The tropical location was the west coast of Palawan, an elongated Philippine island on the edge of the South China Sea.

As a notional enemy amphibious force edged closer to the beach, Australian, Kiwi, Philippine and American troops hiding in foxholes camouflaged by palm fronds unleashed a barrage of small-arms fire.

Afterwards, as the repulsed “enemy” withdrew in disorder, a coup de grace was delivered by an explosive-laden, first-person-view drone. As silence returned to the Aporawan beach in Palawan, disabled unmanned surface vessels – representing enemy landing craft – drifted in the waves or sat burning on the shore.

This counter-landing, live-fire exercise on Apr. 27 was a keystone event in Exercise Balikatan, an annual series of multilateral war games held in the Philippines.

On the day, more than 500 troops worked shoulder to shoulder – which is what “Balikatan” means – to repel the notional enemy amphibious assault.

Gen. Romeo Brawner Jr., Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, explained the event’s “real value is showcasing our resolve to work together to defend the Philippine archipelago and to uphold the rules-based international order. So that’s the more important aspect of all the exercises we’re doing here.”

Palawan is an important location, Brawner added, since it faces the West Philippine Sea and the country’s exclusive economic zone.

“It’s really very important that we defend this territory of the Philippines, and we’re very fortunate that we have with us partners from like-minded nations.”

Although nobody was naming aloud the threat, China with the world’s largest armed forces is the obvious focus of attention in these Balikatan drills.

The South China Sea is witnessing a ramp-up of tensions as Beijing claims maritime territory and builds up reclaimed islands that act as forward military bases.

Involving approximately 17,000 troops from seven countries, Balikatan 2026 is being held from Apr. 20 to May 8.

The primary U.S. Marine Corps participation in the counter-landing exercise was Marine Rotational Force – Darwin (MRF-D), currently comprising 1/5 Marines.

Col. George Flynn III, commander of MRF-D, told Defense News: “We have the ability to be a global force in readiness and in support of our allies.”

Flynn said the very fact that he was standing on that particular Palawan beach demonstrated the ability of the Marine Corps to show up when it is needed.

“We can talk about all the capabilities we have, but the integration of those capabilities is the cornerstone of how this is done right,” he said. “The friendships that we made being in the dirt in defensive positions alongside each other, that’s what really matters about this event.”

Maj. Gen. Thomas Savage, commander of the 1st Marine Division, was pleased with the conduct of the drill, which “was much more complex, with more countries integrated in the live-fire exercise.”

Asked whether the U.S. military is being sidetracked by the Iran war, Savage responded: “The United States has the capability to commit to all of our global commitments, and this alliance we have with the Philippines is rock solid.”

Nor did all this activity and other maritime drills go unnoticed by China.

The Southern Command of the People’s Liberation Army reported that a four-ship naval task force sailed near Luzon in response to “the current regional situation.”

Among the vessels was a Dongdiao-class intelligence gathering ship to soak up signals and electronic emissions.

Capt. Paul Michael Hechenova, commanding officer of the Philippine frigate BRP Miguel Malvar, said: “No confrontation, no radio challenges. They’re just here monitoring our activity.”

This was a contentious point for Canberra, as it is not a party to military actions against Iran.

Two days later, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed the presence of Royal Australian Navy (RAN) sailors aboard the U.S. submarine when the Iranian frigate IRIS Dena was sunk.

“We wouldn’t normally confirm such an issue, but given our meetings and the public interest, I can confirm that there were three Australian personnel on board that vessel,” Albanese revealed.

He added, “I can confirm also, though, that no Australian personnel have participated in any offensive action against Iran.” He noted, too, frameworks are in place to ensure Australians do not participate in such combat actions.

Albanese elaborated: “These are long-standing, third-country arrangements that have been in place for a long period of time, and what they do is ensure that Australian Defence Force personnel, where they are embedded in third countries’ defense assets, they act in accordance with Australian law, Australian policy.”

Jennifer Parker, principal and founder of Barrier Strategic Advisory, told Defense News it would have been possible for Australian submariners to recuse themselves during the attack off Sri Lanka. “It would be quite straightforward to not be on the consoles or in the control room during the engagements,” she said.

“As to legality, this was a lawful target in accordance with the law of naval warfare, and the response was also consistent with international law,” Parker said.

She added that such attacks can legally occur anywhere outside 12-nautical-mile territorial waters of neutral states, something true of the U.S. attack near Sri Lanka.

David Shoebridge, a senator from the opposition Greens party, alleged that Australia was complicit in an illegal war.

“We’re being dragged into these wars because of the dystopian logic of AUKUS, that we’re somehow safer by being part of an alliance led by Donald Trump and his lawless regime,” he said, referring to the U.S. president.

AUKUS is a trilateral pact between Australia, the U.K. and the United States aimed at outfitting Australia with nuclear-powered submarines and other technology that would allow Canberra to hold China at bay in Asian waters.

Parker wrote in a piece for The Academic website, “Under the law of naval warfare, warships belonging to a state engaged in an international armed conflict are military objectives by nature. The rules say they may be lawfully targeted.”

