Japan says Chinese fighter jets risked collision after close encounter over Pacific

Japan said Chinese fighter jets risked a collision with one of its surveillance planes during a close encounter over the Pacific.
In a statement on Wednesday, the Japanese defence ministry said a P-3C patrol plane monitoring China 's Shandong aircraft carrier over the weekend was followed by a pair of J-15 fighters. The jets, which took off from the carrier, tailed the military surveillance aircraft for 40 minutes and 80 minutes, respectively.
'The government has raised serious concerns with the Chinese side, including to the Chinese ambassador in Tokyo, through the vice minister of foreign affairs, and has strongly urged them to prevent such incidents from recurring,' cabinet secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi said at a news briefing on Thursday.
Japan 'will continue to spare no effort to ensure vigilance and surveillance activities in the airspace and waters surrounding Japan in order to resolutely defend Japan's territorial waters, airspace and territorial rights,' he added.
Photos shared by Japan's defence ministry showed a J-15 fighter jet flying dangerously close and parallel to the surveillance aircraft. At one point, the J-15 crossed nearly 900 metres in front of the P-3C's flight path.
While declining to comment on any Chinese military intention behind the dangerous manoeuvres, a Japanese government spokesperson claimed that such 'unusual close approaches by Chinese military aircraft could potentially lead to accidental collisions'.
Japanese officials delayed the public disclosure of the recent close encounters with Chinese planes in order to interview the P-3C's crew and assess the flight data, The Japan Times reported.
The Japanese navy sighted two Chinese aircraft carriers conducting simultaneous operations in the Pacific for the first time over the weekend, in a move signalling Beijing 's intention to expand its blue water capabilities.
Liaoning and Shandong were seen operating in separate areas of the Pacific Ocean, the Japanese defence ministry said.
The Shandong strike group was seen carrying out what appeared to be takeoff and landing operations of its fighter jets and helicopters about 500km southwest of Iwo Jima and north of Okinotori. The Liaoning group was located 300km southwest of Minamitori Island on Saturday and slightly farther away on Sunday. It was also operating its air wings.
The carriers were found in the blue waters beyond Japan 's Second Island Chain.
Considered the second line of defence in the event of a military escalation by China, the chain comprises a strategic group of islands in the middle of the West Pacific, including a US military base in Guam, around 2,700km from Taiwan.
Confirming the presence of its carriers in the East Asian waters, Beijing on Tuesday said Liaoning and Shandong carriers were carrying out the training 'to test the forces' capabilities in far seas defence and joint operations'.
The exercises were a 'routine training' without Beijing targeting any specific country, Chinese navy spokesperson, senior captain Wang Xuemeng, said.
Since May, China has been increasing its presence in East Asian waters by sending an unusually large number of naval and coast guard vessels to the region. At the same time, it has been conducting daily military drills in the Taiwan Strait, which critics have described as staged exercises aimed at escalating military pressure on the self-governed island.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

15 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

MAGA loyalist Danica Patrick fires off message to Donald Trump after president's strikes on Iran

Donald Trump 's decision to bomb Iran after years of condemning America's involvement in Middle Eastern wars is being criticized by some MAGA faithful – just not Danica Patrick. Instead, the NASCAR and Indy Car trail blazer doubled down on her support for the President in a series of patriotic online posts following the controversial attack. The first post did not directly mention Trump, but rather addressed US soldiers stationed around the world – a group that could be impacted by a potential Iranian military response. 'Thank you to all that keep America safe and strong,' Patrick captioned the post, which shows her driving a speed boat with the US flag flapping away in the background. Patrick included Creedence Clearwater Revival's 'Fortunate Son' with her post, which is less of a patriotic anthem than a protest of privileged Americans avoiding Vietnam War service. But lest anyone think the song selection was a dig at Trump, who famously missed the Vietnam War with college and medical deferments, Patrick's subsequent post made her allegiance perfectly clear. 'Get in!' read the caption of above an AI-generated image of Trump dressed as a fighter pilot in a jet cockpit. 'We're making the world great again!' Although careful not to criticize Trump directly, conservative firebrands like Georgian Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and podcaster Tucker Carlson have slammed the US bombing of sites linked to Iran's nuclear program. Trump has since claimed Carlson called him to apologize for his commentary about the US involvement in Iran, Israel and the Middle East. 'He called and apologized the other day because he thought he had said things that were a little bit too strong, and I appreciate that,' Trump said. Both Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have stressed the US is not interested in another regime change in the Middle East. However, Trump contracted that message in a Sunday social media post. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, "Regime Change," but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Patrick had never voted before 2024, but came out strongly in favor of Trump during the last presidential election. 'Don't you guys find it amazing that you can say, 'I love this country,' and it means you're Republican,' the 42-year-old said at an event called 'AmericaFest' back in December. 'That you can wear an American flag and it means you're Republican. 'Why aren't these things American?

