| Office of Research | Issue Focus | Foreign Media Reaction |
|
Commentary from ... Europe East Asia |
| 12 April 2001 U.S.-China: End of Standoff Welcomed; Next, 'Learning The Lessons' |
he end of the U.S.-China standoff was universally welcomed on editorial pages in China, East Asia and Europe, with some analysts expressing "surprise" at the quick resolution. Most went on to ponder what the incident portends for future U.S.-Sino relations and hoped that "both governments will use this as a learning experience." Almost all Chinese newspapers carried the same banner headline: "U.S.: We Are 'Very Sorry,'" while editorials in the state-run media stressed that it was a victory for "the Chinese government and people against U.S. hegemony." East Asian observers typically credited both sides with exercising "relative restraint" in not letting the "crisis escalate." A majority in Europe, meanwhile, praised U.S. diplomatic efforts and concluded that President Bush had "passed his first foreign policy test." Highlights follow:
EAST ASIA: The official Chinese press carried an extensive Xinhua news agency piece highlighting the U.S.' "very sorry" sentiments, reiterating Beijing's official stance that "the Chinese side has handled [the affair] calmly and with restraint," and urging the U.S. to "work with the Chinese side to bring relations back on a normal track." Editorials in the Communist Party People's Daily and the China Daily--echoing views also found in pro-PRC Hong Kong and pro-government Singapore dailies--sought to portray the denouement as an unequivocal win for Beijing, which succeeded in "forcing the U.S. government to change from its initial rude and unreasonable attitude to saying 'very sorry.'" An Australian paper, by contrast, criticized Beijing, arguing that the case revealed "just how little store the Chinese leadership sets by international law." Independent Hong Kong writers and Toyko and Taipei editorialists praised both parties for not letting the standoff derail relations, and even suggested that the incident might "help to form a new strategic cooperative relationship between the two." That said, they also foresaw "many trials ahead for Washington-Bejing ties."
EUROPE: With the exception of one centrist Italian daily--which contended that the Bush administration "emerged humiliated"--most analysts in Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Ireland--praised Mr. Bush's performance in dealing with the "first serious foreign policy test of his presidency." They wrote glowingly of his "controlled" behavior and "pragmatic" response. London's conservative Times observed: "He allowed old-fashioned negotiation and hard-headed diplomacy to do the work.... He announced the hard-argued deal with quiet, statemanslike satisfaction." Several stressed that part of the president's success was that he managed to "keep the Republican hawks at bay." Others argued that Secretary Powell's role "may have been decisive." On a somewhat lesser scale, pundits also praised the Chinese side for being pragmatic and bringing the episode to a swifter conclusion. Editorialists drew a variety of "lessons," with most describing the "limits" of one or the other power. Notably, a nationalist paper in Russia boldly stated that Beijing has "set an example" of how a great power should defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Media voices were in agreement, however, that the "confrontation in East Asia is not over," and that there are likely to be further U.S.-Sino confrontations which cannot be "so easily resolved" as the Hainan standoff.
EDITORS: Katherine Starr, Diana McCaffrey
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 31 reports from 15 countries, April 11-12. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials from each country are listed from the most recent date.
************************************************************************ ***
EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC
CHINA: "U.S.: We Are 'Very Sorry'"
Xinhua official Chinese news agency wrote in both the official English-language China Daily and the official Chinese-language People's Daily (4/12): "While receiving a letter from U.S. Ambassador Joseph Prueher about the incident whereby a U.S. military reconnaissance plane rammed into and destroyed a Chinese military aircraft, handed over to Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan on behalf of the U.S. government yesterday afternoon, Tang pointed out that the U.S. side must take full responsibility for the incident, provide convincing explanations to the Chinese people, stop its reconnaissance activities above the Chinese coast and take measures to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. Ambassador Prueher said in the letter that both President Bush and Secretary of State Colin Powell have expressed their sincere regret about China's missing pilot and aircraft. He said on behalf of the U.S. government that they were very sorry to the Chinese people and the family of pilot Wang Wei and that they were very sorry for the U.S. plane entering China's airspace and landing without a verbal clearance.... Minister Tang emphasized that ever since the incident happened, the Chinese side has handled it calmly and with restraint, in accordance with international law and relevant laws of China.... It is hoped that the United States will strictly abide by the three joint communiques and the basic norms governing international relations and will refrain from doing anything else to harm bilateral relations. The United States should have a constructive attitude and work with the Chinese side to bring bilateral relations back on a normal track."
