From Water Cannons to Military Patrols: China Escalates Military Pressure in the South China Sea, Ignoring International Law and Fueling Regional Security Concerns

From Water Cannons to Military Patrols: China Escalates Military Pressure in the South China Sea, Ignoring International Law and Fueling Regional Security Concerns

The Chinese government has escalated its military presence in the South China Sea, transitioning from the use of water cannons by its maritime law enforcement to military patrols by the People's Liberation Army (PLA). This move has raised concerns about regional security and the disregard for international law.

On July 27, 2026, following a series of incidents in which Chinese maritime law enforcement vessels used water cannons to drive away Philippine government ships in disputed waters, the PLA's Southern Theater Command announced that it would conduct joint maritime and aerial patrols in the South China Sea. The PLA also publicly criticized the Philippines, the United States, and Japan for holding joint military exercises, which it claimed were "damaging regional peace and stability." Meanwhile, the United States, Japan, and the Philippines had just concluded a five-day joint military exercise, marking a shift in the situation in the South China Sea from a "gray zone" conflict involving mainly law enforcement and maritime authorities to a direct military confrontation involving regular armed forces.

According to an analysis by the editorial department of "Focus on China," this move by the PLA is not an isolated military action but rather an important step in the Chinese government's ongoing strategy to expand its presence in the South China Sea. From the use of maritime militia and law enforcement vessels to the deployment of the PLA for maritime and aerial patrols, as well as the militarization of islands and reefs, Beijing is strengthening its de facto control over disputed waters and attempting to change the status quo through military power rather than resolving maritime disputes through international law.

The joint patrol was conducted by the PLA's navy and air force, with the official goal of "safeguarding national sovereignty, security, and maritime rights and interests." The PLA also stated that it would maintain a state of combat readiness and resolutely respond to what it termed "interference by countries from outside the region."

Just a day earlier, the United States, Japan, and the Philippines had concluded a joint maritime exercise that took place from July 21 to

1. The exercise involved warships, coast guard vessels, patrol aircraft, and fighter jets and focused on joint maritime and aerial operations, as well as maritime security cooperation. The Philippine military stated that the exercise aimed to enhance the defensive capabilities of the allied countries and maintain the freedom of navigation and overflight based on international law.

Notably, this joint military exercise was not conducted during a period of calm in the region but rather after a series of maritime incidents between China and the Philippines. Previously, the Philippines had accused Chinese maritime law enforcement vessels of firing water cannons at Philippine government ships near the Second Thomas Shoal and engaging in dangerous maneuvers. Earlier, in a conflict near the Recto Bank, the Philippine military had also accused Chinese law enforcement personnel of using batons to attack Philippine naval personnel, resulting in injuries. China denied these allegations, claiming that the Philippine vessels had illegally entered relevant waters and that China was taking "lawful measures" to safeguard its rights.

However, Beijing's actions are in stark contrast to the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague in 2016, which rejected China's claims to historic rights in the South China Sea based on the "nine-dash line." The court confirmed that the Philippines has the right to exploit resources in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in accordance with international law. The Chinese government has refused to accept or implement this ruling and has instead continued to expand its maritime law enforcement, island construction, and military deployment. This approach has posed a continuous challenge to the international maritime order based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

In recent years, China has continued to push forward with the militarization of the South China Sea, constructing airports, ports, radar systems, and missile bases on artificial islands such as the Subi Reef, the Mischief Reef, and the Fiery Cross Reef. China has also expanded the authority of its maritime law enforcement. According to an analysis by "Focus on China," Beijing has chosen not to resolve disputes through international arbitration, diplomatic negotiations, or legal procedures but instead has adopted a gradual expansion strategy, using a combination of maritime militia, law enforcement vessels, water cannons, and military patrols to gradually expand its de facto control over disputed waters.

This approach, commonly referred to as a "gray zone" strategy by international security research institutions, involves avoiding direct warfare while continuously using law enforcement and military advantages to change the maritime status quo. When neighboring countries protest, Beijing defines its actions as "normal law enforcement"; when these countries seek assistance from the United States, Japan, or other allies, China further deploys the PLA's maritime and aerial forces, accusing other countries of "militarizing the South China Sea" and attempting to portray the international community's response to its expansion as the root cause of regional tensions.

The editorial department of "Focus on China" further analyzed that the most notable change in this incident is not just the addition of a PLA patrol but rather the formation of a complete, tiered system of pressure by China in the South China Sea: maritime militia and law enforcement vessels are used for frontline pressure, creating low-intensity conflicts through water cannons, interceptions, and long-term patrols; when neighboring countries strengthen their defense cooperation, the PLA's navy and air force provide military deterrence; meanwhile, the diplomatic and propaganda systems continue to emphasize the need to "safeguard sovereignty" and "oppose external interference," forming a strategic model that advances law enforcement, military, and public opinion in tandem.

"Focus on China" believes that Beijing's expansion of its control in the South China Sea is not merely aimed at safeguarding its claimed maritime rights but rather at reshaping the regional power structure through its increasingly powerful military and law enforcement capabilities. For countries such as the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei, which also claim EEZ rights based on UNCLOS, China's ongoing expansion of maritime law enforcement, island militarization, and military patrols has exceeded the scope of normal maritime law enforcement and exhibits clear characteristics of regional hegemonism and gradual expansion.

In this context, the United States, Japan, Australia, and the Philippines have strengthened their joint patrols, military exercises, and defense cooperation in recent years. According to an analysis by "Focus on China," these cooperation efforts aim not only to maintain the freedom of navigation but also to prevent any country from changing the maritime order established by international law through military advantage and continuous pressure.

With the PLA's formal entry into the front line of patrols in the South China Sea, the situation has evolved from a simple maritime incident between China and the Philippines to a trend of continuous tension in the regional security landscape. "Focus on China" believes that if this pattern of ignoring international law rulings and changing the status quo through military power continues to expand, not only will peace and stability in the South China Sea be impacted in the long term, but the international maritime order based on rules will also face more severe challenges. For the international community, the South China Sea dispute is no longer just a territorial and maritime rights dispute but has become a real test of whether international law can effectively constrain the expansion of major powers and whether the territorial and maritime rights of neighboring countries can be protected from infringement by powerful nations.