US challenged 13 countries on Navigation rights last year

Discussion in 'International Politics' started by Indx TechStyle, Apr 27, 2016.

  1. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle Perfaarmance Naarmal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    7,528
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    U.S. challenged China, 12 others on navigation rights last year
    [​IMG]
    Chinese dredging vessels are purportedly seen in the waters around Mischief Reef in the disputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea in this still image from video taken by a P-8A Poseidon surveillance aircraft provided by the United States Navy May 21, 2015.
     
    AnantS likes this.
  2.  
  3. desicanuk

    desicanuk Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    288
    Likes Received:
    200
    Location:
    Canada
    Posting error. Self deleted by desicanuk
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2016
  4. AnantS

    AnantS Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    1,219
    Likes Received:
    1,416
    Location:
    Yatra Tatra
    That makes a very strong case for India to sign LSA, CISMOA and BECA. Order F 18, F 16 and beg for F 35.
     
  5. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle Perfaarmance Naarmal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    7,528
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    Actually, India is trying to step back from these agreements now.
    Calling itself not ready.
    Even of LEMoA is signed, there are very rare chances for CISOMA. that's a good thing.
    Anyway,
    BECA has not even chance to get signed over the national security issue from start of this matter.
    Why brought that here?
    BECA won't be there at any cost.
     
    Bahamut and Screambowl like this.
  6. DingDong

    DingDong Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2014
    Messages:
    2,227
    Likes Received:
    3,663
    Location:
    Delhi
    Seems like our government has either gone totally senile. We are having to pay for the inexperience of the current regime in handling of the foreign affairs, which are very different compared to winning elections in India. I can only hope that the "super-confident" Modi doesn't push us into a dangerous trap.

    Just like some idiots in India invented terms like "Intolerance" to bring Congress back into the game, the US has invented a new phrase called "Freedom of Navigation" to maintain it's hegemony in the Asia-Pacific area.

    Off late we have been reading many stories, which really are stories floated by the vested interests on the US payroll to gauge the public mood and government's reaction, for e.g. "Joint patrol in SCS", "US naval basing in A&N islands" etc. We need to be very careful because in long terms the Indian Ocean is of great strategic importance for the current and the aspiring superpowers (including India). We cannot forget historical lessons.
     
    Bahamut and Navnit Kundu like this.
  7. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle Perfaarmance Naarmal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    7,528
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    No doubt US is a great power and at least for now, we can't challenge their hegemony.
    Better is to play between them and communists. We are yet to be a mature power like them.

    This freedom of navigation or banning Indian Launch service etc. is a daily circus played by US to show it's presence. Don't take it seriously. :D
     
    Bahamut likes this.
  8. garg_bharat

    garg_bharat Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2015
    Messages:
    2,001
    Likes Received:
    999
    @DingDong, seems you are the self-appointed smart person of india.

    Extreme reactions like this typically comes from fools.

    USA has been doing its thing for a long time. There is no need for overreaction. China has not shot down a us plane or sunk a ship so far. This shows it is just a game.
     
    Bahamut and Indx TechStyle like this.
  9. Razor

    Razor CIDs from Tamilnadu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5,338
    Likes Received:
    4,474
    Location:
    ഭരതം (Bharatham)
    What do they mean by "challenged navigational rights" wrt india?
    Which geographical part of india?
     
  10. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,124
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Most likely counter anti-access/area-denial or counter-A2AD operations.

    P.S.: Not sure why they say A2AD, instead of AAAD, or A3D.
     
  11. Razor

    Razor CIDs from Tamilnadu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5,338
    Likes Received:
    4,474
    Location:
    ഭരതം (Bharatham)
    Wrt to china it is primarily those artificial islands china is building which the US, and many other countries, do not acknowledge.
    The US considers the islands as international waters, I guess.

    Are you saying that India is denying freedom of navigation in some international waters?

    PS: I guess: (anti-access).... (Area-denial) => AA....AD => A^2.... AD => A2AD
     
  12. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,124
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Is India doing any A2AD at all? Or is it that the US was simply using certain sea routes for regular transport, so as to tell everyone that this is international waaters, whether any country attempts A2AD or not. This is probably to discourage ambitious regional powers from getting too uppity. I don't know whether India has made any such attempt at all.
     
  13. Razor

    Razor CIDs from Tamilnadu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5,338
    Likes Received:
    4,474
    Location:
    ഭരതം (Bharatham)
    Discourage, scare, threaten, send a message etc.
    Like HS & NS was meant as a message to Stalin: "Nippon is off limits"

    Just the local (oops i meam global) goonda and his tall tales.
     
  14. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,519
    Likes Received:
    1,544
    FON operations are just USN's routine to challenge "excessive maritime claims". No big deal.

    Most of the international community haven't got used to a life without US policing. And to do justice to the operations the world could have been a lot more dangerous had there been no US providing "security products" for the public altruistically.