"Turn Patriotic Enthusiasm Into Strength To Build A Powerful Nation"
An editorial in the official Communist Party People's Daily (Renmin Ribao, 4/12) read: "The firm struggle by the Chinese government and people against U.S. hegemony has forced the U.S. government to change from its initial rude and unreasonable attitude to saying 'very sorry' to the Chinese people for the plane collision. In dealing with this incident with the United States, China has fully displayed its manner as a great power in safeguarding world peace and struggling unyieldingly against power politics.... China has won initial success in its struggle, which still continues. The struggle between the pursuers and opponents of hegemony and the unipolar world and the multipolar world is a long-term and complicated one and it will not be completed through one event or one round of encounters.... All Chinese people should turn their patriotic enthusiasm into strength to build our economy, to strengthen our national defense and to enhance our national cohesion."
"A Step Forward, No Conclusion Yet"
An editorial in the official, English-language China Daily held (4/12): "That the U.S. government finally backed down from its aggressive no-apology stance, which had annoyed not only the Chinese but all upright people the world over, is certainly a welcome move toward an ultimate solution of the potentially explosive issue. The difficulty of squeezing an expression of repentance from the U.S. government for its apparent wrongdoing in this case shows the magnitude of the U.S. hegemony that is poisoning relations with many other countries besides China. China is not the sole country that has fallen victim to the U.S.' signature double standards in handling international relations. Neither intimidation nor condescension solves international conflicts.... That the incident happened at all, and became a damaging stalemate, was entirely because of U.S. provocation and its subsequent unrepentance.
"Had U.S. politicians tried to look beyond their self-interest from the beginning, there would not have been the 11-day standoff. And the tension-charged mess would not have been unknotted had the United States not come to terms with reality and reason. It is time for the United States to do some serious soul-searching. The next time it points a finger at any country which defies American will, it really should look at itself in the mirror first. The Chinese government accepted the American gesture--their attitude changed from belligerence to regret, to sorry and to very sorry--and responded graciously..... Apart from saying sorry, U.S. politicians should show more sincerity so that bilateral relations do not suffer irreparable damage. To prevent something like this from happening again, the United States should relinquish its Cold-War mentality against China and stop the provocative spy missions at China's doorstep."
HONG KONG: "Learning The Lessons"
The independent South China Morning Post commented in its editorial (4/12): "It is to be hoped both governments will use this as a learning experience. For the Bush administration, this was a first foreign policy crisis, involving a country it has declared to be a strategic competitor. For China, this has been an encounter with a new U.S. administration that is noticeably less emollient towards it than its predecessor. This crisis could easily have escalated out of control but for the relative restraint both governments exhibited.... Hopefully as a result of this crisis both countries will see the dangers of taking their differences too far and will now concentrate on finding ways to manage their relationship. Putting new life into the existing Military Maritime Commission to avoid incidents such as this, and provide a channel for crisis management, is a good first step. The state visit to China that Bush is due to make this year ought to lay the groundwork for a more stable long-term relationship."
"China Enjoys Major Diplomatic Victory Against Hegemony"
The pro-PRC Wen Wei Po had this editorial (4/12): "The collision incident is not yet over. Wang Wei is still missing and the U.S. apology did not cover its military reconnaissance activities in China. Both China and the United States have to continue to negotiate on the reconnaissance activities and other issues related.... U.S. reconnaissance planes intruding upon our coastal area...together with the...crash incident cause the Chinese people to understand that hegemonism really exists. This incident evoked our will to strengthen China and to seize the chance to accelerate economic development. It has let people know that only unity and stability will make the homeland stronger and more modernized. Hegemony will not dare take reckless action."
