Russian Incursion into South Korean Airspace

The Japanese have apparently decided to get involved. They have registered protests against both South Korea and Russia for violating Japanese air space. Japan claims the islands as being Japanese territory.
www.cbc.ca/news/world/south-korea-warning-shots-russian-warplane-1.5221204?cmp=rss
Japan on Tuesday criticized South Korea for taking action against a Russian plane over what Japan says is its airspace, after Japan lodged a protest against both South Korea and Russia over the incident.

"Takeshima is Japan's territory," Foreign Minister Taro Kono told a news conference, referring to an island claimed by both South Korea and Japan. South Korea calls the island Dokdo.
 
But why fly an A-50 (AWACSski) into harm's way? Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft (with the bloody great radome on the top of the fuselage) do their best to stay well away from fighters. Curioser and curiouser.


 
But why fly an A-50 (AWACSski) into harm's way? Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft (with the bloody great radome on the top of the fuselage) do their best to stay well away from fighters. Curioser and curiouser.


As noted in the BBC story, Russia and China were conducting joint exercises in international air space. They're not at war with South Korea so there's no reason for them to not conduct them in an international air space that is conveniently located half way between both sides.
 
Oh good grief, and we tell children off for squabbling in the playground !
It's a tempest in a tea pot. South Korea's claim to the islands is a bit shaky so they are using the opportunity to get their claims on the formal record. The way the system works is that your claim to sovereignty over territory is only as strong as your record of exercising it. If you don't protest incursions by other countries your claim is weakened. The more tenuous your claim is, the more noise you need to make about it.

The real dispute is between South Korea and Japan. If the case ever goes to arbitration (which I suspect Japan will try to avoid at all costs), South Korea can pull this incident out of their file as one piece of documentary evidence to support their claim of having a history of exercising sovereignty.

Once South Korea filed their protests Japan had to file protests of their own in order to not let the South Koreans get ahead of them on creating "evidence" for their claim.

Something very similar happens between Canada and Denmark with respect to Hans Island in the channel between Ellesmere Island (Canada) and Greenland (Denmark). Every year the two sides send (at separate times) a party ashore to plant their flag. They also leave a bottle of alcohol for the other side to collect and drink when they arrive in their turn. It's all theatre, but it's essential theatre under international law. If either side stops sending their flag party the other side would use that as "evidence" against them that they had abandoned their claim to the island.
 
As noted in the BBC story, Russia and China were conducting joint exercises in international air space. They're not at war with South Korea so there's no reason for them to not conduct them in an international air space that is conveniently located half way between both sides.
I have no issue with the status of the airspace; I just find it very strange in the way an AEW&C aircraft has been employed.
 
Current legal status of the islands is not internationally recognised. They are de facto under Korean control but apparently it is not recognised by Moscow (at least officially).
Which means that the aircraft violated either Korean or Japanese airspace.

What were they doing there in the first place?
 
Which means that the aircraft violated either Korean or Japanese airspace.

What were they doing there in the first place?
According to Russian MoD minimal distance between the islands and the aircrafts was 25 km. So sovereign airspace (no matter which one) was not violated. Russian planes flew strictly inside international airspace.

1563961726771.png
 
According to Russian MoD minimal distance between the islands and the aircrafts was 25 km. So sovereign airspace (no matter which one) was not violated. Russian planes flew strictly inside international airspace.

View attachment 405971
If that map is what the Russian MoD have really claimed happened then they've admitted to their aircraft entering the Japanese Contiguous Zone in transiting between Tsushima and Iki Islands. Under UNCLOS, the sovereign power has the right to prevent or punish "infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations" within its Contiguous Zone.

Can we take it that Naval Aviation submitted the correct Border Control paperwork in advance?
 
If that map is what the Russian MoD have really claimed happened then they've admitted to their aircraft entering the Japanese Contiguous Zone in transiting between Tsushima and Iki Islands. Under UNCLOS, the sovereign power has the right to prevent or punish "infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations" within its Contiguous Zone.

Can we take it that Naval Aviation submitted the correct Border Control paperwork in advance?
They were exercising their "freedom of navigation rights". You know, the ones that certain other parties are so keen on?
 
According to Russian MoD minimal distance between the islands and the aircrafts was 25 km. So sovereign airspace (no matter which one) was not violated. Russian planes flew strictly inside international airspace.

View attachment 405971
Although, curiously, this graphic "prooving" that the Tu-95's didn't enter South Korean airspace makes no mention of the A-50. I only bring this up because it was the A-50 that the South Koreans claim entered their airspace, not the TU-95s.
 
Although, curiously, this graphic "prooving" that the Tu-95's didn't enter South Korean airspace makes no mention of the A-50. I only bring this up because it was the A-50 that the South Koreans claim entered their airspace, not the TU-95s.
Maybe the A-50 pilot was on the vodka and weaving all over the airspace.
 
They were exercising their "freedom of navigation rights". You know, the ones that certain other parties are so keen on?
It would be an extremely awkward precedent to have set either way, wouldn't it?
 
Although, curiously, this graphic "prooving" that the Tu-95's didn't enter South Korean airspace makes no mention of the A-50. I only bring this up because it was the A-50 that the South Koreans claim entered their airspace, not the TU-95s.
The Koreans claim that Russian plane violated something... some border, line, 'Korean' airspace. So it is up to them to publish map and show the point where it has been done.
 
The Koreans claim that Russian plane violated something... some border, line, 'Korean' airspace. So it is up to them to publish map and show the point where it has been done.
Fair enough, but what is it that the Russian MOD are trying to hide? They know that the South Korean’s claim of sovereign airspace incursion is centred on the A-50, yet their refutation only mentions ADIZ and Tu-95s.
The only logical conclusion is that they want to avoid discussion about A-50’s flight path and whether or not it did enter what the Koreans claim as their sovereign airspace.

Or perhaps they just obfuscate as a reflex.
 
Fair enough, but what is it that the Russian MOD are trying to hide? They know that the South Korean’s claim of sovereign airspace incursion is centred on the A-50, yet their refutation only mentions ADIZ and Tu-95s.
The only logical conclusion is that they want to avoid discussion about A-50’s flight path and whether or not it did enter what the Koreans claim as their sovereign airspace.

Or perhaps they just obfuscate as a reflex.
I believe that A-50 was not separately mentioned just for brevity.
 

Latest Threads

Top