The Hijacking of Chinese Patriotism

When the distinction between country and ruler is surreptitiously erased, patriotism ends up being hijacked, and then it’s easily manipulated by a narrow-minded nationalism.

By YU HUA

BEIJING — The Chinese government, adept at lodging protests in the dispute over the Senkaku Islands, on Nov. 23 demonstrated to its people that it can also take real action, declaring an “air defense identification zone” in the East China Sea. 

This has ratcheted up tensions in the area.
In my view, the main significance of the air zone is not its warning to Japan, but the patriotic stance it represents. 

For a long time a strain of popular opinion in China has criticized the government for being weak on the issue. 

The air zone can be seen as a response to these sentiments.
In this connection I am reminded of a pair of incidents that took place in China and the United States in July of this year.
On July 17, in the town of Linwu in Hunan Province in central China, a melon farmer, Deng Zhengjia, and his wife had a dispute with urban management officers by their roadside watermelon stall. 

Mr. Deng fell to the ground and died after being beaten by several officers. 

According to eyewitnesses, he had been struck on the head with a steelyard weight just before he fell.
On July 27, in a shooting in an apartment building near Miami, a gunman killed six people before being shot dead by the police.
These two episodes were quite different in nature and would seem, on the surface, completely unrelated.
But when, on July 28, Chen Mingming, deputy governor of Guizhou Province, in southwest China, posted the news of the Florida shooting on his microblog, a curious link between them was soon established.
“How come there’s yet another shooting in America?!” Mr. Chen exclaimed.
“How come there’s yet another assault by city management officers in China?!” an Internet user shot back, referencing the death in Linwu.
“Some people just can’t wait to see tragic incidents take place in our country, and then they blow things all out of proportion, ” Mr. Chen responded. 

“These unpatriotic people are degenerates — the dregs of society!”
A single comment about a melon vendor’s death in Hunan was enough to send this high-ranking Communist Party official into a paroxysm of rage.

“These people so love to badmouth their native country, but then they hang around here instead of going off to America!” he fumed. 

“Off you go, hurry up! I’m all for it. But before you leave, be sure to get some plastic surgery done — you don’t want them to see you’re a Chinese! ... These people hate their country so much they feel miserable that they’re Chinese, so let’s pack them off to America — the sooner the better! Such riff-raff!”
But Mr. Chen’s effort to frame the question as one of patriotism backfired spectacularly, triggering a huge controversy.
Among his critics, some pointed out that cursing one’s government is not the same thing as cursing one’s country. 

Others challenged Mr. Chen’s love-it-or-leave-it logic: “If your window is broken, don’t you want to fix it? Or do you move into your neighbor’s house? Or do you make a song-and-dance about how your door is intact? If you love this country, it’s natural that you take time to point out its imperfections, for that way you can make it better.” 

But the majority of critics objected mainly to the intemperance of his language and lamenting that an official at the rank of deputy governor would shout such abuse.
Mr. Chen’s supporters clearly are people who feel that the government is the country (but some of them also felt that a deputy governor needs to be careful how he expresses himself). 

Mr. Chen himself realized he had gone too far. 

He made an apologetic remark to the effect that in the future he would be sure to keep his cool.
The real topic that needs discussing is: What is patriotism? 

Does criticism of the government necessarily mean criticism of the country, and does it necessarily betray a lack of patriotism? 

But all we got was a debate about rhetoric and about whether a deputy governor had expressed himself properly.
The patriotic education promoted by the Communist Party over the last 64 years has all too successfully tempered “love for the country” in the same crucible as love for the party and love for the government. 

To sing the praises of the party and government is to sing the praises of the country, and to criticize the party and government is to criticize the country. 

When the distinction between country and ruler is surreptitiously erased, patriotism ends up being hijacked, and then it’s easily manipulated by a narrow-minded nationalism.
In August and September of last year, the Senkaku Islands controversy triggered two rounds of demonstrations in many Chinese cities, and the protests ultimately turned into attacks by violent crowds on Japanese-owned businesses and Japanese-made cars. 

In a shocking scene recorded on video, a motorist in the city of Xi’an, Li Jianli, had his skull smashed in when trying to protect his Toyota from damage.
What makes me all the more uneasy is that it’s not just ordinary citizens who confuse the two separate concepts of nation and government. 

Some intellectuals do, too. 

A scholar-friend once said to me, “Here at home we can criticize our country, but when we go abroad we need to defend it. In the same way, at home it’s O.K. to argue with one’s parents, but outside the home we never tolerate criticism of them.”
“But we’re criticizing the government, not the nation,” I replied.
Later I posted this on my microblog: “Some people still aren’t clear about the difference between nation and government. And so anyone who aims a criticism at the government gets denounced as a traitor. Let me make an analogy: The nation is like one’s parents, and the government is like a steward; loving the steward and loving one’s parents are completely different things. One can’t change one’s parents, but one has every right to replace the steward.”
One of my readers reposted my remarks, with a comment appended: “Mom and Dad, where are you? I want to file a complaint about the steward.”
But our parents will never hear the complaint, for the steward has supplanted them.
The steward, however, is beginning to have a rough time of it. 

Last year, under cover of the anti-Japan protests, some aired their disaffection. 

One slogan urging war on Japan involved a double meaning. 

“Let’s fight!” it read. 

“If we win, we get the Senkaku Islands; if we lose, we get a new China.” 

By “new China” they meant a China in which the Communist Party is no longer the dominant power.

Read More

China is treading on thin ice in the Pacific

By Kurt Campbell

Beijing’s declaration last week of a special air defence identification zone above disputed islands in the East China Sea and the surrounding waters claimed by Japan and China is a clear escalation of an already dangerous situation. 

It might be tempting for commentators at this stage to digress into describing the torturous history of the disputed Chinese or Japanese sovereignty over these uninhabited rocks, to provide context for how the two great nations of Asia have virtually drawn daggers over barren island territories in a distant corner of the Pacific Ocean. 

Yet, the deeply unwise and provocative new Chinese decree of unspecified military measures in the event of unauthorised entry into this airspace has served to dramatically broaden the regional context of this bilateral stand-off.
This matter is no longer simply about duelling nationalisms in China and Japan. 

It now concerns the peace, security and safety of some of the most frequently utilised civilian airspace on the planet, and a critical air route used regularly by Chinese (yes, even Chinese airliners might conceivably be at risk), Taiwanese, Korean, US, Japanese, Russian and other carriers traversing the region that is generally regarded as the cockpit of the global economy. 

Into an already fraught set of circumstances, China has introduced the possibility of civilian airliners loaded with tourists, families and businessmen now at risk simply for flying through a block of airspace in the western Pacific.
China is well-known for nursing historical grievances and for having a long memory, but it must be said that this memory is generally saved for things Chinese. 

However, the animating concern in the case of this new airspace decree is not a perceived century of humiliation but rather something much more specific: the tragic shooting down by Soviet fighters of Korean Air Lines flight KE007 in 1983 during the cold war flying through another murky set of flight identification procedures.
For the Chinese government not to understand that their new airspace guidelines would immediately conjure memories of one of the most regrettable and avoidable air tragedies in history is worrisome. 

It creates unwelcome comparisons between the former Soviet Union with today’s China, and it suggests a coming propensity for Beijing to tempt militarisation of difficult diplomatic problems. 

This move also potentially averts the recent remarkable improvements in Sino-South Korean relations – one of the only positive trends in northeast Asia in recent years. 

It also comes on the eve of the visit of Vice-President Joe Biden to China who worked overtime last year to develop a strong personal connection with then vice-president Xi Jinping. 

All told, it is a remarkable misstep for China’s diplomacy that is seeking to build better ties with virtually everyone in the region, save for Japan and the Philippines. 

It suggests a nation more interested in the pursuit of 19th century-like spheres of influence and prohibited areas, rather than a 21st-century nation committed to sustaining an open and transparent regional operating system.
The Chinese decree has created an enormous conundrum for surrounding countries. 

The US has already indicated that its military planes will not acknowledge these new Chinese government procedures, and will continue operations as if nothing has changed. 

But already civilian aviation authorities, including the Federal Aviation Administration in the US, have instructed civilian airliners to abide by the new regulations precisely to avoid another KE007 calamity. 

Their finding is fundamentally apolitical in these strained circumstances, based almost solely on fulfilling their prime directive, which is the global safety of civilian aviation. 

This potential split between military and civilian authorities creates administrative confusion but, more importantly, it creates uncertainty in the airspace. 

How will the Chinese air defence authorities respond to what they think is a military airliner brazenly defying repeated hails that turns out to be a commercial jet with a broken transponder loaded with unsuspecting travellers? 

Will “emergency defensive measures” be taken as the new Chinese decree indicates?
It is true that many other nations have established air defence identification zones, including the US, South Korea, Guam and Japan, yet none has ever sparked this degree of concern. 

It smacks of what Chinese commentators occasionally accuse the US of: a cold war mentality.
China must now decide whether to retract its controversial edict, phase it out over time with little fanfare (preferably in the short term) or try to tailor it to more specific circumstances. 

How China responds to the confusion and consternation created by this new defence measure will tell a lot about what kind of a great power China is becoming.

