WASHINGTON -- Now that the crew of the EP-3E surveillance plane is back home after their detention, the United States faces a critical and potentially dangerous period in its relations with China.
With talks set to begin this week to determine the eventual fate of the U.S. aircraft, which remains in Chinese hands, there is the danger that those on both sides who oppose constructive engagement between the two nations will use this period to vilify their opponent and raise the level of rhetoric and tension.
Those in the United States who see China as a strategic opponent bent on driving American influence from East Asia (a view that goes far beyond Mr. Bush's characterization of China as a strategic competitor) will declare that Chinese demands for an apology were part of Beijing's long-term plan to diminish, if not eliminate, America's position and prestige.
In many ways, the collision between the U.S. and Chinese planes occurred at a particularly unfortunate time. Historically, the sharpest flow of rhetoric between the United States and China seems to take place between February and April of each year.
For example, China's shrillest opposition to the annual sale of U.S. arms to Taiwan occurs during this time. This year, "Pentagon sources" have imbued such annual Chinese rhetoric with a even more ominous cast.
In addition, China announces its new budget in March. Last year, the People's Liberation Army received a 13 percent increase; this year it received a 17 percent increase -- the ninth straight double-digit increase. These increases are viewed by Sinophobes as indicative of a growing threat aimed at the United States, although in both years most of the money seems destined for pay increases or garrison improvements.
Last year, in February, the Washington Times published the headline "Pentagon study finds China preparing for war with U.S." It was only near the end of the article that one learned that the Pentagon estimated the Chinese could not challenge the United States before 2030.
This year "unnamed Pentagon sources" are warning
that American satellites have detected preparations for a test
at China's Lop Nur nuclear test range. Although sub-critical tests
are allowed under the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (which China
and the United States have signed but not ratified), the implication
is that Beijing is preparing to cheat and test a small
yield device that will be undetectable to seismic and radiation
sensors.
If this is how Sinophobes in Washington see China, consider
how the Chinese might view
some U.S. actions:
-- A section of the Pentagon's fiscal year 1999 authorization legislation requires a "military balance" report to Congress on forces on either side of the Taiwan Strait. The implication is that Congress will ensure that Taiwan is supplied with weaponry to match whatever China buys or develops, including offensive weapons.
-- The fiscal year 2000 authorization measure limits the extent of U.S. weaponry that can be shown to the Chinese, restricts the extent of exercises held with military forces from China, and requires a report of all contacts with Chinese military personnel.
-- Last year, at the request of Taiwan's new president, the House approved the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act which, among its provisions, would have reestablished direct military-to-military contacts between the United States and Taiwan, a move that surely would have antagonized Beijing. Admiral Dennis Blair, the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Pacific Command, opposed the bill on the grounds it would raise the rhetorical and tension levels. The measure failed to win approval in the Senate.
Right now is not the time for either side to needlessly provoke the other. As U.S. and Chinese officials conduct talks designed to sort out the incident over the South China Sea, intemperate rhetoric -- especially from either country's military -- that "names" a winner in the diplomatic standoff or faults the other side will only make the investigation more contentious. Such an outcome will serve no one's interests other than those who need to justify their paranoia by naming -- and thus creating -- a new "Evil Empire."
Col. Daniel Smith, U.S. Army (Ret.) is chief of research
for the Center for Defense Information,
an independent research organization based in Washington, D.C.
that monitors the military.