    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Many countries have been freeloading. It's unthinkable if ...say US pulls out of Afghanistan or IOR. Better to have a few top-class bodyguards (P5 as multipolars) than leave it to 170+ who lack either the wherewithals or wills to patrol the world.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2016
    SANITY likes this.
  15. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle Perfaarmance Naarmal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    7,528
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    One extra country has will and has already been supported from around 80 others.
    How about making P6? I mean include India as well. It has enough, at least to perform the duty of Policeman which you "top" class countries are referring.:biggrin2:
    We are perfect option among G4 countries for UNSC.
    BTW, we could have got it earlier. But the mind of Indian Socialists was boggled in 1955 who kicked out the opportunity.
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2016
    Bahamut likes this.
  16. Navnit Kundu

    Navnit Kundu Pika Hu Akbarrr!! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,379
    Likes Received:
    2,909
    This is as much a long standing legal battle on paper as it is a real one, it has an interesting history. I'll tell you the gist. As per international law, every nation can claim 20 miles beyond its land borders as its own territorial water (TW) and 200 miles as EEZ. There is a legal provision that allows a country to have its EEZ extended by making a formal application to the international body, which will in turn recognize it as such. In our case, we have 20 miles TW + 200 miles EEZ and we applied for 250 extra miles as extended economic zone. We continue to treat that total area in the radius of 450 miles as our de facto TW, which the US disagrees with and deliberately runs their warships through just to make a point. The point they are trying to make is "your extended economic zone is not your sovereign territorial water, let me plough my boat through it just to make sure you know"

    PS : Legally, the US has the right to challenge India in our extended waters since extended economic zone is not the same as territorial waters and it cannot be considered an intrusion (or an act of war), but then again if you take into consideration the context that 'legally' isn't exactly the most reasonable benchmark of propriety, given that the current global order derives its legality from laws which were written by victors of WW, and these laws are inherently discriminatory in nature. So, take your pick. There is no one absolute version of truth in this case; In addition to actual military ability to access and control your claimed waters, legality, morality, geopolitics, nationalism, hegemony, alliances, security, trade, all variables are at play here, which make sea disputes more murky.

    These are the mandatory 200 mile EEZ boundaries which all countries get.

    [​IMG]

    Here's what our EEZ looks like :

    [​IMG]

    Here's the extensions that we claim beyond our EEZ on our east and west coast.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 28, 2016
  17. Razor

    Razor CIDs from Tamilnadu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5,338
    Likes Received:
    4,474
    Location:
    ഭരതം (Bharatham)
    Ah, so now I see why I asked that Q in my previous post.
    Two pieces of info, from your post, I didn't previously know :
    1. India claimed (claims) 250 n.mi. extra EEZ (which is legal as per UNCLOS; extension of continental shelf)
    2. India treats the 450 n.mi. (200+250) as TW.

    I'm okay with that considering that many countries do that with some countries claiming entire seas.
    Besides, as you say, legality is, well, not a concrete term. :)

    PS: I think you meant 12 n.mi. as TW, not 20 mi.
     
    Bahamut likes this.
  18. Navnit Kundu

    Navnit Kundu Pika Hu Akbarrr!! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,379
    Likes Received:
    2,909
    Nah, I meant 20 miles.

    There are certain nuances and technicalities within that so it eventually ends up being 20 miles because if there's a submerged continental reef, then shall we consider it as deep sea or shallow waters and apply rules accordingly? and therefore an exception has been made for shallow reefs, which includes submerged reefs too, I think. There is a whole chapter on how to handle territorial claims of nations which have archipelago configurations. Shall it be treated as de facto land and given its own TW and EEZ or shall it be granted only a nominal TW? and so, in most cases they end up creating an exception called archipelago baseline (AB). And most of the times AB + TW roughly ends up being 20 miles. Because of the way ocean beds are formed, most of the times they are uneven and the dichotomy between land and sea isn't well defined so more than 95% of all land-sea borders have a natural continental shelf which ends up extending the AB. So the arithmetic ends up with supplementary TW extension from the legal 12 miles to de facto 20 miles. The earlier diagram was just a make shift one for school children, this one explains it better. The deeper interest you take in it, the more complicated and interesting it gets.


    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]

    Consider all these rules, exceptions, islands, just to define a non disputed boundary. Imagine how complicated it gets when there are conflicting or overlapping claims? Our conflict with Myanmar and Bangladesh is one such example which will make anyone pull their hair.