"Anti-Hegemonism, China Should Strive To Become Stronger"
The pro-PRC Hong Kong Commercial Daily remarked in its editorial (4/12): "The collision incident once again shows that U.S. hegemonism is unworkable.... Having just moved into the White House, Bush should learn a lesson from this incident. Flaunting one's superiority and exhibiting one's power are useless.... If China had not striven to develop its economy...did not have a stable and united society, were still poor and weak and divided, then the United States would not have made concessions to show 'regret.' The United States would unscrupulously intimidate China. The collision incident has demonstrated that China is heading in the right direction. It shows that China's international status has risen. The United States has reluctantly softened its stance because it sees the importance of the Sino-U.S. relationship."
"China Handles Collision Incident Properly"
The independent Sing Pao Daily News had this editorial (4/12): "China released the 24 U.S. crew members and let them go home to enjoy the Easter holiday. The timing was perfectly handled.... This move has avoided turning the incident into a crisis, and prevented Sino-U.S. relations from going backwards."
"Bush Big Winner By Saying Sorry"
The independent Sing Tao Daily News wrote in its editorial (4/12): "With the assistance of his advisers, [Bush] was able to resolve his most serious diplomatic crisis.... [His] prestige will not be weakened due to the so-called 'letter of apology' because the letter did not make an apology admitting fault."
"A Bigger Test Yet To Come"
The independent Apple Daily News commented in its editorial (4/12): "Although the military plane collision incident has been brought to a temporary close, it does not imply that Sino-U.S. relations will henceforth encounter smooth sailing. This is because more important, fundamental disagreements--such as arms sales to Taiwan and the national missile defense system--will rise up one after the other. These will be the real test of Sino-U.S. relations. We hope that both China and the United States will be more rational and practical when handling these issues, and prevent their relationship from derailing. This will also prevent China and the United States from becoming enemies that give tit for tat."
"Not Enemy, Not Friend; Both Sides Compromise"
The independent Hong Kong Economic Journal opined (4/12): "While sticking to its principle, China was also flexible, which helped it to win points. The Chinese government expressed deepest concern about the life of the missing pilot, and insisted that the U.S. plane landed in China without permission. All these have pressed the U.S. administration to change its arrogant attitude, to express regret, and to say it is 'very sorry' over and again. The Chinese government said that it would release the U.S. crewmembers on humanitarian grounds. This also helps to improve China's international image.... Both the Chinese and U.S. governments do not want to lose points when handling the collision incident because it will put them in unfavorable positions in implementing external and domestic policies in the future. However, both sides also know that breaking down negotiations, turning relations upside down and confronting each other do them no good."
AUSTRALIA: "Spying At The Heart Of Alliance"
Foreign editor Greg Sheridan noted in the conservative national Australian (4/12): "One of the harsh realities the spy plane crisis in Hainan reveals is just how little store the Chinese leadership sets by international law and how much in the crude use of power. There was no legal basis for detaining the U.S. crew. They were simply being held until the United States satisfied a purely political demand for an apology. This is an important thing to know about China...because it is only luck that puts Americans on Hainan and not Australians. Australia has two EP-3...aircraft... It is little realized by the public in Australia but intelligence cooperation...is the true military heart of the U.S.-Australia alliance."
JAPAN: "Realistic Moves Welcomed"
Liberal Asahi editorialized (4/12): "For Beijing, the Hainan incident was the first diplomatic tug-of-war with the Bush administration, which calls China a strategic competitor. Both sides politically settled the case out of concern that, if protracted, it would deteriorate already awkward U.S.-China relations. Despite expected opposition from Congress and anti-China groups to an 'easy' settlement of the incident, the Bush administration also acted realistically to end the standoff.... The crew's release does not mean a complete end to the incident. Difficult negotiations are expected over the cause of the collision and the plane's return."
SINGAPORE: "China Teaches U.S. A Lesson On Sovereignty"
East Asia correspondent Ching Cheong commented in the pro-government Straits Times (4/12): "Credit must go to China for diffusing a major crisis by not demanding a full apology.... China has made a major concession.... The resolution of the crisis brings a win-win situation for both.... While China is not getting exactly what it wants, at least it has taught the Americans an important lesson: In matters involving sovereignty, China would be ready to go all out in its defense.... If the United States learns by experience that China means what it says, then a more realistic approach toward the Taiwan issue might hopefully be devised by Bush."
