U.S. briefly deploys 2 warships to a disputed South China Sea shoal after Chinese collision
MANILA, Philippines — The United States deployed two warships on Wednesday in a disputed South China Sea shoal, where two Chinese navy and coast guard ships collided two days ago while trying to drive away a smaller Philippine ship in a high-seas accident captured on video, alarming several Western and Asian countries.
Both China and the Philippines claim Scarborough Shoal and other outcroppings in the South China Sea. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also lay overlapping claims in the contested waters.
The USS Higgins, a guided missile destroyer, and USS Cincinnati, a littoral combat ship, were shadowed by a Chinese navy ship while sailing about 30 nautical miles (55 kilometres) from the Scarborough Shoal. There were no reports of any untoward incident, Philippine coast guard Commodore Jay Tarriela said, citing information from U.S. officials and a Philippine surveillance flight.
The U.S. navy has staged what it calls freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea for years to challenge China's restrictions and demand for entry notifications in virtually the entire stretch of the disputed waters that it claims. That has angered China and its forces have had close runs-in with U.S. warships and aircraft on such patrols in international waters and airspace.
The deployment happened after Washington's ambassador to Manila, MaryKay Carlson, condemned on Tuesday 'the latest reckless action by China directed against a Philippine vessel' in Scarborough. The rich fishing atoll off the northwestern Philippines has been the scene of increasingly tense confrontations between the Chinese and Philippine coast guard, fishing and other ships in recent years.
The Philippines is the oldest treaty ally of the U.S. in Asia. Washington has repeatedly warned that it's obligated to defend the Philippines if Filipino forces come under an armed attack, including in the South China Sea.
On Monday, a Chinese navy destroyer and a Chinese coast guard ship accidentally collided while trying to block and drive away a smaller Philippine coast guard ship, the BRP Suluan, about 10.5 nautical miles (19 kilometres) from Scarborough. Video footages made public by the Philippine coast guard show the Chinese coast guard ship blasting its powerful water cannon and a number of Chinese personnel standing at the bow shortly before that section was hit by the fast-turning Chinese navy ship.
Shortly after the collision, the video shows the heavily shattered bow of the Chinese coast guard ship without the Chinese personnel, who were standing on deck before the crash. The Chinese navy ship sustained deep dents and what appeared to be linear gushes on its hull.
Japan, Australia and New Zealand expressed alarm on Wednesday over the dangerous maneuvers that led to the collision in the busy waters, a key global trade route.
'Japan upholds the rule of law and opposes any actions which increase tensions. Our concern goes to the repeated actions in the South China Sea,' Japanese Ambassador to Manila Endo Kazuya said in a post on X.
The Australian Embassy in Manila expressed concern 'by the dangerous and unprofessional conduct of Chinese vessels near Scarborough Shoal involving the Philippine Coast Guard,' saying in a statement the incident 'highlights the need for de-escalation, restraint and respect for international law.'
'This is a learning experience for the People's Republic of China,' Tarriela, the Philippine coast guard commodore, told a news conference in Manila. 'For so many years, we have been reminding them to stop dangerous maneuvers, to stop risky blockings, to adhere to the (anti-)collision regulations because if there is a very high chance of miscalculation, this kind of collision incident would happen.'
Tarriela spoke a few hours after a Chinese fighter jet flew as close as 152 metres to try to drive away a Philippine coast guard plane on a surveillance flight on Wednesday over the Scarborough with invited journalists on board. The Chinese jet carried out dangerous manoeuvres for about 20 minutes, including flying about 61 metres above the small Philippine aircraft, Tarriela said.
___
Associated Press writers Joeal Calupitan and Aaron Favila in Manila, Philippines, contributed to this report.