Read More

U.S. Split With Japan on China Zone Puts Carriers in Spat

By David Lerman and Chris Cooper

The U.S. and Japanese governments’ split over how commercial airlines should operate in China’s self-declared air-defense zone has put carriers at the center of an escalating political dispute.
The U.S. State Department has urged airlines to notify Chinese authorities before flying through the zone, while Japan pressed its carriers to stop supplying such flight data. 

China created the zone over an area that includes islands in the East China Sea claimed by both the Asian nations.
Tension over territorial disputes with neighbors has in the past drawn Japan closer to the U.S., which maintains troops and airbases around the archipelago. 

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden will seek clarification from Chinese leaders on their intentions in imposing the zone when he visits Japan, China and South Korea this week.
“Policy execution based on cooperation between Japan and the U.S. is the most important thing, especially for the aviation industry,” said Haruo Ushiba, a director at Japan Aviation Management Research in Tokyo. “This rare crack in the U.S.-Japan alliance must be carefully examined.”
ANA Holdings Inc. and Japan Airlines Co. have stopped sharing flight plans with Chinese authorities after earlier agreeing to do so as Japan denounced China’s move.
The U.S. advisory to carriers came as Japan raised the dispute over the zone at a meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization in Montreal. 

A Japanese government representative told the UN agency that the zone could threaten the order and safety of international aviation and requested a review, according to the country’s foreign ministry.

Biden Talks
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told reporters yesterday that he would discuss the government’s response to the new Chinese air-defense zone with Biden, Kyodo News reported.
United Continental Holdings Inc., the biggest U.S. carrier, will continue its usual policy of sharing flight data with China, according to Megan McCarthy, a spokeswoman for the Chicago-based airline. 

American Airlines is also complying with the Chinese requirement, spokeswoman Andrea Huguely said.
ANA said it was maintaining its policy of not informing Chinese authorities while flying through the new defense zone, spokesman Ryosei Nomura said by telephone today. 

The carrier will reconsider its position if urged by the Japanese government to do so, he said.

Military Penetration
The State Department’s notice emerged hours after the U.S. military disclosed that it has been flying daily through the disputed area without providing notice to China’s authorities. 

That disclosure Nov. 29 by a U.S. defense official indicates that U.S. flight activity in the area, where China has sought to exert control, is more extensive than was previously known.
“It’s very important the U.S. signal to the Chinese that we’re not going to be bullied and that we’re going to adhere to our commitments,” which include a defense treaty with Japan, said Nicholas Burns, a former U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs from 2005 to 2008.
The Pentagon had acknowledged a flight by two unarmed B-52 bombers through the air zone last week. 

The defense official, who asked not to be named discussing military operations, wouldn’t specify the type of aircraft used in subsequent flights or say whether any of them are armed.
China for a second day Nov. 29 sent fighter planes into the air zone. 

The situation “holds the real potential for a crisis,” said Dean Cheng, a senior research fellow at the Asian Studies Center of the Heritage Foundation in Washington.

‘Provocative’ Behavior
China’s “provocative” behavior toward its neighbors in the region “now becomes a very prominent issue for the visit,” said Burns, who’s now a professor of international relations at Harvard University’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Biden will convey U.S. concerns about China’s air zone and seek clarification from Chinese leaders on their intentions, according to an administration official who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity because the talks will be private.
Biden is “well-positioned to play a calming role hopefully to defuse this crisis, in a way that is supportive of our primary friend, the government of Japan,” Burns said in an interview.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told reporters in Tokyo today that the U.S. “doesn’t accept China’s demands on the area.” 

He also said there is no change in the government’s decision to forbid airlines from providing flight data.

‘Emergency Measures’
“We will continue to work closely with the U.S. and have discussions as Biden arrives in Japan today,” Suga said.
China announced the air-defense identification zone effective Nov. 23 and said its military will take “defensive emergency measures” if aircraft enter the area without reporting flight plans or otherwise identifying themselves.
Japan and South Korea also have flown military aircraft through the air zone in recent days, testing China’s resolve to control a swath of the East China Sea that is central to a territorial dispute.
South Korea advised its domestic carriers to stick with current practice as the government doesn’t accept China’s zone, Yonhap News reported yesterday, citing an official at the transport ministry.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has called China’s air zone “a destabilizing attempt to alter the status quo in the region” and warned that it “increases the risk of misunderstanding and miscalculations.”

Joint Statement
The U.S. and Japan will issue a joint statement after Abe and Biden meet this week that calls on China to retract the zone, the Yomiuri newspaper reported, without citing a source. 

The statement will call the zone a dangerous experiment that unilaterally changes the situation in the East China Sea, the newspaper reported.
Japan and the U.S. also plan to step up air surveillance in the East China Sea, with Japan stationing E-2C airborne early-warning aircraft at the Naha base in the Okinawa region and expanding the use of unmanned Global Hawk aircraft, the Yomiuri newspaper reported Nov. 29, without citing a source.
South Korea is considering expanding its own air-defense zone in response to China’s move, Wee Yong Sub, spokesman for the Defense Ministry said in Seoul.
“This is one of the most serious challenges ever posed by China to freedom of movement both on the sea and in the sky and will affect very seriously the forward deployment of the United States,” Tomohiko Taniguchi, an adviser to Japan’s Abe, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television.
The State Department last month recommended that U.S. carriers take all steps they consider necessary for safe operation in the zone.
“We are filing our flight plans with China as we normally do,” United’s McCarthy said in an e-mail last week.
Hagel called Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera last week to assure the U.S. ally of its support. Hagel praised Japan “for exercising appropriate restraint” and “pledged to consult closely with Japan on efforts to avoid unintended incidents,” according to a Pentagon statement.

Read More

China's ADIZ undermines regional stability

By Bonnie S Glaser

China established an "East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ)" effective as of 10 am on November 23. 

China's Ministry of National Defense also announced Aircraft Identification Rules for the ADIZ, which include a warning that "defensive emergency measures" would be adopted to respond to aircraft that refuse to follow the instructions.
The zone overlaps the existing ADIZ of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. China's ADIZ also covers the Japanese Senkaku Islands.

One day following the announcement, China conducted two aerial patrols over the area; its aircraft were intercepted by Japan Air Self Defense Force (ASDF) fighter jets.
All nations have the right to establish reasonable conditions of entry into their territory. 

An ADIZ is a declaration of a perimeter within which unidentified aircraft can be intercepted and prevented from illegally proceeding to enter national airspace. 

It serves essentially as a national defense boundary for aerial incursions. 

There are no international rules or laws that determine the size of an ADIZ. 

Over 20 nations have an ADIZ, including the United States, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Taiwan in the West Pacific. 

ADIZs typically are much more extensive then a country's territorial airspace.
Why did China establish an ADIZ? 

China's PLA spokesman claimed that its action is "a necessary measure taken by China in exercising its self-defense right," and that "it is not directed against any specific country or target." 

However, the decision to declare an East China Sea ADIZ is likely aimed at strengthening Beijing's claim over the Japanese islands in the East China Sea. 

This move follows on China's September 2012 submission to the United Nations of baselines to demarcate a territorial sea around the islands.
China may also be responding to recent Japanese warnings that it reserves the right to shoot down unmanned drones that pose a threat to Japanese airspace. 

By creating an ADIZ that includes the Senkaku Islands, Beijing may believe it has established a basis for challenging and, if necessary, taking action against Japanese aircraft operating in this zone. 

The ADIZ may also signal a Chinese intention to increase flights in the territorial airspace around the disputed islands as a demonstration of its sovereignty and jurisdictional claim. 

China has only flown an aircraft in the territorial airspace around the island once, in February 2013, when a civilian maritime surveillance Y-12 aircraft entered the airspace.
Beijing may also seek to collect and publish data on the number of times that Chinese jets scramble to intercept Japanese fighters that enter into its ADIZ. 

Japan already publishes data on "intrusions" by Chinese and Russian aircraft; China may see benefits in demonstrating to its domestic audience that the party and military are doing their utmost to defend Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity.
China's action exacerbates tensions in ongoing disputes and creating friction in the region where none or little existed. 

It further increases tension in the territorial row between China and Japan at a time when that bilateral relationship is already severely strained. 

Moreover, it heightens the risk of an accident. 

There is a very large overlap between China's ADIZ and Japan's ADIZ. 

When aircraft from either country fly in this overlapping area, the other side is likely to scramble fighters and intercept the intruder. 

If intercepts are not conducted safely and in accordance with international norms, a collision is possible. Recall that in 2001 a Chinese fighter jet that was conducting aggressive intercepts collided with a US surveillance plane, which resulted in the Chinese pilot's death, the forced landing of the US EP-3 on Hainan island where its 24-member crew was held for 11 days, and a crisis in US-China relations.
China's ADIZ also encompasses portions of Ieodo Island and Jeju Island, which are part of South Korea, and overlaps with the Korean ADIZ in a wide swath that is 20 kilometers wide and 115 km long. 

The South Korean government expressed its regret about the Chinese government's decision. 

The newly announced ADIZ also overlaps with Taiwan's ADIZ, prompting the government in Taipei to issue a statement that included a pledge that Taiwan's armed forces would ensure the safety of the country's airspace, and urged all parties to "avoid actions that could escalate confrontation in the region."
Moreover, China's Aircraft Identification Rules make no distinction between aircraft flying parallel with China's coastline through the ADIZ and those flying toward China's territorial airspace. 

