"This is the Chinese navy... You go!" China warns US spy plane flying over South China Sea

[BJlaowai]

If an artificial island created in middle of the ocean can be deemed as a sovereign territory, can an oil rig be considered the same?

 

[gambit]

Sovereign territories can be land or mobile structures like ships or temporary structures like oil rigs.

However, for an island in the middle of the sea to have full legal status, which includes respected territorial waters and controlled airspace, that island must be:

- Naturally formed.
- Surrounded by water.
- Consistently above high tide.

While a ship and other man-made structures like an oil rig are indeed sovereign territories of the country that built them, they do NOT have territorial waters and any aircraft can fly over them without violating international norms, if not laws. You can get married on a ship and that marriage will be respected by any country. A child can be borned on a ship and will have citizenship of the ship's flag. But that sovereign territory do NOT have the same legal status as that of an island.

 

[Genesis]

It's not me who is claiming that the US will get inside rather it's Pentagon spokesman Mr.Warren
At least according to this source
China Rebukes US For 'Risky' Naval Standoff

I do agree that that would be the next step, don't get me wrong, but there's a few factors to consider. Going inside 12 miles would be pushing a boundary even the US knows is there, hence no prior flight. The US wants to put pressure, not for tensions to boil over.

Chinese works will soon be completed and thus timely intercepts will soon become an option and will definitely add costs to any US adventurism.

Having said that, I can't see the future, nor could I definitively say anything, other than, as of this moment, even according to that article, there is no plan to do so.

I will make it simpler .....we all know that the States doesn't considers the islands or the nearby territorial waters as the Chinese EEZ .......let's say they violate it again and again ...then tell me will China make a move???
You will have the advantage....I will give you that.....the Chinese will benefit by laying low on this .......
it's kind of a stalemate which benefits US 60:40 compared to China....
with time,it will change

China will not make a MOVE, as in firing a shot, but we will have the ability to have more and bigger coast guard ships(our 10,000 ton coast guard ship is on sea trial) while at the same time we will have the ability to intercept any US actions. These moves will add cost to the US actions, while cannot be seen as a cause for war.

The US will need to add more ships, men power, and resources to contest these waters, with higher cost, and greater distance, the US will be at a severe disadvantage. Current Africa, middle east, and European affairs are not helping.

The ratio is far more in China's favor, especially as time goes by. Chinese naval ships will increase in size and tons, while US will only be replacing older ones with newer ones.

US cannot do anything to our islands, that will form the corner stone to our claim, while random flybys will do as much as blowing on the islands to wish them away.

Bottom line, we maybe able to change the US' mind without war, but the US definitely cannot take an island without war.

According to the UNCLOS - which China's a signatory to, artificial reefs and islands don't generate territorial boundaries, so the US, overflying these islands are still in international airspace and can't violate China's sovereignty.

UNCLOS and Agreement on Part XI - Preamble and frame index

I've noted that exception here:

"This is the Chinese navy... You go!" China warns US spy plane flying over South China Sea | Page 2

Any land reclamation in the SCS is outside the territorial boundary of China, thought they may fall within other regional nations if their EEZ or territorial sovereignty extends over the area.

It's unequivocally international airspace.

The confusion is that the reefs, or small islands, by themselves are not artificial, China isn't building something on nothing. This is a grey area.

On the other hand, even if the United Nations rules against us, there isn't any way for anyone to remove us from those islands that are already there.

We can always just leave the convention as well, and since the US isn't a signatory member, yet, it's not the first country to not be in it.

The end result will ultimately be a separate or a revised version of the treaty that will confirm at least some of the benefits China seeks.

Unless you think we will just pack our bags and go home, because US isn't afraid of a little island building and fly by a few times.

Even in the worst case scenario, the Vietnamese and Philippines also don't get any EEZ(which they to claim), then it's a battle of international influence and money, and guess who wins there.

 

[Speeder 2]

Which has nothing to do with the inability of artificial islands or land reclamation to generate territorial claims. Irrespective of sovereign claims, artificial islands don't extend or constitute territory gained. Therefore China can't use such islands to extends its claim over the SCS or use them as justification to restrict flights in international airspace.

You seem to have a prob on reading comprehension, but

it has nothing to do with artificial islands, or "claims"or "flights" or whatsoever!

It is inside China's sovereign, for god's sake.