Jim Gomez, The Associated Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
8 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Letters to the editor, Aug. 17: ‘If Canada was a business … it would be bankrupt'
Re 'Nuclear threats, Ukraine's fate cast long shadow as Putin, Trump prepare to meet' (Aug. 8): The Russian and Chinese navies carried out 'a joint drill in which they practised hunting and destroying an enemy submarine.' As a former surface ship sonarman in the Royal Canadian Navy, I can say with some authority that Western allies have been regularly doing this very thing for decades. If asked during the 1960s, the Navy would have admitted that antisubmarine warfare was our raison d'être. Indeed when, a few years into my career, I served in Canada's submarine service, a major part of our job was to act as a target for allied forces trying to hone their skills. It should be noted that in those war games, the submarines usually won. Gord Hunter Regina Re 'Ontario universities must be released from their financial chokehold' (Aug. 11): I believe educating our youth is of paramount importance, and entrance fees must be affordable for all. Allowing our institutions to increase fees as needed would produce a U.S. model of unaffordable postsecondary education. Ontario and Canada are prioritizing government dollars for health care for older citizens over accessible education for the young. This makes no sense to me when about nearly three-quarters of all health care dollars are spent on patients over 60, while a similar amount of all personal wealth is in the hands of the same 60-plus crowd, including myself. It is time to start asking us old folks to open our wallets and free up public funds for better university access. Those who are not affluent can be dealt with under the tax system to support their needs. If Canada was a business, with inadequate focus on rebuilding its workforce, it would be bankrupt. David Parkes Ottawa Re 'Ontario labour group urges more worker protections amid rising air quality concerns' (Online, Aug. 6): Good for the Ontario Federation of Labour for taking the threat of wildfire smoke seriously and pushing for stronger worker protections. We find ourselves in a time of rapid change, and our policies and procedures should adapt accordingly. I think it's also worth taking a moment to reflect on how summer air quality is now a mainstream concern in Southern Ontario. As recently as three years ago, many would have found the OFL's advocacy radical. 'Smoke days' have only been a regular occurrence here since the summer of 2023. We can sit and ponder the reasons why wildfire season has gotten so much worse, but the science points pretty convincingly toward climate change. Let's remember that smoky skies in Toronto aren't some freak occurrence. If we want to stop this situation from getting much, much worse, we need to fight climate change, and that means reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. Mary Blake Rose London, Ont. Re 'It's not a bird! It's a Super Scooper plane, Canada's most powerful waterbombing tool to fight against wildfires' (Opinion, Aug. 9) and 'You can't fly sovereignty on foreign fuel' (Aug. 14): Thanks for publishing creative proposals to shake us out of the plodding complacency that won't cut it any longer in this time of multiple crises. We could use canola oil produced by tariff-battered Prairie farmers to ramp up production of low-emission aviation fuel. At the same time, we desperately need more water bombers to fight forest fires that threaten to become a permanent feature of summer; Canada produces one of the world's best in the 'Super Scooper.' Foreseeing an increase in global demand for water bombers and low-emission fuels, let's invest in our farmers and aerospace sector, strengthening our economy while combatting both the main cause and worst effects of that other existential crisis: climate change. Norm Beach Toronto Re 'Toronto the Grind: Making your way around has never been such a slog' (Opinion, Aug. 9): I think most everybody can agree that, at base, the issue comes down to having either condo construction at a breakneck pace, or the ability to travel around Toronto more seamlessly. We can't have both. Many voices have urged solutions to the traffic problem for years while still being able to build condos, but I find that all these ideas just nibble around the edges. Ultimately, it appears that the 'leadership,' developers and majority of the city's politicians have made one choice in favour of erecting condos – and I believe the vast majority of citizens have made the opposite choice. Ross Hollingshead Toronto I'm always struck by how those who once lived in Toronto, when returning after a long period away, invariably talk traffic chaos. Why is it that those of us who live here simply put up with it and don't demand change and progress? It feels like millions of us are simply the frog in the pot on the stove. We've been in the hot water so long, we've simply accepted it. We shouldn't. Traffic chaos should be an absolute priority at city hall. Stephen Kouri Toronto Blaming Toronto traffic and transit woes on a lack of leadership feels rather a cop-out. Whose leadership? When Toronto consults with residents and produces plans to deal with transportation or housing issues, they most often get shot down by the province. These decisions are then almost always upheld by the courts because, after all, the city 'is a creature of the province.' The province ordering the city to rip out bike lanes? More than 14 years (and counting) for the Eglinton Crosstown LRT? Historic underfunding of public transit? Road and construction deadlock? In whose mind is that acceptable transportation planning for a big city? Unless Toronto has real power under the Constitution to make its own decisions and real authority to raise needed funds, the power and politics and blame games between the city, the province and the feds will continue. And so will Toronto's transportation and transit woes. Monica Franklin Toronto Poor planning, political meddling and financial profligacy has steadily degraded nearly all methods of mobility in and around Toronto. Rather than focusing on transit improvements by studying global best practices and optimizing modal integration, it seems our provincial government has a better answer: Make space for more cars and spend tons of taxpayer money in the process – for what? This populist, tail-chasing process ensures that mobility woes remain entrenched. Exacerbating the problem is that new public transportation infrastructure costs in Toronto are among the highest in the world on a per-kilometre basis, and involved provincial departments seem to be doing little to correct this. Who is accountable for the fact that the three-stop Scarborough subway extension cost has now doubled from $5.5-billion to $10.2-billion? Making Toronto into a world-class city would mean replacing populism with foresight and pragmatism, by investing rather than spending. We continue to suffer the consequences. Kenneth Westcar Woodstock, Ont. Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@
Globe and Mail
a day ago
- Globe and Mail
Trump's economic meddling suggests a new kind of pay-to-play corporatism