TAIWAN: "Brand New Strategic Interaction Model Taking Shape"
Centrist/pro-status quo China Times observed (4/12): "In the short term, Beijing is definitely a winner.... While everybody was waiting in suspension, Beijing made a prompt decision to release the crew.... For the State Department and White House, on the other hand, they got to understand better China's foreign affairs department through this actual blow-exchanging experience. Will this help to form a new strategic cooperative relationship between the two countries? Now is still too early to tell.... But in other respects, cooperation and dialogue between the two countries, which have been stimulated by this most recent interaction, can begin right away. In other words, as a result of this accident, relevant agencies of the two countries can start building a new framework for bilateral ties. Bush has demonstrated his ability to handle international crises.... Bush has demonstrated to the world that he is a leader who can endure and knows how to deal. It is expected that the world will evaluate him in a new light."
"China Has Fought A Diplomatic Battle Wisely"
Pei Teh-hua commented in centrist/pro-status quo Commercial Times (4/12): "A crisis that at first suggested the dawn of a new Cold War concluded in a vocabulary race, which in the end looks like a 'semantic joke.' The vulnerabilities in the Sino-American relationship are evident. It is easy to tell from this incident that Beijing has struck a blow against the Bush administration, which has no diplomatic experience at all. Although this incident has come to an end, many trials are ahead for Washington-Beijing ties in the future."
"Legality of U.S. Flights Becomes New Focus U.S.-China Wrestling"
Washington correspondent Nadia Tsao said in the pro-independence Liberty Times (4/12): "China used an American plane and 24 crew members in exchange for a U.S. nod to start a dialogue on Chinese strategic interests. It also forced Washington to recognize the fact that in dealing with China, one cannot rely simply on superpower strength. China obviously won more than it lost, adding the Third World's approval of Beijing's leadership. But Washington will not forget the lesson it has learned. With an American plane and crew falling into Beijing's hands, Washington had to make concessions in order to resolve the crisis. In the future, however, Beijing must still rely on U.S. support. And in this sense, Beijing may still have to pay a price if it gives Washington a hard time during [future] negotiations. In the long term, after this conflict, hawkish theories about China will attract more attention from the U.S. public and political class since Washington already sees China as a competitor in the Asia-Pacific and a growing potential enemy."
"Very"
The "Black and White" column of the conservative/pro-unification United Daily News said (4/12): "With the simple act of adding a 'very,' the situation [between the United States and China], which was becoming dangerously explosive, was easily resolved. Just when Taiwan was wondering whether this crisis was favorable or unfavorable for itself, the crisis was already over. Obviously, it would be difficult for Washington and Beijing to start a war, a fact that is a safeguard but also a limit for Taiwan. More evidently, Taiwan's security is by no means built on an arms race [with Beijing] but on a long-term political and economic strategy."
THAILAND: "U.S. Should Tone Down Rhetoric"
Aranya Srichantranit commented in top-circulation, Thai-language Thai Rath (4/12): "To those with a measure of impartiality and neutrality, the United States, rather than China, should be the one to tone down its harsh rhetoric. How could it exert such pressure on China when the United States was the one who sent the plane to eavesdrop....and which maneuvered in such a way that resulted in the death of the interceptor's pilot?"
EUROPE
BRITAIN: "The Test Of A President"
The conservative Times editorialized (4/12): "The agreement came only just in time: Had the stalemate gone on much longer, neither government would have been able to keep under control the growing public anger, fed on emotions far broader and older than simply the incident over Hainan.... All presidents reveal themselves only when tested, no more so than when the test is as sensitive as it is unforeseen. Mr. Bush's handling of the incident is reassuring.... In the end, he allowed old-fashioned negotiation and hard-headed diplomacy to do the work. He refused to be rushed or adopt the kind of ostentatious crisis-mode behaviour, thought to signal presidential authority. He announced the hard-argued deal with quiet, statemanlike satisfaction. The result is not only a sudden jump in Mr. Bush's popularity ratings; it gives the first definition of what he meant after the election campaign in his appeal for national unity. This comes after a series of White House initiatives and announcements that seemed to define him as far more dogmatic and ideological than earlier supposed. But few issues in America are more of an ideological touchstone than China; and Mr. Bush here chose politics rather than dogma as his guide.... China needed to demonstrate assertiveness not only at home but to neighbours in Asia--who understand the implications of an apology. But pragmatism eventually took control. Chinese negotiators were told, bluntly, what they risked if they pressed Washington too hard. In the end, markets, access, influence and the Olympics counted for more than emotion. More than face has been saved."
