US gets a warning from China to leave airspace

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by stylinexpat, May 21, 2015.

  1. stylinexpat macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    #1
  2. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    A Ming Dynasty map doesn't give China this territory.
     
  3. stylinexpat thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    #3
    There are a bunch of Islands off of the coast of China,Japan,Taiwan,Philippines, and Vietnam to which each claims ownership. The US claims ownership of some islands as well so to the Chinese they see no difference of whether that island was there to begin with or built after. After all no one disputed the island that they used to build the new Hong Kong International Airport.
     
  4. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    Yeah but there's the international law of the seas to agree those disputes.
     
  5. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #5
    And so it starts ... PRC begins to try to bully and intimidate its neighbours. They must be stoned if they believe the US will sit idly by while they try to intimidate their neighbours.

    [Waits for Greenpeace to show up to protest the destruction of the natural habitant of those reefs...]
     
  6. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #6
    I don't think that this incident in it's self is a turning point.


    As to reclaimed land hell the Netherlands is 70% reclaimed.

    As to threatening behaviour it’s what the world has seen the US do for decades.

    As in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and now the Far East, the US is finding out that things don’t always go their way.

    The days when the US said jump, and the rest of the world asked how high? have gone forever.

     
  7. aaronvan, May 21, 2015
    Last edited: May 21, 2015

    aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #7
    According to the the International Law of the Sea--of which China is a signatory--reclaimed land outside of a nation's territorial waters is not sovereign territory. So, the United States can and will overfly those "new" islands any time we feel like it.

    Edit per #9.
     
  8. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #8
    Well, apparently the days of the PRC bullying their neighbours is not over, but you're right. I doubt very seriously the US will take any unilateral action. Instead, the US will work with other countries (in this case Vietnam, Philippines, Australia, Japan, South Korea, etc.). But to think that the US will not react at all to the PRC's arrogant aggression is sheer fantasy. This is very dangerous situation being engineered by PRC over a pile of coral. Even the Japanese are re-arming.
     
  9. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #9
    A minor clarification: Artificial or reclaimed land outside of a nation's territorial waters is not Sovereign territory.

    If the US built a new islet in the Florida Keys, or Germany built an artificial airport off its Baltic coast - that would be considered their sovereign territory.

    But if Britain (for example) constructed an artificial island a hundred miles off the coast of Norway - it would not be.

    As I have noted previously, a fundamental principle of the US, executed through its Navy, is maintenance of international freedom of navigation.

    The United States will, in this case, ignore China's claims to territorial soveignty over this area - the legal case for such claims is virtually non-existent. It will ultimately be up to international legal bodies to make such determinations. What the US will do is continue to fly aircraft over the area, and transit sea vessels through the associated waters. Failure to do so would establish a precedent that would give weight to China's claim of ownership.

    Again: I am puzzled to think of any nation or navy other than the United States that could perform this task as effectively and assertively as the US Navy. Perhaps our European friends could spend some time pondering on this the next time they start whinging about how terrible the United States is.
     
  10. snberk103 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Location:
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    #10
    That is essential difference in a nutshell. In Hong Kong and the Netherlands there were in competing territorial claims and there was no change in longstanding traditional uses of the area as an international waters. Hong Kong itself was returned to the Chinese by the UK through peacefully through international law.

    What makes the South China Sea issue so different is that there are competing claims, and a long long (really long) history of the South China Sea being international waters.

    There is a similar dispute happening in the Arctic. Waters that have traditionally been international, with loads of resources underneath. Aside from some publicity stunts by Russia and Canada (flags being planted on the North Pole, etc) the Arctic territorial dispute is being handled through diplomacy and the UN. The way it should be. And probably giving the US somewhat less than what it would like.

    My point is that there are mechanisms for peaceful resolutions to territorial disputes like the one in the South China Sea, and China is not using them. I don't believe they've even started the process.

    I think this is a case of China seeing who (among the other nations claiming the islands) is going to blink first. China wants one of them to back down and - in exchange for something big from China - transfer their claim of the islands to China, and end their defence alliance with the US and transfer that as well. By splitting that nation away from the US, the other nations may begin to doubt the benefit of their alliances with the US... which is what China wants, imho... to pull Vietnam, Philippines, etc away from the US and into their own orbit.

    At this point, unless somebody blinks - in big way - somebody's airplane or ship is going to get shot down or sunk. Then it will get interesting. I'd bet doughnuts to dollars the Pentagon (and the Chinese equivalent) have been war-gaming this for a year at least. Lets hope they understand each other well enough to keep any real shooting confined.

