China’s decision to conduct a missile test in the Pacific at short-notice has prompted swift condemnation from leaders including the US, Australia and New Zealand, who have accused Beijing of “destabilising” the region.
China has urged foreign nations to not “over-interpret” the test, but it has set alarm bells ringing among leaders and experts.
Why has China’s missile test in the Pacific proven controversial?
Countries like the US and Australia, that have traditionally held sway in the region, have become increasingly concerned about China’s push for influence in the Pacific, along with China’s desire to expand its military and nuclear capabilities.
Monday’s missile test marked Beijing’s second publicly acknowledged long-range missile launch into the Pacific in less than two years, after an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) test in September 2024, which also drew regional criticism.
Regional neighbours believe they were given insufficient notice and information about the test and is unclear if the US was notified.
“China is a good friend of Solomon Islands, but this is not something a friend does,” said Matthew Wale, the prime minister of the Solomon Islands, a country that for years has been one of China’s closest partners in the South Pacific.
But leaders and experts have also expressed alarm over China’s military and nuclear buildup and a lack of transparency over its intentions.
The demonstration was likely designed to “compel the US to treat China as a more equal partner”, said Tong Zhao, a senior fellow at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
“This very high-profile test is really lifting the curtain on a potential new era of massive nuclear submarine expansion”, said Zhao, adding that when its technology catches up to the US, China could “severely undermine” America’s military security in the Asia Pacific.
Lyle Morris, a senior fellow at the centre for China analysis at the Asia society policy institute, said China was “sending a pretty clear signal” to the US and Taiwan that it “means business”.
The test itself was less of a problem than China’s opacity over its nuclear program, Morris said.
“We, the US, have been putting pressure on China to agree to an arms control agreement, more transparency behind their nuclear program. They’re not giving that to us, so it’s definitely going to ratchet up the tension.”
What has China said?
A Chinese navy statement said a nuclear submarine launched a “strategic missile carrying a training simulation warhead” on Monday, adding it had “accurately [landed] in the designated sea area”.
China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning, according to a translated version of remarks posted on an official government website, hoped countries would “not over-interpret it”.
The test was “a routine part of China’s annual military training, in accordance with international law and practice, and is not directed against any specific country or target”, Ning said.
“Relevant countries were notified in advance, and it complies with international law and practice. The launch activity was conducted safely, systematically, and professionally throughout.”
What do we know about the missile and where it landed?
China’s defence ministry did not confirm whether an ICBM was used in Monday’s test.
But Song Zhongping, a Chinese military expert, told the Chinese state-run tabloid Global Times that the missile was likely a JL-3 submarine-launched ballistic missile, first formally unveiled during Beijing’s September 2025 military parade. Its range likely exceeds 10,000 kilometres, making it an IBCM, the report said.
Su Tzu-yun, director at Taiwan’s Institute for National Defence and Security Research, said unlike the older JL-2, the JL-3 would allow Chinese submarines to threaten targets in the central United States without leaving waters off China’s coast.
“The launch reflected Beijing’s shift from maintaining a minimum nuclear deterrent to developing a more coercive nuclear posture capable of influencing other countries’ strategic decisions,” Su said, drawing comparisons with how Russia’s nuclear arsenal has shaped Nato’s response to the war in Ukraine.
Joseph Wu, secretary-general of Taiwan’s national security council, posted on social media a map purporting to show the missile’s path travelling south-east of China, going over the Philippines and passing Micronesia and Palau, landing south of Nauru.
Is the timing of the test significant?
Some observers have noted that the test came just hours after Australia and Fiji signed a major defence alliance, committing each country to come to the other’s aid in the event of an attack. The so-called Ocean of Peace alliance, which is open to other countries to join in the future, is part of Australia’s efforts to deepen ties in the Pacific and push back at Beijing’s attempts to expand its influence.
Su, meanwhile, said that the timing of the test may also have been intended to send a signal to Nato, whose summit in Turkey began on 7 July.
But others say the timing of the test is largely irrelevant.
“These tests are usually organised months in advance and require a whole lot of things to fall into place,” said David Capie, the director of the centre of strategic studies at Victoria University of Wellington.
Additional research by Yu-chen Li