logo
How Chinese warships encircled Australia – without Canberra even noticing

How Chinese warships encircled Australia – without Canberra even noticing

Yahoo02-03-2025

It was a Virgin Australia pilot who first raised the alarm. At 9.58am on Friday Feb 21, the pilot intercepted a warning from the Chinese navy: a flotilla of warships were conducting live-fire drills in the Tasman Sea, some 300 nautical miles off the eastern coast of Australia.
The message – broadcast on the 121.5 MHz emergency radio channel used by commercial pilots to communicate – was relayed to the air traffic controller, who then passed it to the military.
'At that stage we didn't know whether it was a potential hoax or real,' Peter Curran, deputy chief executive of Airservices Australia, told a parliamentary hearing this week.
But the message was not a hoax.
In a highly unusual move, three Chinese naval vessels dubbed Task Group 107 – including a Jiangkai-class frigate, a Renhai-class cruiser and a Fuchi-class replenishment vessel – were conducting exercises in Australia's exclusive economic zone.
This area is beyond Australia's territorial waters, but it has exclusive economic rights. To avoid any incidents, 49 flights were diverted.
Canberra is in a difficult position as it is keen not to damage improved diplomatic relations. Australia was hit hard by trade restrictions when it led the Five Eyes alliance to ban Huawei, the Chinese tech corporation, and later when it called for an investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic.
Although Australia has rebuked Beijing for providing such short notice, the government stressed the naval exercises were not illegal. China has countered that all criticism is 'deliberately overhyped'.
But a week after the first exercises, as details drip out in senate hearings and the warships continue to circumvent Australia, the saga is continuing to dominate headlines Down Under.
And it has raised critical, uncomfortable questions. What were China's intentions? Are Australia or New Zealand prepared to counter the Asian superpower?
On the first point, analysts say that Beijing was delivering a message: we are a great military power.
Veerle Nouwens, executive director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies Asia, told The Telegraph that the live-fire exercises were a sign not just to Australia, but also to the US and its allies, that 'China is capable of deploying at distance'.
'It's a sign that China's military capabilities shouldn't be underestimated,' Ms Nouwens said.
He added that China is showing that 'its ambitions over the past 10 years to evolve into a blue-water navy is coming to fruition'.
Beijing has certainly transformed its capacity at sea in the last decade. In 2015, its navy battle force stood at 255 vessels, according to the US Congressional Research Office – by 2025, that figure had jumped to 400.
'The growth and modernisation of China's navy has gone hand-in-hand with an increasingly expeditionary strategy,' said Jennifer Parker, a former principal warfare officer in the Royal Australian Navy.
Writing in the Australian Financial Review, she said: 'Chinese naval deployments to the Indian and Pacific oceans are on the rise, marked by the establishment of a naval base in Djibouti in 2017 and increasingly common Pacific port visits, including stops in Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea as well as hospital ship deployments to the South Pacific.
'Against this backdrop, Australia shouldn't be shocked to see a Chinese navy task group off our east coast.
'It's rightly considered an uncommon occurrence, particularly since Australia's east coast isn't exactly on the way to anywhere … but we should expect it to become increasingly common.'
But China's actions are likely also a 'symbolic gesture of 'equal treatment'', according to Ms Nouwens. Amid the mounting battle for influence in the Indo-Pacific, Beijing may want to remind the US and its allies: if you poke us in our backyard, we'll poke you back.
China considers both the Taiwan Strait and large chunks of the South China Sea as its own territorial waters.
'China likely wants to signal that if Australia and others can sail through and conduct exercises in what China considers its waters and neighbourhood, then China will do the same,' Ms Nouwens said.
'Australia and New Zealand continue to engage in and build their defence partnerships in the Asia-Pacific through diplomacy and exercises.
'This has included the South China Sea, while New Zealand made its first naval transit through the Taiwan Strait in seven years in October last year together with Australia.
'China often views these with suspicion, and sees them as confrontational and symbolic of part of wider US competition with China.'
Still, she added that it is significant that Beijing conducted the drills in the exclusive economic zone. It suggests the live-fire drills and long trek south were a show of strength, not an attempt to escalate.
Events over the past week were also an important test of how prepared Australia and New Zealand are to respond to Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific region.
According to Matthew Knot, The Sydney Herald's national security correspondent, 'the results so far look like a failure'. He argued that Anthony Albanese, Australia's prime minister, downplayed the situation, while both the Australian Defence Force and the New Zealand Navy initially missed that the exercise was even happening.
Others have stressed that overreacting could be counterproductive, potentially undermining arguments used by the US and its allies around access to waters such as the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea.
Australia has also recently stabilised diplomatic relations with China, allowing the resumption of trade of goods including wine, beer and barley – a popular policy Mr Albanese will not want to jeopardise.
But analysts said this should not be a 'straitjacket' that prevents criticism of Beijing.
However, an uncomfortable truth should not be ignored: Australia's core vulnerabilities lie at sea. Australia's navy has just 16 battle force vessels, 'its smallest and oldest in decades' after 'underinvestment by successive governments'.
'In a crisis or conflict, an adversary wouldn't need to invade our shores to bring Australia's economy – and by extension, our defence– to its knees,' said Ms Parker. 'All it would have to do would be to cut off our critical seaborne supplies.'
She added that Australia cannot hope to match China's naval might, and its security should continue to rely on strong alliances and partnerships. But even so, the country is coming up short.
Ms Parker said: 'China's naval demonstration on Australia's east coast should serve a reminder of our vulnerability, and a warning that addressing this vulnerability requires Australia to truly recognise its place as a maritime power.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US, Chinese officials exchange barbs at Shanghai event over trade
US, Chinese officials exchange barbs at Shanghai event over trade

