关于防空识别区(ADIZ)

里维宁 转载自 美国国务院 | 2013-11-27 17:44 | 收藏 | 投票
关键字:防空识别区 

  Statement on the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone

  Press Statement

  John Kerry 国务卿克里表态

  Secretary of State

  Washington, DC

  November 23, 2013

  

  Share on facebookShare on twitter

  The United States is deeply concerned about China's announcement that they've established an "East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone." This unilateral action constitutes an attempt to change the status quo in the East China Sea. Escalatory action will only increase tensions in the region and create risks of an incident.

  Freedom of overflight and other internationally lawful uses of sea and airspace are essential to prosperity, stability, and security in the Pacific. We don't support efforts by any State to apply its ADIZ procedures to foreign aircraft not intending to enter its national airspace. The United States does not apply its ADIZ procedures to foreign aircraft not intending to enter U.S. national airspace. We urge China not to implement its threat to take action against aircraft that do not identify themselves or obey orders from Beijing.

  We have urged China to exercise caution and restraint, and we are consulting with Japan and other affected parties, throughout the region. We remain steadfastly committed to our allies and partners, and hope to see a more collaborative and less confrontational future in the Pacific.
 

 

新闻发布/记者提问:


  QUESTION: Can we go to China?

  MS. PSAKI: Sure.

  QUESTION: So the two U.S. military aircraft have flown around these disputed islands in the East China Sea, defying China’s declaration that the region falls into a new airspace defense zone. What is all this about, please?

  MS. PSAKI: Well, I know that the Department of Defense have – has commented on that specifically, which happened, I believe, just earlier today. There was also reports, which this is all related so let me speak to these, about the November 23rd announcement that China has established an East China Sea air defense identification zone. This unilateral action appears to be an attempt to unilaterally change the status quo in the East China Sea, and thus will raise regional tensions and increase the risk of miscalculation, confrontation, and accidents.

  We have made this case to China. Assistant Secretary Russel raised U.S. concerns with the Ambassador on November 23rd. Ambassador Locke also reiterated our concerns in Beijing. And we have urged the Chinese to exercise caution and restraint. We’re also consulting with Japan and other affected parties throughout the region in response to these – this announcement.

  QUESTION: So the U.S. has always said that this needs to be resolved diplomatically.

  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

  QUESTION: But isn’t by flying – for the U.S. intervening this way, isn’t that inflammatory and increasing tensions?

  MS. PSAKI: Well, we are continuing to encourage our partners – one thing, actually, let me say on this is that we don’t – we – does not – we don’t support efforts by any state to apply its air defense identification zone procedures to foreign aircrafts not intending to enter its national airspace. We don’t apply – the United States does not apply that procedure to foreign aircraft, so it certainly is one we don’t think others should apply. We have long talked about concerns about increasing tensions or the raising of tensions and the impact that would have. At this point, our role is to continue to encourage both sides to move forward with dialogue, to express concerns when we disagree with steps that China has taken, which is a case we’ve obviously done here. But our position on the islands that this impacts, of course, has not changed.

  QUESTION: Given that the U.S. recognizes that Japan, for all intents and purposes, does have control of the Senkakus or the Diaoyus, is the U.S. concerned that by declaring this zone over the weekend that China is trying to drag Washington into this, and Washington may have taken the bait?

  MS. PSAKI: I don’t think that there’s been any bait taken. We’ve expressed our concerns, and obviously we have a wide-ranging relationship with China, but when there are concerns that need to be expressed, we are not shy about expressing them. I just conveyed our view that this attempt – that we view this as an attempt to unilaterally change the status quo in the East China Sea. We’ve also expressed our concerns directly to the Chinese as needed.

  So, you’re familiar with our position on the Senkakus. It’s longstanding. We don’t take a position on the question of sovereignty. That hasn’t changed. And we’ve long expressed concerns about efforts to raise tension, and this is evidence of our willingness to express that concern.

  QUESTION: Can the U.S. draw --

  QUESTION: These were – going back to Lesley’s question, these flights were absolutely necessary? They weren’t – they shouldn’t be viewed as a counter provocation?

  MS. PSAKI: Again, I don’t have any specific comment on them. The Department of Defense has commented on them, and obviously, we’ll look more closely at actions as they continue.

