Chinese 'air defence identification zone' in East China Sea

Status
Not open for further replies.
cdxbow

cdxbow

Well-Known Member
Most of you will have seen the news of the Chinese declaring an "air defence identification zone" that covers a significant area of the east China sea, and in particular an contested by Japan. This move is very provocative and could escalate the already tense territorial dispute. Even though the Chinese announcement says it's not aimed at any particular government, this one in clearly aimed at Japan.

I expected China to go more softly with the neighbours after it's more recent bellicosity, this however, ups the ante. The statement implies China will respond, so they have painted themselves into a corner where they will have to respond. I can't for the life of me work out why the PLA would put themselves in such a position unless they want to escalate it into a conflict sooner rather than later.

Can this provocation remain unchallenged? What will be Japans response? Or the US?

Cursed are those who live in interesting times.
 
2007yellow430

2007yellow430

Active Member
cdxbow said:
Most of you will have seen the news of the Chinese declaring an "air defence identification zone" that covers a significant area of the east China sea, and in particular an contested by Japan. This move is very provocative and could escalate the already tense territorial dispute. Even though the Chinese announcement says it's not aimed at any particular government, this one in clearly aimed at Japan.

I expected China to go more softly with the neighbours after it's more recent bellicosity, this however, ups the ante. The statement implies China will respond, so they have painted themselves into a corner where they will have to respond. I can't for the life of me work out why the PLA would put themselves in such a position unless they want to escalate it into a conflict sooner rather than later.

Can this provocation remain unchallenged? What will be Japans response? Or the US?

Cursed are those who live in interesting times.
Click to expand...
Saw it in the news. Japan cannot allow this to stand. I see a major confrontation coming sooner rather than later. My question is: how many carriers do we have within 1000 miles, because I suspect they will be needed.

Art
 
OPSSG

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
This thread has been flagged by the Moderators; and all participants are reminded of the requirement to observe the Forum Rules. Trolling and failure to observe these rules will result in an immediate ban. If a member wishes to participate, the Moderators would strongly recommend the use of sources in support of opinions expressed. Continued failure to cite sources and attempts at trolling, will not be tolerated.

This reminder is provided as a spam/quality control measure, designed to encourage members to do some basic research before posting, like providing sources on the topic, as follows:-

(i) on 23 Nov 2013, US Secretary of Defense, Hagel Issues Statement on East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone;

(ii) CCTV has a report dated 23 Nov 2013, namely, 'Announcement of the Aircraft Identification Rules for the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone of the PRC';

(iii) NY Times has an article on point dated 23 Nov 2013, namely, 'China Claims Air Rights Over Disputed Islands';

(iv) Japan Times on 23 Nov 2013 has noted that 'Japan says China’s new air defense zone above Senkakus ‘very dangerous’ escalation'; and

(v) Focus Taiwan has a 23 Nov 2013 opinion piece on the Impact of China's air defense identification zone.​

Further, in Air Power 101 (a 2 page thread), the Moderators explain 'Why the Middle East and Asia are on Alert 5'. The sources contained therein, provide a context for the balance of power in North East Asia. For these interested in even more current data, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission has published an Annual Report on China on 20 November 2013. In particular, the 29 page section on China's Maritime Disputes may be of interest.

There is a difference between having a passion to discuss geo-strategic issues; and using only blind emotion to articulate the matter at hand. Reasonable attempts have been made to educate new members on expected decorum in a number of threads in this section (eg. the 'US, Japan to establish military bases in the Philippines' thread, which has 3 pages). Read these above links and threads provided as backgrounders. Kindly avoid going half-cocked with emotions or attempting to score nationalistic propaganda points in subsequent posts.

Many thanks for your attention.
 
Last edited:
R

Rimasta

Member
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said it will change nothing in how our forces operate in the region, which sounds like the G.W. and her group could be in the dispatched to the area at some point. It's been described by many as escalatory and I would have to agree, "Emergency defensive measures" sounds like a missiles being fired at a US or Japanese aircraft, prompting a response.