Yahoo

time8 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

US, Chinese officials exchange barbs at Shanghai event over trade

By Casey Hall SHANGHAI (Reuters) -U.S. and Chinese officials traded barbs at a celebration held by a U.S. business chamber in Shanghai on Friday, as the chamber appealed to both countries to provide more certainty to American businesses operating in China. Scott Walker, consul general of U.S. consulate in Shanghai, told a gathering of U.S. businesses aimed at celebrating the 110th anniversary of the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) in Shanghai that the U.S.-China economic relationship had been unbalanced and non-reciprocal "for far too long." "We want an end to discriminatory actions and retaliation against U.S. companies in China," he said. In a speech that directly followed Walker's, Chen Jing, a Shanghai Communist Party official who is also the president of the Shanghai People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries, countered Walker's view. "I believe the consul general's view is prejudiced, ungrounded and not aligning with the phone call of our heads of states last night," he said. The interaction reflects the continued strained relationship between both countries as the trade war continues to simmer. U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke over a long anticipated call on Thursday, confronting weeks of brewing trade tensions and a battle over critical minerals. Trump later said they agreed to further talks. It came in the middle of a dispute between Washington and Beijing in recent weeks over "rare earths" minerals that threatened to tear up a fragile truce in the trade war between the two biggest economies. The countries struck a 90-day deal on May 12 to roll back some of the triple-digit, tit-for-tat tariffs they had placed on each other since Trump's January inauguration but the deal has not addressed broader concerns that strain the relationship and Trump has accused China of violating the agreement. Eric Zheng, president of AmCham Shanghai which counts over 1,000 companies among its membership, told reporters on the sidelines of the event that many companies had put their decision-making on pause due to the uncertainty. "People are looking for some more definitive, durable statements on both sides that enable businesses to feel more secure," he said. "Our number one ask from the two governments is to give us some certainty so that we can plan accordingly." Erreur lors de la récupération des données Connectez-vous pour accéder à votre portefeuille Erreur lors de la récupération des données Erreur lors de la récupération des données Erreur lors de la récupération des données Erreur lors de la récupération des données

Opinion - Trump and Musk fell out because Trump just doesn't get principled people
Opinion - Trump and Musk fell out because Trump just doesn't get principled people

Yahoo

time9 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Opinion - Trump and Musk fell out because Trump just doesn't get principled people

