South China Sea: Australia won't rule out expanded surveillance flights
|
Version 0 of 1. The Australian government has not ruled out expanding its existing program of surveillance flights over the South China Sea amid regional tensions over China’s land reclamation activities in disputed territory. The office of the defence minister, Kevin Andrews, said Australia would “continue to transit the South China Sea” but emphasised that such patrols were not a new phenomenon and that the government had not had any formal discussions with its close ally, the US. The government moved to clarify its position after a report in the Australian newspaper on Tuesday said Canberra was actively considering sending a P-3 surveillance aircraft within 12 nautical miles of artificial islands built by China, the standard extent of territorial seas from a coastline. Australian government lawyers believed such a flight would comply with international law, the report said, “because only land features above high tide can generate territorial rights”. The opposition’s defence spokesman, Stephen Conroy, supported a potential “freedom of navigation” exercise within 12 nautical miles of the artificial islands, saying the structures were not internationally recognised. “We can do that. International law is on our side,” Conroy said. A spokeswoman for Andrews issued a statement on Tuesday saying it was in the interest of all countries “to ensure free and unencumbered transit through international waters, including those in the South China Sea”. “Australia will continue to transit the South China Sea, including conducting maritime surveillance missions consistent with our rights under international law, as it has been doing for more than three decades now,” she said. “It is well known by all countries in the region that Australia has been patrolling the South China Sea from the air for over 30 years as part of ‘operation gateway’. “We’ve been doing it on an ongoing basis since 1980 and will continue to in the future as part of Australia’s enduring contribution to the preservation of regional security and stability in south-east Asia.” China objected to recent US military surveillance missions over the disputed region, but a Pentagon spokesman suggested that US patrols within 12 nautical miles of the artificial islands “would be the next step”. Andrews’ spokeswoman said the Australian government had “not had formal talks with the United States on ‘freedom of navigation’ missions in the South China Sea”. The minister had met the US defence secretary, Ash Carter, twice but “the expansion of current operations or new missions in the South China Sea was not discussed”, she said. Australia’s deputy opposition leader, Tanya Plibersek, who previously warned against language that would escalate tensions, said her party had sought briefings from the government on the South China Sea issue. Plibersek, Labor’s foreign affairs spokeswoman, avoided expressing a view on the potential surveillance missions but said the territorial disputes were “plainly making some of China’s neighbours anxious”. “Of course, we take no position on the territorial disputes in question, but we do say that it is important to have freedom of navigation and freedom of flight through an area that is an extremely busy trading route, an area that Australian vessels have been travelling through for many years,” she said. “We urge the parties, of course, to use international laws and norms to settle any disagreements about sovereignty and, of course, it is important that this area remains open to trading.” But Conroy, Labor’s defence spokesman and deputy leader in the Senate, was prepared to venture an opinion on the maritime patrols. He backed the legitimacy of Australia’s program to sail and fly through the region. “This is nothing new. Let’s be clear. Australia will continue to travel through internationally recognised waters and we call on all countries that have been constructing artificial islands and reclaiming land to settle this matter through the normal international processes,” Conroy said. Asked about potential travel within 12 nautical miles of the structures, Conroy said: “In international law there is no claim because these are recognised under the international law of the sea as international waters and we can safely and legitimately enter these waters at any stage.” Peter Jennings, the executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, also backed further “freedom of navigation” missions. Jennings said such missions were likely to trigger criticism from the Chinese government, but he argued the bigger risk was not to take such action. “Failing to do so makes a de facto concession to China’s claim for treating the area for internal sovereign control,” he said. “That does put the freedom of navigation and air space access at risk.” But Hugh White, the professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University, said he would not be surprised if the government decided to back away from the proposal, which he described as risky. White told the ABC: “It’s not a smart idea to try standing up and bringing on a confrontation where the international law is not plainly on your side, and international law is not plainly on anyone’s side on this issue. It’s a very muddy question.” He questioned the motivations of the US: “I think for the US certainly the concern about these artificial islands is really just a kind of pretext to draw what one might call a red line around China’s expanding regional power and influence.” The debate followed comments from the secretary of the Australian Department of Defence, Dennis Richardson, that China’s land reclamation activity in the South China Sea “had been at a pace and scale over the last two years beyond anything we have previously seen”. This raised legitimate questions about its purpose, Richardson told a Senate estimates committee hearing on Monday. Asked whether any exercises were planned to test the Chinese government’s territorial claims, Richardson said “no decisions have been taken at this point”. The acting chief of the Australian defence force, vice admiral Ray Griggs, told the same hearing that HMAS Perth was in the western part of the South China Sea. Andrews told a security summit in Singapore on Sunday that Australia was concerned about “the prospect of militarisation of artificial structures” and countries should “agree as soon as possible” on a code of conduct for the area. |