Hopefully, it doesn't come to that and cooler heads prevail, but this move appears to INCREASE the chance of a "miscalculation" as Washington describes it, that could "rapidly escalate". The real question I feel is going to be how the Chinese respond to foreign aircraft in the airspace now, since I agree they seem to have talked themselves into a corner perhaps.

Also, reports indicate on the day of the announcement two Chinese reconnaissance aircraft entered the newly declared zone. The Japanese scrambeled two F-15J 's, so I don't see Japan or the United States backing down in any way. Also note, part of the zone is technically over portions of South Korean airspace.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sampanviking

Sampanviking

Banned Member
A lot of silliness being put about this issue.
It is an Air Defence Identification Zone, not an increase in sovereign territory or an air exclusion zone. An ADIZ is simply there to reduce tensions and remove jitters and every developed nation has one. It does not matter if these areas overlap with other nations ADIZ, in fact the more nations Air Controllers that have to be informed of identity and movement the better for security throughout and for everyone.

Japan has had a massive ADIZ since the 60's and expanded it most recently in 2010 towards Taiwan.

The size of a ADIZ relates to the speed and strike range of modern military aircraft and relates to to response time of Air Defences to respond appropriately.

Why this is being hyped up in such a hysterical way is frankly beyond me.
If now China and Japan have their ADIZ's over a hotly disputed area, all the better that both sides now need to talk to each other when they enter the vicinity.
 
K

kickars

New Member
Rimasta said:
Also note, part of the zone is technically over portions of South Korean airspace.
Click to expand...
The new Chinese ADIZ does NOT cover any parts of S Korean airspace. ADIZ and a nation's air space are two different things.

I don't see people complain about Japan's ADIZ which has been there for over 50 years... Mind you, US also has one. In fact, which developed country doesn't?!
 
RobWilliams

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
The problem isn't that China has an ADIZ, that's ludicrous. The issue being about where this new ADIZ is placed, so we can bin the "the US has one" arguments.
 
Sampanviking

Sampanviking

Banned Member
RobWilliams said:
The problem isn't that China has an ADIZ, that's ludicrous. The issue being about where this new ADIZ is placed, so we can bin the "the US has one" arguments.
Click to expand...
Its placed adjacent to Chinese Territorial Airspace, where would you expect it be? Peru?

If you mean that it also encompasses disputed territory, than you are right, it does, and rightly so. Where better for all parties to have a zone where everybody has to talk to everybody else?
The area was disputed last week, it is disputed today and it will be disputed next week. The ADIZ has no impact on any territorial claim or dispute and those calling it an escalation are engaged in spreading disingenuous nonsense.
Had the PRC not included this area, the same voices would now be saying that this represented a climbdown or abandonment of any claim.

The PRC is a major emerging power and such emergence will cause change and need for others to accommodate accordingly. The new ADIZ is a part of this process and the reaction from some, simply evidence that not everybody is yet up to speed with the new and changing reality.
 
K

kickars

New Member
RobWilliams said:
The problem isn't that China has an ADIZ, that's ludicrous. The issue being about where this new ADIZ is placed, so we can bin the "the US has one" arguments.
Click to expand...
Where do you expect China to draw its ADIZ in East China Sea?

In fact, why is it so hard to understand China this time round, but it was so easy to understand Japan when its ADIZ was drawn with disputed area included?

This topic is really pointless. Western countries and most western educated people will always support Japan over China. No matter what China does, as long as CCP is in power, China will always be the evil one. End of the story.

BTW, have a look at the story BBC just wrote on this issue. That's how one sided a report can be. And the comments below really make you question about the intelligence of many average people (if indeed people who read BBC News website are average people).

BBC News - Shinzo Abe: China new air defence zone move 'dangerous'

No wonder, people in the west hate China so much...
 
RobWilliams

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
Sampanviking said:
Its placed adjacent to Chinese Territorial Airspace, where would you expect it be? Peru?