U.S. President Donald Trump has long taken a transactional approach to economic management. He has threatened tariffs against trading partners to extract concessions, and pushed them to purchase American energy, soybeans and Boeing Co. BA-N jets to maintain access to the world's largest consumer market. Recently, the President has found a new group to shake down: American companies. This week chipmakers Nvidia Corp. NVDA-Q and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. AMD-Q agreed to pay the U.S. Treasury 15 per cent of the profits earned from selling certain advanced semiconductors in China in return for export licences. With never-ending tariff drama, the Canadian economy limps along Earlier this year, Mr. Trump demanded the U.S. government get a 'golden share' – giving it certain veto powers – as a condition for approving Nippon Steel Corp.'s NPSCY takeover of U.S. Steel Corp., and the administration is in talks to take a direct stake in Intel Corp. INTC-Q, according to media reports. The President has also called for Intel's chief executive officer to step down and said Goldman Sachs should fire its chief economist. These interventions in the private sector are happening alongside attacks on institutions that underpin well-functioning markets. Mr. Trump has threatened to fire Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell for not lowering interest rates. And he sacked the head of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics last week following an unflattering jobs report and is seeking to install a MAGA loyalist. The United States is not about to abandon market capitalism for state-centric planning, economists say. But the President does seem to favour a pay-to-play economy in which foreign countries and domestic companies pay tribute to the White House for special privileges, and business decisions are increasingly influenced by political considerations. That, economists warn, is a recipe for slower economic growth, less innovation and lower living standards over time. Past American presidents, from both parties, have used their bully pulpit alongside more aggressive measures, such as antitrust investigations, to bend the private sector, said Ryan Bourne, an economist at the Cato Institute, a libertarian-oriented think tank. 'The difference this time is that we've got to a position where the President is making deals with specific firms and demanding specific individuals resign, and telling specific companies how they can advertise their prices, and tying licences to export, effectively, to direct payments to the Treasury,' Mr. Bourne said. 'I think that the best way to think about this as a kind of economic framework is kind of like maximalist corporatism,' he said. That model is more familiar in emerging-market economies, in which weak institutions let politicians skim off the top and direct business to well-connected insiders, or in state-centric systems, such as China, where governments play a major role in allocating capital. The U.S. is hardly China – although Mr. Trump has said he'll personally direct the hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of investments other countries have promised to make in the U.S. as part of recent trade deals. And American institutions, particularly the courts, remain a check on government overreach. But there is a risk that President Trump's private-sector deal-making will distort business decisions and undercut smaller companies. 'I really worry about the competitive landscape with this,' said Mr. Bourne. 'You can come to a deal with Nvidia, AMD, Apple, these massive global companies. But the idea that some small manufacturer being squashed by tariffs is going to be able to get an audience with the President, specific exemptions or carveouts, is for the birds.' Economists also worry about Mr. Trump's attempt to exert more control over institutions, such as the Fed and the BLS, which help create the conditions for private markets to operate. Mr. Trump has walked back his threats to fire Mr. Powell, whose term as Fed chair ends in May, and financial markets have largely discounted the possibility. But the President and his top officials continue to call for huge interest rate cuts, muddying the water for the independent central bank as it tries to balance the inflationary impact of tariffs against a possible economic slowdown. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump's decision to fire the BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer – after a monthly employment report that revised down recent job creation numbers – and replace her with E.J. Antoni, chief economist of the Trump-aligned Heritage Foundation, has led some economists to worry about the quality of U.S. government data going forward. Opinion: How the new policy elite have caricatured the dismal science John Sabelhaus, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former Fed statistician, said it would be difficult for a Trump loyalist, or anyone else, to rig U.S. economic data. Information about the labour market comes from too many different sources, at the state and national level, as well as from the private sector, to fudge over an extended period, he said. The bigger concern is 'that they're going to gut the BLS, and that they'll just stop producing the numbers that you need, and we lose the ability to measure the economy,' he said. Statistical agencies have already been starved of funding for years, and that trend could accelerate, he said. 'Operating in a market environment involves having the information, and we're destroying that. So, the ability of companies to make good rational decisions is really at risk.' In all of this, it's not clear whether Mr. Trump is pursuing an ideological agenda or simply trying to shore up his power and secure 'wins' he can sell to the American public, said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative, market-oriented think tank in Washington. 'Xi Jinping wanted to create a model of corporatism, state capitalism, and was very good at doing that … I think it's going beyond the evidence to argue that President Trump wants to inaugurate a state capitalist regime,' said Dr. Strain, referring to China's President. 'It's probably more likely that President Trump doesn't have strong views on different economic systems and just kind of wanted to shake down Nvidia.' Dr. Strain said that Mr. Trump's approach to the economy is currently ascendant in Washington, but it doesn't necessarily run deep within the rest of the Republican Party. 'If you put all 53 Republican senators in a room and you ask them in an anonymous poll: 'How many of you think that Nvidia should be shaken down to hand over 15 per cent of their Chinese sales revenue? How many of you think the U.S. should have a golden share in Nippon Steel? How many of you think the President should be able to ignore the law and not enforce the TikTok legislation that passed both houses?' You get 52 of them who would say this is all crazy,' said Dr. Strain. But publicly, politicians formerly committed to free markets and private enterprise have largely kept their heads down and avoided criticizing the powerful President. 'If you look, you can already see people standing up,' Dr. Strain said. 'But it's not most of them.'
CBC
2 days ago
- CBC
Indians protest Trump's tariff threats
Indian workers, farmers and students across the country staged protests against U.S. President Donald Trump's tariff threats on Wednesday. Trump has vowed to impose an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods on Aug. 27, which would raise duties on some exports to as high as 50 per cent.