Secretary of State Kerry highlighted this issue in his statement, saying that the US "does not apply its ADIZ procedures to foreign aircraft not intending to enter US national airspace," implying that the US would not recognize China's claimed right to take action against aircraft that are not intending to enter its national airspace. 

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel stated that the US would not change the way it conducts military operations in the region.
Some Chinese may believe that aggressive intercepts against a Japanese aircraft in air space near the Senkakus would not provoke a US response since Washington is neutral on the issue of sovereignty over the islands. 

Secretary Hagel's statement reaffirming that Article V of the US-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty applies to the disputed islands is important in this regard and should prevent Chinese miscalculation.
At one fell swoop, Beijing's ADIZ decision has injected new problems into its ties with South Korea, Taiwan and the US, further soured relations with Japan, and frightened smaller nations in Southeast Asia. 

It appears that Xi Jinping, who by all accounts has emerged stronger from the recently held Chinese Communist Party Third Plenum, is willing to fan the flames of nationalism so he can ensure the party's popularity as he tackles economic reform at home.

Read More

Japan Takes Airspace Issue to U.N. Agency

By MARTIN FACKLER

NIIGATA, Japan — Seeking broader international support for opposing China’s claims to airspace over the East China Sea, Japan has asked the United Nations agency that oversees civil aviation to look into whether the newly created Chinese air defense zone could endanger civilian airliners, the Foreign Ministry said Saturday.
The ministry said that it submitted a proposal for the agency, the International Civil Aviation Organization, to examine whether China’s move could threaten the order and safety of international aviation in the area. Though the organization can make only nonbinding recommendations, Japan appears to be hoping that the heightened international scrutiny will force China to back off its declared intent to control the airspace with military measures if necessary.
China’s new “air defense identification zone” covers a broad section of sea that includes Japanese islands, and overlaps with a zone claimed by Japan since the late 1960s. 

Japan views the zone, which China declared last week, as a new move to gain control of the Senkaku islands.
China has said its new zone would not affect civilian air traffic, and was aimed instead at stopping Japanese military aircraft from entering airspace that it says rightfully belongs to China. 

However, China says that all aircraft, including commercial flights, must submit a flight plan before entering the zone.
While the United States military continues to fly into the zone without notifying China, Obama administration officials said Friday that they were advising American airlines to comply with the Chinese requirement in order to ensure their safety.

Read More

Spat over air space lost on ordinary Chinese

By Jamil Anderlini in Beijing

Captured US jets and wrecked U2 spy planes, permanently grounded at the Military Museum of the Chinese People’s Revolution in west Beijing, offer a stark reminder of the brutal history of the 20th century.
Yet current geopolitical tensions, sparked by China’s unilateral declaration of an “air defence identification zone” over much of the East China Sea, appear to be lost on today’s visitors to the vast museum hangers with their detritus of war.
“I don’t know what you’re talking about; I’ve never heard of such a thing,” said Mr Jie, 40, who was visiting the museum on Sunday from nearby Hebei Province, when asked what he thought of China’s new air defence zone, unveiled by China on November 23.
The new zone’s significance may be lost on Mr Jie but it has rattled China’s neighbours as it overlaps with one established by Japan in the 1960s and because it covers the Japanese Senkaku islands.
Two 19-year-old Beijing men at the museum, asking to remain anonymous, said they had heard about the new zone from state media reports but that those reports lacked detail and had not explained much of the background.
“I’m not so sure why we have set this zone up; maybe it has something to do with the Senkaku islands?” one of the young men speculated, correctly.
Their hazy grasp of the facts is understandable. 

In stark contrast to previous rounds of territorial conflict with Japan or smaller neighbours in the South China Sea, China’s tightly-controlled state media have largely airbrushed the issue from the news agenda.
As a consequence, there have been none of the mass outpourings of anti-Japanese or anti-foreign venom that spilled over into large, government-sanctioned street protests late last year after Tokyo bought some of the uninhabited islands from their private Japanese owner.
On Sunday afternoon, the issue of the new air defence zone did not even rank in the top 30 most popular topics on Sina Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter, which is blocked by China’s “great firewall” censorship regime.
In the sub-category of current affairs, the topic only made it to number seven on the most popular list. Indeed, the most popular topic in the Weibo current affairs sub-category was a series of newly published details about a domestic aircraft crash that happened in 2010.
Chinese netizens’ lukewarm interest in the subject reflects Beijing’s decision to keep the issue for the most part out of the public eye.
Employees of popular online news sites say they received telephone instructions from propaganda authorities ordering them not to publish any reports on the matter apart from short factual pieces issued by centrally-controlled state media.
An explicit ban was issued on any non-sanctioned reports mentioning the US decision to send B-52 bombers through the newly-established zone.
Over the weekend, state media were far more focused on reporting the imminent launch of China’s first moon landing probe and on Friday, China’s foreign ministry spokesman said the new air defence zone “will not cause regional tensions”, according to state media.
On Sunday, the official Xinhua news agency did report that US airlines have, on advice from the US government, agreed to China’s demands to provide all flight information for aircraft passing through the new zone.
But the report did not mention that the major airlines of Japan and South Korea are refusing to provide that information to Beijing, following instructions from their governments.
Analysts say Beijing appears confident the issue will blow over quickly, leaving it in a stronger position than before since many commercial airlines from other countries have agreed to provide flight information and thereby implicitly acknowledge its claims to the disputed territory.
Even on the diplomatic circuit the issue has had a limited airing.
On Friday, as several uniformed officers of the People’s Liberation Army stood shoulder to shoulder with Japanese and American diplomats at a buffet lunch hosted by the Japanese embassy in Beijing to celebrate the birthday of the Japanese Emperor, there was no hint that their countries could be one mid-air collision away from armed conflict.
Meanwhile, back at the Beijing military museum on Sunday, 26-year-old Beijing native Song Guotao made clear that the relative apathy of ordinary Chinese people towards the latest standoff has nothing to do with a more tolerant attitude toward their neighbours.
“This is our territory and Japan is truly a barbaric country,” he said.
Mr Song said he had learnt a lot about the current tensions over the air defence zone thanks to his searches on the internet rather than from state media.

Read More

Paper Dragon

US forces operating 'normally' in China air zone. Japan and South Korea both disregarded the ADIZ, showing a united front after US B-52 bombers entered the area.
AFP

Beijing — US military chiefs have insisted they will not change their operations despite China scrambling fighter jets to monitor American and Japanese aircraft in Beijing's newly declared air defence zone.

But the State Department said US commercial airlines should observe China's demand to be given notice of aircraft entering the zone, while stating that compliance "does not indicate US government acceptance of China's requirements".
China flew warplanes into its air defence identification zone (ADIZ) on Friday, Chinese state media said, nearly a week after it announced the zone, which covers islands at the centre of a dispute between Beijing and Tokyo, raising regional tensions.
The Xinhua report indicated that Japan and the United States are continuing to disregard China's demands that aircraft submit flight plans when traversing the area in the East China Sea or face unspecified "defensive emergency measures".
"We have flights routinely transiting international airspace throughout the Pacific, including the area China is including in their ADIZ," Pentagon spokesman Colonel Steve Warren said on Friday.
"These flights are consistent with long-standing and well-known US freedom of navigation policies that are applied in many areas of operation around the world. I can confirm that the US has and will continue to operate in the area as normal."
Compliance by commercial flights "does not indicate US government acceptance of China's requirements for operating in the newly declared ADIZ," the State Department said in a statement.
Japanese airlines, under pressure from Tokyo, stopped following China's new rules on Wednesday, after initially complying.
In its evening edition Saturday, the Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper said Japan's two biggest airlines were unlikely to change their stance even after the US announcement that commercial airlines should observe China's demand.
Japan Airlines said it had "no plan to change our stance at the moment" while All Nippon Airways said it would follow instructions from the transport ministry, the daily reported the two companies as saying.
Chinese air force spokesman Shen Jinke said Friday that several combat aircraft were scrambled to "verify the identities" of US and Japanese aircraft entering the air defence zone, according to Xinhua.

The Chinese planes, which included at least two fighter jets, identified two US surveillance aircraft and 10 Japanese aircraft including an F-15 warplane, Shen said.
Japan and South Korea both said Thursday they had disregarded the ADIZ, showing a united front after US B-52 bombers also entered the area.
Despite the scrambling of jets referred to in China's state media, Japanese Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera on Saturday said there were no "peculiar developments".
"We do not recognise there have been peculiar developments that we should disclose such as one where aircraft suddenly came close as the Chinese side announced yesterday," he said.
"We have been making our utmost efforts to be vigilant and we will continue," he added.
Onodera also called on China to use "common sense" over the air defence zone.
"It is important for both sides to respond in a calm manner," he said, according to the Kyodo news agency. "We want (China) to deal with this issue according to common sense in the international community".
Beijing is facing considerable internal pressure to assert itself. 

