Our new President is incredibly adept at making self-fulfilling prophecies. First, there were his negative comments about the economy for over a year during the presidential campaign, which may have actually helped to slow down the economy. Then, on foreign policy, Bush downgraded our relationship with China from "strategic partner," to "strategic competitor." Although the two phrases might sound equally meaningless (sort of like "compassionate conservative"), the Chinese apparently didn't think so. Last weekend a U.S. EP-3E Aries II intelligence-gathering plane collided with a Chinese F-8 fighter jet that was flying at close range during the U.S. plane's routine surveillance flight over the South China Sea. The Chinese fighter jet, one of two following the U.S. plane, crashed into the ocean and the pilot has yet to be rescued. The EP-3's 24 member crew managed to land their plane on Hainan Island, a Chinese province approximately 70 miles to the North of the incident. As of last night, China was still detaining the crew members and the plane had not been returned. Whether the crew members are being held as hostages, suspected spies or just for medical treatment is unknown. Still, the incident brings up a number of important questions regarding the future of U.S.-China relations and marks a difficult first test of the Bush administration's ability to deal with international military crises.
The first question that needs to be answered is who was at fault for the mid-air "bumping heads?" Both countries blame each other for the accident, but it isn't clear why Chinese aircraft were flying so close to the U.S. plane to begin with. The U.S. conducts surveillance flights over international waters on a regular basis and claims that they aren't used to spy on any particular country, although the technology is advanced enough that it could easily gather information on China from outside its air space. Chinese air force planes have been "intercepting" U.S. planes for decades, but in recent months the Chinese have become bolder, sometimes flying as close as 50 feet from our planes. The Chinese government already has an unfavorable opinion of George W. Bush as a result of his determination to build a missile defense system. They say such a system will dramatically increase their need for greater numbers of warheads. This recent incident may be a case of Chinese leaders deciding to test the Bush administration's resolve on military issues.
Why did the EP-3 decide to land in China? We know that the plane was in good enough condition to fly 70 miles and make an emergency landing. From an intelligence perspective, it might have been better if the crew had simply bailed out and let the plane crash into the ocean. China could still have recovered the wreckage but the amount they would have learned from a wrecked plane is far less than what they've already gained by taking possession of the plane. Republicans like Chris Cox of California were quick to criticize the Clinton administration when China stole U.S. nuclear secrets in the still unsolved Los Alamos case. Now, the Bush administration has inadvertently "given" China an entire plane full of intelligence information. Perhaps the U.S. military really believed China would respect the plane's integrity. Initially the Bush administration claimed that the plane constituted U.S. territory and an inspection of it would violate U.S. sovereignty. But it seems doubtful that our military would respect the "sovereignty" of a Chinese spy plane that crashed on U.S. soil.
How will this incident impact the Bush administration's decision to send military technology and naval ships to Taiwan? China's rapidly advancing missile program (perhaps aided by U.S. intelligence stolen under Clinton) has become a major concern for Taiwan. China might even decide to use the airplane crew as bargaining chips in exchange for a U.S. promise to not give Taiwan military support. On the other hand, Bush might use China's new aggressiveness as an excuse for amplifying aid to Taiwan; a decision that could seriously destabilize the region even further.
The most important question is how this incident will effect the new economic relationship between the U.S. and China. China's accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) still hinges on their complying with various trade promises expected to be complete by June. If relations between the two countries worsen and the free trade agreement collapses, it could mark a serious economic loss to the U.S. companies that have invested billions in anticipation of free trade. This would be especially disastrous for the economy at a time when U.S. companies are already beginning to lay off workers in anticipation of a second Bush recession.
China is emerging as the greatest threat to U.S. security in the 21st century. Unlike the Soviet Union under much of the cold war, China has the ability to adapt to the world economy, and the country's growing wealth will provide its oppressive government with the resources to develop into a military super power. Minor clashes like the one that happened last weekend will become more frequent in the future if China decides to expand its territorial sphere of influence. In the long term, the Bush administration needs to develop a more coherent policy on China that goes beyond Clintonesque catch phrases, perhaps negotiating a treaty clarifying the U.S.'s role in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Straits. Just as on Wall Street, uncertainty and confusion can be very unhealthy for international relations.
