US and China tensions

[Mr. Coffee]

I was thinking more along the lines of us not being the assholes trying to set up an ADIZ over territory the ownership of which is under dispute. But hey, now we know China can actually read legalese, so they're being cunts intentionally.

The US not infringing on anyone's sovereignty. That's funny. I hear Russia and Cuba would like to have a word with you on that.

Odd, looking at the maps on the wiki page you linked, not a damn bit of our ADIZ overlaps either Cuban or Russian territory or administrative airspace.

You can read a map, right?

Also, please point out where I said a goddamn thing about sovereignty.

The point being that I don't see anyone flying military planes to "test" the US zone.

You mean like all the times the USSR did exactly that during the Cold War?

Christ, are you even trying anymore, Fgalkin?

[Irbis]

I was thinking more along the lines of us not being the assholes trying to set up an ADIZ over territory the ownership of which is under dispute.

Dispute, like US attempts of forced internationalizing internal Canadian waters of Northwest Passage? Or Yukon–Alaska border dispute? Because that's where USA forced Canada to accept US northern ADIZ, de facto control of Canadian airspace during Cold War, in vassal, not ally manner.

But I guess any subtleties or similarity of the situation are lost on someone who thinks USA should go around buzzing territories 12.000 km away from USA on behest of aggressor country (that gained control of the islands during Japan-China war) and didn't lost these islands 70 years ago only because USA and Japan* started violating promises made to "wrong" countries before peace talks in 1945

*To be fair to Japan, it looks like they were honest about peace attempts at first and world would have fewer territorial disputes now if USA didn't force Treaty of San Francisco to be entirely one sided affair.

[Mr. Coffee]

I was thinking more along the lines of us not being the assholes trying to set up an ADIZ over territory the ownership of which is under dispute.

Dispute, like US attempts of forced internationalizing internal Canadian waters of Northwest Passage?

Because every other maritime nation on the planet has this concept called "right to passage" and don't like the idea of giving Canada the ability to fuck with international shipping? Especially when you try and tell us that we need to say "mother may I" to move ships through one of only three routes from the Atlantic to the Pacific? Yeah, in this case Canada needs to STFU.

As far as air defense goes, could have swore that was a joint thing,w hat with norad and all...

Eitherway, still not seeing what the fuck any of that has to do with what China is doing. Oh, right, it's the vogue thing on SDN now to automatically assume the US is doing something wrong in regardless of if they caused a specific problem or not. Or are you and Fgalkin honestly trying to tell me that "the other kid did it once" is a valid excuse?

But I guess any subtleties or similarity of the situation are lost on someone who thinks USA should go around buzzing territories 12.000 km

Also, fuck your ad hominem bullshit. Not having any of it and you can suck my dick if you think I'll put up with it, you pissant motherfucker.

[RogueIce]

Regarding all that "omg WW3" nonsense, I would point out there's a world of difference between what's going on with China and the mindsets of US personnel flying/sailing around over there, and the mindsets of soldiers and pilots in a combat zone. Just saying.

And I know the vast majority of this board are too young to remember, but you do know that whole Cold War thing happened, right? Airplanes got shot down, ships sometimes ran into each other, and yet oddly enough "The Great US vs Russian War of the 1950/60/70/80s" never actually happened. So yes, even if "something happens" it is exceedingly unlikely that war will break out over it, because neither of the two governments involved are stupid and it'll get handled via diplomatic channels, angry words, eventual apologies and maybe some compensation switching hands, but that's about it.

[mr friendly guy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karte ... na_Sea.jpg

Pointing out that the Japanese air defense identification zone which is much closer to the Chinese mainland than the proposed Chinese one is the Japanese home islands. The closest point is only 130 km from the Chinese province of Zhejiang. Naturally since both claim disputed islands, their ADIZ is going to overlap.

Also I would like to add Japan had an ADIZ since the 1960s, and expanded it twice in 1972 and in 2010 right into Taiwanese controlled section (before the Chinese even copied the idea of the ADIZ from the US and applied it here).* Naturally the free liberal media made a big deal out of this and how it will raise tensions, oh wait.

Just to add a bit more info
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/ ... g-advisers

Shi said Beijing would be flexible in operating the zone. "The interpretation depends on the political reality. If a US or Taiwanese [military plane] enters the zone, we will be flexible," he said.

