(1) US military reconnaissance plane carried out point-blank military surveillance activities over the airspace of China's exclusive economic zone, which goes beyond the limit of international law concerning "over-flight freedom".

The US side falsely alleged that the collision of planes occurred in the international airspace, and that the US plane, which carried out "routine surveillance task" in this airspace, enjoyed "over-flight freedom".

The US military airplane rammed and damaged China's military plane when it carried out military surveillance activities in the airspace over China's exclusive economic zone. People with a slight common knowledge of international law know that the exclusive economic zone was an important achievement gained by the vast number of developing countries through long-term struggle for legitimate rights and interests after World War II. According to relevant stipulations of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the exclusive economic zone is neither territorial waters, nor high seas, it has become a region with independent legal position of its own type. Article 55 of the Convention specially stipulates that the exclusive economic zone is limited by a particular legal system, Article 86 clearly excludes the exclusive economic zone from the high seas, this stipulation precisely takes the particular legal position of the exclusive economic zone into consideration. Article 58 of this Convention, while stipulating that all countries enjoy over-flight freedom in the exclusive economic zone, it also explicitly provides that while various countries exercising their rights and performing their duties in the exclusive economic zone in accordance with this Convention, they should give appropriate consideration to the rights and duties of the coastal countries and should observe the laws and regulations formulated by the coastal countries in accordance with the stipulations of this Convention and the other rules of international law, which do not contravene this section. This stipulation indicates that the freedom of a country flying over the airspace of the exclusive economic zone is not absolute freedom, but is conditional and limited.

Firstly, they should show respect and consideration for the rights of the coastal country, these rights of course include the over-flight freedom of the coastal country's airplanes, its sovereign right over the natural resources within this zone as well as related jurisdictions, they also include the country's right to safeguard the security and interest.

Secondly, they should abide by the laws and regulations formulated by the coastal country in accordance with international law. In order to exercise its sovereign rights and exclusive jurisdictions within its exclusive economic zone, the coastal country has the right to enact relevant laws and regulations and limit the over-flight freedom of the aircraft of other countries over the airspace of this zone, so as to maintain the air traffic order of this zone, guarantee flying safety and protect the lawful rights and interests of the country. Article 11 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf published on June 28, 1998 explicitly stipulates: On the premise of abiding by international law and the laws and decrees of the People's Republic of China, any country enjoys navigation and over-flight freedom in the exclusive economic zone of the People's Republic of China. It is thus clear that in line with international law and the laws of China, foreign aircraft, including military aircraft, while enjoying the freedom of flying over China's exclusive economic zone at ordinary time, must undertake the obligation to respect and consider China's rights and abide by China's laws.. Failing to faithfully perform this obligation means misuse and violation of the principle of "over-flight freedom", China naturally has the right to adopt necessary measures.

For many years, the United States has been incessantly carrying out military reconnaissance over China's southeast coasts, its military planes have time and again appeared and disappeared in the airspace over China's coastal areas and even crossing the line of China's territorial waters to carry out reconnaissance flights. This time it was a US military scouting plane, equipped with sophisticated electronic reconnaissance equipment and assigned with professionals scouting and gathering military intelligence, that rammed and damaged a Chinese military airplane. In disregard of the repeated serious representations of the Chinese government, the United States has carried out frequent military scouting activities over China's coastal areas, these activities are by no means conducted out of good and peaceful aim, but obviously carry a hostile nature, posing serious threats to China's security and interest, they have gone far beyond the limit of "over-flight freedom" in the exclusive economic zone as set in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and violated the principle of "over-flight freedom". The US side quibbles that it enjoys "over-flight freedom" over the exclusive economic zone of another country, but what's its attitude toward the freedom of the aircraft of other countries to fly over the coastal areas of the United States? As early as 1950, for its national defense security, the United States set up so-called anti-aircraft identification zone outside its territorial airspace, which extended several hundred nautical miles toward the Atlantic and Pacific oceans respectively, demanding that other countries, before sending their aircraft into the anti-aircraft identification zone, must inform the United States of the type and destination of the aircraft, for the convenience of identification, positioning and control. It is clear that in the eyes of the Americans, they can abuse "over-flight freedom" in the exclusive economic zone of other countries to conduct military reconnaissance that endangers the security of other country. While in the airspace over the coastal areas of the United States other countries must accept its "identification" restriction. As the Chinese saying goes, "The magistrates are free to burn down houses, while the common people are forbidden even to light lamps at night", that is the "juridical logic" of the United States.

(2) The ramming and damaging Chinese military airplane by US military reconnaissance plane seriously violates the stipulations of relevant international air conventions and the consensus on avoiding dangerous military actions on the sea reached between China and the United States.

