Saturday, November 30, 2013

(OT) Obama Administration Instructs US Commercial Airlines to File Flight Plans with China in Newly Declared Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ)


...leaving Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe hung to dry. Nice job, Mr. Obama.

After kindly informing China the other day that its two B52 bombers that flew inside the Air Defense Identification Zone over Senkaku Islands were unarmed, the United States government now says it is requesting the US commercial airlines to adhere to China's new rules and submit flight plans to China, to be safe.

The State Department Office of the Spokesperson (from 11/27/2013 daily press briefing, released on 11/29/2013; emphasis is mine):

China's Declared ADIZ - Guidance for U.S. Air Carriers

Question: Is there any specific guidance or information we are giving to U.S. carriers operating in China's recently declared Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ)?

Answer: Freedom of overflight and other internationally lawful uses of sea and airspace are essential to prosperity, stability, and security in the Pacific. We remain deeply concerned by China's November 23 declaration of an "East China Sea Air Identification Zone."

The U.S. government generally expects that U.S. carriers operating internationally will operate consistent with NOTAMs (Notices to Airmen) issued by foreign countries. Our expectation of operations by U.S. carriers consistent with NOTAMs does not indicate U.S. government acceptance of China's requirements for operating in the newly declared ADIZ.


Well, even NHK News is taking this as "acceptance".

From NHK News (11/30/2013):

これについてアメリカ国務省は、29日、報道官の談話を発表し「アメリカ政府は、国際的に運航するアメリカの航空会社は外国政府が発表する航空情報に従うべきだと考えている」として、アメリカの航空各社に対し、中国当局へのフライトプラン=飛行計画書の提出を、事実上求めていく考えを明らかにしました。

[NHK quoting the State Department answer (second paragraph of the answer above), then says that] the US State Department has made it clear that it is the intention of the US government to effectively request the US airlines to file flight plans with the Chinese authority.


NHK also quotes part of the New York Times article on the matter, with the officials in the Obama administration putting safety first.

According to The New York Times article (11/29/2013):

While the United States continued to defy China by sending military planes into the zone unannounced, administration officials said they had made the decision to urge civilian planes to adhere to Beijing’s new rules in part because they worried about an unintended confrontation.

... It was not immediately clear if the Obama administration had notified Japan, a close ally, of its decision.


Well they hadn't. At all.

The clearly irate Ministry of Foreign Affairs official says they haven't heard anything like that from the US counterpart, as reported by Mainichi Shinbun (11/30/2013):

防空識別圏:米国の新方針に外務省「聞いていない」

ADIZ: Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the new US policy "We haven't been informed"

米政府の方針について、外務省幹部は30日午前、毎日新聞の取材に「全く聞いていない。これまでの米国の行動とは全く異なる対応だ」と語った。

A top official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spoke with Mainichi Shinbun in the morning of November 30 on the US government policy, and said "We haven't been informed at all. It is a completely different response from what the US has been doing."

日本政府は中国の防空識別圏設定について「何ら効力を有するものではなく、これまでのルール通りの運用を行っていく」としており、中国への飛行計画提出は不要との立場。国土交通省を通じ航空各社に、こうした方針を伝えている。政府は今後、米国に詳細を確認する方針だ。

The Japanese government's stance on the Chinese ADIZ is that it does not have any enforceability, the Japanese government will continue to follow the existing rules and that there is no need to submit flight plans to China. The Japanese airlines have been informed of the government stance by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. The Japanese government will ask the US for the details of the new policy.


It was only several days ago the Secretary of State John Kerry and the Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel issued a strong statement condemning China.

But it was also only several days ago that National Security Advisor Susan Rise made a strange speech at Georgetown University which was interpreted in Japan as a sign that the US will form a partnership with China as the two biggest powers in the world, leaving Japan hanging in the air.

Ms. Rice, of lying-through-her-teeth-on-Benghazi fame, indeed said, "When it comes to China, we seek to operationalize a new model of major power relations."