China's state media called Friday for "timely countermeasures without hesitation" if Japan violates the zone but it shied away from threatening Washington.
Washington has security alliances with both Tokyo and Seoul, and analysts say that neither China nor Japan -- the world's second and third-biggest economies, and major trading partners of each other -- want to engage in armed conflict.
The Communist Party seeks to bolster its public support by tapping into deep-seated resentment of Japan for its invasion of the country in the 1930s.
Such passions are easily ignited, and posters on Chinese social media networks have urged Beijing to act.
China's rules covering the zone require aircraft to provide their flight plan, declare their nationality and maintain two-way radio communication -- or face unspecified "defensive emergency measures".
Both Japan, which denies that there is a dispute over the islands, and Washington have ADIZs of their own, and China accuses them of double standards -- though China's zone includes a rock that is disputed between Beijing and Seoul, as well as islands controlled by Japan and claimed by China.
The European Union added its voice to the criticism of the zone, with its top foreign affairs official Catherine Ashton saying it "contributes to raising tensions in the region".
The Yomiuri Shimbun on Saturday reported that the United States and Japan would issue a joint statement demanding China scrap the air zone during a visit to Tokyo by US Vice President Joe Biden next week. Biden will meet Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Tuesday.

B-52 diplomacy

Read More

Face-off

Like a teenager on a growth spurt who doesn’t know his own strength, China has underestimated the impact of its actions. 

The Economist

THE announcement by a Chinese military spokesman on November 23rd sounded bureaucratic: any aircraft flying through the newly designated Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea must notify Chinese authorities in advance and follow instructions from its air-traffic controllers. 

America’s response was rapid. 

On November 26th Barack Obama sent two B-52 bombers to fly through the new zone without notifying China. 

This face-off marks the most worrying strategic escalation between the two countries since 1996, when China’s then president, Jiang Zemin, ordered a number of exclusion zones for missile tests in the Taiwan Strait, leading America to send two aircraft-carriers there.
Plenty of countries establish zones in which they require aircraft to identify themselves, but they tend not to be over other countries’ territory. 

The Chinese ADIZ overlaps with Japan’s own air-defence zone (see map). 

It also includes some Japanese specks of rock called the Senkaku islands, as well as a South Korean reef, known as Ieodo. 

The move is clearly designed to bolster China’s claims. 

On November 28th Japan and South Korea sent aircraft into the zone.

Teenage testosterone
Growing economic power is bound to go hand-in-hand with growing regional assertiveness. 

That is fine, so long as the behaviour of the rising power remains within international norms. 

In this case, however, China’s does not; and America, which has guaranteed free navigation of the seas and skies of East Asia for 60 years, is right to make that clear.
How worrying China’s move is depends partly on the thinking behind it.

It may be that, like a teenager on a growth spurt who doesn’t know his own strength, China has underestimated the impact of its actions. 

The claim that America’s bombers had skirted the edge of the ADIZ was gawkily embarrassing. 

But teenagers who do not realise the consequences of their actions often cause trouble: China has set up a casus belli with its neighbours and America for generations to come.
It would thus be much more worrying if the provocation was deliberate. 

The “Chinese dream” of Xi Jinping, the new president, is a mixture of economic reform and strident nationalism. 

The announcement of the ADIZ came shortly after a party plenum at which Mr Xi announced a string of commendably radical domestic reforms. 

The new zone will appeal to the nationalist camp, which wields huge power, particularly in the armed forces. It also helps defend Mr Xi against any suggestions that he is a westernising liberal.
If this is Mr Xi’s game, it is a dangerous one. 

East Asia has never before had a strong China and a strong Japan at the same time. 

China dominated the region from the mists of history until the 1850s, when the West’s arrival spurred Japan to modernise while China tried to resist the foreigners’ influence. 

China is eager to re-establish dominance over the region. 

Bitterness at the memory of the Japanese occupation in the second world war sharpens this desire. 

It is this possibility of a clash between a rising and an established power that lies behind the oft-used parallel between contemporary East Asia and early 20th-century Europe, in which the Senkakus play the role of Sarajevo.

Seas of troubles
Tensions are not at that level. 

Japan’s constitution bans it from any military aggression and China normally goes to great lengths to stress that its rise—unlike that of Japan in the 1920s and 1930s—will be peaceful. 

But the neighbours are nervous, especially as the establishment of the ADIZ appears to match Chinese ambitions in the South China Sea.
Chinese maps show what is known as the “nine-dash line” encompassing all the South China Sea. 

In the wake of the global financial crisis, perhaps believing its own narrative of Chinese rise and American decline, it began to overreach in its dealings with its neighbours. 

It sent ships to disputed reefs, pressed foreign oil companies to halt exploration and harassed American and Vietnamese naval vessels in the South China Sea. 

These actions brought a swift rebuke from America’s then secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, and China appeared to back off and return to its regional charm offensive. 

Some observers say that the government is using the ADIZ to establish a nine-dash line covering the East China Sea as well. 

They fear China’s next move will be to declare an ADIZ over the South China Sea, to assert control over both the sea and the air throughout the region.
Whether or not China has such specific ambitions, the ADIZ clearly suggests that China does not accept the status quo in the region and wants to change it. 

Any Chinese leader now has an excuse for going after Japanese planes. 

Chinese ships are already ignoring Japanese demands not to enter the waters surrounding the disputed islands.
What can be done? 

Next week Joe Biden, America’s vice-president, arrives in China. 

The timing may be uncomfortable, but it is fortuitous. 

Mr Biden and Mr Xi know each other well: before Mr Xi became president, he spent five days in America at Mr Biden’s invitation. 

Mr Biden is also going to South Korea and Japan.
America’s “pivot” towards Asia is not taken very seriously there: Mr Obama is seen as distracted by his domestic problems. 

Mr Biden could usefully make clear America’s commitment to guaranteeing freedom of navigation in the region. 

Japan and South Korea, who squabble over petty issues, need to be told to get over their differences. 

As for China, it needs to behave like a responsible world power, not a troublemaker willing to sacrifice 60 years of peace in north-east Asia to score some points by grabbing a few windswept rocks. 

It should accept Japan’s suggestion of a military hotline, similar to the one that is already established between Beijing and Washington.
The region must work harder to build some kind of architecture where regional powers can discuss security. If such a framework had existed in Europe in 1914, things might have turned out differently.

Read More

With new air zone, China tests U.S. dominance in East Asia

BY GREG TORODE AND LINDA SIEG

China's new air defence zone, stretching far into East Asia's international skies, is an historic challenge to the United States, which has dominated the region for decades.
For years, Chinese naval officers have told their U.S. counterparts they are uncomfortable with America's presence in the western Pacific -- and Beijing is now confronting strategic assumptions that have governed the region since World War Two.
China's recent maritime muscle-flexing in disputes over the Paracel islands and Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea and over Japanese islands in the East China Sea has stirred concern and extensive backroom diplomacy in Washington.
But it took the events of the last week to spark an immediate and symbolic response from the United States -- the unannounced appearance in the zone of two unarmed B-52 bombers from the fortified island of Guam, the closest U.S. territory to the Chinese coast.
China's unilateral creation of the zone -- accompanied by warnings that it would take "defensive emergency measures" against aircraft that didn't identify themselves -- has raised the stakes in a territorial dispute with Japan over tiny, uninhabited islands in the area.
Even as some suggest Beijing's move is already backfiring, experts in China say it is a part of a long-term effort, carrying broader historic significance for the United States as the traditional provider of Japanese security.
The regional tensions will loom large when U.S. Vice President Joe Biden travels to Japan, China and South Korea early next week.

STRATEGIC SPACE
Shi Yinhong, a professor of international relations at Renmin University who advises Beijing's State Council, said Washington had recognised China as a great trade and diplomatic power, and should now acknowledge China needs its own "strategic space".

Japan and South Korea, another treaty ally of the U.S., also sent military aircraft through the zone this week without informing China, lending muscle to earlier diplomatic protests.
For all the apparent boldness of China's move, some regional analysts believe Beijing has over-reached, in comparison to earlier campaigns of assertion. 

For example, China's rotating presence of ships in seas around Japan's Senkaku islands have continued without sparking a direct military response from Washington.
Some suggest the fact that Chinese planes have yet to attempt an interception in the air this week, despite the swift flouting of its demands, shows that Beijing's bluff has been called. 

They are also puzzled how the move fits with Beijing's vaunted "soft power" diplomacy -- on display recently as China's leaders toured South East Asia after U.S. President Barack Obama pulled out of a long-planned trip.
"What (President) Xi Jinping is trying to do is create a balance between soft and hard, conservatives and liberals. This is part of their trial and error process to get the right balance," said former senior Japanese diplomat Hitoshi Tanaka.
The fact China's zone overlaps Japan's -- including contested islands that the U.S. is obliged to defend under its treaty with Japan -- represents a dangerous strategic shift, U.S. officials say. 

And China's declaration it could take action against unidentified aircraft that ignored its warnings has sparked fears of an increased risk of accidents and miscalculations.
"It causes friction and uncertainty, it constitutes a unilateral challenge to the status quo in ... a region that is already fraught," one U.S. administration official said.

A LONG GAME?
In Tokyo, too, there is a sense that China is playing a long-term game -- even if Beijing struggles to enforce a move some analysts described as poorly thought out.
Speaking privately, one government source said that while it could damage Japan's "effective control" of disputed islands in the short-term, in the longer term it represented a push by Beijing to create a broad defensive zone across the East and South China Seas. 