If you mean that it also encompasses disputed territory, than you are right, it does, and rightly so. Where better for all parties to have a zone where everybody has to talk to everybody else?
Click to expand...
Enough of the attitude, the reason why this has caused such a stir is because it's placed over a disputed location, FACT.

I didn't place any sort of belief on what this does to the geopolitical situation in the region, the morals of it or any other details and to be quite frank I really don't care. No point getting arced up to me about the details about it because I cannot even begin to explain how much I really don't care about it.
 
H

hangman

New Member
Not about Japan...

After careful considerations, deliberations and calculations, China has declared their "air defense identification zone (adiz)." In other words, China has made its move and, the move should be no surprise to anyone--especially to Japan and U.S.

This move by China comes on the heels of a rash of moves and counter moves by China and U.S. Thus, in my opinion, the declaration by China of adiz is simply upping the ante of ongoing game of cat and mouse, etc. In fact, the move by the Chinese is not and should not interpreted as being aimed at Japan but squarely at U.S.

The only remaining question is what would be the next move by the U.S.? Are we really going to go to war with China and risk a potential escalation of unknown proportions for a few tiny contested islands by Japan and China? Are we willing to sacrifice our boys and start another war so far from our home?

In the eyes of Chinese, our pivot to Asia (constraintment) and ongoing circle of ring can be construed as a strategic threat, etc. In this sense, the Chinese declaration of adiz is a product of our own policy, etc.

Can we really contain/constraint China now and in the future? As some Chinese scholars claim, the rise of China really inevitable? If past actions are any indication of perhaps future actions, we did go to war in Korea and Vietnam with mixed results, etc.

At minimum, this move by the Chinese is daring, etc. Now the world waits for U.S.’s response! And I don’t mean the all the tough talking…
 
M

My2Cents

Active Member
This is the best map laying out the area in question that I have been able to find. I includes waypoints for the corners defining the area.
China maps out its first air defense ID zone - Xinhua | English.news.cn

The Chinese announced the following rules apply in the area.
Announcement of the Aircraft Identification Rules for the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone of the P.R.C. - Xinhua | English.news.cn

The identification requirements seem fairly standard. However, I am concerned about how the third part is going to be interpreted.
Third, aircraft flying in the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone should follow the instructions of the administrative organ of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone or the unit authorized by the organ. China's armed forces will adopt defensive emergency measures to respond to aircraft that do not cooperate in the identification or refuse to follow the instructions.
Click to expand...
This would seem to indicate that the Chinese believe that they have the right to order all other nations military aircraft out of the zone at some future date. Or it may just be a poorly nuanced translation.

A question for those more knowledgeable. There have to be other areas on the globe with overlapping air defense zones.
  1. Is such language typical in other overlapping air defense zones?
  2. How are conflicts in instructions issued from ground authorities handled?
  3. How would this effect China’s ability to claim the area as an Air and Surface Defense Zone?
The area claimed extends over 300 nmi from the Chinese mainland and within 100 nmi of Japan’s and Taiwan’s. In fact the eastern edge is the continental shelf for the most part.
 
OPSSG

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Yonhap said:
China informed S. Korea of air defense zone over East China Sea

BEIJING, Nov. 25 (Yonhap) -- China informed South Korea of its new air defense zone over the East China Sea days before it publicly declared the new zone that partly overlaps with South Korea's own zone, a potential dispute between the two neighboring counties, a Seoul diplomatic source in Beijing said Monday. South Korea has conveyed its stance of "regret" to China through a diplomatic channel, the source said on the condition of anonymity. "We had been recently informed of the Chinese side's decision to set up the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ)," the source said, adding that the Chinese side "expressed its willingness to discuss the issue in a friendly manner."

"Our stance is that we will continue consultations with the Chinese side to prevent the issue from undermining our national interest," the source said. China's defense ministry announced Saturday the ADIZ over the East China Sea, obligating all aircraft entering the area to report to Chinese authorities and follow their instructions. The new zone partly overlaps with South Korea's KADIZ off the nation's southern island of Jeju. The Chinese zone also included a South Korean-controlled submerged rock, Ieodo, that lies within the overlapping area of the economic zones of South Korea and China. Although international maritime law stipulates that a submerged rock cannot be claimed as territory by any country, South Korea effectively controls Ieodo, which is closer to it than any other country.

