United States responds to Chinese 'air identification zone' over Japanese-claimed islands by sending B-52 bombers
THREE days ago China declared a no-fly zone over waters claimed by Japan. Yesterday, the US flew bombers over them. Today, China has sent in an aircraft carrier. Are these the drums of war on our doorstep?
Late yesterday Australian time, two US B-52 bombers flew over the Senkaku/Diaoyou island chain in the East China Sea –a deliberately provocative act in response to a freshly declared “air identification zone”.
In response, China has ordered its only aircraft carrier - the PNAS Liaoning - into the disputed waters.
This afternoon, China's defence ministry said it "monitored'' the US B-52 bomber flights in its newly-declared air defence identification zone
In a statement China's defence spokesman Geng Yansheng said: "The Chinese military monitored the entire process, carried out identification in a timely manner, and ascertained the type of US aircraft.
"China is capable of exercising effective control over this airspace,'' Geng added.
The Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning and four escorting warships have been sent towards disputed waters after the United States sent B-52 bombers over one of several disputed island chains yesterday.
The statement, China's first official response to the US action, appeared to be an effort to avoid confrontation while also asserting its authority.
The carrier battlegroup is destined for the Scarborough shoal, claimed by Manila and just 200km from the Philippines, last year.
Once there the warships will conduct "scientific experiments" and "military exercises" , the Chinese website sina.com.cn says.
It's a major escalation of tensions over several sets of islands which have been brewing for decades, but has reached boiling point in the past week.
The Chinese navy has announce the aircraft carrier has put to sea from the port of Qingdao with an escort of two destroyers and two frigates. It's destination: "Routine training exercises" that happens to be in disputed waters of the South China Sea.
B-52 bomber aeroplane arriving in Fairford, Gloucestershire. The United States has sent two of these bombers into airspace disputed by Japan and China after China declared the Senkaku/Diaoyou island chain an "Air Identification Zone"
“This is the first time since the Liaoning entered service that it has carried out long-term drills on the high seas,” an official Chinese naval website declares.
"Other nations do not need to be alarmed," said Zhang Junshe, an expert with the navy, in an interview with China's English language news agency Xinhua.
What is their significance?
The confrontations have all the “red flags” of impending conflict: Disputed territory. Powerful nations. Bluffs and counter-bluffs. Bravado.
It also has another vital ingredient: Gas.
Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning cruises for a test in late last year. The flagship and an escort of four warships is on its way to disputed waters in yet another escalation with Japan, China, Taiwan and the Philippines.
The dispute over the Senkaku island chain is not new. And it is just one set of islands on the western Pacific Rim over which China and its neighbours have been bickering for decades.
Why? Probably because the adjacent waters contain as-yet untapped oil and gas fields.
Who gets to exploit these resources will be determined by who owns these islands.
On November 23, China threw fuel on the diplomatic fire that has been growing between it and Japan all year. It declared a new “Air Defence Identification Zone” over a broad swathe of the East China Sea. This happens to include the air over the islands Japan considers its own.
Chinese authorities have said any intruding aircraft are subject to "emergency military measures" if they do not identify themselves or obey Beijing's orders
The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) destroyer Kurama leads other vessels during a fleet review in Sagami Bay, south of Tokyo. Japanese and Chinese naval vessels have been playing an escalating game of bluff in disputed waters for several months.
US escalation
The unarmed US bombers took off from Guam yesterday as part of a "previously scheduled" and “routine exercise” in the area, US defence officials said.
A US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed to AFP the two planes were B-52 bombers.
``Last night we conducted a training exercise that was long-planned. It involved two aircraft flying from Guam and returning to Guam,'' Pentagon spokesman Colonel Steven Warren told reporters.
No flight plan was submitted beforehand to the Chinese and the mission went ahead ``without incident,'' with the two aircraft spending ``less than an hour'' in the unilaterally-declared Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ), Warren said.