She mentioned China 20 times, Korea 11 times, Japan 7 times. No mention of Senkaku Islands.

(Operationalize? What kind of ugly verb is that? DCSpeak?)

40 comments:

Dean said...

Who would EVER ally with the US again knowing that eventually there's a pussified Obama-like Administration without a testicle amongst them waiting to stab said ally in the back in the sneakiest way possible!

Anonymous said...

GEE, guess we have to be careful of what we blog in the USA! King Obama is taking over and making deals with the Chinese behind our backs. Executive order after executive order. Next, will he cancel elections for national 'security?' While this is meant to be sarcastic, there is a fine line of truth in the comment

Anonymous said...

So what the adminstration is doing is telling commerical airlines to report flight plans to China to prevent accidental confrontations. That way when an accidental incident happens, USA will NOT have to respond. Forgive me if I am incorrect, but USA CITIZENS use those commerical carriers! We, as citizens, should expect protection from our government.Also, what happens when CHINA denies access to our commercial carriers..because that is the situation USA President Obama just agreed to, CHINA ownership of the air space. What about Taiwan? Will they be forced to cede to China now? Terrible decisions by this USA administration!

Anonymous said...

Does China file flight plans with other nations, including the USA, in international areas? Anyone know of a case?

Anonymous said...

Sauce for the Goose. I guess USA had better tell China to file flight plans for THEIR flights with Japan and USA. Since (Reuters)

"Japan and the United States have their own air defense zones but only require aircraft to file flight plans and identify themselves if those planes intend to pass through national airspace".

Time to change this, and make sure USA airspace or zones cover all our territories in the Pacific and Altantic as well. Make China understand status quo.

Anonymous said...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/46/ADIZ_Boundaries.jpg
for alaska:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alaskan_ADIZ.jpg

and then there is Guam and Puerto Rico...and Diego Garcia....the list goes on and on. So China can reciprocate, of course, THEIR commercial flights are pretty limited in comparison with the international community. US, Sec of State Kerry better make them follow the same rules they are asking of USA and the international community. The first time China shoots down a commercial aircraft, they should expect a response of force, as its an act of war. Is China ready for that, and to lose trade? Why not also make commercial vessels/boats FILE plans for passage in the defense zones? There are more Chinese products on vessels being exported..make China squirm a bit....

Anonymous said...

"operationalize a new model."

(Operationalize? What kind of ugly verb is that?)

netudiant, big fella, help us out here, does it mean that Taiwan's failure to declare a similar ADIZ or protest airspace violations and Russia's frequent violation of Japan's airspace will be all tossed together in the upcoming violations of Japanese airspace in a "new model" of diplomatic language salad?

Identify, identify, identify.

Anonymous said...

Ambrose,
Sometimes you're The Man but let's not get too carried away with "watersheds" and "weakness", even keel as they say in Britain.

As far as Larry Summers and his recent mouth runneth over, the response to him is for someone to hold a mirror before his face. Then his employers' Venetian Mask may be set aside.

"If you are not concerned, perhaps you should be [that America should consider backing Japan over these worthless rocks]"
fixed it for 'ya

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100026105/china-japan-rearmament-is-keynesian-stimulus-if-it-doesnt-go-horribly-wrong/

Anonymous said...

Barry Obama can act tough with China, but in the end, China is America's banker. China holds ~3.5 trillion in U.S. debt instruments. The last thing Barry wants is for the Chinese to dump a few hundred billion of U.S. Treasuries on the market, in turn driving up rates.

That would be a war won without firing a single shot.

Anonymous said...

1) China commonly finds a beast to slash, a scape-goat to frighten the others. Now it's Japan. It's been France when we protested about Tibet and welcomed the Dalaî-lama. (I'm not fond of monks although)
2) The Telegraph and Mr Ambrose P. R. are excitable.
3) Japan could make a very good deal buying US Treasuries, if China was to dump them.
4) The US has only WASP allies from the commonwealth. All others are scrap.
5) The rocks have no value, except for their surrounding fishing, mining, and defense importance.
6) What remains unclear to me is this mix of diplomatic rows and the huge economic collaboration (exchanges) between China, Japan and the US.
7) As for Taiwan, it will - or not fall only when the fruit is ripe. It might be very clever to let it on the tricked "western alliance" as long as necessary, or even longer.
Phiphi

Yeda Noboru said...

