East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

Status
Not open for further replies.

A.Man

Major
Wow, Hagel More To Come

Hagel: China territorial claims destabilize region

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


SINGAPORE (AP) — Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel warned an international security conference Saturday that the U.S. "will not look the other way" when nations such as China try to restrict navigation or ignore international rules and standards.


China's territorial claims in the South China Sea are destabilizing the region, and its failure to resolve disputes with other nations threatens East Asia's long-term progress, Hagel said.

For the second year in a row, Hagel used the podium at the Shangri-La conference to call out China for cyberspying against the U.S. While this has been a persistent complaint by the U.S., his remark came less than two weeks after the U.S. charged five Chinese military officers with hacking into American companies to steal trade secrets.

The Chinese, in response, suspended participation in a U.S.-China Cyber Working Group, and released a report that said the U.S. is conducting unscrupulous cyber espionage and that China is a major target.

Noting the suspension, Hagel in his speech said the U.S. will continue to raise cyber issues with the Chinese, "because dialogue is essential for reducing the risk of miscalculation and escalation in cyberspace."

In a string of remarks aimed directly at China, Hagel said the U.S. opposes any nation's use of intimidation or threat of force to assert territorial claims.


"All nations of the region, including China, have a choice: to unite, and recommit to a stable regional order, or, to walk away from that commitment and risk the peace and security that has benefited millions of people throughout the Asia-Pacific, and billions of people around the world," he said.

China and Japan have been at odds over uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that are controlled by Japan but claimed by both.

The U.S. has declined to take sides on the sovereignty issue but has made clear it has a treaty obligation to support Japan. And the U.S. has also refused to recognize China's declaration of an air defense zone over a large swath of the East China Sea, including the disputed islands.

His remarks drew an immediate challenge from Maj. Gen. Yao Yunzhu of China's People's Liberation Army, who questioned if the U.S. and its allies followed international law and consulted with others whey they set up air defense zones.

Yao, director of the Center for China-America Defense Relations at the PLA's Academy of Military Science, also challenged how the U.S. can say it is not taking a position on the island sovereignty issue, while still saying it is committed to its treaty obligation to support Japan.


Hagel said the U.S. and allies consulted with its neighbors and, unlike China, did not unilaterally set up air defense zones.

U.S. officials also have raised concerns about Beijing's decision to plant an oil rig in part of the South China Sea also claimed by Vietnam. The move has led to a series of clashes between the two nations in the waters around the rig, including the recent sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat.

Chinese leaders, however, has been equally strong in defending their territorial actions, and have blamed the Obama administration's new focus on Asia for emboldening some of the disputes.

But some Asian leaders have expressed worries that the U.S. is doing little more than paying lip service to the complaints, fueling doubts about America's commitment to the region.

In an effort to tamp down those concerns, Hagel also used his speech to reassure Asia-Pacific nations that despite persistent budget woes and increasing demands for military aid across Africa and Europe, the U.S. remains strongly committed to Asia.

Allies in the Asia Pacific have questioned how serious the U.S. is about its so-called pivot to Asia, particularly as the recent unrest in Ukraine and terror threats in north Africa have garnered more attention. And President Barack Obama's national security speech earlier this week made no mention of the Asia Pacific.

"The rebalance is not a goal, not a promise or a vision - it is a reality," Hagel said, laying out a long list of moves the U.S. has made to increase troops, ships and military assets in the region, provide missile defense systems to Japan, sell sophisticated drones and other aircraft to Korea, and expand defense cooperation with Australia, New Zealand and India.

Still, the question was raised to Hagel after the speech, noting that the U.S. is busy backing NATO allies in Europe. Hagel said the U.S. has the ability to meet its obligations all around the world, but is also working to build the capabilities of those partners so they can better take responsibility for their own security.

He said the U.S. plans to increase foreign military financing by 35 percent and military education and training by 40 percent by 2016.

Urging nations to work together to resolve their disputes, Hagel said the U.S. is also continuing to reach out to China. Despite persistent differences, Washington and Beijing have been trying to improve their military relations, expand communications between their forces and conduct joint exercises.

"Continued progress throughout the Asia-Pacific is achievable, but hardly inevitable," Hagel told the crowded room at the Shangri-La Dialogue. "The security and prosperity we have enjoyed for decades cannot be assured unless all nations, all our nations have the wisdom, vision, and will to work together to address these challenges."
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member

>>>>>>>>>>>> MODERATOR'S INSTRUCTIONS <<<<<<<<<<

This thread is about the China's East China Sea ADIZ, it's implementation, how it is being used or contested and specific incidents related to it.

