THE US HAS offered to pay China US$34,000 to cover costs associated with the April collision of a US reconnaissance plane and a Chinese fighter jet. "We have arrived at what we think is a fair figure for services rendered and assistance in taking care of the aircrew and some of the materials and contracts to remove the EP-3 plane," stated Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral Craig Quigley. Beijing, however, is not at all happy with the offer of a US$34,000 payment. Instead, Chinese government officials are demanding at least US$1 million as compensation.
Washington's offer is foolish and Beijing's demand is outrageous. The US should not pay even US$1. Giving any payment would reward China for conduct that violated international law in multiple ways.
It is perfectly legal to conduct electronic surveillance of another country from international air space. (The wisdom of conducting such flights so close to the territory of a notoriously prickly power such as China is another matter.)
And there is no question that the US plane was in international air space at the time the collision occurred. Both Beijing and Washington placed the plane at approximately 60 to 70 miles off the shore of Hainan island.
Under international law, a country's territorial waters and air space extend only 12 miles from shore.
The plane entered Chinese air space only after it was damaged in the collision and needed to make an emergency landing. That collision would never have occurred if the reconnaissance plane had not been illegally harassed by the Chinese fighter.
The actions of Chinese authorities after the collision were even more disturbing. The decision to enter the plane and remove the crew for questioning may have been warranted by the unusual circumstances of the EP-3's arrival. But detaining the crew and preventing them from having access to US embassy officials for nearly 72 hours was a flagrant violation of international law. And declining to release the crew for nearly two weeks verged on creating a hostage incident.
The Bush administration already swallowed its pride by offering expressions of regret for the episode.
Although the administration was under no obligation to make such a concession, US officials probably had little choice if they wanted to get the crew back in a timely fashion and prevent a further deterioration in US-Chinese relations.
Likewise, the administration could have done little to prevent Chinese authorities from insisting that the plane be cut up and shipped back to the US in crates unless Washington was willing to escalate the confrontation.
Making compromises and accepting unpleasant realities is sometimes a necessary part of diplomacy. But rewarding a regime for egregious behavior is going far beyond what is necessary. The Bush administration should never have offered financial compensation. And given Beijing's insulting demand for even more money, the administration should immediately rescind the offer.
Ted Galen Carpenter is vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs