 |
| Image: Flickr User - byeangel |
By Roncevert Almond
A curious case of mistrust and misunderstanding in the East China Sea
On July 25, 2015, Lao Airlines Flight QV916 was scheduled to depart from Pusan, South Korea on an inaugural commercial flight to Vientiane, Laos. The projected path of Flight QV916 (see Figure 1) crossed disputed airspace above the East China Sea, passing through China’s controversial air defense identification zone (the “ECS ADIZ”), established in November 2013.
The Lao Airlines Airbus A320 lifted off at approximately 8:10 a.m. from Gimhae International Airport (PUS) and flew towards its destination, Wattay International Airport (VTE). As reported by Air Transport World, Chinese air traffic controllers instructed Flight QV916 to turn back just as the civil aircraft approached the ECS ADIZ. Lao Airlines complied and returned to PUS.
Some observers have interpreted this chain of events as a case of first instance wherein China was able to effectively impose the ECS ADIZ on a non-compliant foreign commercial flight. An ADIZ is an area of airspace, adjacent to but beyond the national airspace and territory of the state, where aircraft are identified, monitored, and controlled in the interest of national security.
Even as many countries, including the United States, have refused to recognize the ECS ADIZ, they have permitted their national air carriers to comply with the security zone’s rules in order to maintain the safety and order of international civil aviation. China claims that over 50 foreign air carriers have adhered to the ECS ADIZ. Notable exceptions include Japanese air carriers, as Tokyo has instructed its commercial airlines to defy the ECS ADIZ.
Of course, Laos cannot be compared to Japan: Laos is not a major power with an overlapping territorial claim in the East China Sea. Nevertheless, the argument is being made that Flight QV916 represents a critical precedent and dangerous trend in the Asia-Pacific.
But was China able to bully a weaker state into complying with the ECS ADIZ? Is Flight QV916 reflective of Beijing’s increasingly aggressive posture towards neighboring states as witnessed in the East and South China Seas? Should the actions of Lao Airlines, a flag carrier of Laos, be interpreted as opinion juris and Vientiane’s acceptance of the ECS ADIZ?
Based on Beijing’s official response, the reported facts and circumstances of Flight QV916, and applicable international law, the best answer to each of these questions is “no.” The case of Flight QV916 is more likely attributable to established and mundane principles underpinning global aviation, and not evidence of a landmark moment under the contentious ECS ADIZ.
Read the full story at The Diplomat