East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

[Cheng]

It looks like Australia is getting the verbal treatment by China.

And this is during a Strategic and Economic Dialogue with China, that the Australians have been trying to establish for years.


Angry China rebukes Julie Bishop over East China Sea dispute
December 7, 2013

JULIE Bishop has been personally criticised by China's high powered foreign ministry for intervening in the East China Sea dispute.

In public remarks at the start of a strategic dialogue meeting between the two foreign ministers in Beijing last night, Wang Yi said China believed Australia was wrong in its criticism of China's new defence zone established over the Diaoyu Islands

More:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

===
Background below

China vents its anger at Australia's stand on airspace rights
Date
December 3, 2013

China is angry at Australia, and when the doors closed on the meeting room in Canberra on Friday, its delegates let the anger show. The third annual Australia-China Forum was designed to strengthen the relationship. Instead, the Chinese used it to pressure Australia.

Read more:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Air Force Brat]

I hope you're right, and only hope to see both sides to work together to move forward. There's nothing that can't be solved.

In this sense, I hope to see both sides of the government to stop antagonizing each other, while something be done to dissolve the anti-Japanese sentiments amongst the Chinese public.

You guys can say that the anti-Japanese sentiment stems from what the Japanese government did, but to be honest, even if that's so, we are all forgetting that a lot of people don't solely zero in on only the source of their grudges, and also not as rational, so they will naturally inflict the hate towards the entire ethnic group, which in this sense will be racism. This means while the Japanese government is to blame, they will also blame the Japaneuse people for some reason. In addition, there's no guarantee that the sentiment disappears as soon as the Japanese government makes the right actions, so even if Japan does all the right things, a lot of people will continue to hold onto the outdated stuffs. (this is why reconciliation is the only way forward.)

Very well stated air, it takes a wise man to be able to get past the emotions of the conflict, to understand the issues at hand as well as recognize the concerns of the "other party", then and only then are you able to strike an equitable and mutually "just or right" decision. There is little doubt that many will continue to hold on to their racial "identity", if you the (the generic you,--not you air), continue to see yourself as a "VICTIM", no one will ever be able to make enough concessions to make you happy, if you see yourself as a "Fellow", and a big boy and come to the table "looking for an equitable and just resolution, then if you come away from the table with "less" than you had hoped for, but an "appreciation" of the other partys concerns or claims, you have been "successful in your negotiations.

There are many in the US who have made a living convincing others that they "were, and are, VICTIMs", and that they had been and were being "wronged", if you convince yourself that everybody owes you something, and that you have never been treated "fairly", then you will never recognize "justice". Life is never going to be "fair", but "justice" can be served, and can bring with it, a sense of purpose and satisfaction that give us a much healthier outlook on life.

I note with some sense of humor, that many of the intial respondants on this thread dedicated to the ADIZ and its implications for China and Japan stated that its purpose was to drive Japan to negotiate with China, those same respondants are now stating that would accomplish nothing because???????? hummh???????? brat

 

[Jeff Head]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODERATOR INSTRUCTION <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
​

This thread is about the Chinese ADIZ. Keep the discussion focused on that, not the Island dispute. No personal attacks. No national rhetoric on either side pointed at the other over the island. Such behavior is unprofessional, and this thread is not about that island dispute anyway.

Everyone has given both sides of the Island dispute...ad nausium...so no more on this thread. Posts about the Island dispute will be deleted on this thread henceforth. If it still does not stop, the thread will be closed permanently.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>> END MODERATOR INSTRUCTIN <<<<<<<<<<<<<<
​

I honestly felt that because of the Japanese announcement, that that would ease the entire "dispute," issue. Clearly, I was wrong. In as much as any discussion between the PRC and Japan goes on over the ADIZ, that is fair game to discuss on this thread as long as you leave politics out of it...but future discussion regarding the Island dispute itself will be removed from this thread.

Please adhere to this condition for this thread. Do not reply to this post.

Thank you.

 

[duncanidaho]

cancel this post please

 

[FarkTypeSoldier]

It looks like Australia is getting the verbal treatment by China.

And this is during a Strategic and Economic Dialogue with China, that the Australians have been trying to establish for years.


Angry China rebukes Julie Bishop over East China Sea dispute
December 7, 2013

JULIE Bishop has been personally criticised by China's high powered foreign ministry for intervening in the East China Sea dispute.

In public remarks at the start of a strategic dialogue meeting between the two foreign ministers in Beijing last night, Wang Yi said China believed Australia was wrong in its criticism of China's new defence zone established over the Diaoyu Islands

More:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

===
Background below

China vents its anger at Australia's stand on airspace rights
Date
December 3, 2013

China is angry at Australia, and when the doors closed on the meeting room in Canberra on Friday, its delegates let the anger show. The third annual Australia-China Forum was designed to strengthen the relationship. Instead, the Chinese used it to pressure Australia.