As for 4) Israel is another matter.
Phiphi

Hélios said...

May someone listen to this video ? I don't understand all what Hatrick Penry says (I'm french, you know), but does it make sense for you about unit 4 ? A complete hoax ?
Thank you.
Link to video :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtZ-QOK5RJ0

Anonymous said...

A decades-old FAIL Policy: Under the Globalization Bus 'ya Go!

Taiwan, Japan, America. All targeted by the globalists post-Cold War.

"U.S. officials said they did not know how China would be able to monitor the flight zone, given its lack of midair refueling capability and limitations of its early warning radar aircraft. "

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/30/world/asia/china-japan-us-tensions/

The Globalization Bus

(if all you have is a hammer .. everything looks like a nail)

Anonymous said...

at Paveway Ml=k IV

1) Every nation ? I don't agree.
About monks ? Nothing wrong in a way, though their weakness is to build up treasuries of occult / ancient / items and milk people's money. I've dealt with some monks, and happened to know how they manage. The history of Tibet and China is very complex.
3) It is a disputated matter. In economics, no-one has The Knowledge, although some are successfull. The loosers don't come and show up nor make the headlines.
4) May-be. I was more thinking of a same-blood policy.
6) Diplomacy has always been a slide-show, even in the Roman Empire time. Otherwise I have no despise of American people themselves, but for their Administrations. Many Americans here in Paris, and it all goes well with them. They are wellcome.
Same for Australians, N. Z. and so on.
We have a memory.
Phiphi

Anonymous said...

@ héliios
je ne comprends pas non plud bien qu'anglophone ce qu'ils disent dans la video.
( j'avais demandé à un copain de lycée anglophone ce que voulaient dire tels et tels "lyrics" anglais - il m'avait répondu que lui non plus ne les comprenais pas ! )
Vu le site, cela ressemble à une paranoîa à la Meyssan, et sans doute inutilisable dans le cadre d'une saine analyse de la question.
Merci, bonne continuation.

Hélios said...

Thank you very much, Paveway. Hatrick speaks so quickly !

All that he says makes sense. Some readers of my blog claimed the removal in unit 4 was fake. It seems they were right.

À anonyme de 8h19, non, je ne pense pas que ce soit une paranoïa. La vérité doit être dite, d'autant que la loi sur le secret est passée.

Anonymous said...

@ helios: I'm sorry, I don't speak French and can't help you understand the video. So I can tell you only this: in the French response at 8:19 AM I saw the word paranoîa. In my opinion, that was being very kind.
*mscharisma*

arevamirpal::laprimavera said...

Helios, according to the transcript of the NRC teleconference on March 16, 2011, they knew their assessment on SFP4 (that it was empty) was wrong. They didn't admit the error until June 2011.

Anonymous said...

@ Paveway: So the video maker takes 3 (!) non-conclusive documents, assumes (reasonably or not) that they state facts, and then views as proof that TEPCO (and the media and who knows who else) is lying about the removal of fuel at Unit 4 because TEPCO always lies and hasn't proven otherwise.
Sorry, this kind of "logic" doesn't work for me.
*mscharisma*

Anonymous said...

A little recent history and an expanded ADIZ in .. 2010.

Japan extended its ADIZ west in June 2010

BE SURE TO SCROLL DOWN TO SEE ADIZ BOUNDARIES !!

http://theaviationist.com/2013/11/24/china-new-adiz/

"Japan’s 2010 unilateral extension of its Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) some 22km west of Yonaguni—without consulting Taipei, [Taiwan], which had until that point controlled air traffic in the area. "

http://cips.uottawa.ca/the-senkaku-islands-a-forgotten-flashpoint-in-the-western-pacific/

Japan considers expanding its air zone
Nov. 27, 2013

-- to where ??

http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/japan-considers-expanding-its-air-zone


Arms merchants looking for customers.