There are limitations to President Trump's transactional view of the world. This is evident in his growing tension with Elon Musk, which risks creating political problems that threaten his agenda. Trump usually gets his way through a mix of flattery, favors and intimidation, but Musk is less inclined than most to respond to these techniques. Musk holds a lot of cards. His Tesla factories employ tens of thousands of American workers. His SpaceX rockets underpin our national aspirations in space. He is also the wealthiest person on the planet, and his wealth facilitates a natural tendency to speak out when his principles are challenged. That was illustrated in late 2023 when he invited advertisers to stay off his social media platform. It is possible to disagree with everything Musk does and still concede that the man is principled. This is why our less principled President is struggling to understand Musk's hostility to the tax and spending bill, the oddly named One Big Beautiful Bill Act, so named after an utterance by Trump. Musk carried out his work at the Department of Government Efficiency without humanity and with childish antics. But if his methods were wrong, his beliefs were real. His opposition to a spending bill that negates his work by increasing federal debt by more than $2 trillion is rooted in deeply held principles. His life would be easier and his businesses more secure if he had stayed quiet and joined other Republicans in supporting a bill they know leads our nation one step closer to fiscal ruin. Musk is different. He was willing to alienate himself from liberal consumers by taking up his position at DOGE and supporting Trump, but equally willing to alienate himself from MAGA consumers by opposing the Trump tax bill on principle. This type of principled stand is difficult for someone like Trump to understand, and I believe he is being honest when he says he can't understand Musk's opposition to the bill. In Trump's eyes, he offered Musk a favorable transaction: Publicly support my policies, and I will maintain your access and influence. Musk refused the deal because staying quiet meant violating his principles. This is foreign to Trump, who values public appearance and profit over principles. Musk isn't the only person President Trump is struggling to understand. Chinese president Xi Jinping is equally principled and believes what he says about the 21st century belonging to China. Xi is committed to erasing the last vestiges of China's subordination to the West. He is telling the truth when he discusses the belief that China should play a central role in the world and dominate Asia. The Chinese president is committed to taking control of Taiwan because its de facto independence represents a contemporary manifestation of an earlier and weaker time in Chinese history. American power can deter Xi from invading, but there is no deal imaginable that will cause him to change his mind about the inevitability of seizing Taiwan. Xi holds the principle too deeply to let it go, and here again Trump struggles to understand. Xi cannot capitulate to American demands on either trade or Taiwan without resurrecting in his own mind the idea of a weak and subordinate China. This is one important reason among several why he hasn't acquiesced to American demands on trade and seems to be preparing for a prolonged standoff — something that probably wasn't part of Trump's initial plan. Xi's principles make it difficult for our transactional president to understand the man and predict his actions. Russian President Vladimir Putin is another example of someone Trump fundamentally fails to understand. Putin acts immorally but is still more principled than he is transactional. Trump's offer to reintegrate Russia into the world economy and deepen American economic ties with Russian companies might have worked to end the war in Ukraine if Putin were as transactional as Trump. Our president offered Putin an objectively good deal — an escape from relative isolation and a chance to increase Russia's national wealth and the personal wealth of its president and closest collaborators. But Putin is being honest when he says Ukraine should be part of Russia. He has so far been unwilling to accept Trump's generous offers because they don't comport with his principled belief. Like Xi, Putin refuses to accept even the appearance of Russian subordination to the West. His principled stand means Trump's transactional offers are unlikely to succeed. American interests are better served by forcing Putin's hand — by weaking Russia's economy and hurting it militarily by supporting Ukraine's resistance. Trump cannot easily see this because he doesn't understand how the Russian president sees the world. Putin is not primarily transactional — he pursues his principles until sufficient counterforce is applied. This is a different way of engaging with the world than Trump's dealmaking. It requires an American approach to Russia that Trump has so far failed to understand and embrace. Trump believes everyone has a price and will eventually make a deal. He has been successful because he has often been proven right in this. Consider, for example, the Republicans in Congress who sacrificed their principles to safeguard their reelections by supporting a fiscally irresponsible bill. Their actions once again affirmed Trump's instinct that everyone has a price. But not everyone is so transactional as that. Men like Musk, Xi and Putin see the world through a principled lens. As good as he is at dominating transactional people, Trump struggles to understand and then anticipate and control the actions of people who are primarily guided by principle. This has political consequences for Trump himself and geopolitical consequences for our nation. Until Trump better understands the motivations of principled people, our country will continue offering deals to people who are entirely uninterested. Trump is also risking his legacy and agenda by antagonizes potential critics like Musk by miscalculating their reactions when his actions violate their principles. One of Trump's most redeeming qualities is his honest desire for peace, but his transactional approach to America's adversaries will never create the stability he seeks. Just as he should have anticipated Musk's opposition to the spending bill, he should have anticipated Xi's intransigence on trade and Putin's desire to continue his war. The understanding that some people act on principle is a blind spot for our transactional president, and this makes it difficult for him to understand the principled parts of the world. Colin Pascal is a retired Army lieutenant colonel and a graduate student in the School of Public Affairs at American University in Washington. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

The cost of losing Indiana's international students
The cost of losing Indiana's international students

Axios

time11 minutes ago

  • Axios

The cost of losing Indiana's international students

Indiana's nearly 30,000 international students contributed around $1 billion to the Hoosier economy during the 2023-24 school year. Why it matters: The Trump administration is halting student visa interviews and revoking visas for Chinese students amid a political pressure campaign against colleges and universities and a broader immigration crackdown. A big drop in international students could hurt college town economies, some of which are already struggling due to lower enrollment. The big picture: The student visa pause comes as the Trump administration has been criticizing U.S. colleges and universities for failing to crack down on what it describes as heightened antisemitism as students protest Israel's actions in Gaza. The State Department is considering broader vetting of student visa applicants' social media posts. The revocation of Chinese students' visas in particular is tied to concerns that their government is using them "to steal intellectual property on Beijing's behalf," a State Department official told Axios' Marc Caputo. By the numbers: Of the more than 1 million international students studying in the U.S. during the 2023-24 school year, about 12.5% were doing so at schools in California, 12.1% in New York and 8% in Texas. Massachusetts (7.3%) and Illinois (5.5%) round out the top five, per data from NAFSA, an international education nonprofit. Zoom in: Purdue led the state with approximately 12,000 international students, followed by IU Bloomington with 6,000. The latest: A federal judge recently extended a temporary order blocking the Trump administration from revoking Harvard University's ability to host international students. After Columbia University, Harvard became the administration's main target, with ongoing battles over federal grants, student visas and more. The other side: Detractors argue that making it harder for international students to come study in the U.S. harms the country's global image, and risks missing out on key talent in hot fields like artificial intelligence.

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