"They don't feel safe without vast space between themselves and their enemies," the person said.
Narushige Michishita, a security expert at Tokyo's National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies, described the zone as a "bad step" for both Japan and China. 

"So far, China's move has backfired on it, but it might have longer term ... or internal political objectives," he said. 

"We should be cautious."

Read More

With air-defence overreach, China has proven itself a paper tiger

By Matthew Fisher

A Chinese produced J-10 fighter jet is displayed outside the offices of the Aviation Industry Corporation of China in Beijing on November 28, 2013. The US on November 28 pressed its concerns over China's newly declared air defence zone, a day after US B-52s flew over the disputed area in the East China Sea.
TOKYO — To use an old Asian expression, is China just a toothless paper tiger?
Beijing threatened “emergency defensive measures” early this week against any aircraft, civilian or military, whose pilots had not received advance clearance from its aviation authorities to overfly islands and reefs that Beijing suddenly has claimed as part of an “air defence identification zone,” although the islands have have been under Japanese, South Korean and American (fairly briefly) administrative control since the 19th century.
The U.S. air force mocked China’s bellicosity by almost immediately flying a pair of lumbering, unarmed B-52 heavy bombers into the “protected air space.” 

After a moment’s hesitation, the country’s two major carriers, All Nippon Airways and Japan Airlines (JAL), acceded to a request by their government to continue flying in the area without informing the Chinese in advance. 

I flew directly over the Senkaku Islands on a JAL flight on Thursday without a hint of trouble.
Also on Thursday, Japan and South Korea sent military aircraft on uncontested patrols through China’s air defence zone without seeking permission.
For all its fierce rhetoric, until now China had reacted to the American bomber run and what it regards as unsanctioned overflights by Japanese and South Korean military and civilian aircraft by doing absolutely nothing. 

However, on Thursday, China, which had earlier claimed it was aware that the U.S. bombers had been there, belatedly sent warplanes into the maritime air defence zone.
Tensions have been growing since China’s dictatorship began asserting sweeping territorial claims over most of the South China Sea a few years ago. 

These assertions have also caused growing tensions with Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei and, especially, the Philippines. 

China also has a toxic land dispute with India. 

In fact, the whole neighbourhood has been in high dudgeon over China’s expansive interpretation of what it owns, with the exceptions of Cambodia and Kim Jong-un’s North Korea.
Japan’s Shinzo Abe wrote late last year that China considered the South China Sea to be “Lake Beijing.” More provocatively, the right-wing politician wrote that nations such as India, Australia and the U.S. should form a “security diamond” to hem in China and keep the Indian and Pacific oceans open for unfettered maritime commerce.
China’s official media reported this week that in declaring an air defence zone, Beijing was behaving no differently than Canada. 

What it did not report was that although Canada and the U.S. jointly co-ordinate the North American “air defense identification zone,” which requires foreign aircraft to file a flight plan, it was not established above disputed territory.
This rough patch for China is jarring because everything had been going its way recently. 

Chinese President Xi Jinping was the beneficiary when U.S. President Barack Obama — who has made a lot of noise about a strategic pivot to Asia — postponed a four-nation tour of Asia in early October in order to try to untangle the budgetary fiasco with Congress.
Overplaying its hand by declaring a protected zone nearly the size of the British Isles has particularly soured China’s warming ties with South Korea, which has its own bitter historic differences with Japan. 

Nor was this China’s first international miscalculation this month. 

It also erred in its niggardly response to the typhoon disaster in the Philippines.
While much of the world, and especially the U.S., rushed to help Manila, China initially chose to do little to assist its neighbour. 

China did eventually send a hospital ship to Tacloban. But the vessel did not arrive until 16 days after typhoon Haiyan did.
With the Philippines still reeling from that monster killer storm, China made yet another aggressive move this week. 

Its new aircraft carrier, the Liaoning (actually an old, refurbished Ukrainian flat top) left its home port in northeastern China for the first time to begin deep water training manoeuvres with four guided missile ships near islets that the beleaguered Filipinos have long regarded as theirs. 

The battle group may sail these politically sensitive waters for several months, according to official Chinese media.
Most Asian nations, and Canada, have held their noses in recent years over China’s human rights record in order to trade with it.

It’s a policy the Harper government — without specifically naming China — officially enshrined as “economic diplomacy” in a report released Wednesday by the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development.
The latest countries to happily shake China’s hand have been Serbia, Romania and Hungary. 

Their leaders sealed a deal with a triumphant Premier Li Keqiang in Bucharest on Monday to build a high-speed rail link between the eastern European countries.
A complicating factor that is feeding the verbal skirmishes over the Western Pacific today is that the vast waters that China claims are, unsurprisingly, believed to be above large pools of oil and natural gas.
To prove that it’s more than a paper tiger, China is spending huge amounts of money on its armed forces. 

To protect their positions, India, South Korea and Japan have joined the Asian arms race, too.
The battle for hegemony in Asia is only beginning.

Read More

Seoul Sees Territory Threat in China Defense Zone

South Korea Wary That Beijing Vying for Advantage With Disputed Rock
By ALASTAIR GALE And JEYUP S. KWAAK

South Korean Vice Defense Minister Baek Seung-joo, left, shakes hands with his Chinese counterpart, Wang Guangzhong, deputy chief of general staff of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, ahead of their talks in Seoul on Thursday. 

SEOUL—South Korea's forceful response to China's new air-defense zone despite otherwise warming ties reflects concern over Beijing's apparent move to tilt a long-running dispute over territorial waters in its favor, officials and analysts in Seoul said.
On Thursday, Seoul confirmed that a South Korean military plane had flown into the new Chinese zone on Tuesday without giving prior warning to Beijing, a day after the U.S. challenged the Chinese demarcation with two B-52 bombers.
South Korea also called for China to redraw its zone at high-level defense talks on Thursday and, after the request was rejected, said it would consider extending its own air-defense zone. 

Seoul says it will send further flights into the Chinese zone without advance notice.
The assertive stance contrasts with South Korea's initial response to China's declaration of the zone on Saturday. Seoul expressed concern but said then the issue would be resolved through dialogue.

A senior South Korean government official said that the more muscular approach was driven by Seoul's wish to reassert its claims over contested territorial waters within China's new zone, primarily an area of ocean around a submerged rock claimed by both Beijing and Seoul.
The rock, known internationally as Socotra Rock, and Ieodo in Korea, has been the subject of a dispute running for decades. 

The rock, northeast of Shanghai and southwest of the Korean island of Jeju, is one point of disagreement in a bigger dispute about the drawing of the countries' respective exclusive economic zones, or EEZ.
The rock, around 15 feet below sea level, lies in an overlapping section of the countries' EEZs. 

Under United Nations guidelines, a country has rights over use of marine resources in an EEZ within 200 nautical miles from its shores—but in case multiple countries' zones overlap, they must negotiate the maritime border.
Beijing and Seoul have met to discuss the issue 16 times previously without reaching consensus.

In 2003, South Korea completed the construction of a marine research center on the rock, including a helicopter landing pad.
A spokesman for South Korea's defense ministry the country's navy and coast guards conduct routine surveillance with aircraft around Ieodo about once or twice a week on average. 

The senior government official said Tuesday's military flight into China's claimed air-defense zone was made to demonstrate South Korea's jurisdiction over the waters around the rock.
On Monday, a spokesman for China's foreign ministry said there was no dispute over the rock and the issue would be resolved through dialogue.
South Korea's shift from its initially restrained response highlights the domestic pressure it faces with regards to territorial sovereignty, said Kim Han-kwon, director of the Center for China Policy at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, a Seoul-based think tank.
Though the Chinese air-defense zone isn't set under international law—and has no impact on territory—South Korean politicians and media have treated China's move as an incursion, helping drive a stronger reaction from the government, Mr. Kim said.
"None of the countries (involved in the regional dispute) can step back at this point" or risk losing face, he said.
In addition to the dispute over the rock, South Korea has protested China's move to create 3,000 square kilometers of overlap in the two countries' air-defense zones in the East China Sea. 

After a senior Chinese military official rejected South Korea's demand for Beijing to redraw its zone, his South Korea counterpart said Seoul may increase its own zone, potentially creating further overlap.
The spokesman for the defense ministry in Seoul said the issue of extending South Korea's air-defense zone was under review but declined to provide further details about where it might be increased.
The dispute marks a sharp turn after months of progress in developing closer political and economic ties between Beijing and Seoul. 

During a state visit to Beijing by South Korean President Park Geun-hye in June, the two countries signed a number of agreements and are in discussions about a bilateral free trade agreement.
Ms. Park's personal interest in the Chinese language and culture has also been warmly received in China. South Korea has prioritized ties with China over Japan, which remains in dispute with Seoul over long-running historical and territorial issues.