"Right Result For The U.S."
The liberal Guardian asserted (4/12): "China had made a powerful point, challenging America's presumption that it has a right to spy whenever and wherever it chooses around the world. But China's self-righteousness, never wholly convincing from a nation which is no slouch on the espionage front either, was wearing very thin. Demands for an outright apology from Washington were both unreasonable and unrealistic. Yesterday's apparent resolution of the 11-day crisis was a welcome sign that someone in Beijing knows when it is time to move on. The United States deserves its share of credit, too. In its early weeks, the Bush administration has alarmed the world. It has seemed to be donning an off-the-peg foreign policy woven by the overwrought minds of one of Washington's conservative think-tanks.... For the past week, however, a cooler approach has prevailed and seemingly without serious internal challenge.... The lesson for both Washington and Beijing is one and the same. For all its military power, the United States does not have the ability to conduct its international activities unconstrained by other nations and other considerations.... But any satisfaction which some may feel at this proof of the limits of American power needs to be set against the dangers. Chinese power is a very threatening force too, both internally and internationally. The confrontation in East Asia is not over. There are likely to be further confrontations between the U.S. and China--above all over Taiwan--which will not and cannot be so easily resolved as the Hainan stand-off now thankfully seems to have been."
"Common Sense Prevails"
The independent Financial Times commented (4/12): "When is saying sorry not an apology? When semantics helps to prevent a potential crisis between the world's only superpower and its biggest rival in Asia.... The outcome marks the triumph of quiet diplomacy and of pragmatism on both sides of the Pacific. President George W. Bush has [also] handled the dispute well. Initial anger gave way to a more emollient tone. The White House managed to keep the Republican hawks at bay. But if common sense has for now prevailed, relations between the two countries will remain tense. The spyplane stand-off may be more or less over. But the damage has been done. China and America are now more inclined to view each other as adversaries. And there is no shortage of potential flashpoints."
"The China Question"
The conservative broadsheet Daily Telegraph observed (4/12): "President Bush's real test comes now. After this incident, America cannot behave as though it is `business as usual' with the `People's Republic.' What is needed is a thorough overhaul of China policy at the highest levels of the administration. Such a process should not be rushed. America ought certainly to be `engaged' with China: The question is how. To that end, the administration should reassess the structure of the regime and its implications for foreign policy. Above all, the review should look at China's vulnerabilities as well as its strengths. Some long-held assumptions should be questioned. For instance, pace Henry Kissinger, would it really be such a disaster if China broke up? After all, the Soviet Union was dissolved largely peacefully, without any of the attendant disasters or instability feared by the practitioners of neo-Metternichian real-politik, including the first President Bush and his secretary of state, James Baker. If the regime is going down eventually, what sense does it make, either morally or commercially, for America to be identified with a discredited dictatorial elite? Whatever its outcome, even the process of holding such a review would concentrate minds in Beijing wonderfully."
FRANCE: "Bush's Baptism By Fire"
Jean-Louis Turlin wrote in right-of-center Le Figaro (4/12): "The new president has just passed his first serious international test with success.... It seems that the act of contrition was enough, but Colin Powell's role may have been decisive. The secretary of state was the first to express American 'regrets' publicly, and gave his Chinese counterpart a plan to get out of the impasse last weekend. It foresees the meeting of diplomats and militaries from both countries on April 18th to discuss recovering the plane as well as the future of reconnaissance flights off the Chinese coast, a much more delicate subject."
