China accuses U.S. of serious military provocation


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Provocation. Assertion. Words.

What is China gonna do about it? Nothing. So long as the US has the ability to stop her.

And that is a good thing.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

@Black Sabbath "the US has the ability to stop her".

Even the USA must show respect to sovereignty of countries.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )


Like China does?

Look: the whole concept of "sovereignty" Is from the West. Invented by Europe, and currently upheld by US power. So, please, don't glibly use respect for sovereignty and Chine is the same paragraph...

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Like Russia does?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

@Black Sabbath"Invented by Europe".

It doesn't matter who invented. The whole world implemented the principle.

@Madverts "Like Russia does?"

I dunno. When did Russia violate Chinese borderline?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Sovereignty does not apply on those islands since they are ARTIFICIAL man made islands in OPEN WATERS or worse on other Nations EEZs. PRC unilaterally claimed them as their own based on BS History so NO US nor any other nations for that matter requires to show any respect towards PRC concerning those MAN MADE ISLANDS.

9 ( +9 / -0 )


Absolutely right! And that is EXACTLY the point the U.S. (and Australia, with its recent spy plane flight) is making. That they do NOT recognise PRC's sovereignty and, therefore, are free to fly through this airspace without PRC's permission or even notification.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

If anyone is raising tensions it is the Chinese with their attempts to seize control of vast areas of the South China Sea. It doesn't belong to them and they have no right to prevent others from sailing through, or flying over, the area.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

The pot calling the kettle black again.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Madverts "Like Russia does?"

I dunno. When did Russia violate Chinese borderline?

As you say the principle applies worldwide...So, Russian violations of sovereignty: Ukraine, pretty obviously, Turkey, Estonia, Latvia, Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

. . . . so if the island was never constructed and the B-52 flew "over" that area of "water" the South China Sea, would that violate China's sovereignty?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The actions by the U.S. side constitute a serious military provocation

And of course China would never do such a thing. The hypocrites and troublemakers of Asia.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

One special bomb would eliminate the artificial outcropping.

1 ( +3 / -2 )


Donald J. Trump
4 ( +5 / -1 )

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, artificial islands do not receive any maritime entitlements. Low-tide elevations are legally part of the seabed, are not subject to sovereignty claims, and do not generate any maritime entitlements in their own right.

Under Article 121, islands must be “naturally formed,” so China cannot hope to legally upgrade its reefs by transforming them into artificial islands. (They may reclaim land - but they cannot apply maritime sovereignty entitlements over it as it is an artificial island. Whether they own the reefs there in the first place is another story.)


Regime of islands

1) An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.

2) Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory.

3) Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.

China has no sovereignty there; they would lose in court.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

So according to China logic 'intrusion' in space they unlawfully claim is military provocation. Then laying claim to the mentioned space is what? Peace-loving provocation?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

"Beijing, which regards Taiwan as part of its territory,"

Then why does Taiwan still have an independent government and the Taiwan dollar?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

This doesn't even pass the laugh test. In the 1940s some Chinese map maker that was unrecognized by the Chinese government made a map that showed the nine-ten- whatever dash line that included what the Chinese are claiming today as "sovereign". It wasn't until 1972 that a UN survey showed the potential for rich natural resources in the south china sea did China even pay attention to their so called "sovereign" right to the area. As we write the Chinese are trying to rewrite their own history by outlawing official maps they themselves have made that show no such sovereign right. Total BS.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

From territorial sovereignty issues to product and intellectual property and trademarks, the Chinese dictatorship needs to be taught to play by the rules of the international community. If that takes humiliation or even a bloody nose, so be it.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Good job USA. If China really want to prove that those islands are theirs, then just prove it in ICJ.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

We can thank Jimmy Carter during the cold war for the US-Taiwan relationship. Hung them out in the wind to avoid Soviet era tensions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Also China logic, any and all shallow waters in current international waters is up for grabs for land reclaimation projects allowing a sovereign territory. How ecologically destructive and absurd.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

China is going with the "possession is nine tenth of the law" theory here. Take it. Make it. . Claim it. And it's ours.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The response from China is no different from what all other nations have been doing, make an issue to suite their agenda. The flyover action itself has several considerations.

One is of course a warning to China, but with a definite knowledge and understanding that nothing will change China's actions and may even make it worse.

The interesting thing is that Mr. Obama is "allowing"all this to occur. From selling to Taiwan to the flyover (mistake or not), they "distract" from the main issues that face the world, specifically terrorism that is also a "cover" for the religious and racial war that is being raged. Any confrontation with Russia or China is a very meaningful and powerful "distraction" from what is really happening behind the scenes.

It certainly also "divides" the US military forces into more than one "region". Modern armaments and technology "cannot" in any way "replace" the reduction in effectiveness due to "reduced" and "divided" force.

Over the past 7 years, he has "reduced" the Navy and all that which has "real" impact in "securing" the USA and in the same light, the rest of the world. He has effectively "divided" the entire world and allowed "power play" that forces each nation to start alliances which are "designed" to cause "conflicts" within each country and "divide" the people within each country that effectively "weaken" that country.

Within that, Mr. Obama appears to "want" conflict with China and send forces to the Pacific. From the almost planned "security breaches" that gave technology and advantage to China and Russia with almost intentional "inattention" to Asia except to Indonesia where he has visited several times to honor his parents that were "radicals", allowing China to advance, N. Korea to grow militarily, S. Korea to go against its benefactor, Japan, and "ignore" the plight of Philippines losing their islands.

But if indeed a conflict starts, US forces will "definitely" be "divided" and "Weakened".

The other nations must be "aware" of that. That is probably why Taiwan (questionable) is rearming, and the other SE Asian nations are forming "alliances".

Wars on two fronts?

One is a religious and racial war that has NO territorial bounds. The other..? economic, territorial, political, ..? war..?

But all that is already happening. Sorry... but if one looks at the total world picture...

There is "definite design" to all this and a "scenario"...

What do you think?

Have you tried connecting the dots?

Chin may be "playing" right into that "design".

Who will benefit from all this?

Nothing happens by chance... does it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites