bigstick61
Junior Member
Quite right, and I agree with the last sentence in your previous post as well. Both sides have a right to interfere with intelligence gathering, so long as it is done reponsibly and within legal bounds.
Pentagon accuses Chinese vessels of harassing U.S. ship
- Thread starter Asymptote
- Start date
Quite right, and I agree with the last sentence in your previous post as well. Both sides have a right to interfere with intelligence gathering, so long as it is done reponsibly and within legal bounds.
antimatter
Banned Idiot
From Chinese Side POV the solution is simple, just send a ship close enough to the US spy vessel and make alot of underwater noise to drown out the sonar listening device. No need to get rough and entangled at all!!
bigstick61
Junior Member
That is something they could have done.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
Well, no harm was done to the US ship. If a Chinese vessel collided with the US vessel or if something more provocative like trying to board the vessel or firing a shot across the ships bow, I can see how China would clearly be in the wrong. Also it appears as if the Chinese boats involved may not even be under PLAN jurisidaction.
Or just go out there and start pinging away with your sonar, or maybe drop some underwater noisemakers like torpedo decoys. That would mess them up. Sucks for any whales that are around though.
joshuatree
Captain
But we don't know what transpired before the reported event. It's easier to argue that one should only get jammed when one is at an advantage in this arena. If you were a nation that had inferior jamming technology, you do the next best thing you can to "intercept". The reports did mention about having planes flown over. What if the US ship did not heed this warning? A lock on? Then I can picture people here accusing of aggressive, warlike behavior. Especially on an unarmed ship.
Article 56
Rights, jurisdiction and duties of the coastal State in the
exclusive economic zone
1. (b) jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of this
Convention with regard to:
(i) the establishment and use of artificial islands, installations
and structures;
(ii) marine scientific research;
(iii) the protection and preservation of the marine environment;
Not a real expert on law or anything, but this does seem to suggest that the US stepped over some boundaries.
Rights, jurisdiction and duties of the coastal State in the
exclusive economic zone
1. (b) jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of this
Convention with regard to:
(i) the establishment and use of artificial islands, installations
and structures;
(ii) marine scientific research;
(iii) the protection and preservation of the marine environment;
Not a real expert on law or anything, but this does seem to suggest that the US stepped over some boundaries.
joshuatree
Captain
China has to uphold the UNCLOS with who? Those who signed and ratified. Would a Chinese citizen living in China be bound by American laws? Would a US citizen living in the US be bound by Chinese laws? No, it's about what society or group you're a part of. The US has not ratified the UNCLOS, you could go on and on about the laws set by UNCLOS but the US is not a part of the UNCLOS, plain and simple. Until ratification......China or any other nation that signed and ratified the UNCLOS technically does not need to adhere to these rules with a non-participant.
bigstick61
Junior Member
No harm in the end was done, but it well could have, based on Chinese actions. They were endangering the ship. That they were not able to harm it is somewhat irrelevant.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
Just a thought-
Can the Chinese claim that the low-frequency sonar array was interfering with the marine life (whales, etc) in their EEZ? Since It states:
You can say a P-3 overflying a Russian carrier is endangering the ship because there exists a chance through either pilot error or technical malfunction for the P-3 to crash into the Russian carrier. The Chinese ships involved are not corvettes but small patrol boats about the size of a tugboat.
Can the Chinese claim that the low-frequency sonar array was interfering with the marine life (whales, etc) in their EEZ? Since It states:
You can say a P-3 overflying a Russian carrier is endangering the ship because there exists a chance through either pilot error or technical malfunction for the P-3 to crash into the Russian carrier. The Chinese ships involved are not corvettes but small patrol boats about the size of a tugboat.