# The China problem **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 4, 2001, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786 "2001-04-04T15:38:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Kyomara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8edcca/32.png) [@Kyomara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyomara)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2001, 9:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/41 "2001-04-09T09:32:27Z")
I agree that China is mostly to blame. I agree that the U.S. has nothing to apologize for in the eyes of the international community. However, the problem is bigger than just this one incident. My recent impression from speaking to friends of various nationalities is that the U.S. is in the diplomatic shitter at the moment. The fishing boat. The Kyoto Accord. In addition, whatever our government might say, our air strikes in Iraq are not being viewed in the most positive light. As an aside, my friends’ views were usually framed by “What the hell is wrong with George W. Bush? That guy is an idiot.” We have long had a reputation as an international bully. For this reason (among about a million others), the situation should be handled as carefully as possible, and WITHOUT FORCE, regardless of whose fault it was, because the entire world is watching. Closely. And while it’s nice to be on top, there is something to be said for grace. ---
**Author:** ![Sterra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8c91f0/32.png) [@Sterra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sterra)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/42 "2001-04-10T01:50:33Z")
Gary Kumquat, did we hold their men and ask for an apology? ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/43 "2001-04-10T07:42:49Z")
Asmodean, Obviously not. However, it still lies contrary to the original argument that the plane was ‘sovereign US territory’ - surely that argument would have been equally true for the foxbat? ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 9:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/44 "2001-04-10T09:05:18Z")
> [@](#): > > However, it still lies contrary to the original argument that the plane was ‘sovereign US territory’ - surely that argument would have been equally true for the foxbat? Perhaps you’d like to save face a little and point out the differences 'tween the two instances. The landing in Japan, the DELIBERATE landing on the part of the pilot, the Cold War, etc. Please instruct me how an emergency landing equates with a defecting (no, not “defecating”) fighter pilot, O Great Master. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Kumquat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gary\_Kumquat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Kumquat)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/45 "2001-04-10T09:47:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly \* > \*\*Please instruct me how an emergency landing equates with a defecting (no, not “defecating”) fighter pilot, O Great Master. \*\* Such humility suits you Spoofe. It would be a pleasure to provide you with such instruction. An American plane lands in China. Cmdr. John Singley, a spokesman for the United States Pacific Command based in Hawaii, says: > [@](#): > > According to our lawyers, the aircraft enjoys sovereign immune status. This precludes foreign officials from searching, inspecting or detaining the aircraft without U.S. consent. However when a Russian fighter plane, which surely enjoys just as much claim to sovereign immune status, lands in Japan America have it thoroughly searched and inspected. Doesn’t that strike you as even a little hypocritical? I mean, of course America went over that plane with every expert they could get to it - that’s what good intelligence is all about - but why should people become outraged when China does exactly the same thing? ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/46 "2001-04-10T10:01:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > However, it still lies contrary to the original argument that the plane was ‘sovereign US territory’ - surely that argument would have been equally true for the foxbat? > > Perhaps you’d like to save face a little and point out the differences 'tween the two instances. The landing in Japan, the DELIBERATE landing on the part of the pilot, the Cold War, etc. > > Please instruct me how an emergency landing equates with a defecting (no, not “defecating”) fighter pilot, O Great Master. \*\* Spoofe, to my reading from the various, non-American to be sure, sources, it really doesn’t matter. The pilot does not own the plane, so his reasons for landing it don’t count. Really, the soveriegn territory thingy was a stretch, that seems clear. Hypocritical surely, but worth a try. Hey, its a free claim. Didn’t work, no reason to argue about it. Holding the aircrew, dat’s the problem. However so long as they’re well treated it would seem rational not to let this escalate out of control, whatever all the emotional talk about shows of force says. Cool as a cucumber at this stage is a better strategy – one of our principal aims should be to turn the PR game against the Chinese. As others have noted, the USA is not in the strongest diplo position at the moment so a little extra-effort and patience may be necessary. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/47 "2001-04-10T10:38:41Z")
> [@](#): > > Doesn’t that strike you as even a little hypocritical? It would strike me as hypocritical if and only if it were the same Governmental leaders who were doing it. We had a different body of people in power in the 1970’s. However, I do recognize the fact that our people would love to instantly dig into any technology they came across today. My point, though, is that just because the US’s tactics haven’t been a shining example in the past, that doesn’t make it right for China to be doing the same thing (two wrongs not making a right, and all that). Combined with the improbability of the US vessel being responsible for the dead Chinese pilot, and the Chinese taking our pilots “prisoner” after an emergency landing, I think China is in the wrong. The part of our ship out on a surveillance mission is immaterial, in my mind. It doesn’t matter WHAT we were doing out there. And re: somthing rjung said… > [@](#): > > why is it that when we fly within 80 miles of China’s coast we call it “international territoriy,” but if a foreign military aircraft were to fly within 200 miles of our own shores, we’re ready to shoot it down? This is inaccurate. Planes that fly within 200 miles of our coast **without identifying themselves** are regarded as a threat. I wouldn’t be surprised if China had a similar policy, and I WOULD be surprised if our plane was flying with its transponder turned off. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2001, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786/48 "2001-04-10T12:30:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly \* > It would strike me as hypocritical if and only if it were the same Governmental leaders who were doing it. We had a different body of people in power in the 1970’s. That’s really quite _irrelevant_. Government duties and international precedents are not based on personalities/individuals in power at any given time (well in my part of the world they are, but that’s a large part of their problem). US actions in the Cold War established precedents wish one can not hand wave away. That being said, like I said above. We tried a rather weak claim, didn’t work. End of story. The only truly hypocritical part thiking about this further is if we got all worked up about the issue. As one can see, officially we haven’t. It was worth a try. What the hell. As I said in the other thread and above, the real issue is the air crew. I could easily understand the initial detention – and would venture the opinion the US would have initially done the same thing. However, China is clearly dragging this out far beyond the reasonable or the necessary. But, still, patience and work towards international “moral” high ground is the best policy now. Shaming them into looking like petulant scofflaws is our best strategy given the current facts. Insofar as that appears our strategy – cool as cucumbers-- I think Bushy et al are playing this just right. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-china-problem/60786.md?page=2)