Pentagon says Chinese vessels harassed U.S. ship

[Hunter]

Kinda funny to see China laying claim to international waters.

Actualy they are claiming for Exclusive Economic Zone which according international agreement spreads national legislation of ashore country 200 miles away to sea.
The area of South-China sea is disputed by several nations.

• Malaysia: Part of the state of Sabah (also claimed by the Philippines);
• Philippines: Part of Palawan province;
• People's Republic of China: Part of the Paracels, Spratlys, and Zhongsha Islands Authority, Hainan province;
• Republic of China: Part of Kaohsiung municipality
• Vietnam: Part of Khanh Hoa Province;
• Brunei: Claims Louisa Reef as an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)[2];

Spratly islands map showing occupied features marked with the flags of countries occupying them.
Philippines
Taiwan/ROC
Vietnam
Malaysia
China/PRC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands

It is not a problem for international shipping and air lines, since they are established by international agreements and have international status even in territorial whaters.
The problem is with US which doesn't respect Parcels, Spratlys ets as islands, as islands owned by People's Republic of China and the other, neither UN approved international agreements launching provocative missions in zones other nations assume their own. Actualy what we see is the begging of competition between China and US for influence zones in Pacific region which will boost in this century.

[JALU3]

Ah, the Spratly Island Group, has reared it's ugly head yet again.

However, these islands are far to the south of the events where the USNS Impeccable and Victorious were harassed, and followed.

Those Islands have been in dispute, in some cases well before WWII, between the different legal entities in the region. Some of the Nations claim only part of the island group, while others make claims on it in its entirety. Last I had read on it, there was a moritorium on making active claims, and that they were going to use ASEAN as the forum which to work out the disagreements. Either way. There are disputing claims, all questionable to the others concerned parties, and the US has only stated that they hope that it comes to a peaceful conclusion without siding with any particular countries claims. Therefore, you are right to some extent, that the US doesn't recognize anyones claims on any particular island, so it can remain politically neutral in the matter.

Like I said, the events regarding the two US flagged vessels in International Waters, is unconnected to the PRCs (and other countries) claims to the Spratly and Parcel Island Groups.

Even if we are talking about EEZs, an EEZ is an are of extended regulation of vessel in regards to the exploitation of the marine fisheries and materials that originate from the seabed underneath it, and doesn't stop foreign flagged vessels from sailing within it when they aren't doing either of the two mentioned. Imagine if that was the case where EEZs were treated as Territorial Waters; that would be rediculous, and laughable at face value.

By the way, there is a Harpoon Scenario that pits the 1990s PLAN against the other regional nation's navies in a combined force over the PRC forcing its claim by armed annexation. It's interesting as you have to manuever around those small islands, there is very little aircraft involved, and the largest size vessel of any significant combat capability is in the size of a frigate.

So lets not bring up matters in the region that are completely unrelated.

[Hunter]

owever, these islands are far to the south of the events where the USNS Impeccable and Victorious were harassed, and followed.So lets not bring up matters in the region that are completely unrelated.

News said the accident took plays within 100 milies to south of Hainan island Thus acording to this map with each grid line marking ~60 miles distance it should be somewhere in deeper waters between the continent and Spratly islands. Am I wrong?
I posted this map just to illustrate that PRC reaction isn't connected to territorial waters rater than EZZ. But it isn't very important too since China uses this claim just to formalaze reason to keep USN aways from Hainan base and nearby testing area, one shouldn't consider this reaction as just result of penetration in EZZ.
But as I have posted above, I suppose the event is much more connected to 2 PLCN SSBNs rather than location. And I called USNS Impeccable mission provocative not because it violates something but just because such reaction on such mission and such area could be well expected in advance.

[JALU3]

Map from maps.google.com of the area.

When I first read about this event, I read that the event occured roughly 75 miles from Hainan Island, which would have placed the events of the USNS Impeccable and USNS Victorious somewhere between Hainan Island and the Paracel Islands (which I mispelled earlier).

