 |
| P-8A Poseidon (Image: Wiki Commons) |
By Butch Bracknell
They would be delinquent in their sovereignty if they didn’t.
The most recent skirmish between U.S. and People’s Republic of China (PRC) military forces occurred on August 19, when a Chinese J-11 fighter jet conducted reckless and confrontational maneuvers in close proximity to a U.S. Navy P-8 anti-submarine warfare aircraft almost certainly engaged in intelligence gathering activities targeting PRC military forces.
The PRC aircraft’s aggressive maneuvering, which resulted in no damage to either aircraft but was illegal under international law, was reminiscent of the April 2001 collision (PDF) caused by a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) F-8 fighter’s aggressive maneuvers close to an American EP-3 reconnaissance plane. The latter incident resulted in substantial damage to the American airplane, PRC detention of the American crew for 11 days, and almost certain compromise of troves of collected electronic intelligence. In December, a PRC naval vessel intercepted the American warship USS Cowpens in international waters, seemingly in retaliation for tracking nearby Chinese military vessels.
To prevent such incidents in the future, one scholar has proposed an elegantly simple, yet preposterous, solution: stop collecting intelligence against China. Following this prescription would not only be strategically foolish; it would be an abdication of the U.S. government’s duty to its citizens.
In an essay so biased it might easily have been written by the PRC itself, Chen Dingding lays out three arguments for why American intelligence activities over international waters should cease. First, he attacks the American position that gathering intelligence in the airspace over international waters is legal under international law, observing that because something is lawful “does not mean it is ok [sic].” He posits that the test should be whether “spying activities hurt or damage other countries’ national sovereignty or security.” Where that question is answered affirmatively, the law should prevent the activity.
Read the full story at The Diplomat