The tracking surveillance carried out by Chinese military airplanes against US military scouting plane which conducted military reconnaissance activities over the airspace of China's coastal exclusive economic zone is a just legal action taken in accordance with international law and the Chinese law to exercise sovereign right over its exclusive economic zone and to defend its national defense security. Article 12 of "the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf" stipulates: With regard to actions taken in the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf in violation of the laws and regulations of the People's Republic of China, the People's Republic of China has the right to adopt necessary measures to investigate and affix legal liability according to law and can exercise the right of hot pursuit. Article 26 of the National Defense Law of the People's Republic of China also stipulates: The State strengthens the construction of frontier defense, coastal defense and air defense and adopts effective defense and management measures to defend the security of territory, inland waters, territorial sea and territorial airspace and safeguard national maritime rights and interests.

The action taken by the US military scouting plane ramming and damaging a Chinese military plane violates both the stipulations of relevant international air conventions and the consensus on avoiding dangerous military actions on the sea reached between the national defense ministries of China and the United States in May last year. This consensus acknowledges that although the 1944 Chicago International Civil Aviation Convention clearly stipulates that it does not apply to military aircraft and State aircraft, but respecting and observing the related rules and basic requirements of the Convention helps guarantee the navigation safety of the military aircraft and civil aircraft of both sides, that fly over international airspace. When the military aircraft of both sides encounter in international airspace, both sides should observe the current international law and international practices, and should give consideration to the navigation safety of the other side, so as to prevent dangerous approach and avoid collision. At the same time, both sides also maintained that when military aircraft of both sides encounter during the period of flying over the sea, they should take precautionary measures to avoid casualties and harms to the lives of the aircrew under non-irresistible circumstance and avoid accidents caused by artificial factors. However, he US military plane completely failed to respect this consensus and did not observe air flight rules as stipulated in international conventions. The US plane was well aware that the Chinese military airplane was flying parallel in the same direction at 400 meters on the left side, he suddenly took drastic action to turn around toward the Chinese aircraft, causing the serious consequence of the damage of the Chinese plane and the missing of its pilot. The US airplane violated the related stipulations of the international convention and broke the relevant consensus reached between China and the United States, it must therefore shoulder full responsibility.

(3) The intrusion of US military scouting plane into Chinese territorial airspace and landing in Chinese territory without application and permission constitute serious infringement on China's territorial sovereignty.

In order to seek and provide the US government with a basis for its unreasonable demand for an immediate return of its airplane and crew, some American scholars clamor: China has no legal right to detain the US reconnaissance plane and its crew who were forced to land on Hainan Island, nor does it have the right to enter this plane.

As everybody knows that various countries have full and exclusive rights to the airspace over their territories, this principle of sovereignty has been universally recognized by various countries around the world. Article 2 of the Civil Aviation Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates: The People's Republic of China enjoys full and exclusive sovereignty over its territorial airspace, Full and exclusive sovereignty here implies that the State exercises full jurisdiction and control over its territorial airspace. On the basis of this principle, Article 3 of the 1944 International Civil Aviation Convention stipulates: The national aircraft of a contracting country, without the permission of a particular agreement or other methods and acting in accordance with the stipulations therein, is not allowed to fly over the airspace of another contracting country or to land on its territory. The national aircraft, said in the Convention, is interpreted as an aircraft used in military, customs and police departments. The US military reconnaissance plane, which was the US national aircraft, seriously violated the stipulation of international law by intruding into China's territorial airspace and landing on a Chinese airport without permission from the Chinese government. At the same time, the action of US military scouting plane arbitrarily intruding into Chinese airspace also violates Chinese law. Article 12 of the Law on Territorial Waters and Contiguous Zones of the People's Republic of China stipulates: Foreign aircraft can enter the sky over the territorial waters of the People's Republic of China only when it acts in accordance with the agreement, accord signed between the government of the country concerned and the government of the People's Republic of China, or with the approval or acceptance by the government of the People's Republic of China or its authorized institution.

In the whole process from its ramming and damaging a Chinese military plane to its intrusion into the sky over China's territorial waters and to its landing on a Chinese airport, the US military scouting plane had never raised request to the Chinese side for entry or landing. Facts show that after the occurrence of the incident of collision, the communication system of the US military reconnaissance plane still operated normally, and the time from collision to landing was as long as 26 minutes, so during this period the US military plane had ample time and technological condition to raise request to the Chinese side for entry and landing, but the US military plane did not do so. The US military plane's arbitrary intrusion into Chinese territorial airspace is an infringement on China's sovereignty and poses threats to China's national security and interest, the Chinese side has every reason to raise its legitimate demands and adopt necessary measures. Even some of US legal experts have expressed this view: It is groundless to say that so-called reconnaissance plane is just like US sovereign territory. China has the right to conduct investigation.

The fact that US military reconnaissance plane carried out military scouting activities over China's exclusive economic zone, rammed and damaged Chinese military airplane which performed normal surveillance tasks, and infringed upon China's territorial airspace and territorial sovereignty is an incident seriously violating international law. China has the right to conduct comprehensive and thorough investigation of the entire event, including the responsible person of the US military plane and the military plane itself. In line with the State liability principle contained in international law, the US government should bear full responsibility arising therefrom, make explanations and apology to the Chinese government and people and immediately stop all military scouting activities along Chinese coasts. After an all-round investigation of this incident is conducted by the Chinese government, the US government should compensate the Chinese side for the losses.

(People's Daily 04/10/2001)