    ----------

    A good post, while I was still typing.
     
  11. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #11
    IMO this is not going to be some quick scenario, I have the idea that in time maybe decades, these islands will become inhabited.

    As the facts are now the US is slowly getting weaker, and China is getting stronger.

    This is not only a trail of military strength, but also economic.

    HP Set to Sell H3C Networking Biz to China's Tsinghua Unigroup.

    http://www.eweek.com/networking/hp-set-to-sell-h3c-networking-biz-to-chinas-tsinghua-unigroup.html

    Maybe the Chinese will end up owning the US.:D
     
  12. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #12
    As countries become superpowers there is a responsibility with that..... America has learnt this to a point, and tries to cover up its wrongdoings, as does the UK...... Russia and China haven't quite learnt this yet. In the grand scheme of things America calling out a country over its actions is more often than not the equivalent of the pot calling the kettle black.
     
  13. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #13
    lol......then they're gonna be surprised at the amount of debt they acquired
     
  14. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #14
    Your point about economic strength is important.

    Which is why the Obama administration is working so hard to negotiate the Trans Pacific Partnership. The fact that so many nations - from Vietnam and Malaysia, to Chile and Brunei - are participating ought to send a very clear signal as to the value of such agreements.
     
  15. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #15
    Up until this year the US always bullied countries who didn't have WMD.Despite the lies over Iraq in 2003.

    But in the cases of both Russia and China well they really do have them.
     
  16. aaronvan, May 21, 2015
    Last edited: May 21, 2015

    aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #16
    As usual, Europe counts on the U.S. to guarantee freedom of passage and keep China is check. Europe is so militarily weak that they are unable to police that small pond called the Mediterranean and prevent thousands of refugees from landing on their shores. What could they possibly do against an actual naval power in the Pacific? Absolutely nothing.
     
  17. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #17
    Horse of Troy.:p
     
  18. snberk103 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Location:
    An Island in the Salish Sea
    #18
    It's not the Europeans who need the South China Sea kept at the status quo, but the Americans. If the US wants to maintain its dominance as the pre-eminent superpower then it needs to keep Chinese ambitions in check, and to keep its allies in the area happy. If the balance of power shifts from the US to China Europe will simply deal with the Chinese hegemony the same way it deals with American hegemony. Not really a big change.
     
  19. stylinexpat thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    #19
    When China built an island to build an international airport I did not see America complaining and sending surveilence flights over that new island which today is an international airport.
     
  20. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #20
    Another thing to think about is, while the US might have the largest military in 2015, but it’s a drain on resources.

    The infrastructure of the US is slowly falling apart, many aspects of lifes social fabric of the US are without proper funding. But you are going to have to spend even more money on the military in the decades to come to make sure you don’t blink first.

    Remember Russia, and IS are still in the picture.

    You might Win the war, only to see that you made a desert of your own homeland.



    Why do a job yourself when you can get someone else to do it for you for free.:p:D:p:D
     
  21. stylinexpat thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    #21
    Looks like these days everyone wants to build on disputed territories. After one has built settlements on disputed territories the odds are quite low that they will return any of those territories to those who also claim ownership or rights to those territories.

    Here is the irony in all this lol.. America seems to pick which areas to send military surveilence flights over when it comes to building of new settlements over disputed territories.
     
  22. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #22
    Again: China is quite free to build artificial islands within their own territorial waters. And there is no question about doing so in Hong Kong or other areas in China's littoral waters.

    The Spratly Islands, located some 500 miles from the nearest part of historical China (Hinan Island) and far closer to both the Philippines and Vietnam - most definitely do not fall into what may reasonably be termed Chinese territorial waters. This is an critically important distinction.
     
  23. Peterkro, May 21, 2015
    Last edited: May 21, 2015

    Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #23
    Umm I think not both France and the U.K. have weapons that could call down all out nuclear war.Russia has enough nukes that the U.S. is not going to call them on it,China has weapons that make the Pacific fleet a big fat target and the U.S. military have already said there is no defence against these weapons.May you live in interesting times.

    E2a: In case I'm not clear here,Chinese missiles with or without nuclear warheads will hit a US carrier group at about 17,000 mph any idea what weapons will prevent that?
     
  24. aaronvan, May 21, 2015
    Last edited: May 21, 2015

    aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #24
    Agreed, Europe is a profiteer par excellence. Case in point: Google.

    And then American B-2s will enter Chinese airspace undetected and drop a few hundred JDAM's on PLA C2 sites. Not sure what that accomplishes, though, besides another war.
     
  25. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #25

Share This Page