What's the fuss? The tiny and somewhat featureless Senkaku/Diaoyou island chain holds is at the centre of a territorial dispute by Japan and China because of nearby gas reserves. Picture: Google
A cascade of rising tensions
This is just the latest escalation. In the past year, more and more research vessels and – more ominously – warships have been deliberately sent into the disputed zone.
Japan suddenly “nationalised” the Senkaku islands in September. It was an open declaration that Japan considered the islands part of its “mainland” and would not tolerate any continued claims.
China was incensed. It immediately cancelled all official visits and imposed boycotts on Japanese products. It also sent ships and planes to the islands in a show of force.
In response, Japan mobilised vessels and aircraft, raising fears the tensions could trigger an accidental clash.
A carrier-borne J-15 fighter jet lands on China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning. The ship and its air group are being sent into disputed waters after the United States sent bomber aircraft into the area to test China's resolve over a new "no fly" zone.
China's newly expanded air defense zone is just the latest development. The zone also includes waters claimed by Taiwan and South Korea, which also have both expressed their displeasure at Beijing's move.
Under the rules unilaterally declared by China, all aircraft are expected to provide a flight plan, clearly mark their nationality and maintain two-way radio communication to allow them to respond to identification inquiries from Chinese authorities.
This "overlaps" airspace over which Japan claims the same right.
"The air defense zone set up by Japan over the Diaoyu Islands is illegal, as the islands belong to China and the airspace over them is China's territorial airspace, rather than part of the air defense zone of another country," a Chinese navy spokesman said.
Now the United States has waded into the diplomatic game of high-stakes poker.
A B-52 bomber drops bombs and flares during a training exercise: Picture US Department of Defence
International reaction
Japan, the United States and several other governments sharply criticized China's move.
Australia earlier this week summoned Beijing's ambassador to express its opposition and Tokyo called on airlines to refuse to accept China's demands to abide by new rules when flying into the zone.
Pentagon officials said the United States views the area as international air space and American military aircraft would operate in the zone as before without submitting flight plans to China in advance.
Without taking sides in the territorial feud, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon meanwhile called on China and Japan to negotiate an end to their dispute.
Ban on Tuesday said tensions should be handled ``amicably through dialogue and negotiations.''
Korea Defies Chinese Aerial Zone
A Korean patrol plane flew over the submerged shelf of Ieo on Tuesday without notifying China, three days after Beijing unilaterally announced an air defense identification zone that includes it.
Such zones are areas outside territorial waters where overflying aircraft must notify the country that claims them.
A military source said the Navy's P-3C maritime patrol plane "conducted surveillance over Ieo," which is home to a Korean research base.
The Navy flows a P-3C over Ieo twice a week.
The source added that the flights will continue without notifying China. However, the military informed Japan ahead of time about the surveillance flights since Ieo has been part of Japan's air defense zone since 1969.
Japanese jets have flown into China's new air zone
Tensions have ratcheted up since Beijing announced a new airspace defense zone that includes the skies over the long-disputed islands
Japanese military airplanes have conducted routine surveillance missions over disputed islands in the East China Sea without informing China, despite Beijing establishing a new airspace defence zone in the area this week, a top Japanese government official said on Thursday.
"They are carrying out surveillance activity as before in the East China Sea, including the zone," Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told a regular news conference, adding that there had been no particular response from China.
"We are not going to change this (activity) out of consideration to China," he added.
The area is routinely patrolled by Japanese naval ships and P-3C aircraft, Suga said.
An update of Japan's long-term defence policy to be unveiled next month will call for stronger air and maritime surveillance capabilities and the improved ability to defend far-flung isles as concerns rise about China's growing military assertiveness.
The policy review, in the works since hawkish Prime Minister Shinzo Abe took office last December, is being finalised as tensions mount between Japan and China over tiny islands in the East China Sea, known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu in China.
"The security environment surrounding our country has become increasingly grave," said a draft outline of the policy shown to ruling party lawmakers and obtained by Reuters on Thursday.
"China is proceeding with wide-ranging and rapid modernisation of its military strength and expanding and stepping up activities in the sea and air surrounding Japan," the draft said.