Read more:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In the first place, Australia shouldn't have voice it's concerns. The ADIZ does not and will not have a concern in Australia's affairs.

Could be a pressure from US side to use the Aussie as a test bed for China's reaction and this is the result.

I hope it won't strain both sides relationship.

 

[Jeff Head]

In the first place, Australia shouldn't have voice it's concerns. The ADIZ does not and will not have a concern in Australia's affairs.

Could be a pressure from US side to use the Aussie as a test bed for China's reaction and this is the result.

I hope it won't strain both sides relationship.

I believe Australia has made it's criticisms known about the ADIZ, and China clearly does not like it.

In my personal opinion, the Chinese ADIZ...as long as it is directed specifically as identifying potential threats approaching its coast line and/or sensitive facilities...is a perfectly natural and not an unusual thing to do.

Operated in that fashion...just like the US, Japan, South Korea, and many other nations operate them...they are not a threat or hindrance to normal operations, commercial or military of any other nation that do not pose a threat. As long as the PRC operates them in this way, and makes it clear that that is its intent...other nations should accept it and let it lay.

Now, this would mean that established commercial corridors through international air space should be respected with out demanding flight plans and transponders...and that other nations, as long as their intent is to abide normal practice should not feel compelled to give them.

Same goes for normal military exercises in international airspace.

However, if an aircraft, or an exercise, intends to drive hard towards the Chinese mainland, they should expect to be contacted, warned off, and intercepted. IMHO, that's just a reality of operating around other nations with modern jet aircraft.

 

[airsuperiority]

It looks like Australia is getting the verbal treatment by China.

And this is during a Strategic and Economic Dialogue with China, that the Australians have been trying to establish for years.


Angry China rebukes Julie Bishop over East China Sea dispute
December 7, 2013

JULIE Bishop has been personally criticised by China's high powered foreign ministry for intervening in the East China Sea dispute.

In public remarks at the start of a strategic dialogue meeting between the two foreign ministers in Beijing last night, Wang Yi said China believed Australia was wrong in its criticism of China's new defence zone established over the Diaoyu Islands

More:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

===
Background below

China vents its anger at Australia's stand on airspace rights
Date
December 3, 2013

China is angry at Australia, and when the doors closed on the meeting room in Canberra on Friday, its delegates let the anger show. The third annual Australia-China Forum was designed to strengthen the relationship. Instead, the Chinese used it to pressure Australia.

Read more:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The last article is very interesting. Thanks

 

[i.e.]

In the first place, Australia shouldn't have voice it's concerns. The ADIZ does not and will not have a concern in Australia's affairs.

Could be a pressure from US side to use the Aussie as a test bed for China's reaction and this is the result.

I hope it won't strain both sides relationship.

Australia's Own ADIZ rules are very similar to those of Chinese ADIZ rules.

in that all aircraft not just those who passes through needs to ID themselves to Australia.

see my post here :
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/air-force/east-china-sea-air-defense-id-zone-24-6653.html#post256982

talking about hypocritical.

 

[i.e.]

I have to say:

I am really surprised that there is no concrete frontal rebuttal by specialists on why "ALL ID rule" is with in a country's right in ADIZ, a point of much contention by US and Japan, from china, instead we have barely laughable spins from Japan and US media run amok.

One thing concerns me abit is that Chinese MFA officials are usually trained as language specialist at first, then foreign studies. then go on as staff, then a foreign posting, and so on so forth up the bureaucratic ladder. They are not as diverse as they would be in other agencies in the west.

Further more the chinese bureaucratic system does not really have a tradition of self motivated horizontal communication, for example a MFA staff at a lower tier will not on its own initative talk to another expert at MofDefense or CAAC regarding the intricate specialty of Air traffic control rules, unless directed by their boss.
briefs are prepared by lower to going up higher. not horizontally.

when they get their briefings and talking points and make a statement, I get a feeling they do not talk technicalities as much as they should.

For example, the spokesperson at MFA/MoD could very much get together a comprehensive brief on
1) why the "All ID" rule is needed (alot of good reason, for one, newly deployed P-8 Poseidon on a radar screen looks alot like a 737-800 airliners with its transponder gone bad).;
2) on which country besides china has similar rules(there are alot of them with different rules, including australia)
3) and how that will increase maritime and airspace safety. (avoid mis-ID and mis-interception of civil aircraft)

Instead we just get repeating statements on " it is safe ".

they could do a better job.

Just my two cent from my impressions with them and from the news press.

 

[i.e.]

Now, this would mean that established commercial corridors through international air space should be respected with out demanding flight plans and transponders...and that other nations, as long as their intent is to abide normal practice should not feel compelled to give them.
.

If you fly through Australia's ADIZ you need to ID yourself regardless if you are inbound towards a Australian Destination.

read this :

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

page 321.

,
Why the double standard?
so, is Australia in more of a danger than China? that it needs more special rules on ADIZ ? or is it that japan and US could not find a real reason to object so they are nit picking.