    [​IMG]

    The same game is being played out in Souch China Sea where China is treating the continental shelf as de facto land and then extending their argument from there to claim full sovereignty over those grey areas. Legally, there's no right or wrong and so if you observe carefully, no American propaganda channel (colloquially known as 'media') ever calls it a legal dispute. The only notion they keep harping on is "this behavior might lead to conflict", basically taking not a legal stance, but an moral one. It is a cryptic way of saying "we will beat you if you try to claim the grey area which we have illegally monopolized until now". Morally and dispassionately speaking, China has a greater right over that area than a foreign power from another continent, but because China has been so rude to its neighbors, they are happy to see China bleed. Compare China's territorial claims to the one which Japan made, in cohorts with their pimp, the USA, and China's transgressions seem trivial in comparison. Since claims over territorial waters extend themselves into Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) protocols, it impacts the control of airspace as well.

    [​IMG]

    The US allowed a large overlapping claim to arise between China and Japan be allowing (read : encouraging) Japan to redefine the territorial claims over Senkaku Islands. In fact, it was this imperialist aggression which provoked China to open up another front and that is how the South China Sea dispute came into being as a response to US douchbaggery, just like the Syria and Ukraine came into being, not the other way round, as the American media claims. They are trying to put the horse before the cart and sell snake oil to the world if they claim that intervention in Indian Ocean, SCS, Ukraine, Syria has got anything to do with freedoms and human rights. They are the one creating the problems by 'challenging' countries thousands of miles away from their continent.

    Essentially all territorial water disputes until now followed the theme of "this land belongs to us therefore the adjacent waters belong to us", the paradigm shift that China has brought to the equation is "this water belongs to us, therefore the land belongs to us, therefore more water belongs to us". 'Land' here is loosely taken to assume continental reef, and they have dumped sand on the reef and pulled the reefs out of the legal grey area and into firm footing (pun intended) and as a corollary, extended their territorial water and ADIZ. Japan did exactly that, but American propaganda will never tell that side of the story.

    Basically long story short, 'Freedom of Navigation' is to capitalism what 'Freedom of Religion' is to Christianity. The former is meant to extend their capitalist hegemony and the latter is meant to extend their Christian hegemony, they are misnomers which have nothing to do with the freedom of people who don't fall in the aforementioned coveted categories.
     
  19. Razor

    Razor CIDs from Tamilnadu Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    5,338
    Likes Received:
    4,474
    Location:
    ഭരതം (Bharatham)
    @Navnit Kundu : Interesting stuff. Gotta read more on this contentious topic.
     
  20. Navnit Kundu

    Navnit Kundu Pika Hu Akbarrr!! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,379
    Likes Received:
    2,909
    Yup. That is why I said, this 'challenging' business has got more to do with the other factors than legality. The framework for all these laws, (including nuclear, space, biological, patent laws, human rights etc) was laid when the US was a rising global power, and therefore from the US point of view it was clear that if they had to rise, they would have to weaken the international order, which was seen as an impediment. Once they became a preeminent power, they started using these laws discriminatory against their potential challengers (to be fair even USSR joined them happily). Now that we are moving from a unipolar world to a multipolar one, the US is again strengthening these laws which they had earlier weakened for themselves to make it that much more difficult for new powers to rise. All these sea conflicts have to be looked at from that angle, otherwise what threat does the US face from the Indian ocean which it feels like challenging? are our fish and prawns conspiring to bring down Obama's government? are our crabs and octopus trying to sink US aircraft carriers? This is simply arrogant show of force to stick it to our face, nothing else.

    Consider the ranges and speeds of missiles these days, 200 miles is nothing. And yet, a warship parked just 200 miles away from our shores is still technically considered to be in 'international waters', never mind the fact that they can hit all our vital targets in a matter of a few seconds if they want. Why is it that the Negro felt the need to park his aircraft carrier near Mumbai all the three times he visited India? to uphold law? Pffff..

    Gun boat diplomacy, or in colloquial terms, blackmail.

    There's a very interesting talk by a Singaporean diplomat of Indian ethnicity about the arrogance of the US. It gives a nice insight into the nuances of American moves, filled with his personal experiences (including one where he was threatened personally by an American diplomat).

     
    Razor likes this.
  21. Navnit Kundu

    Navnit Kundu Pika Hu Akbarrr!! Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,379
    Likes Received:
    2,909
    This is the map of the region affected by so called Somali pirates :

    [​IMG]

    One has to be pretty stupid to believe that a failed stated like Somalia with no economy or technological advancement can produce naval vessels which are able to hold off the most technologically capable navies of 70 nations which participate in the anti-piracy operations. What do they have, a Somali air craft carrier? Just look at that area, it's 20X the surface area of the entire country of Somalia.

    Somalian pirates are to the ocean what Al Qaeda is on the land : American assets.

    They're helping unkil hold on to strategic waters to prevent Iran, India and China from making any strategic inroads on Africa's east coast. First they create the pirates, then they create an anti-piracy coalition to battle the pirates, this is like America's war on terror all over again. One would hope that the US would use their mighty navy to tackle the Somali pirates, but what do they do? challenge India. Well done.
     

Share This Page