China can build a lunar space centre , or 12 ghost cities plus 2 dozens casino & hotel chains there if it wants. or China can buld nothing there , but it is still China's sovereign, which is none of anyone's business.

 

[Speeder 2]

Sovereign territories can be land or mobile structures like ships or temporary structures like oil rigs.

However, for an island in the middle of the sea to have full legal status, which includes respected territorial waters and controlled airspace, that island must be:

- Naturally formed.
- Surrounded by water.
- Consistently above high tide.

While a ship and other man-made structures like an oil rig are indeed sovereign territories of the country that built them, they do NOT have territorial waters and any aircraft can fly over them without violating international norms, if not laws. You can get married on a ship and that marriage will be respected by any country. A child can be borned on a ship and will have citizenship of the ship's flag. But that sovereign territory do NOT have the same legal status as that of an island.

But the whole point is what if "most of the entire sea" is claimed as sovereign territory?

It has nothing to do with what are built on it, and their respective legal rights etc. Perhaps for some practical reasons those structures could probably come handy once in a while, but in reality they're still within the said sovereign territory - SCS.

 

[gambit]

The confusion is that the reefs, or small islands, by themselves are not artificial, China isn't building something on nothing. This is a grey area.

On the other hand, even if the United Nations rules against us, there isn't any way for anyone to remove us from those islands that are already there.

We can always just leave the convention as well, and since the US isn't a signatory member, yet, it's not the first country to not be in it.

Leaving the convention also means that China cannot use the convention's laws as legal weapons against anyone.

But the whole point is what if "most of the entire sea" is claimed as sovereign territory?

Which is rejected.

 

[LordTyrannus]

In war only the dumb and poor will die. The rich elite chinese and japanese will continue to do bussiness and beeing corrupt.

i hate you poor niggaz, riding rich peoples cawks for nothing.

 

[Genesis]

Leaving the convention also means that China cannot use the convention's laws as legal weapons against anyone.

What couldn't China do with our navy and coast guard that the convention can? Since the US, according to the people here, don't respect our 12 miles claim and EEZ claim anyways, what would we have to lose by not being in the convention.

Would the US start to go within the continental China's 12 miles "territorial" waters, if we had not been in the convention?

Who else dares to go inside our territorial water, or want to? Due to our navy and coast guard.

So to recap, the US doesn't respect where we want the convention to work, while the others are too weak to infringe even if we weren't in the convention.

How does this change anything.

 

[gambit]

What couldn't China do with our navy and coast guard that the convention can? Since the US, according to the people here, don't respect our 12 miles claim and EEZ claim anyways, what would we have to lose by not being in the convention.

Would the US start to go within the continental China's 12 miles "territorial" waters, if we had not been in the convention?

Who else dares to go inside our territorial water, or want to? Due to our navy and coast guard.

So to recap, the US doesn't respect where we want the convention to work, while the others are too weak to infringe even if we weren't in the convention.

How does this change anything.

These islands are at best 'grey' in the eyes of the international laws, as you admitted, on whether they are true islands or not. That means until their legal status are settled, there are no automatic obedience to any conditions that are normally granted to legal islands, and that mean the US is fully within legal rights to overfly them. We cannot board them because materially speaking, the built structures belongs to China, but precisely because they are not true islands -- yet or perhaps never will be -- in the eyes of international laws, there are no allowed EEZ to each.

 

[KAL-EL]

Did you just generalize a whole nationality as a bunch of liars?

Unfortunately, over-generalizing about other nationalities/cultures is done in abundance here on PDF.

 

[Genesis]

These islands are at best 'grey' in the eyes of the international laws, as you admitted, on whether they are true islands or not. That means until their legal status are settled, there are no automatic obedience to any conditions that are normally granted to legal islands, and that mean the US is fully within legal rights to overfly them. We cannot board them because materially speaking, the built structures belongs to China, but precisely because they are not true islands -- yet or perhaps never will be -- in the eyes of international laws, there are no allowed EEZ to each.

Your statement was china loses "privileges" that the UNCLOS grants should we ever decide to leave it. My argument was that what would we have to lose really?

Especially, IF, like you said that the international body rules our islands not islands, in that case, what would we have to lose by leaving? Which was my point, of which you questioned.

Something else that needs to be considered is, if UNCLOS actually worked, instead of might is right, why didn't it work for the Philippines, if the judgement comes from the body favors the Philippines.

Which means, China's rights on the seas is directly related to our national strength, because our ambitions puts us on a collision course with the reigning and defending Super Power of the world, rather than become a "friend" to it.

