4 ms·

> progressively violating more and more of Taiwan's sovereign airspace Just in terms of international law, the Chinese flights near Taiwan are provocative but

> progressively violating more and more of Taiwan's sovereign airspace Just in terms of international law, the Chinese flights near Taiwan are provocative but don’t violate any laws. The U.S. and Russia still do this sort of thing all the time. An ADIZ is not sovereign airspace.

kurthr 4y ago
Launching so many missiles over a space of 36 hours that you entirely close airspace and waterways (and apparently over the island) is a little different from flying an airplane at the edge of controlled airspace. https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220805-chinese-missiles-flew-over-taiwan-during-drills-state-media https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220805-chinese-missi... That happened during the Pelosi trip in August, and the jingoists were angry it didn't go further. The likelihood of an effective air/sea embargo on Taiwan is more likely than an initial invasion.
lossolo 4y ago
International law is not a good example here because actually if you look at international law then Taiwan is part of China and formally it's considered as part of China by US, EU etc. Taiwan is not a state from perspective of international law so from this perspective it doesn't have sovereign airspace.
- frankharv 4y ago
  I thought China snubbed their noses at International rulings regarding the South China Sea? Now they get respect from same authorities? Can't have it both ways. Join world system or reject it. https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/hague-tribunals-south-china-sea-ruling-empty-provocation-or-slow-burning-influence https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/hague-tri...
  - dirtyid 4y ago
    >snubbed their noses The PCA "rulings" aren't international law because UN (which PRC accept as international system) has no formal position on them / has not adopted any parts of the decision. Ergo, PRC's SCS position is consistent with international law - like the actual one at UN, not make believe US "rules based order" which was behind PCA lawfare campaign and the ongoing propaganda. PRC is more firmly within bounds of the "world system", versus US who tries to enforce FONAPs despite not ratifying UNCLOS, and doesn't respect the kind of international law that it accused PRC of violating, see ITLOS ruling (an actual UN ruling) regarding UK/US military base on Chagos/Mauritius/Diego Garcia.
  - protoc 4y ago
    A lot of democracy has it both ways, why can't China?

kurthr 4y ago

Launching so many missiles over a space of 36 hours that you entirely close airspace and waterways (and apparently over the island) is a little different from flying an airplane at the edge of controlled airspace. https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220805-chinese-missiles-flew-over-taiwan-during-drills-state-media https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220805-chinese-missi... That happened during the Pelosi trip in August, and the jingoists were angry it didn't go further. The likelihood of an effective air/sea embargo on Taiwan is more likely than an initial invasion.

lossolo 4y ago

International law is not a good example here because actually if you look at international law then Taiwan is part of China and formally it's considered as part of China by US, EU etc. Taiwan is not a state from perspective of international law so from this perspective it doesn't have sovereign airspace.

frankharv 4y ago
I thought China snubbed their noses at International rulings regarding the South China Sea? Now they get respect from same authorities? Can't have it both ways. Join world system or reject it. https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/hague-tribunals-south-china-sea-ruling-empty-provocation-or-slow-burning-influence https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/hague-tri...
- dirtyid 4y ago
  >snubbed their noses The PCA "rulings" aren't international law because UN (which PRC accept as international system) has no formal position on them / has not adopted any parts of the decision. Ergo, PRC's SCS position is consistent with international law - like the actual one at UN, not make believe US "rules based order" which was behind PCA lawfare campaign and the ongoing propaganda. PRC is more firmly within bounds of the "world system", versus US who tries to enforce FONAPs despite not ratifying UNCLOS, and doesn't respect the kind of international law that it accused PRC of violating, see ITLOS ruling (an actual UN ruling) regarding UK/US military base on Chagos/Mauritius/Diego Garcia.
- protoc 4y ago
  A lot of democracy has it both ways, why can't China?