China Says U.S. Navy Ship Broke Laws

Beijing Rejects U.S. Claim Of Harassment In South China Sea, Says Ship Was Operating Illegally

(CBS/AP)  China has rejected an accusation by the United States that a U.S. Navy mapping ship was harassed by Chinese vessels in the South China Sea, saying the American ship was breaking international laws.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu said Tuesday that "the U.S. claim is totally inaccurate and wrong."

He said the ship "broke international and Chinese laws in the South China Sea without China's permission."

The U.S. Defense Department says Chinese ships surrounded and harassed the Navy vessel in international waters Sunday, at one point coming within 25 feet of the American boat and strewing debris in its path.

The Obama administration said the incident Sunday followed several days of "increasingly aggressive" acts by Chinese ships in the region.

U.S. officials said a protest was to be delivered to Beijing's military attaché at a Pentagon meeting Monday.

"The unprofessional maneuvers by Chinese vessels violated the requirement under international law to operate with due regard for the rights and safety of other lawful users of the ocean," said Marine Maj. Stewart Upton, a Pentagon spokesman.

A Chinese intelligence ship and four others surrounded the USNS Impeccable, an unarmed vessel with a civilian merchant marine crew, as the craft conducted ocean surveys in international waters in the South China Sea, the Defense Department said in a statement.

The other Chinese ships were fishing vessels and tried to snap the U.S. ship's towed sonar, among other things, reports CBS News correspondent David Martin.

The Impeccable sprayed one ship with water from fire hoses to force it away. Despite the force of the water, Chinese crew members stripped to their underwear and continued closing within 25 feet, the Defense department said.

[dls3221]

Sadly, the U.S. has a history of falsities. Anyone remember the Gulf of Tonkin ?

[presjfk]

" A water fight and mooning? Is just possible that friendly clowning around from a bunch of guys in two different navies got out of hand? Posted by LithiumDeuteride"

Clowning? Not likely. I am sure the Chinese Communist government gave orders to harass with explicit instructions which were followed to the letter.

[presjfk]

I have had enough of Chinese harassment. Our ships should call the US navy and those Chinese boats that are harassing should be boarded and held. Then the Chinese can chop them up into pieces and ship the boats home in boxes.

If a ship tries to ram our boats, it should be treated as a hostile act and there should be shots fired. I guarantee that will be the end of harassment from the Chinese.

[CathayBuilder]

The main point is that in international waters, one presumes "innocent passage". A US navy vessel laying or retrieving cables with sonar detectors 120 km off a Chinese naval base is "war-like" behavior. The Chinese should capture the vessel - but that creates more problems. That the Chinese only tried to shoo away the vessel is downplaying an incident.
If the Chinese does the same thing near California or Hawaii, what would the US navy do ?

[gdw666]

"Exclusive economic zones Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. the coastal nation = china in this case. in EEZ, other country don't have the right to spy on the coastal nation. so what US did was illegal. read more about EEZ if you don't believe me. http://www.un.org/issues/docs/documents/losenbrch.html
Posted by at 7:32 AM : Mar 11, 2009"

Still incorrect. You are so full of it your eyes must be brown. There was nothing economic or even remotely related to exploitation of resources, and there is nothing, repeat nothing about spying in even your latest desperate attempt. Since there was no spying, you are even more ridiculous. Are you really so foolish as to believe that in these days of satellites, remote sensing, and yes even submarines, that there would be a need to send such a large and easily detected vessel to watch .... what?

What does your OWN source say about the treaty you purposefully mis-read?

"The treaty covers these major topics:

* Limits of maritime zones (territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone, continental shelf)
* Rights of navigation, including through straits used for international navigation
* Peace and security on the oceans and seas
* Conservation and management of living marine resources
* Protection and preservation of the marine environment
* Scientific research
* Activities on the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdictions
* Procedures for settling disputes between States"

If anyone was breaking any law it is the Chinese who were trying to obstruct free movement on the seas in INTERNATIONAL WATERS.

[mecury69]

You might be gay if...

you have water fights with other men in your underwear

Exclusive economic zones Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. the coastal nation = china in this case. in EEZ, other country don't have the right to spy on the coastal nation. so what US did was illegal. read more about EEZ if you don't believe me. http://www.un.org/issues/docs/documents/losenbrch.html

[gdw666]

"Simple, we were NOT in international waters. International waters is not defined by each individual country, but defined by the UN. Im sure you are wondering which law is this? Its called UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea). Here check out these 2 links (you wont):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_waters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

Now Im not sure where you get that each country individually defines internation waters (that would make no sense, there are over 130 countries, what would stop someone from make international waters 1000miles off their cost? its called logic).
Posted by anti-zionist007 at 6:23 AM : Mar 11, 2009 "

First I did not say that each country makes its own international waters definition. I said that it can vary. Which it can in areas where the countries are close together. Areas such as the English channel. Or in the Baltic regions. You did use the word 'logic' I believe?

As usual, you are incorrect. Since reading seems to be beyond you, look at you own link to Wikipedia, the diagram on the right side of the page. What does it say is the "TERRITORIAL BOUNDARY", not the Econonic Zone?

Or if you want to try reading again. Again from YOUR own link;

"Territorial waters
Out to 12 nautical miles from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. "

"Exclusive economic zones (EEZs)
Extend 200 nautical miles from the baseline. Within this area, the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. " Which the ship was not doing.

It seems that I did look at your links. To bad you did not.

Now, since your own source shows you to be wrong. Want to try again?

[gdw666]

"An unnamed spokesman for the Chinese embassy in Washington earlier denied the Chinese ships had violated maritime rules and said U.S. ships had been conducting illegal surveying, the website of Hong Kong-based Phoenix Television (news.ifeng.com) reported.

It said the incident happened 120 km (70 miles) south of the island.

Ma said there were laws about scientific research in Chinese waters.

The U.S. ship "violated the relevant international laws and Chinese laws and regulations," he said, urging the United States to halt such action. U.S. defense officials said the incident followed days of increasingly aggressive Chinese conduct in the area, including fly-bys by Chinese maritime surveillance planes.
Posted by ajmarine2 at 3:24 PM : Mar 10, 2009 "

The Chinses can do just as you did, claim anything that they want to. Specifics however seem to be missing. Specifics such as what interrnational law? Chinese laws, such as they are, are valid in China only and the ship was far outside Chinese territorial waters.

Don't be in such a hurry to ignore reality just so that you can jump on the "blame US" wagon.

[gdw666]

"We are Americans and the laws dont apply to us.
Posted by mrs_concrete at 5:59 AM : Mar 10, 2009 "

I'm still waiting for any of you 'experts' to tell us just what internationally valid laws were broken.