Sounds like its aimed at Japan whose ADIZ is damn site closer to the PRC mainland than the Japanese home island

links
* http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/a ... 2003476438 (Japan extends ADIZ into Taiwan space)

[TimothyC]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karte ... na_Sea.jpg

Pointing out that the Japanese air defense identification zone which is much closer to the Chinese mainland than the proposed Chinese one is the Japanese home islands. The closest point is only 130 km from the Chinese province of Zhejiang. Naturally since both claim disputed islands, their ADIZ is going to overlap.

Minor point, but the Chinese ADIZ gets to 130 km of undisputed Japanese territory, the same distance the Japanese ADIZ gets from undisputed Chinese territory.

Using just the Home Islands is misleading.

[Wicked Pilot]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karte ... na_Sea.jpg

Pointing out that the Japanese air defense identification zone which is much closer to the Chinese mainland than the proposed Chinese one is the Japanese home islands. The closest point is only 130 km from the Chinese province of Zhejiang. Naturally since both claim disputed islands, their ADIZ is going to overlap.

The Japanese ADIZ roughly overlaps their FIR boundary, which is quite appropriate seeing how they are responsible for air traffic control in that area. There is a small overlap with Taipai and Incheon, but none with Shanghai.

Also I would like to add Japan had an ADIZ since the 1960s, and expanded it twice in 1972 and in 2010 right into Taiwanese controlled section (before the Chinese even copied the idea of the ADIZ from the US and applied it here).*
* http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/a ... 2003476438 (Japan extends ADIZ into Taiwan space)

Really? Japan decides to extend their ADIZ over one of their islands and this is somehow a controversy? I realize they could have handled it better, but your bringing it up is nonsense.

[Wicked Pilot]

Minor point, but the Chinese ADIZ gets to 130 km of undisputed Japanese territory, the same distance the Japanese ADIZ gets from undisputed Chinese territory.

Using just the Home Islands is misleading.

Actually, according to what I'm looking at, the closest the Japan ADIZ gets to China is about 60 nm from N 28 E 123. The closest the Chinese ADIZ gets to a established Japanese island is about 17nm from N24 45 W 123 00. The closest it gets to what I would consider 'mainland' Japan is about 85nm.

[TimothyC]

Minor point, but the Chinese ADIZ gets to 130 km of undisputed Japanese territory, the same distance the Japanese ADIZ gets from undisputed Chinese territory.

Using just the Home Islands is misleading.

Actually, according to what I'm looking at, the closest the Japan ADIZ gets to China is about 60 nm from N 28 E 123. The closest the Chinese ADIZ gets to a established Japanese island is about 17nm from N24 45 W 123 00. The closest it gets to what I would consider 'mainland' Japan is about 85nm.

Huh. Thank you for the correction. That actually reinforces the point I made, but I do appreciate getting the facts correct.

[mr friendly guy]

Firstly WP thanks for the correction about the borders of the ADIZ. Rather than answering everyone individually I will try to summarise and hopefully clarify some of the issues as I see it.

This blog post relevant links to the issue, however its quite long so I will summarise. It does say what an ADIZ can and cannot do, and the evidence seems to be that China is following that interpretation (and its not what some people think it means). Also useful is the wiki link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defens ... ation_Zone

Firstly the ADIZ is not a sovereign airspace. Nor did China claim it was theirs by virtue of having an ADIZ. To take from wiki "An Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) is airspace over land or water in which the ready identification, location, and control of civil aircraft over land or water is required in the interest of national security.[1] They extend far beyond a country's airspace to give the country more time to respond to foreign and possibly hostile aircraft. Since this is beyond a country's airspace, that country cannot force it down simply for not complying. They can however...

A nation enforcing an ADIZ thus does not have the right to force airplanes to change course or to refute access to the ADIZ – unless, under the international convention of national self defense – the airplane, for example, is determined to harbor hostile intent and presents an imminent threat to the nation. When an airplane declines to follow with the protocols set for an ADIZ, and is assessed to not be a threat, the most the nation administering the ADIZ can do typically is to track it – which may include scrambling jets if it so deems.

So yeah, a craft that doesn't identify itself might be perceived as worth investigating. Now, not every country needs or wants an ADIZ, but the US, Canada, and lot of China's neighbours eg India, Japan, Pakistan, South Korea and Taiwan have one, so it doesn't unreasonable if China decides it wants one too. Why would you want one then? Well identifying a craft would be useful in times of heightened tension so you don't accidentally shoot a civilian craft down. The PLA has already stated they want it for the purpose of identifying foreign aircraft.