BBC News

35 minutes ago

• BBC News

Strait of Hormuz: What happens if Iran shuts global oil corridor?

There is considerable speculation that Iran might retaliate for the US's strikes on its nuclear facilities by closing the world's busiest oil shipping channel, the Strait of Hormuz. About 20% of global oil and gas flows through this narrow shipping lane in the Gulf. Blocking it would have profound consequences for the global economy, disrupting international trade and ratcheting up oil prices. It could also inflate the cost of goods and services worldwide, and hit some of the world's biggest economies, including China, India and Japan, which are among the top importers of crude oil passing through the strait. What is the Strait of Hormuz - and where is it? The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world's most important shipping routes, and its most vital oil transit choke point. Bounded to the north by Iran and to the south by Oman and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the corridor – which is only about 50km (31 miles) wide at its entrance and exit, and about 33km wide at its narrowest point – connects the Gulf with the Arabian Sea. The strait is deep enough for the world's biggest crude oil tankers, and is used by the major oil and gas producers in the Middle East – and their customers. In the first half of 2023 around 20 million barrels of oil went through the Strait of Hormuz per day, according to estimates from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) – that's nearly $600bn (£448bn) worth of energy trade per year. That oil comes not only from Iran, but also other Gulf states such as Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. What would be the impact of closing the strait? Former head of the UK's intelligence agency MI6, Sir Alex Younger, told the BBC his worst-case scenario in the ongoing Iran-Israel conflict included a blockade on the Hormuz Strait. "Closing the strait would be obviously an incredible economic problem given the effect it would have on the oil price," he said. It would be "uncharted terrain", according to Bader Al-Saif, an assistant professor at Kuwait University who specialises in geopolitics of the Arabian Peninsula. "It would have direct consequences on world markets, because you're going to look at an uptick in the oil price, [and] you're going to see the stock markets reacting very nervously to what's happening," Mr Al-Saif told BBC Newshour. It would, of course, hurt the Gulf countries whose economies rely heavily on energy exports. Saudi Arabia, for instance, uses the strait to export around 6 million barrels of crude oil per day - more than any neighbouring country - according to research by analytics firm Vortexa. Iran, by comparison, exports about 1.7 million barrels per day, according to the International Energy Agency. Iran exported $67bn worth of oil in the financial year ending March 2025 – its highest oil revenue in the past decade – according to estimates by the Central Bank of Iran. Asia too would be hit hard. In 2022, around 82% of crude oil and condensates (low-density liquid hydrocarbons that typically occur with natural gas) leaving the Strait of Hormuz were bound for Asian countries, according to EIA estimates. China alone is estimated to buy around 90% of the oil that Iran exports to the global market. Any disruptions to that could increase fuel and production costs at a time when China is having to rely on manufacturing and exports. That's not just a domestic problem, either: rising manufacturing costs could eventually be passed on to consumers, fuelling inflation around the world. The impact could also be outsized for other key Asian economies, which are among the biggest importers, after China. Nearly half India's crude oil and 60% of its natural gas imports pass through the Strait of Hormuz. South Korea reportedly gets 60% of its crude oil through the strait, and Japan nearly three-quarters. How could Iran close the strait? United Nations rules allow countries to exercise control up to 12 nautical miles (13.8 miles) from their coastline. This means that at its narrowest point, the Strait of Hormuz and its shipping lanes lie entirely within Iran and Oman's territorial waters. If Iran were to try and block the 3,000 or so ships that sail through the strait each month, one of the most effective ways to do it, according to experts, would be to lay mines using fast attack boats and submarines. Iran's regular navy and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) navy could potentially launch attacks on foreign warships and commercial vessels. However, large military ships may in turn become easy targets for US air strikes. Iran's fast boats are often armed with anti-ship missiles, and the country also operates a range of surface vessels, semi-submersible craft and submarines. Experts say Iran could block the strait temporarily, but many are equally confident that the US and its allies could swiftly re-establish the flow of maritime traffic through military means. The US has done this before. In the late 1980s, during the eight-year Iran-Iraq war, strikes on oil facilities escalated into a "tanker war" that saw both countries attacking neutral ships to exert economic pressure. Kuwaiti tankers carrying Iraqi oil were especially vulnerable – and eventually, American warships began escorting them through the Gulf in what became the biggest naval convoy operation since World War II. Will Iran block the strait? While Iran has repeatedly threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz in past conflicts, it has never followed through. Perhaps the closest call was during the tanker war of the late 1980s – but even then, shipping through the Strait of Hormuz was never seriously disrupted. If Iran delivers on its threat, this time could be different. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has claimed that Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz would amount to "economic suicide", and called on China, an ally of Tehran, to intervene. "I encourage the Chinese government in Beijing to call them [Iran] about that, because they heavily depend on the Strait of Hormuz for their oil," Rubio said in an interview with Fox News on Sunday. "We retain options to deal with that, but other countries should be looking at that as well. It would hurt other countries' economies a lot worse than ours." Though China is yet to respond, Beijing is highly unlikely to welcome any rise in oil prices or disruptions to shipping routes, and could leverage its diplomatic weight to dissuade the Iranian government from going ahead with the blockade. Energy analyst Vandana Hari said Iran has "little to gain and too much to lose" from closing the Strait. "Iran risks turning its oil and gas producing neighbours in the Gulf into enemies and invoking the ire of its key market China by disrupting traffic in the Strait," Hari told BBC News. Can alternative routes offset a blockade? The persistent threat of a closure of the Strait of Hormuz has, over the years, prompted oil-exporting countries in the Gulf region to develop alternative export routes. According to an EIA report, Saudi Arabia has activated its East–West pipeline, a 1,200km-long line capable of transporting up to 5m barrels of crude oil per day. In 2019, Saudi Arabia temporarily repurposed a natural gas pipeline to carry crude oil. The United Arab Emirates has connected its inland oilfields to the port of Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman via a pipeline with a daily capacity of 1.5 million barrels. In July 2021, Iran inaugurated the Goreh–Jask pipeline, intended to move crude oil to the Gulf of Oman. This pipeline can currently carry around 350,000 barrels per day - although reports suggest Iran does not yet. The EIA estimates that these alternative routes could collectively handle around 3.5 million barrels of oil per day - roughly 15% of the crude currently shipped through the strait.