It also cited concerns about North Korea's nuclear and missile programmes and Russia's military modernisation.
Tensions have ratcheted up since Beijing announced a new airspace defense zone on Saturday that includes the skies over the long-disputed islands and said planes flying in the area would have to notify Chinese authorities. Japan and its ally the United States have sharply criticised the move.
On Thursday, the policy panel of Abe's Liberal Democratic Party approved a resolution demanding China rescind the new defence zone, saying the unilateral move reflected "unreasonable expansionism". But the resolution dropped the more inflammatory expression "premodern and imperialist expansionism" contained in an earlier draft.
Japan's new defence programme, an update of a defence posture last reviewed in 2010 under the now-opposition Democratic Party, would strengthen the military's monitoring capability to ensure air and maritime safety as well as improving intelligence-gathering capabilities, the draft said.
The Defence Ministry has already said it was considering buying unmanned surveillance drones.
FAR-FLUNG ISLES
The outline says Japan will beef up its ability to send troops to far-flung islands. The ministry is considering creating an amphibious unit similar to the U.S. Marines.
Media reports have said Japan planned to deploy high-speed maneuver combat vehicles that can be sent to remote islands by air and was considering acquiring high-speed small escort ships to counter the threat of sea mines and submarines.
The document also pledges to strengthen the alliance with the United States, including through a review of defence cooperation guidelines to be completed by the end of 2014.
The United States does not take a position on the sovereignty of the islands but recognises that Tokyo has administrative control over them.
U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel assured his Japanese counterpart by telephone on Wednesday that the allies' security pact covers the disputed islands.
The United States has defied China's demand that airplanes flying through the zone identify themselves to Chinese authorities, sending two unarmed B-52 bombers over the islands earlier this week without informing Beijing.
The tensions will loom large during a trip by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden to Japan, China and South Korea next week.
The Japanese policy draft also said Tokyo should enhance its ability to cope with the North Korean missile threat but did not refer to Japan's possible acquisition of the ability to hit enemy targets overseas - a controversial move which would further stretch the limits of its pacifist, post-war constitution.
In a nod to concerns overseas about Abe's hawkish stance, the draft said Japan would keep its purely defensive posture, shun nuclear arms and not become a military power.
Past governments have stretched the limits of Japan's U.S.-drafted constitution but Abe wants to go further, including by easing a self-imposed ban on exercising the right to collective self-defence, or aiding an ally under attack.
China rules out air defence zone along Sino-India border
BEIJING: China on Thursday ruled out establishing an air defence zone along the India-China border like it recently did over the disputed islands in the East China Sea, saying such zones are created only in coastal areas beyond territorial airspace.
"I want to clarify that on the concept of Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ), it is an area of airspace established by coastal state beyond its territorial airspace. So, the question does not arise," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang told a media briefing here.
He was responding to a question whether China has plans to declare ADIZ along the disputed India-China border, similar to a newly-declared zone over the disputed islands in the East China Sea.
Officials say air defence zones are established for coastal areas beyond the 12 nautical mile-territorial waters but not the land borders which have well-defined airspaces.
However, China apparently is keeping its options open for declaring such a zone over the disputed South China Sea as a Defence Ministry spokesman here said, replying to a question whether more such zones will be created.
"China will establish other air defence identification zones at an appropriate time after completing preparations," he said.
China has already sent its first aircraft carrier Liaoning for military drills.
The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei contest China's claims of sovereignty over most of the South China Sea.
The US, Japan, South Korea and Australia have already criticised the ADIZ over the East China Sea openly.
China acknowledged that two US B-52 bombers flew through it on Tuesday for over two hours defying the ADIZ rules.
Qin admitted that a South Korean plane, too, has violated the ADIZ rules without informing about the flight.
At the same time, he said many civilian airlines of various countries started informing their flight plans to Chinese aviation authorities, he said.
"As per ADIZ rule aircraft flying though it should submit plans to China. We hope all sides, including civil aviation side, can cooperate actively to maintain flight security. To my information, so far many airlines of many countries filed relevant application to China's civil aviation departments," he said, responding to a question whether Beijing will take action against violating passenger planes.
