Chinese Ships Put On Show of Force in Neighbor's Economic Waters
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A Chinese coast guard and paramilitary ship are nearing two weeks of patrols in the energy-rich waters of Malaysia's exclusive economic zone.
Chinese government or state-sponsored vessels were observed in the area on 359 days last year, a slight uptick from 2023, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank.
Why It Matters
China claims most of the South China Sea, citing historical rights—despite an international tribunal's 2016 decision rejecting the country's sweeping claims. These claims overlap with competing claims by several neighboring countries.
The encroachment has been met with a more muted response from Kuala Lumpur compared with U.S. ally the Philippines. Yet Beijing's challenge could set the stage for increased tensions as Malaysia expands its oil and gas exploration and development.
Newsweek reached out to the Chinese embassy in Malaysia and the Malaysian foreign ministry via emailed requests for comment outside of office hours.
What To Know
Chinese coast guard vessel 5403 and a maritime militia vessel Yue Hui Wan Yu 22888 on Tuesday remained around 100 miles off the coast of Sarawak state in Malaysian Borneo after first being observed on July 10, according to ship-tracking data shared with Newsweek by maritime analyst Ray Powell.
This is well within Malaysia's exclusive economic zone, within which Malaysia alone is entitled to natural resources under maritime law.
Powell described the patrols as "intrusive" and intended to normalize China's sovereignty claims in its neighbor's maritime zone.
A Chinese Coast Guard ship is seen near the Philippine-occupied island of Thitu in the disputed South China Sea on June 3, 2025.
A Chinese Coast Guard ship is seen near the Philippine-occupied island of Thitu in the disputed South China Sea on June 3, 2025.
Ted Aljibe/AFP via Getty Images
One of three gas fields that began production last year, state-owned operator Petronas started producing gas at Kasawari in August 2024, with an initial flow rate of 200 million standard cubic feet per day. The field is estimated to hold about 10 trillion cubic feet of gas.
In a diplomatic note from China's foreign ministry to the Malaysian embassy in Beijing—leaked to The Philippine Daily Inquirer—China reiterated its "firm opposition" to Malaysia's exploration and development activities, calling them an infringement on China's sovereignty.
The leak prompted a rare public statement on the issue from Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who played down the impact of the controversy on bilateral relations while pledging to continue the projects.
What People Have Said
Ray Powell, the director of the Stanford University-affiliated maritime analysis group SeaLight, wrote on X, formerly Twitter: "People's Republic of China maritime militia ships 'act as frontline enforcers of China's maritime claims and work in close coordination with the China Coast Guard'—as with Yue Hui Wan Yu 22888 clearly coordinating with China Coast Guard 5403 on this patrol."
Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said in September after China's objections over the gas exploration: "We will continue, but we will not close the door on discussions with any country.
"We have issues but these issues do not affect diplomatic relations. These issues do not affect trade relations and close friendships with our neighbors."
What's Next
Production from Kasawari and the other new offshore fields is expected to deliver a significant boost to both Malaysia's domestic energy supply and exports.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies has cautioned, however, that Malaysia's increased activity could prompt more assertive behavior from China.