Read More

Enforcing rules in air zone will stretch China's air force and navy

BY GREG TORODE AND ADAM ROSE

China's military could struggle to cope with the demands for intensified surveillance and interception if it tries to enforce the rules in its new air defense zone over islands at the heart of a territorial dispute with Japan.
Regional military analysts and diplomats said China's network of air defense radars, surveillance planes and fighter jets would be stretched by extensive patrols across its Air Defense Identification Zone, roughly two-thirds the size of Britain.
But some noted that even limited action could still spark alarm across a nervous region -- and serve China's desire to pressure Japan.
China published the coordinates of its zone in the East China Sea over the weekend and warned it would take "defensive emergency measures" against aircraft that failed to identify themselves properly in the airspace.
It is already being tested.
Two unarmed U.S. B-52 bombers on a training mission flew over the disputed islands on Monday without informing Beijing while Japan's main commercial airlines ignored the rules when their planes passed through the airspace on Wednesday.
China's Defense Ministry said it had monitored the entire progress of the U.S. bombers. 

The Pentagon said the planes had neither been observed nor contacted by Chinese aircraft.
A Japanese government source said China's military, while growing rapidly after many years of double-digit budget increases, still did not have the radars or fighters to cover a zone of such size across international airspace.
"China will not implement (the zone) fully because they do not have enough assets ... but they will try to scare smaller nations," said the source, who declined to be identified because he was not authorized to speak to the media on the topic.
While China could field an extensive array of surveillance capabilities, including ship-borne radar, there will still be gaps, added Christian Le Miere, an East Asia military specialist at the independent International Institute of Strategic Studies in London.
"It is just not yet clear how they are going to enforce it," he said. 

"It may be more a rhetorical position to serve a political end."

NOT A NO-FLY ZONE
China's creation of the zone triggered a storm of criticism from Washington and Tokyo, with both countries accusing Beijing of trying to change the status quo in the region.
Some experts have said the move was aimed at chipping away at Tokyo's claim to administrative control over the area, including the tiny uninhabited islands known as the Senkakus.
Japan and the United States have their own air defense zones but only require aircraft to file flight plans and identify themselves if those planes intend to pass through national airspace.
Gary Li, a Beijing-based senior analyst with the consulting group IHS Aerospace, Defense and Maritime, said he did not believe China would try to replicate in the air what it had done at sea by keeping a rotating presence of coastguard ships on standby near the islands.
"I think it will be more a case of China flying enough to make a point -- it is quite a strain on any force to maintain some kind of 24-hour presence in the air," he said.
"It must be remembered that this is not a no-fly zone -- China doesn't have to operate extensive patrols to make its presence felt."
Patrol ships from China and Japan have been shadowing each other near the islets on and off for months, raising fears that a confrontation could develop into a clash.
There have also been several incidents involving military aircraft flying close to each other. 

In October, Chinese military aircraft flew near Japan three days in a row, and Japan scrambled fighter jets each time in response.
While China had significantly improved the quality and number of surveillance aircraft operated by its navy and air force over the last decade, Li said he believed coastal air defense radars would be used for routine coverage of the new zone.
Planes -- whether surveillance or fighter jets -- would be used generally for more specific tasks, he said.
Indeed, attention is likely to focus on airfields and coastal radar stations around Shanghai -- strategically placed near the top of the zone.
Independent academic and commercial analysis of China's air force and naval aviation deployments shows a concentration of surveillance aircraft, together with expanding fleets of indigenous J-10 and Russian-acquired Su-30 jet fighters.
An estimated 45 surveillance planes are also within range of the zone, along with as many as 160 fighters around Shanghai -- including some ageing locally produced J-7 aircraft.
Most of the surveillance planes are variants of the long-range, locally manufactured Y-8, equipped for separate tasks, such as early-warning patrols, electronic intelligence gathering as well as ship and submarine surveillance.
Particular regional attention is focused on four larger KJ-2000 Airborne Warning and Control System aircraft, converted Russian Il-76 planes, based out of Jiangsu province, neighboring Shanghai, and within reach of Japan and Taiwan.
"We don't think China's AWACS planes and their abilities are up to the standard of the U.S. and its allies," one Asian military attache in Hong Kong said. 

"But we can be sure they are getting there -- and any extensive enforcement operation could bring them into full play -- so we are watching them closely."

NO "HOT DOGGING"
The potential behavior of Chinese pilots during any intensified campaign is also drawing scrutiny -- with U.S. officials particularly worried about the risk of miscalculations or accidents.
The days of Chinese fighter pilots buzzing U.S. surveillance planes largely ended when one died in a collision with a U.S. aircraft in 2001.
U.S. military pilots say their Chinese counterparts have generally stopped any fast and loose maneuvers during routine intercepts after the fatal collision above the South China Sea sparked a crisis in Sino-U.S. ties.
"You just don't see the hot-dogging you used to see up there," one pilot said. 

"As China's got a lot more assets, its pilots have gotten a lot more professional."
While insisting the zone would be here to stay, Chinese officials and military officers have insisted that Beijing fully intended to comply with international law.
Senior naval advisor, Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo, told state broadcaster CCTV that it was illegal to shoot down planes in international airspace.
"Once you enter our territorial airspace we can shoot you down," he said. 

"But beforehand I would have warned you: if you don't report and enter our territorial airspace, we would take drastic measures."
A Defense Ministry spokesman would not confirm to Reuters whether China's interception aircraft would be armed as they patrolled the zone, however.
"For unidentified or threatening flying objects in the (zone), the Chinese side will, according to different situations, take timely identification, surveillance ... and control measures to deal with it," the spokesman said.
"We hope that relevant parties give proactive co-operation to jointly maintain flying safety."

Read More

China has thrown down a gauntlet to America

Beijing has turned control of the air space around the Senkaku islands into a test of the US

By Philip Stephens

At first glance, Beijing’s designation of an air defence zone in the East China Sea marks a calibrated escalation of its longstanding dispute with Japan about sovereignty of the Senkaku islands. 

A more worrying, and plausible, interpretation is that Beijing has decided to square up to the US in the western Pacific. 

East Asia is looking an ever more dangerous place.
When Xi Jinping met Barack Obama in California this year, the Chinese president told his US counterpart the Pacific Ocean was large enough to accommodate two great powers. 

The inference was that the US and China should divide the spoils. 

Also implicit in the remark, though, was that China would not accept a status quo that saw the US remain the Pacific’s pre-eminent power. 

At the summit, Mr Obama sidestepped the issue. 

Now it seems Mr Xi has decided it is time for China to start grabbing its share.
The Senkaku have been administered by Japan since the late 19th century, apart from a spell of US control after the second world war. 

China staked a claim during the early 1970s, but for decades did little to press its case. 

Since the 2008 Olympics, Beijing has adopted a more assertive approach, making regular incursions into the disputed territory’s sea and air space. 

This has prompted a US warning that the area is covered by the US-Japan mutual security pact.
This US commitment is now being tested. 

The question Beijing seems to be asking is how far will Mr Obama go to uphold the existing order. 

China’s strategic objective is to push the US away from its coastline and establish its suzerainty in the East and South China seas. 

Does an America exhausted by wars in the Middle East have the political will to risk conflict in Asia in order to defend a few uninhabited rocks? 

It was probably no accident that Beijing’s timing coincided with one of the most troubled periods of Mr Obama’s presidency.
Washington’s decision to send two B52 bombers into the newly designated “air defence identification zone” – flouting Beijing’s demands to be notified of flights and thereby risking “emergency defensive action” – suggests it understands the nature of the challenge.
Chuck Hagel, the US defence secretary, called the Chinese move “a destabilising attempt to alter the status quo in the region”. 

Other US officials were less diplomatic. 

Beijing, though, is playing a long game. 

The $64,000 dollar question in east Asia is whether the US has the staying power to resist a sustained Chinese push for regional hegemony.
The immediate impact of Beijing’s new flight rules is to heighten the already significant risk of an armed clash with Japan over the islands. 

The Chinese zone overlaps with Toyko’s long-established ADIZ. 

The danger of miscalculation on both sides is far from negligible. 

In Shinzo Abe, Japan has a nationalist prime minister determined not to be cowed by his country’s more powerful neighbour – nor to be over-influenced by private US warnings that Tokyo should play its part in lowering the political temperature.
Mr Abe is looking for an excuse to amend Japan’s constitution to provide it with something more than a defensive military capability. 

A clash, accidental or intended, with China around the Senkaku would provide just such a justification.
This leaves Mr Obama in a distinctly uncomfortable position. 

The US has to make clear to China that it stands behind Japan in the dispute, but at the same time it wants to avoid giving encouragement to Mr Abe to ratchet up tensions in the region. 

Each and every one of China’s neighbours is watching closely to see precisely where Washington strikes the balance between these two objectives.
For the US there is much more at stake than its relationship with Japan. 

Beijing’s stand-off with Tokyo over the Senkaku is one of many territorial disputes between China and its neighbours. 

The new airspace restrictions overlap with the South Korean zone as well as with Japan’s territorial claims. The Philippines is unhappy with Washington for what it sees as a US failure to give it sufficient support in its dispute with Beijing over a group of islands in the South China Sea. 

Vietnam has a separate quarrel with China over its maritime borders.
Consciously or otherwise, Beijing has now turned control of the air space around the Senkaku into a litmus test of the US security commitment to east Asia. 

For Washington to accept the Chinese restrictions would be to send a signal to every other nation in the region that the US cannot be relied on to defend the status quo against Chinese expansionism.
Yet to demonstrate its resolve as a resident east Asian power by constantly patrolling the disputed air space is to accept a new source of friction with Beijing. 

