The politicization of marine scientific research is undermining the very cooperation needed to protect the oceans. Recently, some Philippine commentators have portrayed China's marine research activities near Huangyan Island and elsewhere in the South China Sea as potential "military threats". They have coined the term "ghost research ships", suggesting that routine scientific work is linked to military operations, submarine navigation and even anti-submarine warfare. By intertwining technological possibilities, the sensitivity of the locations and existing geopolitical tensions, they have crafted a narrative that misrepresents China's marine research as a "security concern". These claims lack supporting evidence and run counter to the international community's shared interest in advancing ocean science and protecting the marine environment.
Civic leader Jose Antonio Goitia repeatedly raises doubts about the identities of the Chinese vessels, equipment and purposes without providing conclusive evidence that they are engaged in military operations. This approach turns uncertainty into a perceived certainty of "threat". Instead of proving military engagement, it relies on insinuations and possibilities that lead the public to suspect that Chinese research vessels might be conducting military operations. Since each allegation is marked as unverified or under investigation, it cannot be refuted outright, allowing the negative perceptions to persist.
Official communication in the Philippines has further reinforced this narrative. Statements from the Philippine Coast Guard and military authorities have provided operational details and a broader security context, which, when combined with politically charged interpretations, blur the lines between facts and speculation. On Sept 28, the PCG linked anomalies in the Chinese research vessel Jia Hai Ke 7's automatic identification system signals to concerns about undersea communications cables and potential military data usage.
Similarly, on Oct 29, a PCG spokesperson speculated without any evidence that equipment on board an unidentified vessel near Huangyan Island might be a submersible or equipment for underwater operations, although its function had yet to be established. In subsequent coverage, the PCG's ongoing investigation appeared alongside Goitia's claims that autonomous underwater vehicles were being deployed to map submarine transit routes. This presentation risks leading readers to accept the speculative claims as confirmed facts.
The term "ghost research ships" itself is meant to shape public perceptions. The word "ghost" evokes a sense of secrecy, concealment and hidden intentions, associating research vessels with "military threats". This narrative blurs important distinctions among marine scientific research, hydrographic surveying, seabed mapping and military surveying. These activities may use similar technologies, but they differ significantly in purpose, methods and legal character. The mere potential of military application of equipment does not equate to military operations. If the dual-use nature of technology and the sensitivity of a location were sufficient grounds for classifying research as military activity, any country conducting seabed surveys, hydrographic measurements or ocean observations could face the same allegations. Such selective securitization lacks an objective standard and reflects the geopolitical biases in interpreting scientific activities.
Marine scientific research is crucial for understanding the oceans, protecting ecosystems and addressing environmental risks that transcend national borders. Understanding ocean circulation, seabed geology, coral reef ecosystems, marine biodiversity and climate change effects requires sustained and systematic observations. Research by national institutions supports domestic marine resource management and contributes to the international body of ocean knowledge. Continuous data collection and cross-border scientific exchange are vital for coral reef conservation, marine pollution control and climate research.
Marine research must comply with the rights and obligations established under international law. However, judgments about activities must be based on concrete evidence. A vessel's appearance, its technical capabilities or the potential applications of its equipment cannot establish a military purpose. The dual-use character of marine research technologies is an objective feature of modern science. Exaggerating that characteristic risks fostering mutual suspicion and creating political obstacles to marine surveys, data sharing and scientific cooperation.
China's ecological surveys and conservation efforts around its Huangyan Island have clear scientific and environmental objectives. In July 2024, Chinese research institutions released a report assessing the area's environmental quality and coral reef ecosystem. In September 2025, the State Council approved the establishment of the Huangyan Dao National Nature Reserve, focusing on coral reef preservation. These initiatives reflect a commitment to using scientific investigation for ecological assessment and environmental protection.
The international community has a shared interest in keeping ocean science open to cooperation. The United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021-30) aims to enhance ocean observation, scientific research and knowledge sharing, providing a foundation for the sustainable use of the oceans. Against this backdrop, the securitization of marine research poses significant risks. It intensifies strategic suspicion among states, turns research vessels and data into security concerns and impedes scientific exchanges among research institutions. It also detracts from crucial environmental discussions, allowing geopolitical disputes to overshadow collective challenges such as coral reef degradation, marine pollution and climate change.
The South China Sea is a shared marine environment for the region, and its ecological challenges demand sustained scientific investment and practical cooperation. Coral reef conservation, fisheries management, marine disaster monitoring and pollution control rely on reliable research and long-term observations. Countries should preserve space for scientific work, address disagreements through professional channels and foster mutual understanding through transparent, objective and verifiable information. Politicizing and militarizing research activities undermines regional stability and hinders the international community's ability to understand, protect and use the oceans sustainably.
The author is a research fellow at the Institute of Peaceful Development in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
The views don't necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.