"More importantly, it may put China and the US on a collision course. Which will prove much more hazardous than sending military aircraft to play chicken in the air," it said.
China rules out air defence zone along India border
BEIJING: China on Thursday ruled out establishing an
air defence zone along the India-China border like it recently did over the disputed
islands in the East China Sea, saying such zones are created only in coastal areas beyond territorial airspace.
"I want to clarify that on the concept of air defence identification zone (ADIZ), it is an area of airspace established by coastal state beyond its territorial airspace. So, the question does not arise," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang told a media briefing here.
He was responding to a question whether China has plans to declare ADIZ along the disputed India-China border, similar to a newly-declared zone over the disputed islands in the East China Sea.
Officials say air defence zones are established for coastal areas beyond the 12 nautical mile-territorial waters but not the land borders which have well-defined airspaces.
However, China apparently is keeping its options open for declaring such a zone over the disputed
South China Sea as a defence ministry spokesman here said, replying to a question whether more such zones will be created.
"China will establish other air defence identification zones at an appropriate time after completing preparations," he said.
China has already sent its first aircraft carrier Liaoning for military drills.
The Philippines,
Vietnam, Malaysia and
Bruneicontest China's claims of sovereignty over most of the South China Sea.
The US, Japan, South Korea and Australia have already criticised the ADIZ over the East China Sea openly.
China acknowledged that two US B-52 bombers flew through it on Tuesday for over two hours defying the ADIZ rules.
Qin admitted that a South Korean plane, too, has violated the ADIZ rules without informing about the flight.
At the same time, he said many civilian airlines of various countries started informing their flight plans to Chinese aviation authorities, he said.
"As per ADIZ rule aircraft flying though it should submit plans to China. We hope all sides, including civil aviation side, can cooperate actively to maintain flight security. To my information, so far many airlines of many countries filed relevant application to China's civil aviation departments," he said, responding to a question whether Beijing will take action against violating passenger planes.
More on This Strange Chinese ADIZ: 'Sovereign Is as Sovereign Does'
Which explanation is less worrisome: calculated expansion, or miscalculated blunder?
JAMES FALLOWSNOV 27 2013, 3:18 PM ET
Overlapping areas of Chinese and Japanese airspace claims, from
China Military Review. The legend says that the red line shows the new Chinese ADIZ area, and the black line shows Japan's. The gray is the overlap.
Following
yesterday's item on the newly expanded Air Defense Identification Zone, or ADIZ, that China has announced in the East China Sea, these links and updates. Also, please see the discussion from our partners
at ChinaFile.
1) From
The Interpreter, the excellent blog of the Lowy Institute in Sydney, an overview
by Rory Medcalf of the things to worry about, and not, in the ADIZ announcement. (By the way, you pronounce this
A-dizz, with a long A, not spelled out as A-D-I-Z.) Summary of what's worrisome:
- 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/Diaoyu 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...
- 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.
The third point on Medcalf's list is one I should have highlighted more clearly yesterday. The borders of the United States are also ringed by ADIZs. But here the ADIZ rules -- mainly, a requirement for a pre-filed flight plan showing who you are and where you're going -- apply only to planes headed to destinations
in the United States. They don't affect planes passing through en route to somewhere else, say from Canada to the Caribbean. The new Chinese claim is that even planes merely passing through must comply with their ADIZ requirements.
Also see
Andrew Erickson, mentioned previously as a go-to source. If you'd like to see an outright "sky is falling!" reaction to the events, check out
Politico.
2) "
Sovereign is as sovereign does." From a reader:
Your article about China's ADIZ didn't explicitly recognize a major component of the move. Namely, in international law a major way by which states acquire sovereignty over an area is by actually exercising sovereignty (i.e. administering) over it for a "reasonable" period of time and especially having other states acquiesce to its administration.