I think we can all agree that this in no way is connected to their actual recognized territorial water limit, but more so is related to their view of what control an EEZ allows them, which appears to be far greater than internationally accepted norms. However, what the PLAN needs to understand is that international waters, are just that, not owned or controlled by any specific nation-state. And if they want to test their SSBNs, like any other nation that has them, that means that other vessels will be out their to listen (and as other's have said, they are pretty sure it happens all the time). Following at a distance, buzzing is one thing, directly interfering with the safe navigation of another in international waters is a completely different story all together.
Futhermore, even if PRC were to claim that the vessel were violating its EEZ by exploiting the fisheries or mineral wealth within it, the five vessels, that the USN released pictures of did not clearly show that they were of any authoritiy by which to make an inspection. Rather they appeared to be PRC flagged merchant vessels, actively engaging in navigation disruption of a US flagged Government vessel. Of course depending on your news source, some say they were PLAN vessels, while other only claim that they are PRC flagged vessels without being specific to being connected to the government or not of said nation-state.

Full Sized image of one of the vessels interfering with the USNS Impeccable.
Note that it wasn't flying a customs ensign, which some claim its usage has been discontinued. Even if they were customs vessels, I don't believe that the action shown in that picture can been seen as legitimate.

[Hunter]

When I first read about this event, I read that the event occured roughly 75 miles from Hainan Island

Than I am right with placing the accident.Yeap, you are absolutely right with details. But events shall always be viewed in context. I believe we wouldn't see such accident if it wasn't a USN ship with such aqustic capabilities or it wasn't USN ship at all. There wouldn't be problem niether with rutine civil line for sure, nor with other navies which would stay away of that area on their own because sending surv. vessel into area where other nation test their newest equipment is hostile act and no good way to demonstrate freedom of seas. USN had no other reason of being there besides collecting secret information and showing to PLAN that they can control waters next to China even the last one unwills it. In its own part of this play China used their claim on islands and EEZ to formalize their claim to withdraw US vessels, but as China didn't relay much on that and had to use civil 'protesters' rather than its fleet. As for US, if one have a right to do smth it doesn't mean one is to use this right with no actual reason, especialy knowing that someone else may concider it abusive. It is the primary rule for having good neibours. If one knows that such action will likely to cause negative reaction he provokes it. With all my respect salute.gif, US got used to demonstrate their legal rights all over the globe by violating interests of other nations, which brings such events here and there from time to time.

[JALU3]

Please don't misunderstand me. I completely see why PRC doesn't like US Flagged Government owned and US Navy vessels in international waters within their non-disputed EEZ. There is very little question as to why the vessel was there, or what it was doing. However, it is the case, that this occurs to US vessels during testings with foreign flagged vessels within the US EEZs doing the same thing, gathering intel. The US recognizes though that it cannot stop it, because of international laws and customs, so doesn't try (that is unless you believe the conspiracy theories saying that that unfortunate accident with that Japanese training ship was not an accident).
Imagine though if the US were to act the way that the PRC acted towards the USNS Impeccable, and used the EEZ arguement that the PRC is doing. There would be cries from the international community that would be so much louder against the US, then the near silence from the international community regading the PRCs actions.
In fact, during the cold war, it is my understanding that it was very common for foreign flagged vessels to be within the US EEZ for the specific purpose of listening in on US movements, as well as to tail any USN task forces that did leave port.

[Hunter]

Please don't misunderstand me... . Imagine though if the US were to act the way that the PRC acted towards the USNS Impeccable, and used the EEZ arguement that the PRC is doing. There would be cries from the international community that would be so much louder against the US, then the near silence from the international community regading the PRCs actions.

You are absolutely right. This situation can be easily reverted back to US or any other nation. Press react on such events whether it is USN vessel harrased by trawlers outside China's whaters or Russian bomber intercepted and escorted by nato fighter outside of Norwegian aerospace. It always happens with nations that have global interests and there is no difference berween them. I was rather explaining reasons to those who wondered how China deared to claim something in international waters. Original news said that China claims for South-China sea as its territorial waters which was misleading from real facts.

In fact, during the cold war, it is my understanding that it was very common for foreign flagged vessels to be within the US EEZ for the specific purpose of listening in on US movements, as well as to tail any USN task forces that did leave port.

Yeap, and it was a common practice and not a problem at that time since both sides had been keeping an eye on each other and were avoiding powerful confrontation. Though unlike thier Soviet counterparts US ships and planes didn't avoid penetrating national borders in their recon missions refering to different counting of international laws or even without regarding it at all (especially in 1950s and 1980s). But currently it is only US that continious doing that, thus attracting bashing on itself. Such missions are absalutely legal from formal point of view internationaly and reasonable for US, but not acceptable by those who don't want to be whatched by 'Big Brother'. Becides it israther annoying when spy missions are explained by protection of universal democratic principals.