My guess is that Mr Obama, accused of presiding over a collapse of US power in the Middle East, cannot afford to back down over the Senkaku.
Chinese policy makers are nothing if not assiduous students of history. 

The rise of Germany at the end of the 19th century has long featured prominently in the curriculum of Beijing’s foreign policy elite. 

China, these officials tell visitors, will not repeat the Kaiser’s miscalculation in uniting Germany’s neighbours in opposition to its rise to great power status. 

This attentiveness to the past now seems to be taking second place to China’s determination to assert its power. 

History’s mistakes are often repeated.

Read More

Paper Dragon: Beijing Draws Online Ridicule Over Air Defense

VOA News

US warning

The Chinese government has drawn ridicule from domestic Internet users for its low-key reaction to U.S. and Japanese aircraft ignoring Beijing's creation of an air defense zone in the East China Sea.

Many Chinese microbloggers posted messages Wednesday mocking the ruling Communist Party or lamenting that it has become, in their view, an international "laughing stock."
China declared an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) over disputed waters in the East China Sea on Saturday. 

It said all foreign civilian and military aircraft flying in the zone must identify themselves and follow Beijing's instructions or face unspecified "emergency measures."
The Chinese zone includes air space above a resource-rich chain of Japanese islands claimed by China.
Chinese nationalist commentators initially expressed a largely positive view of the move as a sign of China's greater assertiveness in dealing with Japan and its key ally the United States.
But the United States said it flew two unarmed B-52 bombers through the zone on Monday without notifying China. 

Japanese airlines operating in the area stopped submitting flight plans to Beijing on Wednesday, at the request of the Japanese government.
China's defense ministry said Wednesday it monitored the U.S. military planes while they transited the zone. It also insisted that China has the capability to exercise "effective control" of the air space.
When asked whether China will take tougher measures if there are further such incidents, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said Beijing will "respond accordingly depending on the different circumstances and the threat levels that we may face."
The Chinese government's muted statements on the issue prompted many Internet users to describe the Chinese aerial zone as a farce. 

Those sympathetic to the government said stronger action is needed in future.
In a Weibo message monitored by Reuters, outspoken retired Chinese Major General Luo Yuan called for the zone to be "enforced to the full" and said "no country must think that they can ... leave things to chance."
Chinese officials have said Beijing established the ADIZ in order to exercise its "right" to defend national sovereignty. 

They also have said China is acting like other nations that have created aerial notification zones in international airspace.
The United States and Japan have their own aerial zones, but only require foreign aircraft to identify themselves if those planes intend to pass through U.S. and Japanese national airspace.

Read More

Tony Abbott refuses to back down over China comments

"We are a strong ally of Japan, we have a very strong view that international disputes should be settled peacefully and in accordance with the rule of law..." -- Tony Abbott 

By Mark Kenny, Philip Wen

PM Tony Abbott

Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop: "Australia opposes action by any side that we believe could add to the tensions or add to the risk of a miscalculation in disputed territorial zones in the region."

Tony Abbott has refused to take a backward step in a deepening diplomatic spat with Beijing, declaring "China trades with us because it is in China's interest to trade with us".
The unapologetic comments came after Beijing issued an arrogant warning to Canberra to "correct" its public statements which were seen as siding with Japan over disputed territory in the East China Sea.
An escalating series of diplomatic gestures by both sides have strained relations this week after Australia called in China's ambassador on Monday.
Canberra demanded an explanation from China for its unilateral decision to declare an expanded air defence zone over disputed waters and islands claimed by both Japan and China.
Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop defended the government's position on Thursday, arguing Australia has a key stake in the region and therefore opposes "action by any side that we believe could add to the tensions or add to the risk of a miscalculation in disputed territorial zones in the region".
Later in the day, Mr Abbott went further, stressing strategic ties.
"We are a strong ally of the United States, we are a strong ally of Japan, we have a very strong view that international disputes should be settled peacefully and in accordance with the rule of law and where we think that is not happening, or it is not happening appropriately, we will speak our mind," he said.
Beijing announced the expansion at the weekend, along with the instruction that civil aircraft would be required to lodge flight paths and seek permission before traversing the newly declared air defence identification zone.
The highly provocative act brought an immediate response from the US, which dispatched as many as four military aircraft, including two B52 long range bombers, to fly through the zone as a way of demonstrating that the Chinese annexure would be ignored.
With Australia's ambassador to Beijing, Frances Adamson, away on leave, China hauled in Justin Hayhurst, the deputy head of mission at Australia's Beijing embassy, to remonstrate.
Beijing also issued a series of statements complaining that Australia had taken sides and that it should act quickly to "correct" its position, if it wanted the relationship with China to remain healthy.
The new air defence zone came just days after Ms Bishop signed a joint communique with the US at the annual Australia-US ministerial consultations in Washington opposing “unilateral or coercive change in the status quo” in the East China Sea. 

It also follows a tri-lateral agreement signed with the US and Japan in Bali last month.
“It's certainly a slap in the face for the diplomatic position that Australia, the US and Japan have been taking on this issue,” Rory Medcalf, the director of the international security program at the Lowy Institute, said.

Read More

China’s Move Puts Airspace in Spotlight

By RICK GLADSTONE and MATTHEW L. WALD
 
 China’s proclamation of a new “air defense identification zone,” an obscure aviation term that became the catalyst for escalating military tensions with Japan and the United States this week, has thrown a broader spotlight on the control of international airspace, an issue that has created confusion, and danger, in other places affected by territorial disputes.
Who has the right to fly where has been a historical irritant in relations between China and Vietnam, Panama and Colombia, Japan and Russia, to name a few examples.
Aviation experts say airspace-control arguments are perhaps most acute in Cyprus, the divided Mediterranean island, where rival air traffic controllers on the Greek and Turkish sides do not communicate with each other and can give conflicting flight information to pilots, elevating the risk of collisions.
No international treaties or agreements define the size or the rules of air defense identification zones, known by their initials, A.D.I.Z.
The zones, which originated early in World War II, have been established by more than a dozen countries with maritime borders, most notably the United States and Canada.

The B-52 message

The United States was also responsible for defining the zones claimed by Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, a legacy of the American military role played in the region since the Cold War, and an underlying source of resentment in China that perhaps helps to explain why it has asserted its own zone.
Managed by domestic military and civilian authorities, the zones are much bigger than the internationally recognized boundaries of the countries that proclaim them.
While not legally binding, they require that aircraft intending to enter the zones first provide identification and location information to determine whether they are a threat to national security.
Aircraft that fail to comply may be regarded as hostile, potentially leading to their being forced to land or shot down.
Civilian aviation officials said Wednesday that China’s new zone was just another fact of life international commercial airlines must now take into account in their flight plans and scheduling.
“There have been no delays, disruptions or anything that would impact the traveling public,” said Perry Flint, a spokesman in Washington for the International Air Transport Association, a trade group.
“We continue to monitor the situation closely.”
Others said, however, that China’s new zone was different in some important respects — the most obvious being that it overlaps with Japan’s in an area where both claim sovereignty to the Senkaku islands.
Aircraft traversing that airspace could face a confusing situation.
“The question here is, file the intent with which nation?” Robert Mann, an aviation consultant, said.
“Seems the jury is out about filing to one, the other, or both. It won’t really be an issue until someone’s aircraft is intercepted. Hopefully not.”
The Chinese also imposed requirements that other countries do not, notably that all aircraft — even those that are not flying to a China destination but are simply passing through — provide identification and flight plans.
Secretary of State John Kerry made a point of emphasizing that distinction in his criticism of China’s new zone on Saturday.
“The United States does not apply its A.D.I.Z. procedures to foreign aircraft not intending to enter U.S. national airspace,” he said.
China provided no advance warning of its new zone to the International Civil Aviation Organization, a United Nations specialized agency, based in Montreal, that sets standards and regulations necessary for aviation safety and security.
Anthony Philbin, a spokesman, said in an emailed response to a query that “China was not required to contact I.C.A.O. on this matter and it therefore did not provide us with any notice.”
Some airlines have begun filing plans with China.
Singapore Airlines, which does route flights over the disputed airspace, files its plans with the Japanese authorities but said that since Monday it had “been keeping Chinese authorities informed” of flights through the area, according to a spokesman.
It is rare that commercial airlines become hostages to political disputes, but there are precedents.
In 1983, Korean Air Lines Flight 007 was shot down by a Soviet military jet after flying through a prohibited zone.
All 269 people on board died.

Read More

Air Defence Farce

After Challenges, China Backpedals on Air Zone
By JANE PERLEZ

Protecting the Senkakus

BEIJING — China has permitted rare street protests and sent armadas of fishing boats to show its growing national interest in a small string of islands in the East China Sea.

Earlier this year, the Chinese military locked its radar on a Japanese navy vessel.
Each step seemed like a measured escalation in the long-running territorial dispute, intended to press Japan to negotiate over jurisdiction of the islands. 

But they also seemed calibrated to avoid a sharp international backlash — or to raise expectations too high at home.
But by imposing a new air defense zone over the islands last weekend, Beijing has miscalculated. 

