China Rebukes US-Led Statement on Missile Test Notifications

China’s Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs Li Chijiang delivered a forceful rebuke at the Geneva Conference on Disarmament on August 11, rejecting a US-led joint statement criticizing Beijing’s July submarine-launched ballistic missile test for insufficient advance notification. The Chinese envoy dismissed the statement as “typical political manipulation and blatant double standards” that China “will neither accept nor tolerate,” according to Xinhua News.

The Joint Statement and Its Backing

The United States and 41 other countries issued the joint statement at the Conference on Disarmament plenary, criticizing China’s July 6 test of a submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missile (SLBM) for failing to provide adequate advance notification. The statement calls on all countries, particularly those possessing nuclear weapons, to issue notifications at least 24 hours in advance for tests of ICBMs, SLBMs, and space launch vehicles, as Latvia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs detailed when announcing its participation.

The signatories include Albania, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States, among others. The statement specifically references the recent Chinese missile test in the Pacific region, which it says “did not comply with the standard practice of advance notification adopted by many countries.”

China’s Rebuttal

Li Chijiang, speaking at the plenary, accused Washington of engaging in “microphone diplomacy” and rallying countries—including some that are not even members of the Conference on Disarmament—to join the statement. He characterized the move as political manipulation driven by US self-interest, as Global Times reported.

The Chinese ambassador rejected the US citation of the Hague Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (HCOC), a voluntary political commitment, noting that China is not a subscribing state and is therefore not bound by it. He emphasized that China has always conducted ICBM tests in a safe, standardized, and responsible manner, providing advance notification to the US and other countries.

“China has conducted only three intercontinental ballistic missile tests to date, the fewest among the five nuclear-weapon states, while the US has carried out more such tests, and more frequently, than any other country,” Li said, according to the China News Service. He also criticized US nuclear-sharing and extended deterrence arrangements, which he said pose a serious threat to international peace and security.

The July 6 Test and Notification Controversy

The dispute traces back to July 6, when China’s PLA Navy conducted a submarine-launched strategic missile test from a Type 094 nuclear submarine, flying approximately 7,300 kilometers into the South Pacific. It was China’s first-ever SLBM test into international open waters and its third ICBM test in history, following launches in 1980 and September 2024, as detailed in CSIS analysis.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning described the test as “a routine military training exercise” that was “not targeted at any specific country or target,” adding that China had notified relevant countries in advance, per Global Times reporting. PLA Navy spokesperson Senior Captain Wang Xuemeng echoed this, stating the test was part of China’s annual military training.

However, the notification process was more complicated than official statements suggested. According to China-Arms analysis, Japan’s Coast Guard was initially told on July 5 that a zone south of Shionomisaki was being designated due to “the fall of space debris”—not a missile test. It was only approximately 90 minutes before the launch that China’s Ministry of National Defense informed Japan’s embassy that the notice actually concerned a ballistic missile launch. The US State Department similarly said China provided only a few hours of notice, as The Print reported.

Pacific Reactions and Regional Divisions

The missile test drew sharp criticism from several Pacific nations. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called it “a provocative act which does destabilise the region,” while Solomon Islands Prime Minister Matthew Wale, chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, said “China is a good friend of the Solomon Islands, but this is not something a friend does,” as ABC News Australia reported.

New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters warned that “we as a region should not sit by and allow such tests to become normalised or routine,” and Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape said “our region has lived through war, nuclear testing and military activities imposed upon us by larger powers. We do not want history repeated.”

Yet the Pacific response has been far from unified. At the Pacific Islands Forum Foreign Ministers Meeting on August 7, Kiribati and Naoero (formerly Nauru) blocked consensus on a joint statement condemning the test, according to WSWS reporting. Naoero’s Deputy Foreign Minister Russ Joseph Kun questioned the criticism, noting that the US “is launching rockets three or four times a year” and asking why there was “so much noise on one rocket that flew out of China.”

Strategic Implications

The diplomatic confrontation reflects deeper tensions in US-China nuclear arms control relations. China’s nuclear arsenal has grown from roughly 290 warheads in 2019 to more than 600 today, with projections of over 1,000 by 2030. The July test demonstrated that China’s sea-based nuclear deterrent is maturing, with the JL-3 SLBM capable of ranges between 10,000 and 14,000 kilometers.

China remains the only major space-faring ballistic missile nation entirely outside the HCOC, which has 140 subscribing states. Since 2009, the US, France, and the UK have lobbied for China’s integration into the code through the P5 process, but Beijing has consistently declined.

CSIS analysts Joseph Rodgers, Bonny Lin, and Leon Li argue that China’s ad-hoc and discretionary notification approach “circumvents international procedures and has already drawn significant condemnation and criticism.” They warn that “testing ballistic missiles in international waters without following the proper protocols poses risks to the international community,” including increasing the chance of miscalculation.

What to Watch

As the Pacific Islands Forum prepares to convene its leaders’ meeting in Palau on August 30, the missile test controversy is expected to remain on the agenda. Whether the PIF can reach consensus on a regional response, and whether China will engage on missile notification mechanisms, will be key indicators of how this diplomatic friction evolves.

The US-China nuclear arms control dialogue remains stalled, with Washington urging Beijing to join arms control negotiations while China maintains its self-defensive nuclear strategy. The August 11 exchange at the Conference on Disarmament suggests that the path to mutual understanding on missile transparency remains fraught with geopolitical tension.