As per normal practice, the U.S. did not name the submarine involved, but there are suggestions it was the Virginia-class boat USS Minnesota, which rotated through Australia’s submarine base near Perth last year.

AUKUS progress

As the Australian Navy ramps up preparations to receive second-hand U.S. Virginia-class submarines, dozens of its sailors have been rotating onto American nuclear-powered attack submarines.

Last October, Australian officials revealed “more than 50” sailors were at that time serving on American SSNs. Furthermore, Rear Adm. Stephen Hughes, Australia’s Head of Navy Capability, told Defense News last November that about 160-200 Australian sailors were then in the U.S. and U.K. training pipelines.

“AUKUS remains on track, with a significant amount of achievements to date,” said Parker.

Hughes said it is “a really complicated equation” training sailors on SSNs, even while the Australian Navy keeps six conventionally powered Collins-class submarines in service.

“It’s not hard because we can’t do it and we don’t understand it, but you’ve got to keep Collins at its peak performance while you’re bringing in a new apex predator,” he said. “So the balance here is obviously across the industry spectrum, it’s across navy workforce, getting them trained and still having enough Collins submarines while you’re trying to build a workforce for that.”

The Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF), for example, is set to receive 10 new landing craft by the end of Fiscal Year 2027. This includes two 3,500-ton Logistics Support Vessels (LSV), four 2,400-ton Landing Craft Utility (LCU) and four smaller Maneuver Support Vessels.

Japanese shipbuilder Naikai Zosen launched the first LSV on Nov. 28, and the first LCU on Oct. 29. All these vessels will join a joint Maritime Transport Group being established next March, and will help support the Amphibious Rapid Deployment Brigade, Japan’s equivalent of a marine corps.

Tokyo is alarmed at the vulnerability of its southwest archipelago to Chinese intrusion. The military said, “In light of the current severe security environment, the JGSDF will steadily build transport vessels to strengthen transport functions to islands.”

Australia is charting the same course as it rapidly overhauls its amphibious capacity with 18 new Landing Craft Medium (LCM) and eight Landing Craft Heavy (LCH). Last year’s Defence Strategic Review mandated greatly improved littoral capabilities.

The LCMs, designed by Birdon Group, carry 90 tons of cargo, while the larger LCHs displace 3,900 tons. On Nov. 22, Canberra announced the LST 100 design from Damen Shipyards had been selected for the LCH. Austal will build all LCMs and LCHs in Western Australia.

Australia’s chief of Army, Lt. Gen. Simon Stuart, said: “Our plan is to have the first medium in the water by the end of 2026, the first heavy by the end of 2028. That means we’ve got to work with industry and make sensible compromises to get the capability, which will be a step change above anything we’ve currently got.”

The Australian government said the craft “will support a strategy of denial, which includes deploying and sustaining modernized land forces with long-range land and maritime strike capabilities across our region.”

Elsewhere, the Philippines already has two Tarlac-class landing platform dock (LPD) vessels, and PT PAL in Indonesia is building another two following a 2022 contract.

To be delivered to the Philippine navy in 2026, these LPDs are useful for moving units around the Philippine archipelago, including its existing South China Sea bases. Manila is currently facing Chinese pressure in this maritime territory.

Taiwan commissioned the domestically built LPD Yushan in September 2022. This 10,000-ton vessel cannot help counter a full-scale Chinese invasion, but it can support mine countermeasures, resupply offshore islands and support amphibious landings.

India is dragging the chain in terms of improving its limited amphibious sealift. The Indian Navy issued a request for information for four LPDs in 2021, but little more has occurred since.

Navantia of Spain teamed up with Larsen & Toubro to offer the Juan Carlos I platform. However, amphibious vessels are competing for funding against submarines and other surface combatants. Plus, India’s land borders with China and Pakistan are mired in tensions.

Perhaps the clearest admission came from a WeChat social media post by Aviation Industry Corporation of China in January 2019. In an interview discussing sixth-gen fighters, Wang Haifeng, the chief designer at AVIC subsidiary Chengdu Aerospace Corp., said preparations were underway to research a combat aircraft that would be ready to “protect the sea and sky” by 2035.

At the time, Wang mentioned elements like manned-unmanned teaming, the use of artificial intelligence, as well as improved stealth and omnidirectional sensors.

In 2022, the head of U.S. Air Combat Command said those efforts are “on track.”

“By and large, they see it [sixth-gen fighter technology] greatly the way we see it in terms of an exponential reduction in signature and exponential acceleration in processing power and sensing, and the ability to iterate in terms of open-mission systems, to be able to essentially reprogram at the speed of relevance,” Gen. Mark Kelly said.

Fast forward to the present, and Rick Joe, who has written extensively about the Chinese military, considers the sixth-gen efforts a program of record, noting that “indicators since 2019 in the semiofficial space have only increased.” Examples include AVIC artwork depicting generic next-gen fighter configurations, academic papers, and statements from military and industry officials. In addition, satellite imagery of a tailless fighter-like airframe was seen at Chengdu Aerospace facilities in October 2021.