It provoked a quick, pointed challenge from the United States, set off alarm bells among Asian neighbors and created a frenzy of nationalist expression inside China on hopes that the new leadership team in Beijing would push for a decisive resolution of the longstanding dispute.
On Wednesday, after the Pentagon sent two B-52 bombers defiantly cruising around China’s new air defense zone for more than two hours, Beijing appeared to backpedal. 

The overflights went unchallenged, and some civilian airlines ignored China’s new assertion of air rights.
“We will make corresponding responses according to different situations and how big the threat is,” the spokesman at the Foreign Ministry, Qin Gang, said when asked about China’s lack of enforcement against the American planes.
Under President Xi Jinping, China has suggested that it intends to make a more robust defense of its national interests, including in maritime disputes, to match its rising economic and military power. 

But even some Chinese analysts say they wonder if the new leadership team fully anticipated the response to the latest assertion of rights — or had in mind a clear Plan B if it met with strong resistance.
“I believe Xi Jinping and his associates must have predicted the substance of this reaction; whether they underestimated the details of the reaction, I’m not sure,” said Shi Yinhong, an occasional adviser to the government and a professor of international relations at Renmin University.
China does appear determined to escalate the issue of the uninhabited Senkaku islands, as a way of forcing the Japanese to negotiate and give up control of territory that has symbolic and strategic value for both countries. 

In the long term, China has not tried to disguise its goal of weakening the alliance between the United States and Japan and supplanting the United States as the dominant naval power in the Western Pacific.
Beijing is especially frustrated that its previous, more cautious steps to convince Japan of the seriousness of its claim to the islands have not prompted Japan, which administers them, to negotiate in earnest.

But if China has been trying to drive a wedge between Washington and the Japanese government of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, their strategy seems to have backfired, at least for now.
The United States had for months seemed reluctant to get involved or take sides in a dispute that carries so much emotional weight for China. 

And the Obama administration dodged requests by Japanese leaders to take a clearer stance in their favor.
That hesitation seems to have largely vanished since China pronounced it was expanding its hold on the region’s airspace.
With the flyover by the B-52s, the United States has shown it is more willing to work with Japan in opposing China’s efforts to unilaterally force a change in the status quo, even if the United States still takes a neutral stance in the islands dispute itself.

Hours after China declared its new air zone, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel reaffirmed that the United States would stand by its security treaty obligations to aid Japan if it was attacked.
Since Saturday, Japanese leaders have publicly emphasized the close coordination with Washington — largely to reassure their own population, which has felt growing anxiety over China’s increasingly assertive stance.
On Wednesday in Tokyo, the defense minister, Itsunori Onodera, pledged in a phone call with Mr. Hagel to work closely with the United States military by sharing information and coordinating in the surveillance of Chinese activities in the East China Sea, Japan’s Defense Ministry said.
The new United States ambassador to Japan, Caroline Kennedy, said in her first speech since assuming her post, broadcast around the world on CNN, that China’s creation of the air defense zone “only serves to increase tensions in the region.”
The Chinese action also stirred the first official negative comments about China in South Korea since President Park Geun-hye took office this year and forged a closer relationship with Beijing. 

The coordinates of the air defense zone announced by China overlap with South Korea’s own air defense zone in some places and appear created to give China an edge in a separate maritime territorial dispute with South Korea.
“We see competition and conflict in the region deepening,” South Korea’s foreign minister, Yun Byung-se, said Wednesday. 

“Things can take a dramatic turn for the worse if territorial conflicts and historical issues are merged with nationalism.”
The announcement of the air defense zone may also have created problems at home for the leadership in China, where there are expectations among an increasingly nationalist population that the country can live up to its promise of standing up to Japan.
On Chinese social media, a barrage of commentary congratulated the government on the new air defense zone and warned that Beijing should make good on threats by the Defense Ministry that aircraft give notification or face military action.
“If the Chinese military doesn’t do anything about aircraft that don’t obey the commands to identify themselves in the zone, it will face international ridicule,” wrote Ni Fangliu, a historian and an investigative journalist, on his microblog, which has more than two million followers.
The Liberation Army Daily, the official newspaper of China’s military, said in a commentary published before the Chinese government acknowledged the B-52 flights that without strong enforcement, the zone would be just “armchair strategy.”
Despite the risks, Mr. Shi, the government adviser, said that proclaiming the air defense zone was important because it represented China’s first effort to expand its strategic space beyond offshore waters since the establishment of Communist China in 1949.
The response by the United States, he said, amounted to “a negative development for a strong great-power relationship” that China sought between the United States and China.

Read More

China's presence looms amid massive U.S.-Japanese AnnualEx war games

• USS George Washington in huge naval exercise -- AnnualEx 2013 -- off Okinawa
• This year's games held against backdrop of tension after China imposes new air zone

By Paul Armstrong

As the United States prepared to mark Thanksgiving, the centerpiece of the U.S. 7th fleet in the Pacific, the USS George Washington, was deployed off the Japanese island of Okinawa.
USS George Washington, East China Sea -- The deafening roar of state-of-the-art warplanes being catapulted into the air from its huge flight deck signaled that the USS George Washington was back in combat mode after its recent detour to the Philippines to take part in the aid effort in the wake of Super Typhoon Haiyan.
Barely a week on and the 90,000-ton Nimitz-class aircraft carrier is now patrolling waters off the island of Okinawa as part a huge naval exercise -- AnnualEx 2013 -- involving dozens of warships, submarines and aircraft from the U.S. Navy's 7th fleet and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF).
The aim? 

To provide a stern test of their ability to effectively and mutually respond to the defense of Japan or to a regional crisis or contingency situation in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, according to the U.S. Navy.
But this year's war games have taken on an added dimension given the high-pressure atmosphere in the region at present -- they take place in the shadow of a controversial new Air Defense Identification Zone announced by the Chinese last weekend.
Map showing the controversial air defense identification zone in the East China Sea.

This zone, which incorporates among other areas an East China Sea island chain at the center of an acrimonious tug of war between Tokyo and Beijing, requires that all military aircraft in the area must report their flight plans to China, maintain two-way radio and clearly mark their nationalities on the aircraft. 

China has warned it will take "defensive measures" if their orders are ignored.
The commander of the U.S. 7th fleet, Vice Admiral Robert L. Thomas, appeared relaxed about the situation while addressing a group of reporters aboard the USS George Washington. 

He said while China's air defense zone did not appear to be "well thought out" given the overlap with both Japanese and South Korean territorial claims, he did not think U.S. military activity in the region would be negatively affected.
"We are going to continue with our operations in international airspace as we always have," he said.

"It's about international norms, standards, rules and laws. When anybody makes an extreme claim it is really an imperative that the international community can continue to operate in accordance with international law and not be distracted.

"So for us it's 'steady as you go.' Our operations in the East China Sea will continue as they always have."

Japan, which administers the largely uninhabited Senkaku island chain, has described China's move as "a profoundly dangerous act that may cause unintended consequences in the area," while U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said "this unilateral action constitutes an attempt to change the status quo in the East China Sea. Escalatory action will only increase tensions in the region and create risks of an incident."

In recent months, both sides have been involved in a dangerous game of "cat and mouse," prompting fears that any miscalculation could set the two Asian powers on a collision course -- with the United States likely to be dragged into such a conflict to defend its Japanese ally. 

Tokyo says it has twice scrambled fighter jets this month after Chinese aircraft appeared on course to enter its airspace. 

For its part, China lodged a complaint after it said a Japanese warship recently entered waters where the People's Liberation Army (PLA) Navy was holding live-fire drills, noting "the provocative move may have led to unexpected emergencies."
Meanwhile, China's first aircraft carrier, the "Liaoning," set sail this week from its home port of Qingdao in eastern China. 

According to the PLA Navy's website, it will head for the South China Sea to "conduct scientific experiments and military training." 

This course would take it through the East China Sea accompanied by four other warships.
Yet with so many potential flashpoints in the region, Thomas is optimistic that conflict will be avoided. 

He pointed to the professionalism shown by the armed forces on all sides in the region as the basis for this confidence.
"The South Koreans have shown great restraint with regard to North Korea and those severe provocations, while the Japanese Self Defense Force has also been very measured," he said. 

Significantly, he pointed to China's development of a "world class" navy, with a level of professionalism that matches its improving infrastructure.
"The more confident they become in their own capabilities, then this will actually 'depressurize' the situation," he said. 

With F-18 fighters taking off and landing almost every few minutes, it was easy to forget the role the carrier played in the Leyte Gulf more than a week ago.

Many of its fighter jets were flown back to Japan to make room for more helicopters able to ferry in supplies to remote areas of the Philippines in the wake of Super Typhoon Haiyan.
"The ship became a 'lily pad' for relief operations," said the carrier's commander, Rear Admiral Mark Montgomery. 

"This is something we'll train more for," he added, citing the need for a modern navy to be able to adapt to an increasingly diverse range of challenges and missions within its theater of operations.
"It was humbling to be able to take part in the extraordinary humanitarian effort in the Philippines."
Yet the sight of dozens of warships in tight formation in high seas off Japan was another reminder of how serious the U.S. and Japan are taking the threat to regional security -- undeniably their biggest challenge.

Read More