一路 BBS

 找回密码
 注册
搜索
查看: 194|回复: 1

Neither CN nor US Will Back Down on US Surveillance Flights

[复制链接]
发表于 8-29-2014 09:09:29 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Neither CN nor US Will Back Down on US Surveillance Flights in International Airspace Near CN

My comment: There will be a long weekend in US, Sept 1 being the Labor Day. China will be working that day, though. But this report is important, so I will not wait for translation.

Jane Perlez, Air Encounter More Likely to Cause Alarm Than Change. New York Times, Aug 29, 2014.
www.nytimes.com/2014/08/29/world ... rm-than-change.html

Note: The full text on “China”:

Jen Psaki, Daily Press Briefing,US Department of State, Aug 25, 2014.
www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2014/08/230859.htm#CHINA


``````````````transcript
Should we go to – China, did you say?
QUESTION: Uh-huh. Yeah, China.
MS. PSAKI: China, okay.
QUESTION: On Chinese fighter jet encounter, as you know, J-11B, which is a Chinese jet fighter, intercept U.S. Navy plane Poseidon in South China Sea. I forgot the date, but --
MS. PSAKI: I think it may have been Thursday or Friday.
QUESTION: Friday.
MS. PSAKI: Friday.
QUESTION: Okay. And the United States has raised its concern very strongly through diplomatic channel with Chinese. Could you explain in more detail what kind of language did you – did the United States raise a concern to the Chinese official?
MS. PSAKI: What kind of language?
QUESTION: Yeah.
MS. PSAKI: Well, we raised – both State and Department of Defense officials both expressed strong concern to the Chinese about the unsafe and unprofessional intercept last week which posed a risk to the safety and well-being of the air crews and was inconsistent with customary international law. We again, as I noted, have relayed that through multiple channels and certainly strongly, given the level of our concern. I also think my counterpart over at DOD also spoke to this, and certainly, they would be the appropriate entity to read it out further.
QUESTION: And as we know well, the Chinese official denied – they said the United – U.S. aircraft intercepted. How do you respond this?
MS. PSAKI: I would think I would stand by the concerns we expressed and the statements made by my DOD counterpart.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
QUESTION: And at the same time – one more thing (inaudible).
MS. PSAKI: Okay.
QUESTION: According to the Pentagon official, they said this is not a first thing, first time, but same kind of dangerous situation has occurred from March to May. So – but did United States make concern known to China at that time, before this time?
MS. PSAKI: I think we’ve spoke to when we’ve addressed – when we have expressed concerns, whether it was the ADIZ – obviously that’s a slightly different issue, but – about actions that China is taking. We express those to them through diplomatic channels and also publicly when we have them.
QUESTION: So United States raise the concern before March or May or April at that time?
MS. PSAKI: No, I was – broadly speaking, there have been incidents, which I think my colleague was speaking to, not maybe identical to this, but that we have addressed and raised in the past about the importance of safety and security and – with the Chinese, and actions they’ve taken. And so we’ve raised them directly and we’ve spoken about them publicly on those occasions. I don’t have any other expressions of concern to read out for you.
Go ahead in the back.
QUESTION: Jen, how can you justify the U.S. action like this is not provocative to Chinese?
MS. PSAKI: Which specific action?
QUESTION: This specific in-close reconnaissance is not provocative to Chinese?
MS. PSAKI: Well, I think our concern was about the Chinese intercept and how it closely flew to our aircraft. So I’m not sure how that’s provocative on our part, but maybe you can explain further.
QUESTION: Yeah. As you said, this is a routine patrol or – but as – in China’s view, this is in-close reconnaissance, which is to spy Chinese maybe submarine or other military activities. So how can you justify this kind of routine patrol is not provocative to the Chinese side?
MS. PSAKI: I don’t think we viewed it as routine, and that’s why we expressed the concern.
QUESTION: And the similar actions like this patrol or your military in close surveillance activities, why this kind of activities is constructive to the U.S.-China military relation?
MS. PSAKI: Well, I think it’s important to note that obviously we work with China on a range of issues. And the Secretary was there just a couple of months ago having the S&ED meetings and talking about security issues and working together on them. When there are concerns, we express them. And that’s a sign of strength in a relationship. And here there was one by our military counterparts over at the Department of Defense. We express that through both State and DOD channels. It doesn’t mean that we don’t still work with China on a range of issues. We will continue to.
QUESTION: But how can these kind of actions help the trust, to build the trust between the two countries?
MS. PSAKI: The kind of action --
QUESTION: Surveillance.
MS. PSAKI: Well, I’m not sure what you’re referring to.
QUESTION: I’m referring to this in-close plane reconnaissance or surveillance in South China Sea which is like around 200 miles close to Chinese territory.
MS. PSAKI: I just am not going to speak to that. I will just convey that obviously this was specific case where we had concerns about a step that was taken by China. We expressed them. It doesn’t mean we can’t move on with our relationship. We will, we do, and we have a range of issues we’ll continue to work on together on.
QUESTION: Will this incident change your plan or your military actions in that area in the future?
MS. PSAKI: I would point you to my defense colleagues. Not that I’m aware of.
QUESTION: Is it the U.S. position because this is international water, so the U.S. surveillance is not any – violate the international law?
MS. PSAKI: I don’t have anything more to outline for you on this particular topic. But go ahead, Elliot.
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 8-29-2014 09:10:39 | 显示全部楼层
US Spokesperson Questioned on Bombers Entering China Air Zone. CNTV, Aug 28, 2014.
english.cntv.cn/program/newshour/20131128/103237.shtml

Note:
(a)  The report carries a duplicate of US State Department's video recording (released by that department in its website).
(b) Paragraph 1 said the briefing occurred on "Tuesday," which was Aug 26, 2014. Apparently it refers to Being time, which was Aug 25 in US when the briefing was held in DC. I have checked State Department briefings from Aug 25 to 28, inclusive, and only the Aug 26 briefing at State Department mentioned China.
(c) Paragraph 3 misspelled the family name: Psaki, not "Pusaki."
(d) Most, if not all, of the quotations in the CNTV are not found in US official transcript.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表