It is not about UNCLOS, the Security Conference in Singapore, or other more general relationship issues.

We have closed the thread before because of going off topic like this and will do so again if necessary.

Stay on topic. Do not get political.

Do not respond to this moderation.



>>>>>>>>>> END MODERATOR'S INSTRUCTIONS <<<<<<<<
 

Janiz

Senior Member
Because it's unilateral, provocative, and destabilizing to peace in the region. See how the same criticisms validly apply? If your counterargument is to merely say because they did if first, then all the more reason to ignore these double standard accusations.
It doesn't apply as Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese and US have a strict code of conduct in the cases of the intrusion to the aforementioned countries ADIZ. China on the other hand showed that it lacks it, or it's not clear or offcially announced and the last year's happenings around Diaoyu showed that a single commander can do as he wants aiming at foreign aircraft above the international waters. You can apply it to PLA so that's not double standard accusations.
Incorrect, Japan unilaterally expanded their ADIZ in 2010 to overlap with Taiwan's ICAO assigned air sector. Taiwan's air sector is approved by an international body. Which international body gave the green light to Japan's ADIZ expansion?
Oh yeah, my bad. Japan extended it's ADIZ over Yonaguni island's territorial waters and the change was 12 nautical miles from it's shores into Taiwan's ADIZ. And Taiwan didn't protest about the move.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

joshuatree

Captain
It doesn't apply as Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese and US have a strict code of conduct in the cases of the intrusion to the aforementioned countries ADIZ. China on the other hand showed that it lacks it, or it's not clear or offcially announced and the last year's happenings around Diaoyu showed that a single commander can do as he wants aiming at foreign aircraft above the international waters. You can apply it to PLA so that's not double standard accusations.

It most certainly is double standards and I sense a great deal of denial. First and foremost, what strict code of conduct? Taiwan protested Japan's ADIZ expansion. As I said, did Japan get some approval from the ICAO on conflicting with ICAO's assignment? And JASDF have been harassing civilian Taiwanese flights. Hardly safe jamming communications and this is already after Taiwan submitting flight plans to Japan. A Japanese rogue air commander perhaps?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Shen disclosed that even though the CAA had submitted our civil flight plans to Japan in advance, Japanese jet fighters interfered with, or even intercepted, our civil aircraft over the two countries’ overlapping ADIZs on at least 41 occasions between 2009 and 2012.

When direct flights across the Taiwan Strait were launched in 2008, the CAA designated a cross-Strait northern flight route, No. B591, for civil flights from Taipei to Beijing, Shandong Province, and Northeast China. This flight route is within the Taipei flight information zone.

Shen stated that even though the CAA had submitted flight plans to Japan in advance, Japan’s Air Self-Defense Force consistently jammed our passenger planes’ communication signals.

Second, did Japan, US, and South Korea consult with China about their ADIZ zones? Did Japan consult with Taiwan on it's ADIZ intentional expansion and overlap?



Oh yeah, my bad. Japan extended it's ADIZ over Yonaguni island's territorial waters and the change was 12 nautical miles from it's shores into Taiwan's ADIZ. And Taiwan didn't protest about the move.

As Insignius already pointed out that is wrong as well.


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Thanks but that article makes zero mention about the SK CG being disbanded due to illegal fishing. A quote of a resident only states that person believes the CG was too busy with the ferry disaster.
 
Last edited:

mr.bean

Junior Member
"Oh yeah, my bad. Japan extended it's ADIZ over Yonaguni island's territorial waters and the change was 12 nautical miles from it's shores into Taiwan's ADIZ. And Taiwan didn't protest about the move."---by Janiz

Taiwan is furious over the developments on DYT by japan but they cannot do anything because of immense American pressure. that is why officially they play down the dispute but privately they love what china Is doing because they wish they could do that themselves but can't. you can verify this by watching tw news media when ex govt people go on tv talk shows but you will never see a current govt official because the Ma jingjeou administration has to be careful of what they say and it cannot be interpreted as pro china.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Don't forget South Korea extended their ADIZ over into North Korea. Was North Korea consulted or did they give their permission for that? So who was consulted to then say it wasn't a unilateral decision? Anyone who agreed and left out anyone against?
 

