If the USA denies access to this aircraft then the whole 30+ nation Open Skies treaty will basically collapse.
The point of it is that each nation is able to monitor each other, within prescribed limits to number and duration of overflights and sensor resolution.
I mean there isn't even a basis for this objection; the USA's OC-135s that participate in Open Skies are already fitted with synthetic-aperture radars ( SAROS ) and it's explicitly permitted in the Treaty:
Open Skies aircraft can be equipped with four types of sensors: optical panoramic and framing cameras; video cameras; infrared line-scanning devices; and sideways-looking synthetic aperture radars.
But the Russkies are fitting digital cameras! Those sneaky buggers. The OC-135s still use film cameras... embarrassing.
American authorities flip out when reporters from a print newspaper take photographs from a public road of a tank in front of a tank manufacturing plant--something that is obviously on display to the public--for use as stock photos the next time the paper needs to run a related story.
This just shows that they are hypersensitive and irrational about photography of any kind, whether it has actual intelligence value or not. That makes me suspicious that they are hiding something from us, perhaps something they fear that the Russians might reveal to the American public. But that could be just my foil hat talking.
Mutually assured surveillance seems a less dangerous baseline than mutually assured destruction, anyway.
It's worth noting that the Russians have already set precedent for denying access to their air space under this treaty by canceling scheduled US surveillance flights during the build up on the Crimean border.
As the article notes, the practice in question is governed by the Open Skies Treaty.[1] The treaty[2] allows party countries to review which aircraft types are permitted overflight rights under the treaty. So if the United States initially objects to a new type of aircraft doing overflights, it is simply exercising its rights under the treaty. This is an issue for international negotiation by diplomats. As in most matters of diplomacy, how the specific issues are resolved in this review will be determined in part by what each side has to offer the other in terms of reciprocity--does the United States get to fly enhanced aircraft over the territory of other countries, or not?
"Article V
"AIRCRAFT DESIGNATION
"1. Each State Party shall have the right to designate as observation aircraft one or more types or models of aircraft registered by the relevant authorities of a State Party.
"2. Each State Party shall have the right to designate types or models of aircraft as observation aircraft or add new types or models of aircraft to those designated earlier by it, provided that it notifies all other States Parties 30 days in advance thereof. The notification of the designation of aircraft of a type or model shall contain the information specified in Annex C to this Treaty."
. . . .
"Article VI
"CHOICE OF OBSERVATION AIRCRAFT, GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR THE CONDUCT OF OBSERVATION FLIGHTS, AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MISSION PLANNING
"SECTION I. CHOICE OF OBSERVATION AIRCRAFT AND GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR THE CONDUCT OF OBSERVATION FLIGHTS
"1. Observation flights shall be conducted using observation aircraft that have been designated by a State Party pursuant to Article V. Unless the observed Party exercises its right to provide an observation aircraft that it has itself designated, the observing Party shall have the right to provide the observation aircraft. In the event that the observing Party provides the observation aircraft, it shall have the right to provide an aircraft that it has itself designated or an aircraft designated by another State Party. In the event that the observed Party provides the observation aircraft, the observing Party shall have the right to be provided with an aircraft capable of achieving a minimum unrefuelled range, including the necessary fuel reserves, equivalent to one-half of the flight distance, as notified in accordance with paragraph 5, subparagraph(G) of this Section.
. . . .
"Article VIII
"PROHIBITIONS, DEVIATIONS FROM FLIGHT PLANS AND EMERGENCY SITUATIONS
"SECTION I. PROHIBITION OF OBSERVATION FLIGHTS AND CHANGES TO MISSION PLANS
"1. The observed Party shall have the right to prohibit an observation flight that is not in compliance with the provisions of this Treaty.
. . . .
"ANNEX C
"INFORMATION ON OBSERVATION AIRCRAFT
Pursuant to the provisions of Article V, paragraph 2 of the Treaty, States Parties, when designating aircraft as observation aircraft, shall notify all other States Parties of the information specified below.
"1. Identification:
"(A) type and model; and
"(B) number, category, type and configuration of each sensor installed on the observation aircraft, as provided in accordance with the provisions of Annex B to the Treaty;"
The point of it is that each nation is able to monitor each other, within prescribed limits to number and duration of overflights and sensor resolution.
I mean there isn't even a basis for this objection; the USA's OC-135s that participate in Open Skies are already fitted with synthetic-aperture radars ( SAROS ) and it's explicitly permitted in the Treaty:
Open Skies aircraft can be equipped with four types of sensors: optical panoramic and framing cameras; video cameras; infrared line-scanning devices; and sideways-looking synthetic aperture radars.
But the Russkies are fitting digital cameras! Those sneaky buggers. The OC-135s still use film cameras... embarrassing.