 

[boke]

美国的间谍飞机和舰船需要的不是善意的言语警告，需要的是火控雷达的锁定和警告性射击！在中国的领海内谈飞行和航行自由是美国人自己的理解，按照他们的思维逻辑的话全世界都是美国的，那只是一厢情愿的想法，这在中国的领海领空不会被认可，也行不通。如果美国人执意要试探中国的底线，悲剧一定会发生，至于发生悲剧的会是哪一方，每个国家对此感兴趣的人都可以发挥想象力，有一点作为中国人我是很清楚的，那就是现在的中国决不允许在自己家门口打仗打输，这是国家的利益要求也是国家的尊严要求，即使付出再大的代价！

 

[China-Pakistan friendship]

What's wrong with our American friends? they need to learn how to respect sovereignty of another country.

exactly
US always want to spy off other countries' coastline, but it will never allow other countries to spy off its coastline

What ??? that fake Island is within 200 miles Philippines EEZ while the chinese claim 9 dash line is 600 miles from China

Sorry, sir, you should learn the history firstly.
Those islands belong to China for more than 1000 years. Phillipines, vietnam never claim the sourvenity of these islands until 1970s.
We can never say some islands is nearer to one country, then these islands belong to this country.
If this is the case, then the Andaman Islands should belong to Burma, right? They are far away from India

Sovereign territories can be land or mobile structures like ships or temporary structures like oil rigs.

However, for an island in the middle of the sea to have full legal status, which includes respected territorial waters and controlled airspace, that island must be:

- Naturally formed.
- Surrounded by water.
- Consistently above high tide.

While a ship and other man-made structures like an oil rig are indeed sovereign territories of the country that built them, they do NOT have territorial waters and any aircraft can fly over them without violating international norms, if not laws. You can get married on a ship and that marriage will be respected by any country. A child can be borned on a ship and will have citizenship of the ship's flag. But that sovereign territory do NOT have the same legal status as that of an island.

But please do not forget, besides these artificial islands, there are plenty of islands that are naturally existed, and they have territory waters and EEZ!
These nansha and xisha islands (also called Paracel islands and Spartly islands) have been a part of China for more than one thousand years. China has sourvenity over these islands and territory waters. Any violation will be punished.

 

[gambit]

Your statement was china loses "privileges" that the UNCLOS grants should we ever decide to leave it. My argument was that what would we have to lose really?

Especially, IF, like you said that the international body rules our islands not islands, in that case, what would we have to lose by leaving? Which was my point, of which you questioned.

Something else that needs to be considered is, if UNCLOS actually worked, instead of might is right, why didn't it work for the Philippines, if the judgement comes from the body favors the Philippines.

Which means, China's rights on the seas is directly related to our national strength, because our ambitions puts us on a collision course with the reigning and defending Super Power of the world, rather than become a "friend" to it.

You cannot 'lose' something you never had. Leaving the convention means most likely China will never be able to use the convention's legal benefits for future situations in the seas. It means for those future situations, China will have only force of physical methods, not from moral persuasions, to deal with others. It will be simpler for all.

Given how China is behaving recently, China might as well leave the table of civilized countries altogether, after all, in Nov 2011, the International Department of the Chinese Communist Party effectively rejected the concept of a 'great power responsibility' as fundamentally flawed because it holds a country, regardless of size, to what China considered to be false 'universal values' that were conjured up by major global powers intent on maintaining their hegemonic status.

But please do not forget, besides these artificial islands, there are plenty of islands that are naturally existed, and they have territory waters and EEZ!
These nansha and xisha islands (also called Paracel islands and Spartly islands) have been a part of China for more than one thousand years. China has sourvenity over these islands and territory waters. Any violation will be punished.

The legal possession status of those islands are in dispute. They may have their own EEZ, territorial surface and airspace restrictions, and those privileges are standalone from possession, but until that issue is resolved China cannot claim them and use them to control the South China Sea. Any such attempt at control will be punished.

 

[ShioTikus]

Sorry, sir, you should learn the history firstly.
Those islands belong to China for more than 1000 years. Phillipines, vietnam never claim the sourvenity of these islands until 1970s.
We can never say some islands is nearer to one country, then these islands belong to this country.
If this is the case, then the Andaman Islands should belong to Burma, right? They are far away from India

.

yeah, same like Malvinas and DiegoGarcia