Oh yea of little knowledge.
1. What armed warship? The US ship? Does the designation USNS have any meaning to you?
See
http://www.msc.navy.mil/inventory/ships.asp?ship=17&type=OceanographicSurveyShip
Where's the armament?
As for violated article of UNCLOS, try these:
Article56
Rights, jurisdiction and duties of the coastal State in the exclusive economic zone
1. In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has:
(a) sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources, whether living or non-living, of the waters superjacent to the seabed and of the seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the water, currents and winds;
(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;
(c) other rights and duties provided for in this Convention.
2. In exercising its rights and performing its duties under this Convention in the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State shall have due regard to the rights and duties of other States and shall act in a manner compatible with the provisions of this Convention.
3. The rights set out in this article with respect to the seabed and subsoil shall be exercised in accordance with Part VI.
Article58
Rights and duties of other States in the exclusive economic zone
1.
In the exclusive economic zone,
all States, whether coastal or land-locked,
enjoy, subject to the relevant provisions of this Convention,
the freedoms referred to in article 87 of navigation and overflight and of the laying of submarine cables and pipelines, and other internationally lawful uses of the sea related to these freedoms, such as those associated with the operation of ships, aircraft and submarine cables and pipelines, and compatible with the other provisions of this Convention.
2. Articles 88 to 115 and other pertinent rules of international law apply to the exclusive economic zone in so far as they are not incompatible with this Part.
3. In exercising their rights and performing their duties under this Convention in the exclusive economic zone, States shall have due regard to the rights and duties of the coastal State and shall comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal State in accordance with the provisions of this Convention and other rules of international law in so far as they are not incompatible with this Part.
That ship is not military ship? which company does it belong to? don't find the company spokensman stand out for asking China return it, but USA government first, hehe.
Exclusive economic zone? why dragged it here, first tell the ship is military ship or civilian ship.
Man, you are thick. I have indicated China and my own country are and US isn't an UNCLOS (ratified) signatory. Irrespective of whether the US is or is not a signatory, China is therefor bound by UNCLOS.
So, China violate the UNCLOS? ok, we don't accept that, how to deal with it? I think you should ask USA sue China for it, 30 million dollars is very small money for them.
Oceanography is necessary e.g. for the production of accurate sea maps, particularly in areas that have been hit by e.g. large storms, where shift may have occurred on the sea bed. If you (or China) claim that the USNS ship was actually spying, you should produce evidence thereof and lodge a complaint via diplomatic channels, or with the international institutions or practices indicated in UNCLOS. Up untill now China (and you) have produced NOTHING that actually supports the notion that this particular ship was spying. How hard is THAT to understand?
Does spyer will come at you volunterily, and say they are spyer, although average IQ of American is lower than Chinese, but not that fool, is it? they were sneaking around Chinese islands, seems collecting the information about security of China, rumor said at that time, there was a nuclear there, we as a peacekeeper of SCS, it is our responsiblity to check whether the ship is bad guy, if you are not, will release you soon, don't feel it is unreasonble.
As the evidence of the ship is spying, we need check its device, you know spyer will not tell you voluntarily, and how do you know whether UUV came into China territorial sea and what did it do underwater? we were collecting evidence, it is very normal thing like police does, hard to understand?
SECTION 2. LIMITS OF THE TERRITORIAL SEA
Article3 Breadth of the territorial sea
Every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles, measured from baselines determined in accordance with this Convention.
Article29 Definition of warships
For the purposes of this Convention, "warship" means a ship belonging to the armed forces of a State bearing the external marks distinguishing such ships of its nationality, under the command of an officer duly commissioned by the government of the State and whose name appears in the appropriate service list or its equivalent, and manned by a crew which is under regular armed forces discipline.
Article30 Non-compliance by warships with the laws and regulations of the coastal State
If any warship does not comply with the laws and regulations of the coastal State concerning passage through the territorial sea and disregards any request for compliance therewith which is made to it, the coastal State may require it to leave the territorial sea immediately.
Article32 Immunities of warships and other government ships operated for non-commercial purposes
With such exceptions as are contained in subsection A and in articles 30 and 31, nothing in this Convention affects the immunities of warships and other government ships operated for non-commercial purposes.
Article87 Freedom of the high seas
1. The high seas are open to all States, whether coastal or land-locked. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this Convention and by other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and land-locked States:
(a) freedom of navigation;
(b) freedom of overflight;
(c) freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, subject to Part VI;
(d) freedom to construct artificial islands and other installations permitted under international law, subject to Part VI;
(e) freedom of fishing, subject to the conditions laid down in section 2;
(f) freedom of scientific research, subject to Parts VI and XIII.
2. These freedoms shall be exercised by all States with due regard for the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas, and also with due regard for the rights under this Convention with respect to activities in the Area.
Article89 Invalidity of claims of sovereignty over the high seas
No State may validly purport to subject any part of the high seas to its sovereignty.
Article95 Immunity of warships on the high seas
Warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State.
Article96 Immunity of ships used only on government non-commercial service
Ships owned or operated by a State and used only on government non-commercial service shall, on the high seas, have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State.
Scientific research? cool words, like democracy and freedom of navigation, when you peep at girl taking a bath, you can say you are doing human research; when you break into other room and move the belongs, you can say you just do exercise
, we know what you are doing, rhetoric words can't change it in essence.
It is exactly like what the Russian are doing: there is propaganda value in this. "Oh look how tough we are, the US can't touch us'" on minor thinngs... but in reality the true professionals are shown to be the US crews. Each such incident to me is 'Chinese lost face"
Hehe, Chinese lost face? we lost again?
I remember that in 1993, the Chinese Ship Yinhe affair, which was suspected by USA that it took prohibited goods, and will sent to Iran, US Navy warship seize surrounded it, try board on it without permission from China government, the ship can't pull in to shore, finally for the crew life safety, China government had to come to compromise that let the ship pull in to a port of Saudi arabia, let US officers boarded on it, but nothing forbiden found, what do you think about the affair, US military ship get Chinese ship trapped in "international sea" and suspecting it? and who lost face? interested in your answer.
BTW, Thanks your "negative" label to my comments, but baised to not give to that fake American, never mind, hehe, just so-so, like freedom of navigation, deomcacy to western, the power that give other "negative" just a tool to you, be abused.
China didnt argue that way, they simply return the AUV immediately.
That tells something.
An apology is recommended for a perfect end.
Disappointed to see they wasted the budget that way to ignite this potential crisis.
But disappointed more to see they didnt use an apology which cost None to end this.
Why you were disappointed? we are wasting our money, according to reason, you should be happy, you fall to new lower level, in fact if you don't know what should to say when see the conflict between two big boys, you should better to sit down and enjoy it, here opening your mouth only expose your fool side,
Who cares ? But China's face is in pieces. LOL.
No care? but you are jumping up and down here, LOL.
You want face, we can give you more, be ready
