China's aggressive claims have no basis in customary international law or UNCLOS
The United States and China, on the other hand, do not share a common interest in freedom of navigation and overflight. On the contrary, the PRC's views on the legality of military activities in the EEZ are diametrically opposed to the views of the United States. China argues that military activities in their EEZ, such as U.S. Sensitive Reconnaissance Operations (SRO) and other SMS operations, are hostile acts and therefore violate the "peaceful purposes" provisions of UNCLOS Articles 88, 141 and 301. Beijing additionally argues that such operations impair state security interests and damage China's sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the EEZ. Accordingly, China insists that it has a right to impose restrictions on military activities in the EEZ, including prohibiting surveillance and reconnaissance operations as well as other military marine data collection activities. China's claims have no basis in customary international law or UNCLOS and are not supported by state practice.42
Journal of National Security Law and Policy. Vol. 6. (2012): 207-226. [ More (4 quotes) ]
"The U.S.-China Incidents at Sea Agreement: A Recipe for Disaster." Quicktabs: Evidence
Arguments
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
-
China views its excessive regulatory claims over the EEZ as an important component of its ability to conduct asymmetric maritime warfare and deny U.S. access to the Asia-Pacific region.
Keywords:Related Quotes:- China executing a lawfare campaign against U.S. navy with excessive EEZ claims
- U.S. freedom of operations under continual and increasing challenge by a more aggressive China
- Multiple examples of Chinese excessive naval claims that run afoul of UNCLOS
- China's excessive claims run counter to its global economic ambitions and its own territorial defense strategy
- ... and 5 more quote(s)