A Global Times editorial on the 28th dismissed claims that a Philippine Coast Guard vessel ‘tailed’ China's Liaoning carrier group as exaggerated publicity. Manila's military, which disclosed on the 26th that the group passed waters west of Mindanao on the 22nd, says there is no cause for alarm.
Philippine outlet astig.ph, relaying statements from military spokesperson Rear Adm. Roy Vincent Trinidad and others, reported that the Liaoning carrier group transited waters under the Western Mindanao Command on October 22. The command spotted it near Sarangani, and its closest approach was about 50 nautical miles from shore. The military disclosed the transit only four days later, on the 26th.
광고 문의 · 300×250The Philippine account
According to that outlet, the Philippines used the frigate BRP Diego Silang, the patrol ship BRP Emilio Jacinto and the Coast Guard vessel BRP Sarangani to watch the group, with the air force adding a helicopter and a transport aircraft. Chinese ships did not answer radio challenges, which Trinidad said is not unusual. He linked the passage to the US- and Japan-involved Keen Sword exercise, in which he said Manila is only an observer.
Trinidad called the route unusual, since Chinese carriers normally pass on the eastern side, whereas this group went along the west into the Sulu and Celebes seas. The Western Mindanao Command urged residents to stay calm and rely on official information and did not say whether a diplomatic protest was lodged. The transit came a day before the 22nd Philippines-Japan-US maritime cooperative activity ended.
Beijing's reading
The Global Times editorial argued that the Philippine vessel merely trailed far behind and took a few photos, which Manila then hyped as ‘tracking’ and ‘monitoring’. It said the Liaoning's western Pacific training is a routine, planned annual activity that follows international law and practice and targets no particular country. It described the ship as a retired coast guard rescue vessel donated by Taiwan's authorities, a claim this paper could not independently verify.
The editorial also cited a Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson as conceding the action ‘may still fall within internationally recognized navigation rights’, and accused Manila of redirecting domestic economic and political pressure into external threats. China's stated position is that it firmly defends its sovereignty and maritime rights and favors managing differences through dialogue. The two accounts differ on the nature of the exercises, the ship's identity and what the monitoring means, and independently verified facts remain limited.
