Peak Oil is You
Warning: Trying to access array offset on false in /var/www/peakoil.com/public_html/wp-content/plugins/random-image-widget/random_image.php on line 138
Warning: Trying to access array offset on false in /var/www/peakoil.com/public_html/wp-content/plugins/random-image-widget/random_image.php on line 139
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on November 30, 2013
China scrambles fighter jets towards US and Japan aircraft in disputed air zone
Escalation of response in South China Sea is the first time China is known to have sent military jets in zone alongside foreign craft.
China scrambled fighter jets to investigate US and Japanese aircraft flying through its new air defence zone over the East China Sea on Friday as the regional clamour over the disputed airspace escalated.
The ministry of defence announced the move, which is the first time China is known to have sent military aircraft into the zone alongside foreign flights, stepping up its response to the challenge after its unilateral establishment of the zone. It previously said it had monitored US, Japanese and South Korean aircraft and had flown routine patrols in the area on Thursday.
The ministry’s statement said that two US reconnaissance aircraft and 10 Japanese early warning, reconnaissance and fighter planes had entered the zone.
The airforce “monitored throughout the entire flights, made timely identification and ascertained the types,” defence ministry spokesman Shen Jinke told the official China News Service.
The Pentagon has yet to respond to the statement. Japanese officials declined to confirm details of any flights, saying that routine missions were continuing.
The move came as South Korea‘s Yonhap news agency said officials were discussing how to expand its own air zone.
In Taiwan, legislators issued an unusual joint statement chiding Ma Ying-jeou’s government for its tempered response to China’s announcement of the zone and urging it to lodge a tough protest with Beijing. The government later said it would convey its “stern position”.
Earlier the European Union’s foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton expressed its concern that the zone had contributed to tensions in the region, saying that the EU called on all sides to exercise caution and restraint.
Foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang urged the EU to handle the situation “objectively and rationally”, adding: “European countries can have air defence identification zones. Why can’t China?”
While such zones are common, China’s is controversial because it includes the skies over islands known as the Senkaku in Japan and Diaoyu in China, which are the subject of a long-running territorial dispute, and overlaps zones established by Japan and South Korea. There has also been concern over China’s warning that it would take unspecified “emergency defensive measures” if aircraft did not comply.
Taylor Fravel, an expert on regional security at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said establishment of the zone increased the potential for an incident in the air that could spark a larger crisis. But he said tensions might ease if China continued to clarify the nature of the zone and how it intended to deal with unidentified aircraft, especially those flying through the zone but not heading toward China.
“China has always chafed at Japan’s adiz [air defence identification zone], which at some points is less than 150km from China … China probably wants to level the playing field with Japan and increase the pressure on Tokyo regarding the disputed islands,” he said.
Japan does not acknowledge that ownership of the islands is disputed. The US does not have a position on their sovereignty but recognises Japan’s administrative control and has said they are covered by the joint security pact.
Many analysts think China is laying down a long-term marker, but did not anticipate the forceful response it has received from the US as well as Japan.
“The Chinese government is not going to concede the substance,” said June Teufel Dreyer of the University of Miami. “When circumstances are more conducive, they will try to enforce it more strictly in the future. This is a pattern we have noticed for decades.”
Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt, Asia-Pacific director at the US Institute of Peace, said the creation of its zone had its own momentum. “The danger in the announcement is that it empowers the People’s Liberation Army, maritime agencies and netizens [internet users] to hold the government to account,” she said. “Now people are transgressing the zone, they have to make it look to the domestic audience like they are serious. They have given birth to internal pressures.”
Behind the immediate issues lie regional concerns about China’s growing strength, Beijing’s unease at Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe’s determination to strengthen his country’s forces, and questions about the US presence in and commitment to the region. US vice-president Joe Biden will visit Beijing, Tokyo and Seoul on a trip beginning this Sunday which is likely to be dominated by discussions of the zone.
