China Cries Foul At Philippines, But Its Own Cruise Ship Provokes Taiwan – Analysis

In the contested waters of the Indo-Pacific, China frequently denounces the maritime activities of neighbouring countries as provocative violations of sovereignty. On April 20, 2025, Beijing accused a Philippine Navy frigate, BRP Apolinario Mabini (PS-36), of illegally intruding into Scarborough Shoal’s waters—territory clearly awarded to Manila under a landmark 2016 international ruling. 

Yet, during a similar timeframe, a Bermuda-registered Chinese cruise ship provocatively sailed within two nautical miles of Taiwan’s Hengchun Peninsula. These simultaneous incidents starkly highlight China’s maritime double standards, where it vocally condemns activities by other nations while methodically pursuing its own coercive maritime strategy.

The Philippine Navy rejected China’s allegations regarding Scarborough Shoal, asserting their routine patrol was fully compliant with international law and consistent with the 2016 Arbitral Award from The Hague, invalidating China’s expansive claims. Rear Admiral Roy Vincent Trinidad emphasised that the Philippine Navy’s mission—far from a provocative intrusion—was entirely legal, citing the Philippine Maritime Zones Act and the internationally recognised ruling rejecting China’s “nine-dash line” assertions.

Indeed, the Scarborough incident is part of a pattern. In March 2025, Philippine Coast Guard vessel BRP Cabra narrowly avoided being rammed by aggressive Chinese Coast Guard ships near Scarborough Shoal. A month earlier, a PLA helicopter dangerously manoeuvred within just three meters of a Philippine fisheries aircraft, highlighting Beijing’s increasingly assertive stance in waters legally belonging to Manila.

While condemning routine operations by regional states, China itself routinely engages in more alarming maritime provocations. On April 19, 2025, Taiwan was on high alert after the Gulangyu, a cruise vessel operated by Chinese entities but registered in Bermuda, came dangerously close—just two nautical miles—to Taiwan’s Hengchun Peninsula. Notably, the vessel, capable of carrying approximately 1,800 passengers—a force equivalent to a military battalion—broadcasted provocative messages on social media platforms reading, “Taiwan is China.”

Taiwan’s Ocean Affairs Council Minister, Kuan Bi-ling, described the incident as a classic example of China’s broader “grey-zone maritime” strategy—a policy of coercion designed to achieve strategic aims without sparking open conflict. Taiwan responded with increased monitoring, recognising that civilian vessels like the Gulangyu could swiftly transition from harmless tourism to strategic assets in a crisis.

Indeed, the Gulangyu incident recalls similar episodes, such as the February 2025 incident involving the Togo-flagged, Chinese-owned ship Hong Tai 58, which severed critical undersea cables in the Taiwan Strait, clearly indicating Beijing’s willingness to exploit civilian assets for strategic gain.

Experts categorise such actions as grey-zone tactics—operations intentionally crafted to remain below the threshold of military conflict while steadily altering geopolitical realities. This strategy was detailed in recent reports from institutions like the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) and the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). 

According to these reports, China deliberately deploys ostensibly civilian vessels, maritime militia, and covert sabotage to incrementally establish dominance in disputed waters without openly triggering armed conflict.

Regional stakeholders have responded vigorously to China’s coercion. 

The Quad nations (India, the US, Japan, and Australia) have publicly condemned Beijing’s aggressive manoeuvres, committing to uphold a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific.” Simultaneously, recent Balikatan military exercises by the Philippines and the US explicitly included scenarios simulating the defence of Scarborough Shoal, sending a clear deterrent message.

From a legal perspective, China’s actions appear particularly problematic. Maritime law experts highlight Beijing’s blatant disregard for established international norms, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Under UNCLOS, the innocent passage doctrine allows civilian vessels peaceful transit through territorial seas. However, deliberate intimidation or sabotage clearly violates these provisions. The 2016 Arbitral Tribunal’s ruling unequivocally affirmed Philippine sovereignty over its EEZ, making China’s repeated incursions at Scarborough Shoal both provocative and unlawful.

Analysts warn that China’s persistent use of civilian assets for military signalling significantly escalates risks of unintended conflict. A CNAS report (2024) explicitly cautioned that Beijing’s incremental aggression—known as “salami-slicing”—risks accidental clashes that could spiral into broader confrontations, notably around Scarborough Shoal and Taiwan. Consequently, the international community, including the G7 nations, has begun developing coordinated diplomatic, economic, and security measures designed explicitly to counteract Chinese coercion.

Given China’s assertive rhetoric against others’ routine maritime operations, Beijing’s overt provocations appear even more glaringly hypocritical. The Philippines and Taiwan—alongside regional powers such as India, Japan, and Australia—are increasingly vocal about China’s disruptive and duplicitous maritime practices. Bolstered by proactive regional security cooperation, international legal frameworks are increasingly being leveraged to challenge and expose Beijing’s maritime double standards.

As Beijing intensifies its maritime coercion strategy, the Indo-Pacific is becoming a critical testing ground for the resilience of international law and collective regional resolve. These recent episodes around Scarborough Shoal and Taiwan’s coastline emphasise the necessity of coordinated action among Indo-Pacific nations to push back against Beijing’s persistent grey-zone provocations.

China’s strategy of aggressive maritime coercion wrapped in diplomatic accusations against others risks undermining regional stability. The hypocrisy inherent in Beijing’s tactics—highlighted starkly by these simultaneous incidents—exposes the underlying agenda of asserting unilateral control over the contested Indo-Pacific waters, reinforcing the urgency for regional and global action to maintain maritime peace and order.