Anonymous said...

Someone wants to sell Japan .. F-35s.

Anonymous said...

Paveway, thanks for your feedback.
I have not read Hatrick's blog, and although I was determined to read all the FOIA documents when they were made available, I have to admit that I quickly gave up given the sheer volume of them. I commented solely on the video, which I find unconvincing and manipulative in its reasoning and presentation.

The video shows a total of three documents repeatedly. One a heavily redacted portion of a transcripted conversation in which an NRC person voices an opinion, one an email note that could mean just about anything, and one an IAEA document that (if authentic) is based on information the Japanese government provided who was as clueless as anyone else at the time. And all information stems from a time of high chaos and general uncertainty. If indeed there are more and/or more conclusive documents available to make the case that there was a fuel fire in Unit 4 or that no removable fuel exists anymore, Hatrick sure missed the boat in the video as far as providing convincing evidence is concerned. In addition, he never clearly states what conclusion exactly he draws as to the condition or existence of fuel in the pool or even the pool itself. At least I am unable to extract it from the video, even after watching it 5 times and understanding every word in it.

I also find it highly improbable that TEPCO would have managed to quickly quench a zirc-alloy fire in the chaotic days right after the quake. Does anyone even know how to put out such a fire?

I could certainly be wrong, but the way the video and the arguments in it are set up, it surely looks like deliberate fear-mongering to me.

I do, however, very much agree with your and Hatrick's expressed opinion that TEPCO and, by extension, governments involved cannot be trusted to truthfully and honestly reveal all available information. I have voiced my opinion repeatedly in many blogs that it is unacceptable that TEPCO remains the sole entity in charge of collecting and disseminating information about the state of the reactors to the public. Naturally it is in TEPCO's best interest to paint a picture as whitewashed as possible. That in and of itself, however, is not proof that they are dishonest about everything and/or are now providing false evidence of fuel removal at Unit 4.
*mscharisma*

Anonymous said...

mscharisma, there was no zircalloy fire to quench.

Andrew Judd said...

It would be useful to see a summary of the various communications so that we can understand why for example there was talk of putting sand into the ponds because they could not hold water. Other things being equal you would imagine that during the crucial days of the disaster there would have been intense cooperation between the americans and Japanese and whatever was being communicated to the Americans would have had some fairly close relationship to what was being reported to the Japanese authorities dealing with the problem. We also have the statement coming from the nuclear fire safety officer that prior to the disaster nobody in the USA nuclear safety arena would have imagined that a hydrogen explosion could have been that powerful. Plenty of things just do not add up and it does not seem to me to be paranoid to observe that.

Anonymous said...

@ anonymous at 8:19 pm:
Re. the zirc-alloy fire in the fuel pool: it was suggested in the video I was commenting on.
*mscharisma*

Andrew Judd said...

SFP4 Fire and associated radiation release

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/15/us-japan-nuclear-iaea-idUSTRE72E1I820110315

Anonymous said...

NRC concedes Japan fuel pool not dry

http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2011/06/16/nrc_concedes_japan_fuel_pool_not_dry/

Andrew Judd said...

NRC conceded that it was unlikely that sfp4 was completely dry

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzZPGJyEAHU

Anonymous said...

the "ham-handed" ADIZ shuffle of 2010,
or,
Does Japan's Abe need a Secrecy Act to prevent whistleblowing of Lockheed bribes for F-35 purchases?

http://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/overlapping-JP-CN-ADIZ.png

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110301164442AA2JTUj

Japan secrecy law stirs fear of limits on freedoms
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_JAPAN_SECRECY_LAW?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Anonymous said...