"With Malaysia's expanding drilling and a potential reduction in China-Philippine tensions, Beijing could ratchet up the pressure on Malaysian hydrocarbon production," CSIS's Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative wrote in a report late last year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
22 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump's Fed battle is not like his other political tussles
President Trump is once again floating the idea of firing Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, ostensibly in objection to excessively high interest rates. But this debate is not about monetary policy. It's a power play aimed at subordinating America's central bank to the fiscal needs of the executive branch and Congress. In other words, we have a textbook case of 'fiscal dominance' on our hands — and that always ends poorly. I'm no cheerleader for Powell. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he enthusiastically backed every stimulus package, regardless of size or purpose, as if these involved no trade-offs. Where were the calls for 'Fed independence' then? And where were the calls for fiscal restraint after the emergency was over? Powell failed to anticipate the worst inflation in four decades and repeated for far too long the absurd claim that it was 'transitory' even as mounting evidence showed otherwise. He blamed supply-side disruptions long after ports had reopened and goods were moving. And as inflation was taking a stubborn hold, Powell delayed raising interest rates — possibly to shield the Biden administration from the fiscal fallout of the debt it was piling on — well past the point when monetary tightening was needed. If this weren't the world of government, where failure can be rewarded — and if there had been a more obvious alternative — Powell wouldn't have been invited back for another term. But he was. And so Trump's pressure campaign to prematurely end Powell's tenure is dangerous. I get why with budget deficits exploding and debt-service costs surging, the president wants lower interest rates. That would make the cost of his own fiscal agenda appear more tolerable. Trump likely believes he's justified because he believes that his tax cuts and deregulation are about to spur huge economic growth. To be sure, some growth will result, though the effects of deregulation will take a while to arrive. But gains could be swamped by the negative consequences of Trump's tariffs and erratic tariff threats. No matter what, the new growth won't lead to enough new tax revenue to escape the need for the government to borrow more. And the more the government borrows, the more intense the pressure on interest rates. One thing is for sure: The pressure Trump and his people are exerting on the Fed is a push for fiscal dominance. The executive branch wants to use the central bank as a tool to accommodate the government's frenzy of reckless borrowing. Such political control of a central bank is a hallmark of failed monetary systems in weak institutional settings. History shows where that always leads: to inflation, economic stagnation and financial instability. So far, Powell is resisting cutting rates, hence the barrage of insults and threat of firing. But now is not the right time to play with fire. Bond yields surged last year as investors reckoned with the scale of U.S. borrowing. They crossed the 5% threshold again recently. Moody's even stripped the government of its prized AAA credit rating. Lower interest rates from the Fed — especially if seen as the result of raw political pressure — could further diminish the allure of U.S. Treasuries. While the Fed can temporally influence interest rates, especially in the short run, it cannot override long-term fears of inflation, economic sluggishness and political manipulation of monetary policy driven by unsustainable fiscal policy. That's where confidence matters, and confidence is eroding. This is why markets are demanding a premium for funds loaned to a government that is now $36 trillion in debt and shows no intention of slowing down. But it could get worse. If the average interest rate on U.S. debt climbs from 3.3% to 5%, interest payments alone could soar from $900 billion to $2 trillion annually. That would make debt service by far the single largest item in the federal budget — more than Medicare, Social Security, the military or any other program readers care about. And because much of this debt rolls over quickly, higher rates hit fast. At the end of the day, the bigger problem isn't Powell's monetary policy. It's the federal government's spending addiction. Trump's call to replace Powell with someone who will cut rates ignores the real math. Lower short-term interest rates will do only so much if looser monetary policy is perceived as a means of masking reckless budget deficits. That would make higher inflation a certainty, not merely a possibility. It might not arrive before the next election, but it will inevitably arrive. There is still time to avoid this cliff. Trump is right to worry about surging debt costs, but he's targeting a symptom. The solution isn't to fire Powell — it's to cure the underlying disease, which is excessive government spending. Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate.
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Bessent tamps down Powell threats
Bessent was asked on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' if the president should say he will let Powell finish his term to give certainty to the markets, after indications he would try to fire the head of the central bank have rattled them. The secretary pushed back on the question. 'I'm not sure where that question comes from, because President Trump has repeatedly said he's not going to fire Chair Powell,' Bessent said. 'He might like for him to resign, but he's not going to fire him. He's said that on numerous occasions. I think he may have even said it again yesterday.' The president said Tuesday he doesn't think Powell should resign before his term is up in May but bashed him for not lowering interest rates. 'I think he's doing a bad job, but he's going to be out soon anyway. In eight months, he'll be out,' the president said. When asked about the pressure campaign on the Fed chair to lower rates, Bessent said it is part of the role. 'I think anyone who goes into public service should expect pressure. I get pressure from the president, from the Congress, from constituents,' Bessent said.
Newsweek
23 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Full List of Republicans Who Voted to Subpoena Epstein Files from DOJ
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. Republican Representatives Nancy Mace of South Carolina, Brian Jack of Georgia and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania sided with Democrats as a House subcommittee voted Wednesday to subpoena the Department of Justice for records related to the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation. This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.
