The $2.2billion (£1.76billion) arms sale coincided with a state visit by Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen to the US. The sale included 108 General Dynamics Corp (GD.N) M1A2T Abrams tanks and 250 Stinger missiles, which are manufactured by Raytheon (RTN.N). But Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said the arms sales were a violation of international law and harmed China’s sovereignty and national security.
Mr Shuang told a press conference: “China’s government and Chinese companies will not cooperate or have commercial contacts with these US companies.
“I can’t reveal the details at the moment. But believe this – Chinese people always stress standing by their word.”
China claims self-ruled and democratic Taiwan as its own and has never renounced the use of force to bring it under Beijing’s control.
China regularly calls Taiwan the most sensitive issue in its relations with the US.
READ MORE: South China Sea: How Beijing breached 2015 pledge
On Sunday, the ruling Communist Party’s official People’s Daily posted an article on its WeChat account identifying US companies that could be vulnerable to sanctions.
They included Honeywell International Inc (HON.N), which makes the engines for the Abrams tanks, and private jets maker Gulfstream Aerospace, which is owned by General Dynamics.
China is an important market for both Honeywell and Gulfstream.
Ties between China and the United States are already strained over a trade war, which has seen them levy tariffs on each other’s imports.
The US Navy has conducted multiple Freedom of Navigation operations in the disputed sea to push back China’s claim.
China’s threat comes after its naval test last week fired six Anti-Ship Ballistic Missiles (ASBS) in the sea.
Pentagon spokesman, Lieutenant-Colonel Dave Eastburn, labelled the tests “disturbing” and stated it goes against the Chinese President’s 2015 election pledge to de-militarise the waters.
He said: “The Pentagon was aware of the launch of Chinese missiles from the artificial structures of the South China Sea near the Spratly Islands.
“What is really disturbing about this act is that it is in direct contradiction to President XI’s statement … that he would not militarise these artificial outposts.”