The Independent

an hour ago

• The Independent

AOC humiliates Pete Hegseth after tweet congratulating him on not leaking Iran attack information

Praise poured in for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after he didn't leak U.S. plans to bomb Iranian nuclear sites – a low standard Democrats were quick to mock. Newsmax host Todd Starnes applauded Hegseth's efforts on X, writing, Not a single leak. Well done, @SecDef' seemingly referencing the so-called 'Signal-gate' scandal. The incident saw the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic added to a group chat with national security officials, including Hegseth, as a drone strike got underway against Houthi rebels in Yemen. Critics of President Donald Trump's administration, led by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, held back any praise for the embattled Defense Secretary. 'This is like applauding a grown man for being able to wipe their behind,' the New York Democrat wrote on X. 'Not exactly a vote of confidence.' Other X users were quick to join in on the mocking, with one person adding, 'LOL. He didn't pee himself either! WHAT A BIG BOY!' 'The signal app was down,' another social media user joked. 'This is such an embarrassing new standard to try to celebrate,' another person said. Another user quipped: 'MAGA praising Pete for not leaking war plans again is like giving a toddler a medal for not eating glue – congratulations, he finally did the bare minimum.' Hegseth described the U.S. strikes on three major Iranian nuclear sites as an 'incredible and overwhelming success,' adding that they 'devastated the Iranian nuclear program.' The strikes have also drawn swift threats of retaliation from some Iranian leaders, including the country's army chief, who warned the strikes have given Tehran a 'free hand' to 'act against U.S. interests and its army.' UN officials on Monday said 'very significant damage' was caused in the U.S. bombardment, which followed strikes from Israel just days before. Israel launched airstrikes on Iran earlier this month on June 13, after accusing it of being days way from developing a nuclear weapon. The attack kicked off a long-feared war that the U.S. directly entered over the weekend. Ocasio-Cortez also called the strikes ' grounds for impeachment, ' which sparked backlash from the likes of former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani and Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.