So the complaint is about... what exactly?
- The guys serve their country IAW their contract and their pledge of allegiance.
- They sign a little thing called the OSA, which is binding in perpetuity.
- After retirement, they are offered a job flying for another mob, instructing,
- They get paid for their service.
So, exactly... "what the problem is?"
Have they breached a term of their service or the OSA? If so, throw the book at them!
If they haven't, then exactly what is the issue?
Do bankers not work for, assist in profits etc of enterprises that are wholly owned by the PRC govt? Is making trillions of dollars for the PRC govt a lesser "sell out" than a guy walking out to a J-20 to go and teach a guy to fly?
Are they going to teach any factor that came out of SQN SOPs or out of the NATO/US/NOFORN tactics manuals? Would that not be a breach of the OSA and do we assume that they would breach the OSA for a handful of yuan?
PRC as a country has a relatively belligerent attitude to interests in the SCS area, ROK, and JPN. The breach of the UNCLOS by their actions in the SCS is an irritant, and if anyone has a right to object to EFA drivers playing around in Sanya or some other exotic part of PRC, it would be the countries around the SCS.
I changed airforces, as did probably 10% of my generation. In our cases, we went from using one set of tactics to using the same set of tactics with another paint job. There was no lessons learned asked for, and none were given, we drove the planes and taught as the new force required.
Can the guys teach new tactics based on what they had from the squadron SOPs? That is the bit that runs into a serious risk of breaches of the OSA, to which end the relevant states security service has every right to ask appropriate questions, including use of usual techniques to evaluate candid responses.
Does this make me happy to hear? Absolutely not. The RAF and various other defence forces fail to care for their assets which are their people, the engineers, operations and flight crew that make up the capability to do the job. Defence has a need to have a churn rate, there is a continuous training activity to maintain peak proficiency, which at least the US DOD recognised means to avoid losing the competency over time, by developing the reserves, which permit the war fighter to maintain his (or her) competency and capability to support his nation, and to give them a life that is reasonable, the DODs not being known for properly paying engineers, pilots or ops staff.