The US claim their ADIZ doesn't apply to military aircraft (which makes sense so that they don't require a Russian one in training to identify themselves, nor makes it illegal if the US military aircraft enters another nation's ADIZ). China's claim was different in that initially they just stated planes (making no distinction between military and civilian aircraft), and then later specified not US or Taiwanese military planes. This will come into play later.

While an ADIZ doesn't constitute a territorial claim, if you extend an ADIZ over another territory's airspace you are either
a) violating their sovereignty (by demanding to notify you in their territory) or
b) saying that you dispute their sovereignty over a certain region.

The second point is hardly new in the territorial disputes in the East China Sea. So now lets look at some of these statements


1. China made the airspace theirs.

Well no. An ADIZ doesn't do that. Moreover the evidence is quite firmly showing that the Chinese government knows just what an ADIZ does.
From the PRC's own mouthpiece, English edition of course

“The identification zone is not a territorial airspace. It’s an area demarcated outside territorial airspace, and to establish an early warning mechanism and ensure our air security. It does not mean the expansion of territorial air space; it helps to improve the effectiveness of safeguarding China’s territorial airspace,” said Yang.

Sorry, China isn't claiming what you think they are. Now some ignorant person over there, just like ignorant people over here might mistake an ADIZ as a licence to declare the sky all theirs, but that just proves both those people are ignorant.

2. China is unilaterally change the status quo in the East China Sea.

This is quite a common accusation, so lets first work out what they could mean by changing the status quo.

Since an ADIZ doesn't change territorial claims in and of itself, it will be spurrious at best to assume that this does that. China's ADIZ does extend into overlapping ADIZ with Japan because both sides claim disputed territory. Nothing new here. If you're going to bitching about setting up an ADIZ over disputed territory, well Japan already did that. What's good for the geese is good for the gander and all that nice stuff.

If you are going to say that an ADIZ in itself changes the status quo in the sense that aircraft coming into an ADIZ may now start putting all that extra effort into notifying China, well yeah ok. Status quo changed. However bitching about it being done unilaterally is very weak when other nations also set up an ADIZ unilaterally. Moreover Japan's ADIZ also overlapped Taiwan's ADIZ, and they did this earlier.

3. The US totally showed the Chinese right?

Well the problem is because China's original statement just mentions planes (in general) while the US ADIZ supposedly just requires civilian planes to identify themselves. The above link talks about whether they actually do that, but lets assume the US does. So China mentioned the ADIZ covers all planes, which makes their ADIZ different from the US. Ok so the US showed them up, and then the Chinese said (in my earlier post) that it doesn't apply to US or Taiwanese military planes. If China had of outright applied the same standards as the US did at the very beginning, flying military planes through it wouldn't be a big deal. But because they didn't, score 1 to the US.

Now lets have a look at the civilian aspect.

From a total Chinese mouthpiece The New York Times

Airlines Urged by U.S. to Give Notice to China
By PETER BAKER and JANE PERLEZ
Published: November 29, 2013 314 Comments

WASHINGTON — Even as China scrambled fighter jets to enforce its newly declared air defense zone, the Obama administration said on Friday that it was advising American commercial airlines to comply with China’s demands to be notified in advance of flights through the area.

And just in case they are wrong, it's also being reported by Boston Globe and USA today.

So I sure hope all those people going "America fuck yeah" rip Obama a new one for caving in to big bad China. Because every US civilian craft that enters China's ADIZ and required to notify China is apparently a big fuck you from the PRC to the USA. Or maybe the Chinese just used legalese to get the similar treatment foreign civilian planes get when they enter the US ADIZ. Couldn't be that could it?

[Patroklos]

There is nothing wrong with ADIZs overlapping, just like multiple navies patrol the same international waters. The daft that they do this does not make those waters theirs to control and neither does an ADIZ. Actual controlled airspace is designated differently.

The issue here is that this ADIZ was extended over islands Japan claims, and thus local airspace and sea space Napan claims to be territorial.

[Borgholio]

So I sure hope all those people going "America fuck yeah" rip Obama a new one for caving in to big bad China.

How did he cave in to China? Our warplanes are flipping China the bird even as we speak. It's just the civilian airlines that are asked to comply, probably for their safety. I can remember a few instances where civilian airliners were shot down out of the sky by Soviet fighters due to alleged airspace infringements.

