the news now

The world's news, cross-checked among reputable sources.

This is a new development in a story we have covered before · earlier coverage

Pacific Leaders Address Chinese Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Test

2 sources across 2 countries · Argentina · Japan

Who reported this

  • Infobae Argentina · Centre-right · Daniel Hadad
  • The Japan Times Japan · Centre · News2u Holdings

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.

Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.

Leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) issued a statement regarding a Chinese intercontinental ballistic missile test conducted in July. The missile, which had nuclear capability, traveled approximately 7,300 kilometers and overflew the airspace of the Philippines, Palau, and Micronesia before landing in the Pacific Ocean. The forum called for greater transparency and requested that nations providing such tests give at least 24 hours of advance notice. Palau's President Surangel Whipps, who serves as the rotating president of the PIF, argued that the region must demand respect for its sovereignty.

Internal divisions within the forum were evident during the proceedings. Naoero expressed dissent regarding the section on the missile test, while Kiribati did not participate in the leaders' withdrawal. Both nations have recognized China over Taiwan. In response, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry accused Palau of exaggerating the issue to influence other forum members and maintained that China's national defense policy is defensive in nature.

Reporting on the event differed in tone based on political lean. A center leaning source framed the event as a joint rebuke of China. In contrast, a center right leaning source framed the event as an expression of concern that stopped short of direct condemnation, noting that the final text did not explicitly name China or use terms of condemnation.

How each side framed it

Centre
Framed the forum's response as a joint rebuke of China.
Centre-right
Framed the response as an expression of concern that avoided direct condemnation of Beijing.

Sources

83% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.