Flares in the South China Sea

When a Chinese jet released flares dangerously close to a Royal Australian Air Force surveillance plane over the South China Sea, as reported yesterday, it wasn’t just an operational nuisance. It was a strategic and moral provocation.

Let’s call it what it is. China’s behaviour in the skies is increasingly aggressive, and Australia’s complacency is becoming a liability.

Defence Minister Richard Marles described the incident: a Chinese jet came alongside the Australian P‑8 aircraft in international airspace, and on two occasions released flares so close they could have entered the plane’s mechanisms. We are told such aerial confrontations can be “reasonably standard,” but only if done safely and professionally. In this case, it wasn’t.

Marles labelled the act “unsafe and unprofessional.” And he’s right but also seriously understating the incident. Because when flares are released within dangerous proximity of another sovereign nation’s military plane, it isn’t bravado. It’s intimidation. And if it took out the other plane, it could be war.

Most of Australia’s trade goes through the South China Sea. Marles emphasised that the “rules based order applying there is fundamental to our national interest.” Yet the actual message from this flare‑filled drama is deeper. China is signalling it will challenge that order, not subtly but openly. And such signals matter.

The fact we have to publicly “call out” unsafe and unprofessional interactions is telling. If everything was fine, we wouldn’t need the spectacle.

There are three uncomfortable truths here.

First, China’s intent is clear. This is part of a pattern of behaviour in the region: air intercepts with questionable proximity, naval confrontations, and diplomatic coercion.

Second, Australia is caught in the middle. We are aligned with the US‑led alliance through the AUKUS and Quad commitments, yet reliant on economic ties with China and vulnerable in our region.

Third, we may be under‑estimating how serious this is. Calling something “unsafe and unprofessional” is correct, but the next time it could escalate to damage or loss of life. We need to assume so.

So what should Australia do?

Maintain vigilance. Regular surveillance is part of our duty, but it must be backed by readiness to respond if deterrence fails.

Strengthen alliances, not just speak of them. Partnerships with the US, Japan, India, Southeast Asia and ASEAN states must move from statements to joint training, shared intelligence and capacity‑building.

Forge the narrative. If we allow China to define the terms, we lose the moral high ground. Australia must consistently frame these incidents as violations of international law and norms.

And most importantly, prepare for the “next time.” If we treat this as a rare oddity, we’ll be blindsided when it becomes the new normal. We need rules of engagement, escalation controls and strategies for crisis moments.

The flares over the South China Sea were more than just military flash bangs. They were a warning. The old rules are under fire, and Australia can no longer act as though the status quo will hold by itself. By naming the incident “unsafe and unprofessional,” we haven’t solved the problem. We’ve only accepted the challenge.

It’s time Australia stopped hoping for restraint from others and assured it in its own conduct. Because the alternative is watching the rules‑based order unravel and realising too late we weren’t ready for the reset.

P.S. Don't forget to take our Confidential Daily readers' survey. Go to https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/6K7XRFW or click the button below:

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
– Wendell Phillips