GERMANY: "Bush Has Learned His Lesson"
P. Schlesinger commented on ARD-TV's (national channel one) late evening newscast Tagesthemen (4/11): "President George W. Bush has learned his lesson. With a simple 'America first,' it is not always possible to reach one's goals, let alone in foreign policy. And what other possibility but an apology would Washington have had? To send U.S. bombers, to vote against Beijing as the site for the next Olympics, to withdraw trade preferences that were promised before? With such rude methods, there is no getting at China,which is proud of its culture that is millennia years old. China rightfully felt it was spied on, put off in an arrogant way, and not getting the attention it deserves according to its role. Beijing showed the only remaining superpower its limits. But the fact that the Communist Chinese dictatorship gave the U.S. president this lesson cannot please us Europeans."
"Turnabout Came In Beijing"
Beijing correspondent D. Lohse commented on national radio station Deutschlandfunk of Cologne (4/11): "The turnabout did not take place in Washington, but in Beijing. And China has taught something to all those who described the leadership in Beijing as being unable to cope with a crisis. Probably we will never learn why the leadership in Beijing changed its mind, but one thing seems to be sure: China's state leader Jiang Zemin asserted his views. He allowed the negotiations to go on until a formulation was found with which all sides can live, the hardliners and the military, the pilot's wife and the Chinese public. At the same time, Jiang saw to it that the negotiations did not take longer than was absolutely necessary, since he was realistic enough to know what was at stake. Over the past few days, Jiang proved that he is still the master of the house, but also that he is interested in establishing a good relationship with the United States. We cannot talk of a Happy End, but the settlement of this conflict offers one consolation: The world will be saved from further incidents like this for the time being."
"Regret"
Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger judged in center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine (4/12): "Every additional day that the U.S. crew spent in China without the prospect of release would have made it more difficult for President George W. Bush to keep at bay those Republican forces who want the United States to pursue a tougher policy toward China. If it was a test that the Chinese leadership wanted in order to find out how the U.S. president reacts under stress, then George W. Bush passed it. He and Secretary of State Colin Powell did not make a complicated situation even more complicated by making threats and by using violent words; instead, they showed restraint and maintained the perspective on overall developments and the advantages of quiet cooperation. This is something the Chinese leaders have to admit. This air incident did not turn into the confrontation that some had predicted before."
"Bush's Litmus Test"
Stefan Kornelius said in center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (4/12): "[President Bush] acted in a remarkably controlled way during the crisis, abandoned plans to use harsh rhetoric and did not give in to hardliners in Congress. He must now resist the wish for retaliation. The surprisingly quick end to the conflict demonstrates the understanding of the conflicting parties that they can get along with each other, but not against each other, because the progress since the Cold War is this: China and the United States, but also regional powers such as Russia, cannot accept isolation. China will find out that propaganda is unable to stop the flow of information in a globalized world and that credibility can be achieved only with arguments. And the Bush administration will draw an early lesson in foreign policy: A black-and-white picture is not enough for the description of the globalized world."
"Creative Translators"
Jochen Siemens said in left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (4/12): "The only one who has won is Secretary of State Colin Powell, who seems to have asserted his views against the hardliners in the White House, such as Vice President Cheney."
"Powell's Flexible, Acceptable Formulation"
Center-right General-Anzeiger of Bonn had this to say (4/12): "'Very sorry' is an apology for the intrusion into China's air space and the death of a pilot of the National People's Army? This was not the interpretation of the Americans, but this is exactly what the Chinese wanted to hear, since this incident had to look like a victory for them. The political leadership in Beijing cannot afford to lose face before the masses and cannot afford to be presented as weak and yielding. In this situation, the formulation presented by Secretary of State Colin Powell was flexible enough and acceptable, in order to get out of this dilemma more or less unharmed. The men in the Chinese Politburo hesitated for a long time, since the army wanted a U.S. kow-tow to avoid being presented as the loser. But China could not wait for too long."
