Who’s “defiant?” The US or CHINA? Al-Jazeera

The title of a recently released Al-Jazeera article is “China says it MONITORED DEFIANT US bomber flights” (Web-site/URL: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/11/27/china-says-it-monitoreddefiantusbomberflights.html).

“China acknowledged Wednesday (November 27, 2013) it let two American B-52 bombers through its newly declared Air-Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea despite its earlier threat to take DEFENSIVE measures against any unidentified foreign aircraft”. This is the first example of China’s DEFENSIVE behavior (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI). 

“The flights followed days of ANGRY RHETORIC and ACCUSATIONS over Beijing’s move, which some experts say is designed to assert Chinese sovereignty over SENKAKU/Diaoyu — uninhabited islands, also claimed by Japan, whose nearby waters are rich in NATURAL GAS, OIL and FISH “, in other words “rich in” NATURAL RESOURCES – certainly something to FIGHT over.

“The Chinese DEFENSE Ministry said on Saturday (November 30, 2013) they would take “DEFENSIVE emergency measures” against any planes failing to identify themselves, provide their flight plans or maintain two-way radio communication”. So, the Chinese DEFENSE Ministry is DEFENSIVE (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI).

“Rory Medcalf, director of the International Security Program at the Lowy Institute, wrote on Wednesday: “IF China’s new zone DID NOT include disputed maritime territory, IF its requirements for compliance applied ONLY to aircraft heading into Chinese airspace and if neighbors like Japan and South Korea had been consulted AHEAD of the announcement, then THERE WOULD BE LITTLE OR NOTHING FOR OTHERS TO OBJECT TO“, but of courseNONE OF THESE CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET/NONE OF THIS IS TRUEWhen was the last time CHINA “consulted” anyone when THEY BELIEVE THEY’RE RIGHT?

“State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that U.S. civilian air carriers were being advised “to take all steps they consider necessary to operate safely in the East China Sea region”. But Psaki DID NOT specify what those steps might be and STOPPED SHORT of saying airlines should provide flight details to Chinese authorities”. If US airlines “provide flight details to Chinese authorities”they would certainly be the victims of EXCESSIVE “monitoring”.

“Japanese airlines, after initially indicating they would comply with Chinese information requests, have since said they are IGNORING China’s directives. South Korean airlines are also DECLINING to submit their flight plans to China, according to the Wall Street Journal“. So China is also blaming SOUTH KOREA in addition to their spat with Japan.

“Asked repeatedly about the incident at a regularly scheduled briefing, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said it had been handled according to procedures laid out in the Saturday (November 30, 2013) statement but offered no specifics”. “Different situations will be dealt with according to that statement“.

“The bomber flights came after the State Department’s Psaki said China’s move appeared to be an attempt to CHANGE THE STATUS QUO in the East China Sea”. “This will RAISE REGIONAL TENSIONS and INCREASE the risk of miscalculation, CONFRONTATION and accidents“. There are TWO things to note here. First, it’s NOT as if we need any more “tension” in the world nowadays. Secondly/On top of this, “confrontation” is an example of the “force and pain technique” (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI). 

“The Pentagon said Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel discussed the situation by telephone on Wednesday (November 27, 2013) with his Japanese counterpart, Itsunori Onodera and Hagel said U.S. military operations “WILL NOT IN ANY WAY as a result of China’s announcement“.

“Hagel reiterated that the “U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty applies to the SENKAKU Islands”. SENKAKU, as we know, is the name that the Chinese HATE; they insist it’s the DIAOYU Islands

“The American decision to fly bombers into the disputed area, however, may have been made to deter Japan, not China, from making any belligerent moves that could aggravate the already tense situation, said Anne-Marie Slaughter, president of the New America Foundation, Bloomberg News reported”. On Monday (November 25, 2013), Slaughter said: “We are saying to Japan, ‘DO NOT RESPOND; we are here‘”.

“Chinese reaction to the U.S. bomber flights was predictably bitter, with some recalling the 2001 collision between a Chinese fighter and a U.S. surveillance plane in international airspace off China’s southeastern coast — the kind of accident some fear China’s new policy could make more likely. The Chinese pilot, Wang Wei, was killed in the crash and the U.S. crew forced to make a landing on China’s Hainan island, where they were held for 10 days and repeatedly interrogated before being released”. This incident occurred on APRIL 1, 2001 and the American crew was also INTERROGATED AGGRESSIVELY before finally being let go (Web-site/URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incident).

“Zheng Daojin, a reporter with THE OFFICIAL Xinhua News Agency, (wrote) on his Twitter-like Weibo microblog”: “Let’s not repeat the HUMILIATION of Wang Wei. Make good preparations to COUNTERATTACK“, again via the “force and pain technique” (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI). Also, we’re talking about THE OFFICIAL Xinhua news agency so we will only be given THE OFFICIAL or STATE-APPROVED opinion

“Chinese scholars, who often serve as ad-hoc government spokesmen, criticized Tuesday’s (November 26, 2013) flights as A CRUDE SHOW OF FORCE and said Beijing WASN’T (?) looking for a fight“. REALLY? This is our latest INTERPRETATION as well as our latest example of “We think they made us mad; they think we made them mad and here we go” (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI).

Finally, according to Zhu Feng, “an international security expert at Peking University”, “It’s NOT that China didn’t want to enforce its demands, but how do you EXPECT China to react?” DEFENSIVELY AS EXPECTED (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI). 

To conclude, once again, this IS NOT news because China claims it is “monitoring” the US because the US is “defiant” toward China but CHINA has been “defiant” toward the US AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES for such a LONG time now


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s