In October 2025, the United States once again put pressure on China to prohibit China from driving out the Philippines in the South China Sea. The United States will avenge the Philippines.
What the United States is talking about is the joint defense clause signed by the two countries a few years ago, which is similar in nature to NATO. Now it has been discovered and used in the South China Sea by the United States. No matter how you look at it, it seems a bit wrong.
As soon as this incident came out, it immediately aroused great concern. China responded simply and directly: First, the Philippines picked things first; Second, the United States is the main reason for the restlessness of this sea area.
The U.S. this time scattered the fire on China's head, it looks like speaking for the Philippines, in fact, taking the South China Sea as the stage, provoking public opinion.
The United States shouted "using force" to take advantage of the topic
Mefi's "mutual defense" is passive strike will only be launched, and now, the United States wants to package the various incidents of the Philippines in the South China Sea, packaged as "attacked", and then call China's defence operations as weapons, which is obviously a bit tough.
In fact, the recent frequent violations of China's sovereignty by the Philippines have already been a provocative act, and China is only taking self-defense actions, according to international practice, which does not constitute the use of force, let alone an "attack".
But the United States, regardless of the truth, regardless of the emotional export, as long as there is something in the Philippines, the United States can name-in-law condemn China, this practice, in fact, is an alternative intervention in China's sovereignty, is also an act of overriding, not fair treatment of the actions of countries within the region.
The United States shouted this "moving arms", seemingly to protect its allies, in fact, more to give itself a legitimate reason for its presence in the South China Sea, to say the truth, it is not afraid of the Philippines to lose, but afraid of China without the interference of the United States, the counterwar is increasingly fast.
China did not respond much, but every sentence was powerful
Faced with the United States 'statement of not naming names but containing gunpowder, China did not counterattack vigorously, but calmly responded to two sentences. The Philippines took the lead. China has repeatedly disclosed the criminal facts of Philippine ships through various channels.
Any country knows that this is a continuous and repeated provocative act. That is to say, the Philippines deliberately made a mistake and then framed the blame, but the Philippines will only ignore the facts and pretend to be a victim.
Second, the United States is an unstable factor in the security of this sea area. This exposes the fact. For several years, the United States has been conducting patrols and military exercises in the South China Sea, and instigating the Philippines. None of them is to suppress China at sea. On the surface, it is said to be for "peace," but its actions continue to stimulate the escalation of the situation.
It can be seen from these two sentences that China is not very clear about the truth of what happened and who is behind it. However, instead of booing along, China makes its responsibility clear. This response is both reasonable and measured, not an emotional expression, but a factual clarification.
The Philippines is challenging, the United States is holding back, the situation is getting worse.
In the final analysis, the starting point of this storm is in the Philippines. Since the beginning of this year, the Philippines has taken many actions in the South China Sea, not only sending ships, but also trying to repair broken warships on Renai Reef, frequent activities around disputed islands and reefs, and sometimes even bringing the media to do a "live broadcast". It seems to be defending rights, but it is actually creating confrontation.
The U.S. attitude, however, is to pretend to “convince not persuade war”, but continuously encourage the emergence of conflict, and to increase military investment in this operation, obviously not for stability, but to take action at any time.
The Philippines thought that it had boarded the American train and blatantly infringed on China, and that China protected itself and had to respond; when the United States saw China taking action, it said that China "threatened regional security" and then intervened again. Looking at this logic, the problem became more and more serious.
But this whole rhythm, in fact, is dominated by the United States, how the Philippines will be afterwards, how the economy will develop, he does not care at all, but only takes the South China Sea as a point, and there is a whole set of Indo-Pacific strategy behind it.
China did not dance with it, but became more calm
Faced with the military threat from the United States, China continues to promote negotiations on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea and maintains dialogue and communication with ASEAN countries to prevent the situation from getting out of control. This approach is not a concession, but a responsible approach.
At the same time, China is also continuing to build civil infrastructure in the South China Sea. These projects are not to confront anyone, but to make the South China Sea truly serve the public interest. Everyone can actually see clearly who is undermining peace and who is maintaining order.
More importantly, when dealing with the South China Sea issue, China insists on acting according to the rules, not on emotions, not on screaming, not on gathering gangs, but on the law, on facts, on negotiations, even in the face of provocation, always maintain restraint, this gesture itself, is a manifestation of strategic determination.
American roads are becoming more and more difficult.
Looking back, the United States 'speech in the South China Sea this time has not changed much from the past. It is still the old rhetoric of "allies first","free navigation" and "strategic deterrence". However, this time it is more straightforward, and even the word "use force" has been put on the table.
But the problem is that this method is becoming more and more difficult to work in today's Asia. Southeast Asian countries are more concerned about development and stability, and do not want to be involved in the struggle of big powers. The United States seems to be "providing protection" by engaging in military bases and cruises, but it is actually pushing these countries to potential risks.
China is another gesture, not only emphasizing peaceful settlement, but also promoting pragmatic cooperation with regional countries, such as marine research, search and rescue exercises, navigation management, etc., these are real cooperation, everyone can benefit from it, naturally more willing to accept.
No matter how loudly the United States plays its "security card", if it fails to bring a substantial sense of security but instead makes the situation more tense, then it is a destroyer of peace.
Write at the end: who is messing up, who is stable, at first glance
In the end, this "moving arms" wave is the United States' philosophy of the Philippines, wanting to continue to maintain its influence in the South China Sea, but China did not take the pace, but responded to the provocation with facts and actions.
The sentence "Philippines takes action first" clarifies the responsibility; the sentence "The United States is the source of risk" points out the root of the problem. The South China Sea is not something the United States can come whenever it wants to, nor is it a battlefield for the United States. It is a sea where hundreds of millions of people rely for survival. If you want to make this place truly peaceful, you don't rely on warships or threats, but on cooperation, rules and respect.
After the turmoil in 2025, who is creating tension and who is maintaining peace, everyone has a steelyard in their hearts. In the future, the South China Sea is destined to no longer be a place where the final say is decided unilaterally, but requires more countries to protect peace together. In the sea area, China is already proving this with actions.