Joe told Defense News that demonstrator testbeds, possibly subscale versions, have already flown.

For lack of an official name, he referred to the mysterious fighter as the J-XD. “I fully expect the J-XD to have some subsystems (like engines), which will be less capable than a U.S. equivalent initially, simply because there are some domains where they are still catching up, albeit with significant closing of gaps over the past few decades.”

Joe noted that sixth-gen fighters are typically expected to include aerodynamic design and control; radiofrequency materials; flight control software; sensing technologies; data-linking and combat-management systems; weapons; and the integration of collaborative combat aircraft, or complementary drones.

“I see them as playing in the general ballpark of other nations pursuing a sixth-gen capability,” Joe said.

But when Defense News asked Brendan Mulvaney, the director of the U.S. Air Force’s China Aerospace Studies Institute, whether China currently has the capability to develop these advanced fighters, the response was slightly less optimistic for Beijing.

“Today? No. Twenty years from now? Absolutely. And we’ve seen this time and time again. We’re getting better at not … underestimating what the Chinese system is capable of when it sets its mind to it,” Mulvaney said.

The official said mastering jet engines has been China’s bane, but it is getting better. “At the end of the day, that’s just science. I tell people that physics works the same in Berlin as it does in Beijing. So if you put enough time and effort … you can make a good aerospace engine, especially for the military side.”

Working with drones

Mulvaney said China has described its future fighter as unmanned, but he believes the design is more likely optionally manned, as it depends on how quickly industry can develop AI systems, alongside other requisite technologies. “You don’t have to have a man [in it] and you potentially let it go off on its own, or it could serve as a loyal wingman.”

China’s drone manufacturers are ambitious, but it’s not entirely clear where that technology stands in terms of complementing a future sixth-gen fighter. Notably, Joe said, Chinese-made combat drones and collaborative combat aircraft that have appeared at air shows are “likely not representative of actual in-development [unmanned combat aerial vehicles] intended for the [People’s Liberation Army], which are almost certainly more ambitious in scope.”

He also said it’s fair to assume various sophisticated combat drones “are in advanced development/testing or even limited trial service.”

An in terms of trialing manned-unmanned teaming, China’s existing J-20 fighter could contribute, as the country developed a twin-seat version where a backseat operator can control drones. However, this variant is currently a technology demonstrator.

If the Chengdu Aerospace chief designer’s predictions of a sixth-gen fighter being operational in 2035 hold true, Joe said a maiden flight would need to take place at least five years before then, and thus a prototype would need to be ready around 2028. He expressed confidence this is possible, although Mulvaney predicted it will probably take China “until the late 2030s, if not the early 2040s,” to reveal a meaningful design.

The construction comes as China continues growing its naval force, which includes 48 diesel-electric and 12 nuclear-powered submarines, according to a Pentagon report. The submarine force is expected to grow to 65 boats by 2025 and 80 by 2035, the report noted. China considers Taiwan a rogue province and has threatened to take it back by force.

In total, Taiwan plans to acquire a dozen light frigates — six for anti-submarine warfare and six for anti-air warfare — to replace already-decommissioned Knox-class frigates. The island nation’s naval fleet carries out missions in the Taiwan Strait, including patrol, surveillance, offshore-island transportation and escort, maintenance of maritime communication lines, and training support.

Jong Shyn Shipbuilding held a ceremony Jan. 16 in Kaohsiung to mark the beginning of construction. The company had signed a contract on May 12, 2023, and began constructing one of the anti-air warfare frigates on Nov. 17, 2023.

The shipyard is expected to complete both vessels by October 2026, which will serve as prototypes before follow-on frigates are built.

According to a 2022 budget allocation, Taiwan plans to spend NT$24.6 billion (U.S. $777.7 million) for these two so-called new-generation light frigates, instead of previously planned heavy frigates.

“In order to strengthen its sea control capabilities, the Navy originally planned to build a new-generation missile frigate under the code name Project Zhenhai. Later … it switched to a new-generation light frigate with a smaller tonnage,” according to the government-run Central News Agency.

Taiwan’s Defense Ministry declined to release the ships’ specifications to Defense News, but local media reported the vessels will likely displace nearly 3,000 tons and measure approximately 115 meters in length.

The government’s renderings show the anti-submarine warfare variant does not use vertical launching systems like the anti-air warfare type. Instead, the former boasts a towed-array sonar and two triple-torpedo launchers. Its phased-array radar appears to be BAE Systems’ Artisan offering.

Other armaments include eight deck-mounted launchers for Hsiung Feng II/III anti-ship missiles and TC-2N surface-to-air missiles. There is also an OTO Melara 76mm naval gun and two 30mm remote weapon stations.

Jong Shyn Shipbuilding has considerable experience constructing vessels for Taiwan’s Coast Guard Administration, including 3,000-ton cutters, but it does not have as much of a background in building ships for the Navy.

“They have the capability to make surface ships. This is OK, but we do not have the capability to integrate the weapons, sensors and all the systems integration,” Chen Kuo-ming, a Taipei-based defense analyst, told Defense News.