A.Man

Major
The East China Sea Boils: China and Japan's Dangerous Dance

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Jeffrey W. Hornung

June 5, 2014


At the recent Shangri La Dialogue, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Chinese Lieutenant General Wang Guanzhong traded verbal barbs regarding each other’s countries’ regional behavior. Abe, clarifying his support for ASEAN states locked in territorial disputes with China in the South China Sea, stressed the importance of international law, indirectly criticizing China’s approach to territorial disputes. Wang, in turn, accused Abe of being provocative and trying to stir up trouble. While making for good drama, the verbal barbs reflect an increasingly dangerous situation playing out in the East China Sea that carries real-world consequences that may prove difficult to deescalate. Assuming neither country is willing to risk unintended conflict, it behooves Beijing and Tokyo to discuss mutual rules of interaction between their military forces.

At issue is an incident between military aircraft that took place on May 24. Chinese SU-27 jet fighters flew incredibly close to two Japanese surveillance planes, within fifty meters of a Maritime Self-Defense Force OP-3C aircraft and within thirty meters of an Air Self-Defense Force YS-11EB aircraft. The area where the incident took place was several hundred kilometers north of the Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands (“Diaoyu” in Chinese) and in an overlapping region of both countries’ Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ), areas where states ask aircraft to identify themselves and provide flight plans.




Disputed, however, is the circumstance of the event. China initially argued the Japanese aircraft entered an area where China and Russia were conducting joint naval exercises, thereby forcing China to scramble jets to meet the Japanese aircraft that were monitoring and interfering with the exercise (i.e. being provocative). Japan denies this account, arguing not only did the incident take place outside the exercise area but that it was carrying out routine information-gathering operations over the high seas, an activity backed by international law. China then piled on a separate argument, saying its planes were defending its ADIZ against Japanese provocations.

So, who is at fault? Examining these few certainties against the corpus of international law defining state behavior in international waters/airspace provides different perspectives. First, consider the activity of each military. Because the incident occurred over high seas, according to most interpretations of international law, there are no restrictions on Japan performing information gathering. Likewise, there are no restrictions on China and Russia performing joint exercises. From this perspective, both sides’ behavior is backed by international law.

Yet, while there is no international law that prescribes behavior regarding joint exercises in international waters, it is considered prudent to avoid an area until after the completion of an exercise. If Japan entered into an area where China and Russia were undertaking joint exercises, then Japan would be at fault (although not legally), particularly because China released a no-fly notice prior to the exercises. This point appears to be moot, however, as Japan vehemently denies China’s claim.

Legal arguments that are consistent generally have greater authority. Yet, China convoluted its argument by also saying it was defending its ADIZ. Under international law, there is no legal support for the sovereignty of one’s ADIZ apart from the airspace above one’s territorial sea. Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), this translates to a maximum of twelve nautical miles from one’s shores. China’s position of defending its ADIZ from Japanese provocation far from its shores, therefore, lacks a basis in international law.

Regardless of these differences, one point stands out. There is a practice among pilots to maintain safe distances between aircraft. Japan, for instance, maintains a distance of several hundred meters from other aircraft when it scrambles its jets. To send warnings to foreign aircraft, its aircraft will usually flap their wings or radio an alert. The Chinese aircrafts failed to provide any such signaling; rather, they flew dangerously close, thereby risking the lives of both Chinese and Japanese pilots. Given China’s jet fighters are faster and more maneuverable than Japan’s propeller planes, the blame for the dangerous behavior falls solely on China.

This brings us to finger-pointing at China (once again). Similar to Abe Denmark’s recent observations in the National Interest about the South China Sea, Beijing’s modus operandi in the East China Sea is to couch its actions as reactions to perceived provocations from Japan. In this case, it was to defend China’s ADIZ against a Japanese intrusion. What Chinese leaders fail to recognize is the self-defeating nature of its behavior. Chinese actions in both the South and East China Seas frighten periphery states, thereby making Abe’s efforts to play hardball with China that much easier.

But this trend is worrisome, because as China engages in more provocative behavior short of war in the East China Sea, Japan continues to match China’s assertiveness. This tit-for-tat behavior leaves room for mistakes that could have disastrous consequences. One need only think of the 2001 EP-3 incident—on steroids.

In 2001, a Chinese J-8 jet fighter collided with a U.S. Navy EP-3 off the coast of Hainan, China. The Chinese pilot was killed and the EP-3 crew was detained and interrogated by Chinese officials, demanding skillful diplomacy to end the confrontation. But that was with the United States. With the Chinese Communist Party not wanting to look weak vis-à-vis its historic rival Japan or cede any ground in its territorial claim, it is hard to imagine an East China Sea version of events ending well where a Chinese pilot is killed in a collision with a Japanese aircraft and Japanese military personnel are detained. The explosive mix of nationalism and historical grievances in China combined with a Japanese leader more willing to take a hard line with China means a mistake on any scale has the potential to spiral out of control.