“I think the only problem is Japan because it has taken a confrontational policy. They want clashes and to drag America into military containment against China,” said Yan Xuetong, a foreign relations scholar at Tsinghua University.
“The international community has ignored the roots of this … Abe has clearly stated that his fundamental goal is to revise the constitution [under which Japan renounces war] and he needs security tensions to legitimise his efforts.”
Tokyo’s military ambitions are particularly sensitive because many in China say Japan has not adequately recognised or atoned for its brutal occupation.
19 Comments on "China scrambles fighter jets towards US and Japan aircraft in disputed air zone"
BillT on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 1:36 am
Payback is a bitch!
The US cannot ‘contain’ China. The US is now a toothless dog, barking at the huge dragon growing next door. Japan is in even worse position than it was in WW2. It has no oil/fuel to do anything if the supply is cut off. No resources of any amount to make anything with. All it has is that toothless dog, a radioactive island and huge debt.
Interesting times…
MrEnergyCzar on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 2:50 am
Here’s a short video regarding the potential oil war with China, interesting perspectives:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plIBDxkc4gI
Stilgar on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 4:42 am
Guess who the next big dog on the block is? It was bound to happen sooner or later; China flexing their new found power. Should get much more interesting in the years ahead as energy sources get harder to find and more expensive to extract.
DC on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 6:25 am
Its the US that keeps goading its ‘allies'(read satraps) , South Korea, Japan, The Philippines, into creating confrontations over imaginary lines over the open water. The end goal?, start a (new) fire somewhere else,just in case the ones in the ME were not enough, then stand back and tell everyone involved the US is having a sale on matches and gas-o-line.
Since the the make believe global war *of* terror fable is starting to wear a little thin, amerika desperately needs a cast a new villain of the world#1
I mean, the choices are pretty thin.
Russia, despite ceaseless provocation from the US and its Nato lackies-still, to its credit, wont take the bait.
Threat to world:Zero
Arab ‘terrorists’? LoL! the ‘terrorists’ are pretty much ALL on the US’s payroll. The people that really would strike at the US are mostly too poor and have had their nations wrecked to do anything about it. Mostly though, they would just be happy if the US went away and left them alone.
Threat to world:minimal
The Axis of Evil? Remember them? Pretty much a bust since the 1/3 of its ‘membership’ spent a decade under a brutal US military occupation and lost over a million citizens AND lost control of its oil to western corporations. Both North Korea and Iran have no real dealings, much less an ‘axis’. The only thing they share in common is they are under permanent siege by the Us and its satraps.
Threat to world:Zero
That leaves China, no one around has the size or red scare factor like China does. Sure, the fact that they make amerikas salad shooters and Ijunks is awkward, unlike Russia which hasnt whored itself out to US corporations. But amerika cant be choosey. Hell, the pentagon is probably wishing that peaceful aliens would land tomorrow so the US could turn them into enemies.
Threat to world:minimal, possibly zero as well.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/11/29/diplomacy-via-b52s/
*Long article, but worth the read.
peakyeast on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 11:12 am
I wonder if a war between US and China is just what we need?
The eradication of china would remove quite a bit of pressure on both mineral and biological usage in the area.
The only better situation would be china and india mutually destroying each others – but i suppose we cant get a best case scenario.
Anything is better than trying to continue BAU until the wars breaks out anyway.
BillT on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 11:41 am
Ah peaky, but China would NOT be eradicated. Likely, in the first few days, the US would crumble under the crush of all those trillions of worthless dollars flooding the banks of the US, the collapse of the internet from cyber warfare from the Chinese, and the revolt of the US population when the ATMs no longer work and people are starving.
BillT on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 11:42 am
Also, peaky, if the US went down and took the rest of the West with it, there would be plenty of resources for the rest. After all, the West (13%) uses 60% of the world’s resources. Spread that among the other 87% and there would be plenty.
