The larger issue is that of civilian vs military FON.
Now, I'm not sure exactly what your underlying premises are (to be honest the bulk of your writing makes it difficult to string out individual premises), but it seems that your conclusion is simply that it is logically, philosophically and legally incongruent to divide FON into "civilian" vs "military" in a practical or legal sense.
However, that is not actually the discussion I was having in my previous post, though I can understand how it may be easy to mix the two up given I wasn't being very precise.
I was talking about FON in the context of the SCS FON narrative, which has been portrayed as one where the FON of civilian shipping is under threat and which must be protected. This isn't a question about law or philosophy on any sort of large or global scale, it is about relating specific actions to the SCS FON narrative.
The reason why I believe it is necessary to consider civilian FON vs military FON in this specific context to begin with, is because the narrative has been portrayed in a way where it seems like civilian FON has been emphasized as under threat due to either past actions by certain nations or suspicions that certain nations might seek to obstruct it, but where there is actually a lack of evidence to suggest it. Thus I believe it is a significant misportrayal of actual past events as well as the intentions and perceived threats and interests of the various actors involved.
If the narrative had been portrayed in a more wide manner and spoken by media and govt and military officials in a broader sense to acknowledge the lack of past evidence regarding civilian navigation as being under threat, and acknowledged the fact that past navigation obstructions were in relation to military ships or aircraft -- putting it another way, if the narrative was clear that the reason FON emerged as an issue was because of past incidents involving military aircraft and vessels -- then I could agree that it would not be as necessary to differentiate between civilian vs military in the SCS context.
tldr: the reason I'm emphasizing the need to separate civilian and military FON in the context of the SCS is because of the narrative portrayal by media, and military and govt officials as presenting civilian FON in the SCS as seemingly under threat with significant past indicators to believe so, when in reality the past indicators point virtually exclusively to military FON being obstructed only. Therefore, conflating both civilian and military FON in the context of SCS has the great potential to present a distorted picture of what is practically going on in the SCS