Does not require an ADIZ. Do you understand, my friend?
The establishment of an ADIZ by any government is purely arbitrary. No international advisory/consultant/authoritative body have any say in it. Any government can create any rules inside it and if anyone does not like those rules, there is nothing they can do about it except to present their objections. In short, an ADIZ by any country have no foundation in international law. It means an ADIZ is neither 'legal' nor 'illegal' in the sense of precedence.
But what you, the rest of the Chinese members here, and the suck-ups, do not understand is that the formal establishment of an ADIZ is a statement of intent to exercise
INCREASED AND EXCEPTIONAL controls of an airspace that extends beyond what international agreements and laws recognized as exclusive to the country, such as territorial airspace or an area of the sea that is acknowledged to be an economic asset, and that any time such increased and exceptional controls of a non-territorial area, air or sea, are claimed, there better be exceptional justifications presented to the international community for examination. As courtesy, such an area that is claimed for increased and exceptional controls by A should not trespass B's territorial airspace and if B already have an existing ADIZ, the new ADIZ created by A should not trespass that of B.
The creation of an ADIZ is based upon analyses of potential access by anyone, friendly and hostile, by air, and generally it is based on perception of threats. Friends do not threatens friends. That is why there is not an ADIZ between US and Canada. Have any of you done any basic research on flights between the US, Mexico, and assorted island nations in the Western hemisphere? Probably not, so here is a sample...
Private aircraft arriving from areas south of the U.S.
Pretty simple. A flight plan can even be phoned in. The US and Mexico are not hostile to each other.
If Japan have an ADIZ, and there is one, it was created because the US-Japan alliance felt there were sufficient countries that are either outright hostile to Japan or of indeterminate relationships and that these countries have high accessibility to the Japanese home islands and other national territorial assets. So it is absurd to simply argue that since A, B, and C each have their respective ADIZ, D must have one as well. Just because the US on the Western Hemisphere have an ADIZ because Soviet/Russian bombers often test our defense, it does not means landlocked Luxembourg that is surrounded by friends on the other side of the world must have an ADIZ as well.
Is this China's first ADIZ? Let the forum see if you guys can find out.
But the bottom line is that China have next to no experience in the maintenance of an ADIZ. The word 'maintenance' here mean creating an ADIZ, making rules for it which includes exceptions to the same, publishing those rules and their exceptions, explaining those rules and exceptions to the international aviation community, and finally enforcing those rules with restraints and without appearing aggressive and belligerent.
The Hainan Incident (2001) is not forgotten by the international aviation community. Yes, everyone know the US was on a 'spy' mission. But no, the same community will not excuse China, particularly the PLAAF, for poor intercept protocols and air discipline that resulted in a collision that killed the Chinese pilot in international airspace where no ADIZ was declared. Now with an ADIZ where the Chinese government have presented rules to the international aviation community and with those rules came latitudes for the government to respond with lethal force if the interceptors and their local commanders felt necessary, the odds of a tragedy dramatically increases via an aggressive but inexperience military.
I hope my prediction will never come true, but I still stand by it: There will be a commercial airliner shot down by an incompetent interceptor inside this ADIZ.