It is precisely for this reason that Beijing and Tokyo need to wake up and act. It is unlikely that the dispute over the Senkaku Islands—and the accompanying issues over resources, permissible behavior in Exclusive Economic Zones, and airspace sovereignty—will be resolved anytime soon, thereby remaining a potential flash point in bilateral ties. Yet, because the status quo is becoming increasingly risky, it behooves Beijing and Tokyo to take action to manage the situation.




Managing the situation means a number of things. To establish clear rules of the road for their militaries—and thus reduce the likelihood of an unwanted incident—they should sign an Incidents at Sea agreement to structure their interactions and prevent incidents from escalating to conflict. Likewise, they should create a maritime communication mechanism to serve as a hotline for better communication between their respective forces. Japan’s agreements with Russia serve as valuable precedents.

If such bilateral mechanisms prove difficult, perhaps the next best alternative is a multilateral initiative. At the recent Western Pacific Naval Symposium, participating nations—including China and Japan—adopted a Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea. While not legally binding, it is an agreement of a standardized protocol of safety procedures, basic communications and basic maneuvering instructions to follow for naval ships and aircraft during unplanned encounters at sea. China and Japan should follow up with each other with specifics.

Regardless of their cool relations, China and Japan have an incentive to act. Neither China nor Japan wants a conflict borne out of tactical errors from their military personnel. And given Japan’s military is arguably the most powerful on China’s periphery, and that Japan is working to get ASEAN states to coalesce against Chinese aggression at the same time, it is making important security changes that enable it to stand up to China. This means Beijing has an increased incentive to manage the dispute with Tokyo. After all, it is essentially fighting a two-front battle against a gradually unifying set of periphery states. But, in the end, managing the volatile situation in the East China Sea requires both capitals to make efforts. If Tokyo and Beijing fail in this regard, the future will be filled with more Shangri La Dialogue-type diatribes and East China Sea aerial provocations—or worse.

Jeffrey W. Hornung is an associate professor at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu and an adjunct fellow with the Office of the Japan Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. The views expressed in this article are his alone.
 

LesAdieux

Junior Member
The East China Sea Boils: China and Japan's Dangerous Dance

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Jeffrey W. Hornung

June 5, 2014


At the recent Shangri La Dialogue, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Chinese Lieutenant General Wang Guanzhong traded verbal barbs regarding each other’s countries’ regional behavior. Abe, clarifying his support for ASEAN states locked in territorial disputes with China in the South China Sea, stressed the importance of international law, indirectly criticizing China’s approach to territorial disputes. Wang, in turn, accused Abe of being provocative and trying to stir up trouble. While making for good drama, the verbal barbs reflect an increasingly dangerous situation playing out in the East China Sea that carries real-world consequences that may prove difficult to deescalate. Assuming neither country is willing to risk unintended conflict, it behooves Beijing and Tokyo to discuss mutual rules of interaction between their military forces.
.....................


Abe has been talking up the "China threat" all around the world whenever he got an audience, his purpose is to get rid of the constitution, the west has been quite supportive, so far Abe has largely achieved his goals: collective defense, over sea deployment, selling weapons etc....
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Just in case Japan felt left out, China continues to pressure Japan in Diaoyu Isle dispute.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Japan has lodged a diplomatic protest with Beijing after Chinese military jets flew as close as 30 metres to Japanese military aircraft over the East China Sea, an official said.

Japan's Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera said two Chinese SU27 fighters approached the Japanese aircraft in separate incidents in airspace claimed by both nations on Wednesday.

He said the Chinese planes posed a danger to the Japanese aircraft and a serious incident could have occurred.

Onodera said the Japanese planes were on a regular surveillance mission in international airspace and that Japan would continue to defend its territory.

Calls to the Chinese defence ministry's press office rang unanswered.

The two countries have increased patrols by ships and military planes to press their conflicting territorial claims in the East China Sea. They had a similar incident on May 24.

Tensions between the rivals have worsened in recent years over a group of uninhabited islands in the East China Sea called Senkaku in Japanese and Diaoyu in Chinese. Japan controls the islands but China also claims them.

Japanese fighter jets were scrambled in response to foreign aircraft 810 times last year, more than half of them Chinese, according to a recent Defence Ministry report.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top