ITALY: "Bush The Pragmatist Passes His First Foreign Policy Test"
New York correspondent Mario Platero commented in leading business daily Il Sole-24 Ore (4/12): "The crisis with China was the first true foreign policy test for the White House. Now that the test is over, we can say that of the many facets attributed to the U.S. president, the one that has prevailed, from all points of view, has been his pragmatic face. And the WTO is safe. Thanks to a minor language concession (sorrow about the unauthorized landing, but no real apology), George Bush has managed to obtain the release of the U.S. crew before Easter and before the reopening of Congress next Monday, two crucial deadlines.... There will continue to be disputes about the solution found yesterday, but next week most of the story will be old stuff and Republican 'hawks' will be more cautious.... Some people in America are disappointed. They would have preferred a confrontation with China. Bush, instead, has shown during his first 'true' foreign policy test that he possesses self-control and practical sense to a great extent. At the same time, he was able to prove wrong all those who thought that he would have used the first possible occasion to revive a Cold War atmosphere."
"Bush Style: Low Profile And Delegating Power"
Rightist Il Tempo held (4/12): "Low profile, delegating power. The 'Bush style' has passed the test of its first international crisis and has triumphed. The new president, faced with a situation that could have turned explosive, dealt with the crisis using the same method adopted successfully during the electoral recount in Florida. He kept a low profile, limiting his interventions to decisive occasions, with statements always cautious and brief, delegating initiatives to a restricted group of experts.... In Congress, the president was under pressure from two fronts--the Republican 'hawks' and the Democratic opposition. Bush was able to maintain the right path, in the middle between the two. The solution of the crisis came in perfect time: After ten days, both Congress and public opinion were beginning to show the first signs of impatience."
"Bush's Realistic Choice To Avoid The Risks Of A Clash"
Washington correspondent Vittorio Zucconi wrote in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (4/12): "The new American president has performed well in his first international test. He behaved more like Clinton than like Reagan. He followed the private advice of his father, 'the old China hand.'... He was able to control both his language, as well as the right-wing, which was getting ready to revive 'anti-Communist' propaganda, and he managed to avoid rhetorical escalation and tough ultimatums that would have put more conditions on him than it would on China. He prevented unsolicited mediation and the propaganda tomfoolery of a personal mission by Rev. Jesse Jackson.... He has fully passed his first foreign policy test. But the lesson from the incident, for him and for his collaborators, is that the unilateral arrogance displayed during the first 100 days in office does not pay."
"The Reverse Side Of Victory"
Francesco Sisci commented in centrist, influential La Stampa (4/12): "China won its first diplomatic battle yesterday as the emerging superpower in the era of Pax Americana. This is a historic victory for Beijing and the Jiang Zemin leadership. China is taking on the international role that it could only have dreamt about in the past.... Beijing also wins with respect to Taiwan, which it has shown that it cannot hope for the support of the United States to formally declare independence, since China is no longer afraid of America. And the Chinese reformist leadership wins also over the 'hawks.'... This is, however, a victory full of thorns. The Bush presidency emerges humiliated precisely on the issue that was to be its foreign policy forte--i.e., the transformation of the relationship with China from strategic partnership to strategic competition. This is an added weakness for Bush following his electoral weakness, and it is not clear which strategy he will adopt towards China in the future. The U.S. Congress could lay unpleasant ambushes on China in the next few months--on the PNTR and Beijing's candidacy for the 2008 Olympic Games.... A very difficult, uphill path is ahead for China."
RUSSIA: "As Much As China Can Get"
According to Aleksandr Timofeyev of reformist Vremya Novostei (4/12): "It is as much as China can get. The damage caused by the confrontation grew by the day, as Americans threatened to boycott Chinese consumer goods."
"Who's Who"
Dmitry Kosyrev commented on page one of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (4/12): "Clearly, getting into a 'hostage' crisis and looking helpless in the eyes of the U.S. public is a lot worse than losing a spy plane even if it brims with state-of-the-art avionics. There's far less humiliation in apologizing than in having 24 officers resting and learning about Chinese cuisine on a tropical island in spite of the calls by 'the world's most powerful man' that it is time 'our guys got home.' The U.S.-Chinese crisis lasted 10 days that didn't shake the world only because the new administration managed in a short time to find out about its limitations as far as China is concerned."