...

In announcing the zone, which went into force at 10 a.m. Saturday and covers a wide area of the East China Sea between South Korea and Taiwan, the Chinese defense ministry said all aircraft entering the zone must report to Chinese authorities and follow their instructions.

The ministry's statement, carried by China's Xinhua news agency, said China's military "will adopt defensive emergency measures to respond to aircraft that do not cooperate in the identification or refuse to follow the instructions."

Responding to South Korea's response to the new air zone, China's foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said Monday that his government hopes to resolve the issue with South Korea through "friendly consultations and negotiations."

"The ROK (South Korea) and China have no territorial dispute" over Ieodo, Qin added...

<snip>
Click to expand...
The above Korean news agency report, provides some background on how the new ADIZ affects the Republic of Korea.

RobWilliams said:
...the reason why this has caused such a stir is because it's placed over a disputed location, FACT.
Click to expand...
The fact that the new declared ADIZ covers disputed areas is not in dispute; and this move by China will be seen by other powers, like Japan and the US, as a move that will result in the escalation of tensions between these three parties. From the news reports, it seems that Korea and Taiwan are differently affected by China's announcement; and they have also been consulted prior.

A point to note is that in 2012, the number of Japanese fighter scrambles against potential Chinese intrusions overtook those over-flights conducted by Russian aircraft. However, to be fair, not all of Japanese airspace is agreed upon by China. Like the US, Japan has a much broader region it calls its “air defense identification zone,” where entry can trigger Japan scrambling its jets. Chinese officials in the past have made the point that Japan’s ADIZ is much too big (see here, for a 3 Oct 2013 article for background).

Sampanviking said:
If you mean that it also encompasses disputed territory, than you are right, it does, and rightly so. Where better for all parties to have a zone where everybody has to talk to everybody else?

....

The PRC is a major emerging power and such emergence will cause change and need for others to accommodate accordingly. The new ADIZ is a part of this process and the reaction from some, simply evidence that not everybody is yet up to speed with the new and changing reality.
Click to expand...
As we have pointed out, the basic facts are not in dispute -- the issue is consequence management of China's decision to set-up a new ADIZ. There will be no propaganda war in this thread; and if any participant does not respect undisputed facts and attempts to convert basic facts into nationalistic propaganda points, then that person does not respect the intelligence of the membership in this forum.

Further, earlier on 16 November 2013, the Japanese Ministry of Defence issued a press release that it has scrambled interceptors against a Chinese Air Force Tu-154MD Type II Signals Intelligence/Electronic Intelligence (SIGINT/ELINT) aircraft west of Okinawa. For details and map of the intercept, the BaseLeg has a more comprehensive report, here.

We urge all participants in this thread to move towards an accurate discussion of the different competing perspectives and interests.
 
Last edited:
C

colay

New Member
The US pointedly flew a couple of B-52s within the controversial ADIZ disregarding China's demands for notification and identification. Now, the stakes have been raised as Japanese commercial airlines will follow suit. The ball is back in China's court and we shall see how far they will force the issue.

BBC News - Two Japanese airlines to disregard China air zone rules

Two Japanese airlines to disregard China air zone rules

Two of Japan's biggest airlines have agreed to abide by a government request not to implement China's new air defence zone rules, officials say.

All Nippon Airlines and Japan Airlines say that they will stop filing flight plans demanded by China on routes through the zone, set up on Saturday.

Japan says that China's new air defence identification zone are "not valid at all" and should be disregarded.

Singapore Airlines and Qantas have said that they will abide by the new rules.

More at the link.
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
colay said:
The US pointedly flew a couple of B-52s within the controversial ADIZ disregarding China's demands for notification and identification. Now, the stakes have been raised as Japanese commercial airlines will follow suit. The ball is back in China's court and we shall see how far they will force the issue.

