check.
What To Know
Captain John Percie Alcos, spokesperson for the Philippine Navy, said on Tuesday that the NMESIS remains in the country, where it will be used to train the Philippine Marine Corps. He declined to disclose the location of the U.S. missile system, citing operational security.
The announcement comes after a pair of Chinese aircraft carriers, the CNS Liaoning and CNS Shandong, transited near the Philippines for deployments beyond the First Island Chain.
Without naming a specific country, the official said that the presence of the NMESIS, capable of striking targets over 115 miles away, serves as a deterrent to those who intend to conduct "illegal, coercive, aggressive, and deceptive actions" against the Philippines.
The Philippines has territorial disputes with China over maritime features in the South China Sea, often resulting in confrontations and clashes between their naval forces. Washington has reaffirmed its security commitment to Manila under a 1951 mutual defense treaty.
The NMESIS became the second U.S. missile system stationed in the Philippines following joint exercises. A U.S. Army Mid-Range Capability (MRC) missile system has remained in the Southeast Asian country "indefinitely" after participating in a drill in April last year.
U.S. Marines operate the Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System in the Philippines on May 27, 2025.
U.S. Marines operate the Navy-Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System in the Philippines on May 27, 2025.
Cpl. Malia Sparks/U.S. Marine Corps
What People Are Saying
Captain John Percie Alcos, spokesperson for the Philippine Navy, at a press briefing on Tuesday: "The NMESIS will remain here in our country for as long as training opportunities are still there for us, for us to use that particular military equipment so that our Marines can better conduct combined operations with their counterparts."
The U.S. Third Marine Division, in a press release in April: "The NMESIS provides [the U.S. Third Marine Littoral Regiment] with enhanced sea denial capability, deepens naval integration, and strengthens deterrence by extending the Joint Force's ability to target and engage from both land and sea. In the Philippines, the NMESIS will also aid in shaping defensive capabilities in accordance with the [the Armed Forces of the Philippines]'s coastal defense strategy."
What Happens Next
It remains to be seen whether the Philippines will consider acquiring the NMESIS to counter threats posed by the Chinese navy, the world's largest by hull count. The U.S. has been equipping its Pacific allies and partners with various types of anti-ship missile systems.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
32 minutes ago
- USA Today
See photos: The last large-scale military parade in Washington DC in 1991
See photos: The last large-scale military parade in Washington DC in 1991 Show Caption Hide Caption Armored tanks arrive in DC for Trump's military birthday parade As Washington, D.C. prepares for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, armored tanks have begun to arrive ahead of Saturday's celebration. Thousands of soldiers, military equipment, musical performances and more are set for this weekend in Washington D.C. for the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary celebration. Happening along the National Mall on Saturday, June 14, the event is also falling on the same day as President Donald Trump's 79th birthday, but the administration has insisted that the Army's anniversary and Trump's birthday are a coincidence and that the parade is justified to honor soldiers' sacrifice. Army parachutists jumping from aircraft are set to land and give Trump an American flag for his birthday, Pentagon officials said, according to Axios. A rare sight in Washington D.C., the last major military parade was held in 1991 to celebrate the end of the first Gulf War. Before 1991, large-scale military parades were held following the American victory in World War I and World War II. According to the National Park Service, "debates over military policy" that occurred during the Korean and Vietnam wars forced parades to be more "subdued." Photos: The last large military parade in Washington DC Contributing: Kathryn Palmer and staff, USA TODAY Fernando Cervantes Jr. is a trending news reporter for USA TODAY. Reach him at and follow him on X @fern_cerv_.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
China solar industry to address overcapacity challenge but turnaround far off, experts say
By Colleen Howe SHANGHAI (Reuters) -Solar manufacturing company heads in China, grappling with losses and tariffs on exports to the U.S., called for an end to a price war and a solution to overcapacity in the sector, but industry participants predict a slow turnaround. China's solar manufacturers have reported losses this year as U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war put further pressure on demand within the industry. Losses in the photovoltaic manufacturing value chain reached $40 billion last year, while for the industry as a whole - including firms' other business lines - totalled $60 billion, Trina Solar Chairman Gao Jifan said. The Chinese government and industry were working to address the overcapacity and breakneck competition that have pushed most major producers into the red, Gao told the SNEC PV+ Photovoltaic Power Conference and Exhibition in Shanghai this week. The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), China's state planner, held an online meeting in February calling for a ban on new production, Gao said, but new capacity has nevertheless been built in recent months. NDRC did not immediately respond to a faxed question on the matter. Zhu Gongshan, chairman of polysilicon and module producer GCL, called for a "clear out" of the sector through mergers and a paring back of production capacity. China was also moving away from reliance on a single market, Zhu said, referring to growth in new markets outside China in response to tariffs and other trade barriers. Chinese manufacturers have been rapidly expanding in the Middle East, and a module-producing firm said demand is set to grow in eastern Europe and South Asia. Solar manufacturing makes up less than two-thirds of Trina's business now and will fall to 50% or less in the next two to three years, Gao said, with a greater focus on product solutions and energy storage. Several experts told Reuters during this week's industry event that there is no hope for recovery in solar component prices this year. One procurement manager at a module producer in eastern China said two or three large factories would have to stop production for supply and demand to rebalance and support prices, unlikely in the near future. "The overcapacity issue is so deep one cannot see to the bottom," another module producer, using a Chinese proverb. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Trump Administration Needs Better Opposition
