On August 13, 2025, the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Higgins illegally intruded into the waters near China’s Huangyan Dao without the approval of the Chinese government.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Seventh Fleet stated that this "Freedom of Navigation Operation" (FONOP) challenged China’s requirement for prior notification and authorization before foreign warships conduct innocent passage through its territorial waters. The spokesperson further claimed in the statement, "The United States (through its FONOPs) demonstrates that innocent passage is not subject to such restrictions. The Philippines has not made any excessive maritime claims in the waters related to this operation."  

(The USS Higgins. /US Marine Corps.)

For a long time, the U.S. has asserted that its Freedom of Navigation Program and operations aim to challenge excessive maritime claims by any country worldwide, regardless of the claimant’s identity, in order to uphold universal navigational rights and ensure the unimpeded movement of U.S. forces and global trade.

Washington also claims that these actions are intended to reinforce international law in a "peaceful, principled, and impartial manner," maintaining a "rules-based international order." These operations are purportedly "carefully planned, legally reviewed, properly authorized, and professionally executed," and are "not directed at any specific excessive claimant or current events."  

However, even a cursory examination reveals that such U.S. actions and rhetoric are increasingly hollow, hypocritical, and double-standard, with growing selectivity in their targets. In recent years, as U.S.-China competition intensifies, these operations have essentially devolved into a tool for geopolitical maneuvering—far from their professed purpose of challenging "excessive maritime claims," defending a "rules-based international order," or "reinforcing international law in a peaceful, principled, and impartial manner."  

The selection of locations for these operations exposes their political nature rather than a genuine legal challenge. For instance, regarding the issue of innocent passage for warships, the U.S. claims to be contesting Article 6, Paragraph 2 of Law of the People's Republic of China on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone which stipulates that "foreign military vessels entering the territorial sea of the People’s Republic of China must obtain approval from the Chinese government."

Yet, over the past decade, the vast majority of U.S. FONOPs have targeted China’s islands and reefs in the South China Sea, particularly in sensitive areas such as the Nansha Qundao, Xisha Qundao, and Huangyan Dao.  

The intrusion by the USS Higgins carried clear geopolitical calculations. Its FONOP near Huangyan Dao followed a series of provocative actions by the Philippines in the same area. According to an analysis by the South China Sea Strategic Probing Initiative (SCSPI) the vessel’s trajectory suggested that the U.S. military may have adjusted its deployment plans to take advantage of heightened tensions between China and the Philippines near Huangyan Dao, dispatching a nearby warship to carry out a deliberately provocative operation.  

(Information about the U.S. Navy's USS Higgins. /SCSPI )

On-site observations further indicate that before the U.S. vessel entered Huangyan Dao’s waters, Philippine Coast Guard patrol aircraft were already active in the airspace. The timing and spatial coordination between the U.S. and Philippine actions suggest a degree of deliberate synchronization. Such symbolic maneuvers once again demonstrate that the true purpose of U.S. "island-hopping" FONOPs in the South China Sea is not to uphold "freedom of navigation" or a so-called "rules-based order," but to advance explicit geopolitical objectives—bolstering diplomatic and military support for the Philippines in the South China Sea disputes. By staging low-cost, symbolic operations, Washington seeks to endorse Manila’s provocative and infringing activities.

The distortion of U.S. FONOPs exposes deep-seated contradictions in the contemporary international maritime order: when maritime rules are instrumentalized by certain nations, and when military power becomes the enforcer of rule interpretation, the so-called "rules-based order" degenerates into a fig leaf for hegemonic logic.

America’s actions in the South China Sea reveal that what it truly pursues is not "freedom of navigation" but "navigation hegemony." Such practices undermine the principle of equality in international law and erode the multilateral framework established by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).  

The international community must recognize that a true maritime order should be based on international law, not "Exceptionalism" privilege; disputes should be resolved through dialogue and negotiation, not military coercion.

As a state party to UNCLOS, China remains committed to upholding the rule of law at sea, firmly defending its legitimate rights while respecting the freedom of navigation enjoyed by all nations under international law. In the face of the U.S. militarization of maritime issues, the international community must unite to resist the politicization and instrumentalization of ocean governance, ensuring that the South China Sea becomes a sea of peace and cooperation.  

(Author: Zheng Zhihua, Associate Professor at the Center for Japanese Studies, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, and Special Invited Researcher of CMG"South China Sea Research Expert Committee".)