I don't think both sides are arguing about territory this time. They are arguing which side is less 'professional' during the incident.Did anyone here paid any attention to where the recent "radar luminating" incident happened? It is near "Takeshima/Dokdo" islets. It is a disputed islets, therefor the surrounding waters. From either sides, it is in their sovereign waters. Dismissing a potential conflict between the two because they are both US allies (therefor US controlled) is over simplistic. For one reference, look at Turkey and Greece or Britain and Spain.
Of course US will try to mediate and the two would try to calm down for the common purpose (alliance), but none will backdown from the position of sovereign rights. The best would have been neither sides enters the water, but once they are there, radar luminating is the least dangerous and I am sure both sides are willing to do the same.
P.S. there is no reason to remain in an alliance if that alliance is not serving the purpose of territory integrity of the country. NK may be a threat to SK from land, Japan can be equally a threat to SK on the sea.
Let's say you are right that "STIR was doing searching", shouldn't it point its beam on the sea surface rather than higher up in the air to the Japanese plane? To me that looks more "deliberate" than "unprofessional" because it is a mistake too simple. Another thing is "unprofessional" is used frequently in contested waters and airspaces that makes it more like a cover word for "your fault to be here in the first place", example is the "PLAN's unprofessional acts in SCS against "Freedom of Navigation"". My bottom line is that if there was no dispute of the rock and its surrounding water, there would not have been TWO countries competing administrative rescue operation. The owner country will invite the other when help is needed, and the invited party would not have complained at all if their plane got some radar beam.I don't think both sides are arguing about territory this time. They are arguing which side is less 'professional' during the incident.
At first glance the Korean side might be on the wrong side, but after taking a look at what the STIR 2.4 radar does, there might be merit with the Korean excuse. The capabilities of STIR 2.4 goes beyond being just a fire control radar that it includes both search and track, including early detection of targets. STIR 2.4 has much more power at 220kw and search range than the mast head G band search radar the KDX-1 uses, which is an MW08 search radar with 50kw in comparison. This is further incentive that the STIR 2.4 is going to be used for search and track while scan.
The whole thing will blow over, and it looks more and more like a misunderstanding.
However it may not be wise to illuminate a patrol plane in the first place with a fire control radar, even with one that has multiple role capability. If this was a PLAN plane that was shone upon, that would be god send because the PLAN plane would have acquired the STIR's waveform to add to the SIGINT database, one step to make it easier to jam in the future. It so happens that there might be a PLAN Y-9 ELINT that patrols the area within that time frame.