Donald Trump needs better enemies. More accurately, the American people need the president and his allies to have a higher quality opposition. In office, President Trump has embraced some truly terrible—and occasionally dangerous—policies, including federalizing National Guard troops and mobilizing U.S. Marines to deal with riots that really should be left to California officials to handle or fumble as their abilities allow. But his opponents insist on embracing lunacy and ineffectiveness and making the president look reasonable by comparison, effectively giving his actions a pass. "Donald Trump, without consulting with California's law enforcement leaders, commandeered 2,000 of our state's National Guard members to deploy on our streets. Illegally, and for no reason," complained Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom after the president turned local rioting into a federal issue. Newsom expanded on his objections in a glitch-filled speech that focused more on Trump than the riots. It played into the reputation for incompetence he's gained over years of ignoring his state's problems, including all of the missteps that led to the recent wildfires in and around Los Angeles. Those fires didn't exactly cover Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in glory either, and neither has her response to the chaos. She's alternated between supporting demonstrators protesting the federal immigration raids that sparked the riots and vowing crackdowns on violence. One minute she touts her work with "community organizations, legal advocates, and local leaders to ensure that every resident knows their rights" and the next she reminds Angelenos that downtown is under curfew. That's unfortunate, because the feckless California officials raise legitimate concerns about the president's actions. There are good reasons to object to a president responding to local events with federal troops. "Preemptive nationwide deployment of the military is the very opposite of using the military as a 'last resort,'" warns Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program. "It is so wildly out of keeping with how the Insurrection Act and 10 U.S.C. § 12406 have been interpreted and applied that it should be entitled to no deference by the courts." The law that President Trump relied on—10 U.S.C. § 12406—allows the president to "call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State" to repel invasions, suppress rebellions, or enforce the law when regular forces are insufficient. Invoking that law over local disorder before state and local officials have had much of a chance to do anything is a stretch of the law's intent as well as a slap at federalism. The law says nothing authorizing the use of regular military forces, leaving the impression that the Marines Trump dispatched are just hitching a ride on his presidential memorandum to bypass the Posse Comitatus Act's restrictions on the domestic use of the military. Which means that Newsom and Bass had a great opportunity to show their chops and object to federal interference—if they were up to the demands of that role. They're not. Worse, though, are the rioters themselves. As Matthew Ormseth and James Queally described the scene for Los Angeles Times readers, "some in the crowd lobbed bottles and fireworks at the LAPD," "vandals set fire to a row of Waymos," and "people wearing masks flung chunks of concrete—and even a few electric scooters—at" California Highway Patrol officers. That speaks for itself—but not as loudly as the idiots throwing Molotov cocktails at police. Rioting understandably became the dominant news story, overshadowing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids that originally set off protests before they turned violent. Smarter protesters would have kept demonstrations peaceful and attention focused on arrests that we were told would target violent criminals but too often ensnare harmless people. "Federal immigration officials appeared to target day laborers in raids Monday at a Home Deport in Santa Ana," the Los Angeles NBC affiliate reported this week. Traditional gathering places for immigrants seeking work—and not so many vicious gangbangers—have been targeted across the country. "Stephen Miller, a top White House aide and architect of the president's immigration agenda, asked ICE officials to step up the pace of immigrant deportations, including in Home Depot parking lots and at 7-Eleven Stores," according to The Wall Street Journal. ICE has also gone after immigrants navigating the bureaucratic path to legal immigration and even citizens who were wrongly detained. Those outrages were pushed into the background when rioting inevitably grabbed the headlines. Not that Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson gives a damn about keeping the message straight. As violent protests spread across the country, he urged his constituents to "rise up" and "resist." Apparently, he doesn't want to miss out on the excitement of watching parts of his city burn. Not everybody is impressed by this version of opposition to the Trump administration. "I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations, and immigration—but this is not that," Sen. John Fetterman (D–Penn.) warned this week. "This is anarchy and true chaos. My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement." Fetterman has, somewhat surprisingly, emerged as a voice of sanity for his party. He's called Democrats to account over the antisemitism of the party's progressive wing and now for confusing tantrums in the street with effective opposition. A few more Democrats like him would go a long way towards rescuing the party from its self-inflicted wounds and giving the U.S. a functioning political opposition. The country could really use a functioning opposition. The Trump administration's turn towards economic nationalism, unilateral power, authoritarianism, and xenophobia cry out for criticism and alternative solutions. That criticism should be peaceful and those alternatives should be sensibly presented. Ideally, they should also advance liberty and limit government. For the moment, though, that may be too much to ask of Democrats. Many of them are still wrestling with the temptations of appearing to be either inept or dangerous lunatics. The post The Trump Administration Needs Better Opposition appeared first on