DC on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 1:31 pm
The eradication of the US would remove quite a bit of pressure on both mineral and biological useage world-wide.
The only better situation would be the US and Israel both destroying themselves-but I suppose we cant get a best case scenario.
rockman on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 1:44 pm
“The eradication of china would remove quite a bit of pressure on both mineral and biological usage in the area.”
Hmm…have we forgotten that China has nuclear weapons that can easily reach CA let alone Japan? Is there any doubt they would use those weapons if they thought their “eradication” was at hand? This isn’t Hitler invading Poland while the rest of the world just watched. This is a potential enemy that has the capability of destroying the US economy in a matter of hours. Given the apparent US escalation I have to wonder what sort of assurances the Pentagon has given the President there is ZERO POSSIBILTY of this happening. After all what POTUS would risk nuclear war if there was even a very small chance of such a possibility? Maybe the Chinese could send just a small warning shot to get our attention…like a small yield nuke in downtown Tokyo.
I don’t consider myself an expert on the current Chinese political landscape. But I do know a bit of history. Such as this wouldn’t be the first time China took a massive military action against US forces. IOW do all the youngster here know that China had already once chosen to go to war with a nuke armed US? If not just search “Korean war”
mo on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 2:14 pm
You guys seem to forget that any nuclear exchange any where would probably escalate and for those of us who are left, if any, will probably wish a Nike had exploded right over their heads. No kind of happy ending here like that 70s book “Down to a sunless sea”
BillT on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 2:36 pm
mo, did you know that we have already lived through 2,050+ nuclear explosions since WW2? True, only 2 hit cities, but…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY
PrestonSturges on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 3:38 pm
These must be some of the Chinese government’s paid bloggers posting this childish wanking, because I refuse to believe there are live people who are actually that stupid.
PrestonSturges on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 3:53 pm
“……I don’t consider myself an expert on the current Chinese political landscape. But I do know a bit of history. Such as this wouldn’t be the first time China took a massive military action against US forces. IOW do all the youngster here know that China had already once chosen to go to war with a nuke armed US? If not just search “Korean war…..”
That was Mao, who also destroyed China several times. His personal brand of insanity is hardly representative of the Chinese culture he sought to eradicate.
Bob Inget on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 5:40 pm
Still fascinated that the reason four of five nations are willing to war over these ‘rock out-croppings’ is NEVER mentioned. It’s as if reporting motive
would somehow worsen effects of crime.
This dispute is a matter for the courts,
not which side is tougher.
PrestonSturges on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 5:43 pm
not sure what “victory” would look like since any Chinese platforms would be subject to random attacks pretty much forever. Obviously, only a negotiated treaty would gain them anything.
Feemer on Sat, 30th Nov 2013 7:50 pm
A war between China and the US means both our economies collapse. China makes all our shit, and we buy all of it. China also holds $1.1+ Trillion of our debt, so a war between us would likely end with us not paying that. The nuclear issue is very alarming, and hopefully nukes are never used, although I believe they will be. America though, cannot survive a war like WWII. People cut back on everything, they had rations, were limited to only 2 pairs of shows a year, etc. Today any cutback would not only destroy our consumerism based economy but people wouldn’t have it. Its not the 1940’s people aren’t patriotic, they aren’t tough anymore. Europe will never be at war with itself again. Why is that? because Germany’s, England’s and France’s economies are so interdependent on one another, a war would destroy them all. That is what we should do with China.
mo on Sun, 1st Dec 2013 12:48 am
BillT I do know that. But that was over a period of years, I’d hate to see what would happen if they all went off in a short period of time
BillT on Sun, 1st Dec 2013 1:30 am
mo, true. However, it appears that the elite believe that surviving a nuclear exchange is possible. The Us has already taken the option of first nuclear strike if the Emperor decrees it.
John Orr on Sun, 1st Dec 2013 11:33 pm
PrestonSturges….u are totally right, there would be no winner without an agreement…even the little man can be a terrorist!!!!