This must be the look Biden's face wears when the "diplomatic pouch" from Lockheed has been successfully emptied into Abe's coffers?

http://www.timesunion.com/news/politics/article/US-voices-solidarity-with-Japan-on-China-air-spat-5029527.php

or,
The "Women" Don't Mind, and We Don't Either

Anonymous said...

What happens to the fuel when the SPF is not yet totally dry but water level has receded enough to expose the upper part of the fuel assemblies? Can it catch fire or be otherwise damaged?

How radioactive is the water evaporating from a fuel pool that is not being cooled any more?

Why were we made believe that Fukushima Daiichi unit 4 was not so much of a problem because the reactor was offline?

Beppe

Anonymous said...

Sorry Beppe, can't answer those questions as all this talk of SP4 in a page about SKF's (OT) (ADIZ) has me a bit confused, LOL.

I can only refer you to a true source of stability, TEPCO webcam page of enenews.
Start here, proceed to boats and keep on rolling, LOL,
http://enenews.com/forum-fukushima-webcam-discussion-thread-june-30-2012-present/comment-page-125#comment-419244

Anonymous said...

Beppe, from what I've read and hopefully understood (may not be much), it depends on how hot the fuel still is. If hot enough and exposed, it overheats and can melt or catch fire. Even the non-exposed portion may not be sufficiently cooled by the remaining water and can melt. The exposed fuel cladding may catch fire as the zyrc-alloy (or however that's spelled) reacts with oxygen. Even if the fuel is cooled down enough to not melt or catch fire, if not covered by water, it releases substantial amounts of radiation into the air. The fact that regulators require a number of years for the fuel to cool down in the SFP before it can be moved into other storage in indicataive of the high danger potential.

As for evaporating water and radioactivity, I have no idea. I would guess, however, that it is probably relatively little compared to what the fuel itself would release if exposed. Does anyone have an idea?

I'm not sure if or to what degree we were deliberately made to believe that Unit 4 was not such a big problem because off-line at the time of the accident. From the beginning, SFP4 was a major concern due to the large quantity of fuel, including the unloaded core. We may have naturally inferred that off-line meant less dangerous, but many reports pointed out right away that it presented a major risk if cooling could not be re-established and maintained. Speaking for myself, I also underestimated the danger because I initially didn't fully grasp that the fuel pool is outside the containment in this type of reactor and hence a lot less secure than one would like to believe. In fact, I know people that still refuse to believe that these fuel pools are "protected" only by water and the reactor building itself. Naturally, this may also not be a point the "powers in charge" would like to be emphasized a lot in the media.
*mscharisma*

Anonymous said...

Laprimavera, thanks for graciously letting us, as so often, ramble on OT on the OT article. Original article nonetheless very much appreciated!
*mscharisma*

Paveway Mk IV said...

Uh... yeah. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

And Beppe, one last sarco-quippage event,

if after you achieve the "start here" point and begin rolling, do your best to avoid response to reports of anomalous flashes of light various.

If, however, you encounter the infamous "pixels of light" you are to report back IMMEDIATELY to me, ok?

/sarc

Anonymous said...

James "Big Jim" Fallows of The Atlantic likes the Official hand of the ham, and "a senior Obama administration official emphasized that, “In terms of the U.S.-Japan position on the ADIZ, there is fundamentally no daylight between us.”! My God! Such immodesty!

"Put simply, this has to change .. "

"Until both China and the U.S. start making an effort to communicate — especially before making unexpected military and diplomatic changes in the region — there’s no chance of building any sort of real relationship, much less a “new” one."

http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/bidens-china-visit-a-failure-to-communicate/

LOL

View website about Cold Laser Dr Robert Hanson said...

It was a news everyone needs to know.

Anonymous said...

Hatrick Penry's video on SFP4 is a big no.

Classic case of trying to do too much with too little data.

Best Big Susitna Salmon Fishing Alaska Guides, IFishAlaska said...

requesting the US commercial airlines to adhere to China's new rules and submit flight plans to China, to be safe.

Post a Comment