"China Is A Shining Example"
Nationalist opposition Sovetskaya Rossiya stated in a page-one piece by Vasily Safronchuk (4/12): "Beijing has set an example of how a great power should defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Russia should have acted more resolutely to identify with China as its strategic partner."
BELGIUM: "Ideal"
Independent De Morgen observed (4/12): "The Chinese did not publish the entire text of the letter--to the Americans' regret. So, the Americans themselves published the entire text. It became immediately clear that they did not at all express genuine apologies. They expressed their 'sincere regret' about the lost aircraft and the missing pilot. They expressed their sympathy to the pilot's family, but they did not admit anywhere in the letter that they were wrong. Allegedly, everything happened in accordance with the international emergency procedure. Thanks to the vague language, the text is ideal for domestic use in both the United States and China."
"A Major Crisis Was Avoided, But The Policy Remains To Be Defined"
U.S. correspondent Nathalie Mattheiem wrote in left-of-center Le Soir (4/12): "George Bush stated that 'China would be a strategic competitor,' giving up his predecessor Bill Clinton's concept of a 'strategic partner.' The first crisis with which the new president has just been confronted reinforces him in this option, where he intends to combine firmness and commercial opening, even before he had the time to think up and implement a policy which would correspond to his intentions.... A major crisis was avoided, the matter is closed, except for those who, in the long run, will have to define the U.S. administration's Chinese policy."
"Chinese And Americans Have Rooted Out The Evil"
Philippe Paquet held in independent La Libre Belgique (4/12): "Of course, the White House limited the damage, at least as a matter of form. It did not have to formally apologize, as the Chinese were demanding since the beginning of the crisis. But it was only able to avoid the apology at the price of semantic contortions and diplomatic gesticulation which have harmed its prestige, or even its credibility.... But--a consolation for George Bush--the Chinese do not come out unharmed from this affair either. Beyond triumphant editorials which will appear in today's Chinese papers and which can fool a population which is little or ill informed, the reality is that the Chinese showed a pragmatism which preserves China's strategic interests--a long-term correct cooperation with the United States at the expense of a short-sighted rhetoric--humiliating the planet's sole superpower by keeping its soldiers hostage.... Jiang Zemin finally managed to impose a prompt resolution of the conflict, which ran the risk of dragging on. But the Chinese Number One will only be able to pride himself on this option before the Politburo if he obtains from the Americans--as a reward for his 'understanding'--concessions on issues which are extremely important for Beijing--China's accession to the WTO, the 2008 Olympic Games, the sale of American weapons to Taiwan, and U.S. support for the Falungong sect."
IRELAND: "Diplomacy Wins Out"
Moderately conservative Irish Times opined (4/12): "That is a first class diplomatic achievement, for which both states must be commended. To have avoided such a confrontation is no guarantee that Sino-U.S. relations will be harmonious. But it is certainly a reassuring indication that the calculation of interest and advantage remains under relatively calm political control.... It looks as if the outcome represents a victory for the conservative approach of Mr. Powell rather than the hard-edged neo-conservatism of those who would wish to classify China as more of a threat than a partner. But that disagreement remains to be resolved, despite the benign outcome on this occasion.
POLAND: "A Weak China Is A Dangerous China"
Krzysztof Darewicz opined in centrist Rzeczpospolita (4/12): "The release by China of the U.S. military aircraft's crew only after 11 days confirms concerns that the influence of conservatives and generals in the Chinese leadership...is growing alarmingly. Their anti-American and confrontational approach does not portend well for relations between the two countries and makes the prospect of increased military rivalry in Asia and the Pacific possible.... The new American administration, which from the very outset has perceived China as a 'strategic rival,' has now every reason to review fundamentally the policy of far-flung concessions toward China and to introduce elements of realism and deterrence.... It does not mean, certainly, that efforts toward the constructive involvement of China, integrating this country into the world, and supporting Chinese reforms should not be continued. Let us hope that the deterrence aspect will not predominate in the policy of the United States and its Asian allies because a China that is weak and unstable will always pose a bigger threat than a China that is strong and certain of its future."
##
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