Now if Obama actually agreed that the airspace belonged to the Chinese, then yeah I'd agree with you.

[mr friendly guy]

So I sure hope all those people going "America fuck yeah" rip Obama a new one for caving in to big bad China.

How did he cave in to China? Our warplanes are flipping China the bird even as we speak. It's just the civilian airlines that are asked to comply, probably for their safety. I can remember a few instances where civilian airliners were shot down out of the sky by Soviet fighters due to alleged airspace infringements.

Now if Obama actually agreed that the airspace belonged to the Chinese, then yeah I'd agree with you.

You just skim read what I wrote didn't you?

1. An ADIZ doesn't give a country that airspace. Its not a territorial claim. Its an area beyond that which gives a country time to respond to an unidentified aircraft. China knows this, America knows this. Which is why China isn't demanding "that the airspace belonged to them", so by default Obama can't agree to give China something they didn't even ask for in the first place.

2. What they did ask for is foreign aircraft to identify themselves within the ADIZ. Obama is giving them part of that in regards to American civilian aircraft if not military (which is the same standard the US applies in its ADIZ). In effect its giving China equal standards.

Now I have no problem with countries having the same standard. However the way people were carrying on it sounded like if the Chinese got what they want it would be bad. Well from the US, they mainly got what they asked for by virtue of more civilian planes will likely enter there than military planes. Plus they indicated military planes (from the US) might not be a big no no anymore. The problem is, people think the Chinese were asking for something ridiculous (rather than for the most part, similar to what the US does with its ADIZ), and then crowing when Obama doesn't give them this imaginary demand.

[Borgholio]

You just skim read what I wrote didn't you?

Yeah I did skim it...my apologies. I'll just stop posting until I fully wake up this morning and can manage to actually fucking read properly...

[Mr. Coffee]

After reading Mr. Fiendly Guy's explaination, makes a bit more sense. Fair is fair and all.

[Wicked Pilot]

The problem is, people think the Chinese were asking for something ridiculous (rather than for the most part, similar to what the US does with its ADIZ)

No they are not similar. The US ADIZ for the most part covers area an aircraft would enter going to, from or over the US. Looking at the charts I could only find one published airway crossing the US ADIZ that simply transits, R628/M328 from Havana FIR to Nassau FIR. (That airway crosses the Miami FIR and aircraft have to talk to the US anyway) And the ADIZ covers less than 15nm of it. The Japanese ADIZ covers only two airways that transits outside their FIR, B391 and L2. The Chinese ADIZ covers the following airways that don't go into or out of China or their FIR: Y111, Y732, B576, Y579/A586, Z401, OTR30, Z40, A1, M750, Y291, R583, R595, L3. It also covers two Special Use Airspaces: All of RCR-8, which is a Taiwanese Restricted Area (not sure what they do there), and a part of RJW-189, which is probably used as a training area for military aircraft out of Kadena.

Now do I think all of this is a big deal, that China's done something super dastardly that we should all get our panties twisted over? No. It's kind of a dick move, but really, meh. No one really has to comply, and if China wants to spend millions scrambling fighters to check out every Japan Air jet going to Jakarta, so be it.

[mr friendly guy]

I said it was similar, not exactly same. I did say equal standards when it came to civilian planes notifying the authorities though. I already mentioned a few things differently, like for example how China's original proclaimation covered all planes, whereas the US didn't apply theirs to military planes.

The other things that was different is that the US mainly is interested in planes going to the US and not interested in those merely passing through its ADIZ without going to the US. China appears to be interested in both. As you said, their ADIZ covers more planes merely passing through its ADIZ without going into their airspace.

Like you say, despite this difference, this most probably isn't a big deal. Although from what I have heard, its not just the US but other countries have said they will comply. Now if the Chinese are that paranoid about planes potentially passing near their airspace, then those airlines that comply will certainly help them sort out which aircraft are non hostile.

What this thing has shown though, is that the US can say they got tough on China, while the Chinese can say, look the US gave us concessions on the civilian aircraft thing. All over an issue which isn't really that big a deal. Sounds like a win win and I am too cynical.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Certainly the news services seem to not think it's news-worthy anymore, though one of them did remark that if others continue to ignore it, it might make their leadership look weak in the eyes of their people. If so, it does raise the question of how this is being portrayed in their media.