  QUESTION: But you --

  QUESTION: Does the U.S. consider this a similar type of action to what China has done in the past 18 months or so around the Scarborough Shoals?

  MS. PSAKI: I don’t want to compare it to any past incident. I think I just expressed what we’ve done, and obviously we’ll continue to monitor day by day.

  Go ahead.

  QUESTION: Jen, 20 countries in the world have ADIZ – why can’t China – including U.S. and Japan?

  MS. PSAKI: Well, I think I’ve just conveyed that for the United States, we don’t apply the Air Defense Identification Zone procedures to foreign aircraft, so – I don’t know the procedures or policies of other countries. The concern here is what I just expressed, which is about unilateral action on the part of China that appears to be an attempt to unilaterally change the status quo in the East China Sea.

  QUESTION: I understand your concern. And actually, after Secretary Kerry released the statement --

  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

  QUESTION: -- Chinese Foreign Ministry and Chinese Defense Ministry both said China’s ADIZ is not aimed at any country and does not affect freedom of – over flight.

  MS. PSAKI: Mm-hmm.

  QUESTION: So what is your response to this?

  MS. PSAKI: We’ve expressed our concerns when they need to be expressed, and I’ve done those and our statement did those as well.

  QUESTION: And when you’re talking about changing the status quo of the disputed island, months ago, Japan sent coastguard vessels to the island. Japan also released a video to claim the sovereignty of the Senkaku-Diaoyu Island. Why didn’t you express your concern back then?

  MS. PSAKI: I don’t have any historical analysis for you today. I can just tell you what we’ve done in this specific case.

  Jo.

  QUESTION: I wanted to ask – today, the Japanese airlines have actually said that they’re going to obey with these new rules set by Beijing, and they’re going to start notifying Beijing of their flight patterns. Is that a good move, or do you see – would the United States see it as a good move, or is it something that then – that becomes – make this a fait accompli at the end of the day?

  MS. PSAKI: I hadn’t seen that before I came down here. I’m happy to speak with Assistant Secretary Russel and others and see what our thoughts as a U.S. Government are on that specific announcement.

  QUESTION: Jen, whose decision was it to send the bombers?

  MS. PSAKI: The what?

  QUESTION: Whose decision was it to send those bombers over there?

  MS. PSAKI: Again, I’d point you to DOD for any specifics on that.

  QUESTION: Jen, when it comes to ADIZ by Japan, which is overlapping the Chinese one, are you aware of who drew the Japanese ADIZ line?

  MS. PSAKI: Who drew it?

  QUESTION: Yes, and who maintained it, who operated it?

  MS. PSAKI: I don’t have any specifics on that.

  QUESTION: Are you aware of – when you’re conveying message, that that line has been set by the United States and maintained by the United States and operated by the United States? I just wanted to clarify that.

  MS. PSAKI: I don’t have anything more for you. Do you have a question?

  QUESTION: No. I just wanted to clarify that.

  MS. PSAKI: Okay.

  QUESTION: On Syria, just to follow up on --

  QUESTION: On China as well?

  MS. PSAKI: Go ahead.

  QUESTION: Do you have a readout of the Secretary’s phone call with Japanese Foreign Minister, and did they talk about this issue as well?

  MS. PSAKI: They did. I didn’t get a lengthy readout. I will see if there’s more we can provide to you. It was a call they had this morning. They spoke about this issue as well as the recent agreement on Iran.

  QUESTION: On Syria --

  QUESTION: Jen, did you hear anything specifically from --

  MS. PSAKI: We’ll go to you next, I promise.

  QUESTION: -- yeah, sorry – from your Chinese counterparts through diplomatic channels, otherwise, in response to this U.S. mission?

  MS. PSAKI: Well, we’ve been in touch, as I mentioned. Assistant Secretary Russel has been in touch, Ambassador Locke has been in touch to convey our concerns. I don’t have any readout for you of what they conveyed in response.

  QUESTION: If the Chinese do not rescind this zone, what options does the U.S. have?

  MS. PSAKI: I’m not going to get into a hypothetical.

个人简介
由军人历练至访问学者,经国企,跨国企业实践又客座于研究,亲历动荡,目睹改革......
每日关注 更多
里维宁 的日志归档
[查看更多]
赞助商广告