Thursday, April 5, 2001

By Steven Butler, Knight Ridder Newspapers

WASHINGTON — This week’s eyeball-to-eyeball standoff with China over a disabled U.S. Navy reconnaissance aircraft lacks the drama and danger of, say, the Cuban missile crisis.

But a war between the United States and China may be far more likely than war between America and the Soviet Union ever was, and the face-off over the crippled EP-3E and its 24 crew members could send the world’s only superpower and Asia’s rising power skidding into a collision.

"This is a defining moment," said David Shambaugh, a China specialist at George Washington University here. "Given the fragility and suspicions on both sides, this is an incident that can really change the tenor and substance of the relationship."

That could profoundly alter the strategic landscape in Asia, where America’s closest allies, Japan and South Korea, have counted on friendly relations with China to work out regional economic and security problems, including reducing tension on the Korea peninsula.

The United States and the Soviet Union came close to war in numerous crises as they competed globally for influence. What they lacked was a single flash point, an issue of such fundamental importance that neither side would back down.

With China, there may be just such a dispute: Taiwan, the prosperous island province that has run its affairs independently for the past 56 years but that China vows to reclaim. Taiwan is a democracy whose spirit of independence is a poor fit with the autocratic Chinese system.

The United States insists that Taiwan and China must resolve their differences peacefully and has an implied commitment to prevent an invasion from China. But China, which recently installed new missile batteries within range of Taiwan, calls for reunification by any means.

"Those goals are irreconcilable," said Andrew Nathan, a Columbia University China specialist. "The Chinese are obviously preparing to use military force if they feel the time is right and nothing else works. That is not just a rhetorical option, because they won’t achieve their goal any other way."

That view is open to dispute. Yet the current standoff appears to stem in part from the same Chinese nationalist impulses, including an agitated and dissatisfied public, which could propel Beijing to take a more aggressive stance on Taiwan.

"The rhetorical positions of the new administration are seen by the Chinese military as extraordinarily threatening," said Kenneth Lieberthal, who served as a China specialist on President Clinton’s National Security Council staff. These include expanding the Japanese security role in Asia, taking a tougher line with North Korea, increasing diplomatic respect for Taiwan and selling sophisticated weapons there, promoting a theater missile-defense system despite Chinese opposition and reducing the importance of China in U.S. foreign policy.

Lieberthal thinks China’s Foreign Ministry may have wanted to resolve the spy plane incident quickly, while the Chinese military could not pass up an opportunity to dissect an American spy plane and demonstrate that China can’t be pushed around.

Nevertheless, said Robert Ross, a Boston College foreign-policy specialist, the Sino-American relationship is remarkably resilient, underpinned by strong economic, cultural and educational ties.

In 1999, for example, the accidental U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, and a congressional report that accused Beijing of stealing U.S. nuclear secrets soured relations. Yet Clinton won congressional approval that same year on a deal for China to join the World Trade Organization. Last year, Congress approved permanent normal trade status, removing the painful annual ritual of examining China’s human rights record before granting favored trade status.

Experts also note that every new president since Jimmy Carter has gotten off to a rocky start with China and eventually had to moderate his policies.

"All the presidents come in with the sense that their predecessor did not know how to use American power to bring about Chinese cooperation," said Ross. "But then they learn that the Chinese can also be powerful."

Ross is optimistic that trends in Taiwan will discourage the impulse toward outright independence there, decreasing the chance of war.

"They have an anxious business elite that is keen to do business on the mainland," he said. That encourages Taiwan’s leaders to deal with China and seek political compromises, a trend that has pleased political leaders in Beijing.

Nathan believes that China will make a simple calculus, planning offensive action against Taiwan if it sees the military balance turning against it. That would force the United States to decide whether to use its military might to defend the island.

Some Chinese, Nathan said, believe that even a Chinese military defeat would alienate America’s Asian allies and work to Beijing’s advantage. But whatever its outcome, war would mark the ultimate failure of today’s diplomacy.

Back to April's stories
Page Two news roundup
Stories from March, 2001
Stories from February, 2001
Stories from January, 2001
Stories from December, 2000
Stories from November, 2000
Stories from October, 2000
Stories from August and September, 2000
Stories from June and July, 2000
Home