War or Economic and Financial Stability?
Beijing and Tokyo have reached an agreement concerning permitted naval activity in exclusive economic zones, which reach 220 nautical miles from shore. Shouldn’t Washington and Beijing be doing the same?
President Eisenhower apologized for the flight of captured American spy pilot Francis Gary Powers over Russia and ended the U-2 flights over that country. Why couldn’t President Bush do the same when the U.S. reconnaissance plane crash-landed on Hainan Island in March 2001? Why couldn’t he just pick up the phone and discuss matters amicably with Jiang Zemin? Why was the first American spokesman Admiral Dennis Blair, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific? Why did the U.S Ambassador in Beijing, Adm. Joseph W. Prueher, handle the negotiations? Why was the U.S. defense attaché to Beijing, Brig. Gen. Neal Sealock, wearing his military uniform at his first press conference? Was this diplomacy or a constant subtle unnecessary military reminder and threat?
When a Russian pilot defected with his MiG-25 in 1976 to Japan, American experts spent nine weeks stripping the plane and examining every part. The Russians eventually got the plane back in boxes. Why was the U.S. surprised then that the Chinese examined the U.S. spy plane? Isn't that part of the risk in the espionage game? Besides, if all the hardware and software was destroyed per the "checklist" as claimed by the American crew before the Chinese got access to the plane, what is the big deal? It is face. Symbolic value ─ it is just as important to the U.S. as it is to China.
What is the point of America pairing and starting to operate radar-evading B-2 bombers and F-22 fighters in the Pacific for the first time in February 2009? More to the point, what is the point in sending USNS Impeccable, a surveillance-spy ship with 2-km-long underwater receiver and source cables, off Hainan Island to gather underwater acoustic data of China’s submarine movements from its main submarine base on Hainan earlier this month? Whether the ship was in China’s exclusive economic zone or in international waters is secondary and irrelevant. The end result is the same ─ an unnecessary confrontation with five Chinese vessels that was luckily contained without any casualties, but triggered the U.S. to send warships to protect its "surveillance" vessels. China responded by sending its largest "fishery patrol ship" China Yuzheng 311 "on a routine mission" in the South China Sea and decided to convert mothballed naval vessels to fishery patrol ships ─ all this at the dawn of a new U.S. presidential administration. It was a similar provocation to what happened with the spy plane that crash landed at the dawn of Bush’s first term in office. Why does the U.S. military insist on provoking China while the White House and State Department are trying to get the two countries to work closer to resolve the global financial crisis?
President Eisenhower apologized for the flight of captured American spy pilot Francis Gary Powers over Russia and ended the U-2 flights over that country. Why couldn’t President Bush do the same when the U.S. reconnaissance plane crash-landed on Hainan Island in March 2001? Why couldn’t he just pick up the phone and discuss matters amicably with Jiang Zemin? Why was the first American spokesman Admiral Dennis Blair, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific? Why did the U.S Ambassador in Beijing, Adm. Joseph W. Prueher, handle the negotiations? Why was the U.S. defense attaché to Beijing, Brig. Gen. Neal Sealock, wearing his military uniform at his first press conference? Was this diplomacy or a constant subtle unnecessary military reminder and threat?
When a Russian pilot defected with his MiG-25 in 1976 to Japan, American experts spent nine weeks stripping the plane and examining every part. The Russians eventually got the plane back in boxes. Why was the U.S. surprised then that the Chinese examined the U.S. spy plane? Isn't that part of the risk in the espionage game? Besides, if all the hardware and software was destroyed per the "checklist" as claimed by the American crew before the Chinese got access to the plane, what is the big deal? It is face. Symbolic value ─ it is just as important to the U.S. as it is to China.
What is the point of America pairing and starting to operate radar-evading B-2 bombers and F-22 fighters in the Pacific for the first time in February 2009? More to the point, what is the point in sending USNS Impeccable, a surveillance-spy ship with 2-km-long underwater receiver and source cables, off Hainan Island to gather underwater acoustic data of China’s submarine movements from its main submarine base on Hainan earlier this month? Whether the ship was in China’s exclusive economic zone or in international waters is secondary and irrelevant. The end result is the same ─ an unnecessary confrontation with five Chinese vessels that was luckily contained without any casualties, but triggered the U.S. to send warships to protect its "surveillance" vessels. China responded by sending its largest "fishery patrol ship" China Yuzheng 311 "on a routine mission" in the South China Sea and decided to convert mothballed naval vessels to fishery patrol ships ─ all this at the dawn of a new U.S. presidential administration. It was a similar provocation to what happened with the spy plane that crash landed at the dawn of Bush’s first term in office. Why does the U.S. military insist on provoking China while the White House and State Department are trying to get the two countries to work closer to resolve the global financial crisis?
posted by Peter de Krassel's Custom Maid Politics at 7:37 PM
1 Comments:
I had not heard of this confrontation? Do you think it's intentional on the part of Obama?
Post a Comment
<< Home