As one famous court opinion put it:
"The modern international law of the acquisition (or attribution) of territory generally requires that there be: an intentional display of power and authority over the territory, by the exercise of jurisdiction and state functions, on a continuous and peaceful basis."
Even if it has little real practical effect for airliners, by having them identify themselves to China
Beijing will be exercising sovereignty over the area and can claim that others are acquiescing to its claims of sovereignty. This is why the U.S. and Japan immediately announced they wouldn't comply with China's demands and the U.S. is openly defying the order already.
Of course Japan has anADIZ over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands but at the very least by establishing its own ADIZ (and patrolling the waters below) China is chipping away at Japan's int'l legal claim of sovereignty. This is also why China has made a point of increasing its patrols in the South China Sea and is acquiring the necessary capabilities to constantly patrol the skies over the South China Sea.
3)
A Chinese Caribbean. A reader who has worked in politics:
Re: "Why are the Chinese doing this?"
Obviously as you point out it's opaque and we can only speculate to Zhongnanhai's [rough equivalent of the White House] motivations but I think a helpful way to think about is their view/ambition for the East China Sea is that it is/should be a Chinese Caribbean.
Think about the US role there in the late 19th century - the Venezuela thing/ Roosevelt Corollary/ getting the British out). Which is the tack I would take if I were sitting in Beijing.
4) "
A generally more emboldened China." A reader with a lot of experience in the defense world:
I
would draw your attention to the Defense Ministry spokesman’s response to the question regarding if China intended to set up ADIZ’s in other areas (e.g., the South China Seas): “China will establish other Air Defense Identification Zones at the right moment after necessary preparations are completed.”
I believe that the central question that this new provocation raises is what accounts for it? Of course, longstanding tension over the Daioyu/Senkaku issue has been rekindled and that offers a proximate explanation; the arrival of Abe into office in Japan, another.
But what I fear we may be seeing is a generally more emboldened China. There is a lengthening bread crumb trail of recent PRC activity that leads me to this observation (not yet a firm conclusion).
I’m not referencing the (still) ongoing detentions and boardings that occur with regularity over the Spratleys, the Paracels, and Scarborough Shoals, but to chest-thumping behavior such as the recent Chinese news releases covering the capability of the PLAN’s SSBNs to lay waste to much of the western United States with 20 nuclear weapons. Yes, it did come to us via the Global Times, and yes, I’m well aware that even Beijing is rapidly losing its ability to control much of what comes out of China’s increasingly pluralistic press. That said, Beijing most certainly has proven itself capable of fully controlling what is being uttered in public about its nuclear weapons capabilities.
To be clear, the concern is not on the substance – or even veracity in this latter case of the story – the Xia class SSBNs with their JL-1 SLBMs remain the Chinese maritime equivalent of the Edsel, while the JIN-class (094) SSBNs (with the JL-2 SLBMs) are not yet on operational patrol. So, again, why the chest thumping?
Well, here’s to hoping that we aren’t witnessing the emergence of a new hawkish China.
Yes, I agree with that hope. To me, the evidence in recent years has been equivocal, even random -- a lurch forward here, a retreat there. A few days in, the ADIZ expansion appears to have been either a coldly calculated expansionary step, or a wildly miscalculated gamble. Neither is a great option from the rest of the world's perspective, but the blunder option is less worrisome.
27 November 2013 4:02PM
China’s announcement of an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea has come in for widespread criticism, including from Japan, the US and Australia. Already, the US and Japan have made it clear that their aircraft will not comply, and the Pentagon has made its point by
continuing its training missions within the zone.
I agree with the view that China’s move is, on balance, a destabilising step, and one that will make tensions over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands even harder to manage. This is the very opposite of the kind of diplomatic leadership former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating called for
in a recent speech reported on this site. It also flies directly in the face of recent statements by the Australian, US and Japanese governments opposing coercive or unilateral changes to the status quo in the East China Sea. It is more than ‘
poking and prodding’; it is using a grey area of international law in an attempt to expand a geographic zone of accepted Chinese authority.
