news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

Source: Global Times

On July 25, a Chinese and Russian military aircraft formation conducted a joint air strategic cruise in the airspace of the Bering Sea. The purpose was to test and enhance the level of cooperation between the two air forces and deepen the strategic mutual trust and pragmatic cooperation between the two countries. This was also the first time that Chinese bombers flew near Alaska. The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) of the United States and Canada issued a statement on the same day saying that the United States and Canada sent military aircraft to "discover, track and intercept". US senators also called the approach of Chinese and Russian military aircraft to Alaska "unprecedented provocation". The Chinese Ministry of Defense stated that China and Russia organized a joint air strategic cruise in the relevant airspace of the Bering Sea on the 25th in accordance with the annual cooperation plan of the two militaries. It was not targeted at any third country, was in line with relevant international law and international practice, and had nothing to do with the current international and regional situation.

On July 25, the Chinese and Russian militaries organized the eighth joint air strategic cruise. The picture shows a formation of Chinese and Russian air force bombers flying over the relevant airspace of the Bering Sea. Photo by Wu Yuepeng

The joint patrol of Chinese and Russian military aircraft in the relevant airspace of the Bering Sea is in full compliance with international law and international practice. The relevant exercises were conducted in international airspace, which is equivalent to the "international legitimate use" of military aircraft that the United States claims in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Prior to this, the Chinese Air Force and the Russian Aerospace Forces had organized a total of 7 joint air strategic patrols, which effectively tested and improved the level of cooperation and joint action capabilities of the two armies' air forces, and achieved "normalization" of cooperative exercises in the relevant airspace of the Sea of ​​Japan and the East China Sea. During all the joint air strategic patrols, the exercises of Chinese and Russian military aircraft never violated the airspace of other countries. This time, the joint patrol of Chinese and Russian military aircraft in the relevant airspace of the Bering Sea also did not violate the airspace of the United States and Canada, which is consistent with relevant international practices and is not worth making a fuss about.

Some Americans have interpreted China and Russia's strategic cruise as an "unprecedented provocation," which is clearly an overreaction. You know, even if the U.S. believes that China and Russia's military aircraft are "approaching" Alaska, the closest to the U.S. coast is 200 nautical miles. Last year alone, the U.S. military approached the airspace of mainland China and Hainan Island about 100 times, most of which were less than 30 nautical miles from the territorial sea baseline. If the reasonable and legal cruises of Chinese and Russian military aircraft in international airspace 200 nautical miles away make the U.S. and Canada nervous, and they send fighter jets to intercept them in the name of "national security," then when faced with illegal close reconnaissance by U.S. military aircraft less than 30 nautical miles from China, what qualifications do the U.S. and its allies have to make irresponsible remarks about China's legitimate and professional interception and expulsion?

Washington has always had double standards on the issue of "freedom of overflight." In recent years, the provocative activities of U.S. military aircraft in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait have become increasingly obvious. For example, in December 2022, a U.S. P-8A anti-submarine patrol aircraft flew across the Taiwan Strait from north to south, less than 13 nautical miles from the baseline of the Chinese mainland's territorial waters, setting a new record for U.S. military aircraft's close reconnaissance of China. Washington seems to believe that only the United States and its allies' ships and aircraft enjoy "freedom of navigation and overflight" and can conduct "peaceful" military activities such as close reconnaissance in "international waters and airspace" adjacent to China's territorial waters and airspace. As a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, China's naval and air force ships and aircraft pose a "military threat" once they go out to sea. I don't know where this absurd double standard comes from.

The picture shows relevant photos released by the People's Air Force

In the final analysis, the disproportionate tension of the United States is still a manifestation of its hegemonic mentality. It does not take the security concerns of others into consideration, and even has no scruples about putting its own security above the security of others. Thousands of close reconnaissance flights and hundreds of targeted exercises in the waters around China every year should not be considered normal in any way, but the United States has continued to increase them in the name of the so-called "Indo-Pacific Strategy" and "freedom of navigation" and "maintaining regional stability". If the United States really wants to achieve peace and stability, it should probably first reflect on its activities around China.

related news

US media: Chinese and Russian military aircraft entering Alaska's air defense identification zone together is a "new development"

On July 25, the Ministry of National Defense held a regular press conference. Regarding the China-Russia joint strategic air cruise, the Ministry of National Defense spokesman Zhang Xiaogang said that according to the annual cooperation plan between the Chinese and Russian militaries, on July 25, the two sides organized a joint strategic air cruise in the relevant airspace of the Bering Sea.

