The facts are that Lai’s legislature is a fucking mess domestically. It’s breaking out into fistfights, people are trying to steal away bills to prevent them getting passed, and the KMT+TPP are much more unified than expected.
Lai was only elected because of FPTP and he needs to project legitimacy in the face of the KMT+TPP opposition (who, together, received something like 60% of the vote). This is him attempting to do so.
He’s deflecting on a fucking non-issue because he doesn’t want to admit that his policy of antagonizing China isn’t working and the opposition (KMT+TPP) have increasing power.
Lai is objectively fucked in his own legislature. Both the KMT and TPP are opposed to the DPP (enough to set aside their own differences)… And they hold the majority in the legislature.
The US Coast Guard recently released images of a fleet of four ships of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) sailing near a US Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) near Alaska’s Aleutian Islands
Fraud in China has far worse consequences than fraud in Australia. Even if I were to be arrested, I’d prefer it to happen in Australia where I can get off with a slap on the wrist.
China’s navy is by no means advanced enough to project power halfway across the globe. It’s not been designed to do so, either: most of China’s navy is designed to repel a naval invasion near Chinese waters.
It’s considered breaking news and a gross overstep when China flies over an arbitrary EEZ line in the Taiwan Strait to enter another EEZ for even a second. That should tell you all you need to know about China’s confidence in its own capabilities.
Australia claims they were flying there for surveillance to enforce sanctions on North Korea. UNCLOS stipulates what internationally lawful uses of the sea are (including freedom of navigation, overflight), and it’s difficult to argue that foreign surveillance falls under that definition. Notably, surveillance does not fall under overflight, as overflight stipulates that no activities are conducted over the flyover that are not related to the flyover itself.
Your claim is that military surveillance is an internationally lawful use. That’s insane. Your interpretation would allow Chinese and Russian aircraft to surveil within 12 miles of the US mainland, drop maritime survey beacons outside of key harbours (to spot submarines and map out the harbour), and do acrobatics within view of major US cities.
Again, dropping warning flares in front of an aircraft to intercept is standard policy. It’s not even worthy of mention most of the time, and it’s described in FAA rules.
Motherfucker are you dumb, blind, or arguing in bad faith? Literally your own exact motherfucking source says this.
Articles 88 to 115 and other pertinent rules of international law apply to the exclusive economic zone in so far as they are not incompatible with this Part.
In exercising their rights and performing their duties under this Convention in the exclusive economic zone, States shall have due regard to the rights and duties of the coastal State and shall comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal State in accordance with the provisions of this Convention and other rules of international law in so far as they are not incompatible with this Part.
UNCLOS Article 58.2 and 58.3
Jesus Christ if you’re going to argue in bad faith at least make an effort.