BBC News - Two Japanese airlines to disregard China air zone rules

Two Japanese airlines to disregard China air zone rules

Two of Japan's biggest airlines have agreed to abide by a government request not to implement China's new air defence zone rules, officials say.

All Nippon Airlines and Japan Airlines say that they will stop filing flight plans demanded by China on routes through the zone, set up on Saturday.

Japan says that China's new air defence identification zone are "not valid at all" and should be disregarded.

Singapore Airlines and Qantas have said that they will abide by the new rules.

More at the link.
Click to expand...
Sounds not too dissimilar to the Gulf of Sidra in that it is basically a red flag that will force the international community to go out of their way to demonstrate their opposition to the move as to do otherwise would be a tacit acceptance. I hope this can be sorted without any resort to military action.
 
C

colay

New Member
Volkodav said:
Sounds not too dissimilar to the Gulf of Sidra in that it is basically a red flag that will force the international community to go out of their way to demonstrate their opposition to the move as to do otherwise would be a tacit acceptance. I hope this can be sorted without any resort to military action.
Click to expand...
The Hainan Island incident years back and, more recently, the provocative action by the PLAN when one of it's warships locked it's fire control radar on a Japanese vessel come to mind. The US has been trying for years to build working relationships and understanding with their Chinese counterparts. No margin for misunderstanding in the current scenario.
 
OPSSG

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
colay said:
The US has been trying for years to build working relationships and understanding with their Chinese counterparts. No margin for misunderstanding in the current scenario.
Click to expand...
The US has a responsibility to respond to China’s rise that serves the interests of regional stability. To build a new order in Asia with the PRC, the US has to share its leadership. In sharing leadership, it must also 'socialize' the PRC to the idea that 'with great power comes great responsibility'. Therefore, the US military will continue to build working relationships with China's military, regardless of bumps on the road ahead.

IMHO, Rory Medcalf has an interesting post that explains in a nutshell of what is wrong with China’s air defence identification zone (and what’s not). It is worth a read for the following points made:-

• It is a unilateral step, announced suddenly and apparently without consultation with two countries whose civilian and military aircraft will be most affected, the US and Japan.

• It includes a contested maritime area, notably the Senkaku/Daioyu Islands, and thus can be seen as a deliberate effort to change the status quo, even a provocation.

• Its ‘rules’ demanding that aircraft identify themselves and obey Chinese direction on flight paths seem to apply to all aircraft in the zone and not only aircraft en route to China. This conflicts with the basic early warning and air-traffic control purposes of an ADIZ, and with longstanding Pentagon regulations advising US military aircraft to comply with a foreign ADIZ only when they flying on a course into that country’s airspace, not when they are simply in transit or on patrol.

• It looks like a pretext for one of two undesirable security outcomes. If foreign aircraft now regularly obey the new Chinese rules, we will see precedents set for the unilateral expansion of Chinese authority over contested maritime territory. Alternately, if foreign aircraft contest or ignore the Chinese zone and a dangerous or deadly incident occurs (such as a collision or a forceful encounter), then China will have prepared the way to absolve itself of legal or moral blame, making it easier to use the incident as a justification to escalate the crisis if China so chooses.
​
 
Last edited:
T

tonyget

Member
OPSSG said:
• It looks like a pretext for one of two undesirable security outcomes. If foreign aircraft now regularly obey the new Chinese rules, we will see precedents set for the unilateral expansion of Chinese authority over contested maritime territory.

Alternately, if foreign aircraft contest or ignore the Chinese zone and a dangerous or deadly incident occurs (such as a collision or a forceful encounter), then China will have prepared the way to absolve itself of legal or moral blame, making it easier to use the incident as a justification to escalate the crisis if China so chooses.
Click to expand...

Commercial air lines care about safety, not politics
 
S

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
Oddly two Japanese airliners have just agreed to fly into the airspace mentioned, which tends to suggest they are at least willing to test the access for the Japanese government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top