This is the eighth strategic air cruise organized by the two militaries since 2019, which further tests and improves the level of cooperation between the two air forces and deepens the strategic mutual trust and practical cooperation between the two countries. This operation is not targeted at any third party, is in line with relevant international law and international practice, and has nothing to do with the current international and regional situation.

Chinese and Russian bombers organize joint strategic air patrol in the relevant airspace of the Bering Sea. Photo/Yuyuan Tantian

Earlier, on July 24, local time, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) issued an announcement stating that two Russian Tu-95 fighters and two Chinese H-6 fighters were found and tracked in the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) of the United States that day. NORAD stated that Canadian and American fighter jets "intercepted" the four aircraft.

The North American Aerospace Defense Command also stated that Chinese and Russian fighter jets were always in international airspace and did not enter the sovereign airspace of the United States or Canada, and their activities were not considered a threat. The North American Aerospace Defense Command added that it will continue to monitor the activities of competitors near North America and meet presence with presence.

The picture shows a screenshot of the announcement issued by the North American Aerospace Defense Command

The North American Aerospace Defense Command is a military organization jointly established by the United States and Canada, responsible for aerospace warning and defense missions in North America.

Regarding the appearance of Chinese and Russian fighter jets in the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone, CNN hyped that although Russian fighter jets often enter the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone, the appearance of Chinese and Russian fighter jets together here this time is a "new development."

CNN also quoted the remarks made by Gregory Gillot, commander of the US Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command, in March this year, saying that China was further "advancing northward." He predicted at the time that China would see air activities in the Arctic Alaska region "as early as this year" and claimed that he was "concerned about this."

Scope of the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone (data map)

Naval military expert Zhang Junshe told Observer.com that there is no need for Western media to make a fuss about this.

Zhang Junshe said that the strategic cruise of China and Russia is not aimed at any third party and has nothing to do with the security situation in the region. This move demonstrates our determination and ability to maintain global strategic stability. In addition, this action also improves the air cruise and coordination capabilities of both sides. Countries that have no bad intentions towards China should not feel threatened, so there is no reason for the North American Aerospace Defense Command to have an excessive and dangerous reaction.

"Alaska's sea and airspace are not unfamiliar to the Chinese and Russian militaries," Zhang Junshe said. "The air defense identification zone does not fall within the scope of sovereignty in international law. The North American Aerospace Defense Command report also mentioned that this time Chinese and Russian military aircraft did not enter the U.S. and Canadian airspace. It is normal for China and Russia to enter the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone."

An Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) is an airspace unilaterally designated by a country for air defense needs as an air warning range to facilitate rapid positioning and control by the military. Specifically, it refers to the demarcated airspace extending from the surface of a country's land or waters, within which aircraft must be immediately identified, located and controlled for national security.

Normally, the boundary of an "air defense identification zone" is the farthest point that a country's strategic early warning aircraft and early warning radar can cover. It is much larger than the airspace and exclusive economic zone and does not fall within the scope of sovereignty in international law. So far, the United States, Canada, South Korea, Japan, China and other countries have established air defense identification zones.

The US military once claimed that it did not recognize the ADIZ established by China. Zhang Junshe said that this is a typical double standard. Because the United States was the first country to establish an ADIZ, and the ADIZ established by the United States has the largest area. The ADIZs of Japan and South Korea were also established under the leadership of the United States, and they overlap with the Chinese ADIZ. As a sovereign country, China can naturally establish an ADIZ. The US denial of this is a manifestation of its hegemonic thinking.

Zhang Junshe stressed that "the long-term close reconnaissance of China and Russia by the United States is one of the sources of risk." The United States is the world's largest surveillance and reconnaissance country, and has long been conducting intelligence activities around the world. The United States frequently sends ships and aircraft to conduct close reconnaissance around China, which seriously endangers China's national security and undermines regional peace and stability.

Recently, when the United States and the Philippines, Japan and other countries conducted air patrols in the South China Sea, they frequently claimed that their purpose was to check and balance China. Zhang Junshe pointed out that the United States has repeatedly used "freedom of navigation" as an excuse to provoke trouble in the South China Sea and other places, intervening in regional affairs and maintaining US hegemony. Ironically, the United States has not yet joined the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, but loves to use this convention as an excuse. This kind of hegemonic behavior of the United States is precisely the source of the current maritime security risks.