But in opposing China’s new move, it is important to be clear about precisely why it is objectionable, and why it did not have to be so.
An ADIZ is not a provocative or negative step in itself; indeed, it can be in the interests of stability and security of the nation enforcing it. Many countries have such zones already, including Japan, South Korea and the US, which started the whole trend decades ago.
If China’s new zone did not include disputed maritime territory, if its requirements for compliance applied only to aircraft heading into Chinese airspace, and if neighbours like Japan and South Korea had been consulted ahead of the announcement, then there would be little or nothing for others to object to. Indeed, it could have been part of a wider strategy of cooperation to reduce maritime security risks in North Asia.
Instead, there are several things wrong with China's declared position:
- 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/Diaoyu 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.
If the motive for establishing the ADIZ was solely or genuinely about the prevention of risky incidents, then China’s bureaucratic energies would have been better spent on reaching out and negotiating with Japan and America to craft
effective ‘confidence-building measures’: communications protocols, hotlines and ‘rules of the road’, or incidents-at-sea (and in-the-air) agreements.
Instead, tension has become the new normal in the East China Sea, and it won’t end here. It was striking that the
official Chinese announcement of the new zone included these words:
China will establish other Air Defense Identification Zones at the right moment after necessary preparations are completed.
It sounds like we should expect another such zone over a substantial part of the South China Sea before too long.
China Gives Muted Reaction to B-52 Flight in ADIZ
Nov 27, 2013
BEIJING -- China on Wednesday asserted its right to control a newly designated air defence identification zone, but appeared to play down the impact of an incursion by two U.S. B-52 bombers.
Defence Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng said China had monitored the U.S. flight late Tuesday over the eastern edge of the zone.
"The Chinese military conducted surveillance during the whole course, identified and ascertained the type of the US jets in time," Geng said.
"China has the ability to take efficient control of the relevant air space," he said.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang deferred to the military, adding that China hoped to improve communication with other nations to "jointly maintain flight security."
China's reaction to any similar flights across the zone will be "in accordance with different situations and level of threat," Qin said.
Gary Li, a senior analyst at US-based consultancy IHS Maritime, said the flight of the B-52s was "likely a sign that Washington is displeased with the Chinese ADIZ."
"However, I don't think it is a major intrusion, at least from the Chinese perspective," Li told dpa.
An ADIZ is a control zone rather than a no-fly zone. Announced on Saturday, China's first such zone covers the Japanese-controlled Senkaku islands, a group near oil and gas reserves and claimed by China as the Diaoyu and Taiwan as the Tiaoyutai.
South Korean Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se on Wednesday said the Chinese zone, which overlaps a Japanese zone, "has made already tricky regional situations even more difficult to deal with," Yonhap news agency reported.
The Pentagon said the two B-52s flew "a routine, planned training mission" from a U.S. base in Guam, and did not identify themselves to Chinese authorities as demanded.
Cheng Xiaohe, an international relations expert at People's University in Beijing, said the US flight represented "a small upgrade on the dispute" over the zone.
Although China did not send planes to shadow the U.S. ones, it could do so next time, Cheng said.
"If such a situation happens frequently, it will certainly cause a tense situation," he said of the U.S. flight.
China and the United States are likely to discuss the zone during U.S. Vice President Joe Biden's visit next week, Cheng said.
Gordon Chang, a U.S.-based China analyst, said Washington appeared to be trying to deflect China's anger away from Japan.
"Obviously, the Chinese were not going to interfere with the U.S. Air Force, and they in fact did not," Chang said. "If the Japanese, however, were the first ones to challenge the Chinese zone, Beijing might have provoked an incident.
"The risk of conflict has been reduced, at least for now," Chang said.
Japanese media on Wednesday said the country's two main airlines, JAL and ANA, had stopped reporting details of their flights over the zone to Chinese authorities.
In a separate statement, Qin expressed "strong dissatisfaction" with criticism of the zone by Australian officials.
"The Australian side's irresponsible remarks are completely wrong and the Chinese side cannot accept them," he said.
Indians.
