ADVERTISEMENT

Opinion The hysteria over China’s spy balloon is dangerous and unwarranted

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,442
58,937
113
By Max Boot
Columnist|
February 6, 2023 at 6:00 a.m. EST



So the Battle of the Balloon is over — and, not surprisingly, America won. On Saturday, one of the most advanced U.S. weapons systems — an F-22 Raptor — shot down one of China’s most primitive surveillance systems: a balloon that had been traversing the United States during the previous week.


Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates

The whole incident leaves me feeling unsettled and alarmed. Oh, I’m not worried about the spy balloon. The violation of U.S. airspace was unacceptable, but it did not pose any actual threat, and it’s doubtful that it gathered any intelligence that Chinese spy satellites cannot. What concerns me is the hysterical overreaction on the part of so many Americans to the balloon’s progress.
Former president Donald Trump claimed that President Biden now “has surrendered American airspace to Communist China,” even though the Pentagon reports that Chinese balloons had crossed into U.S. airspace at least three times during Trump’s own presidency. “The president failed on this one,” said New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu (R). “Tough guy, Joe. Too little, too late,” huffed talk-show host Mark Levin. “Bought and paid for by the Communist Chinese government.”






http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...?itid=mc_magnet-cartoons_inline_collection_18
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...?itid=mc_magnet-cartoons_inline_collection_19
What is it that Biden was supposed to have done? Should he have personally climbed into an F-22 cockpit and led the attack on the balloon like the president played by Bill Pullman in “Independence Day”? Should he have launched a nuclear strike against China in retaliation? Republicans didn’t have any clear alternatives, but that did not stop their hyperventilating. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) argued that China sent the balloon to show “that the United States is a once-great superpower that’s hollowed out, it’s in decline.”

Follow Max Boot's opinionsFollow

The reaction was so overwrought that Biden felt compelled to postpone Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s trip to China. That’s too bad, because the frenzy over the spy balloon underlines the need to establish better lines of communications with Beijing to prevent U.S.-China tensions from spiraling out of control.
The balloon-mania, after all, comes only a few days after Air Force Gen. Michael A. Minihan, head of Air Mobility Command, sent out a memo to his subordinates predicting war with China within two years: “I hope I am wrong,” he wrote. “My gut tells me we will fight in 2025.” Sounding like one of the unhinged generals in Stanley Kubrick’s Cold War satire “Dr. Strangelove,” he advised his airmen — who operate and maintain cargo aircraft — to “fire a clip into a 7-meter target” and “aim for the head.”
David Ignatius: The inside story of how the U.S. shot down the Chinese balloon
Minihan and everyone else who thinks that war is imminent (e.g., House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Michael McCaul [R-Tex.]) needs to get a grip. CIA Director William J. Burns said last week that Chinese leader Xi Jinping had ordered his military to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027, but “that does not mean that he’s decided to conduct an invasion in 2027, or any other year.” Indeed, Burns noted, Russia’s bungled invasion of Ukraine might give Xi pause before launching a risky attack of his own.



War with China can and should be avoided — but we make it more likely by assuming it’s inevitable or by giving vent to exaggerated fears about Chinese power. The kind of anti-Chinese paranoia we are now seeing reminds me of the early days of the Cold War. Back then, there was also a sense that the United States was losing a global struggle with the Communists and that World War III might be nigh. That was a dangerous, destructive mind-set that led to anti-Red witch hunts at home and to ill-fated, costly military interventions such as the one in Vietnam. It almost led, during the Cuban missile crisis, to nuclear Armageddon.
In reality, the Soviet Union was never as strong or as reckless as so many imagined — and neither is Communist China. Xi presides over a country with an aging population, a slowing economy and few friends. That helps to explain why he has lately been trying to mend ties with the United States and Europe.
Sebastian Mallaby: China’s alleged spy balloon is the perfect symbol of its clumsiness
The United States, while it has a smaller population than China, is actually stronger by most measures of hard or soft power. Indeed, Australia’s Lowy Institute, in its annual survey of the balance of power in Asia, finds the United States still in first place ahead of China. The index notes that the United States leads in “future resources, resilience, defence networks, cultural influence, and military capability.” Last week saw another reminder of one of our key advantages — we have a lot more allies than China — when the Philippines agreed to extend U.S. access to four more military bases.



None of those advantages are negated by China’s ability to send a balloon wafting over the United States. Indeed, it’s not clear that China accomplished anything other than alarming Americans about the threat it poses. A healthy concern about China’s growing power is warranted, but paranoia and alarmism are not. The United States is still the No. 1 power in the world, and we can remain that way as long as we do not blunder into a catastrophic and unnecessary war with a No. 2 power whose rise might have already peaked.

 
Democrats
Not worried about Chinese spying apparatus flying over numerous USA military installations.

Believe these guys are the biggest threat to democracy ever.
2833.jpeg
 
Set aside for the moment that Max Boot is a complete idiot who has precisely zero to contribute with respect to any discussion of security matters...

The reality is that nobody really knows whether we played this well or not from a military perspective. But a few thoughts and observations...
1. There is a certain humorous irony that in 1968, the phrase "national technical means of verification" was introduced to the lexicon, to refer to the fact that the US and the USSR would be monitoring each other's compliance with SALT I by virtue of satellites. Why such horrific bureaucratese? Well, simple. Because for the Soviets at the time, the very concept that the west was infringing their airspace, even at relatively infinite altitudes, was something that they were completely unwilling to let their population know about. So, this whole mindset that we are now apoplectic about - ie, that someone infringed our airspace - is very cold war, and very Soviet. But it does underscore a certain political expectation on the part of the population that is quite real indeed. So at least politically, FWIW, this was played exceptionally poorly.
2. Also regarding #1, one hypothetical question that occurred to me is whether it might even violate international obligations (or at least customs) to shoot it down. My sense is that NTMV have been implicitly (if begrudgingly) accepted as something you have to put up with. Now I have no idea whether that would rise to the level of a treaty or other obligation, but it's an interesting question to ponder.
3. Whether, and when, to shoot it down, depended on a couple of very practical facts.
a. Did we have the tech to, given its altitude? My sense is that at certain altitudes it's not actually that easy a target given minimal radar and heat profiles If that's the case, it is something to work on.
b. Did we have the effective capability to limit, or to monitor, its ability to either gather, or more importantly, transmit, data? I'm sure we had some capability and learned some things, but I also have the sense that, on the whole, we are operating at a real information deficit.
c. LZ. Honestly, this whole "danger of debris" line strikes me as BS. The debris area, from what I understand, was anticipated to be about 7 sq mi. You are unlikely to persuade me that no competent physicist could run a reasonably predictive model that could identify 7 sq miles of high-probability empty space over (i) Alaska, (ii) Western Canada, or (iii) Montana, NE Wyoming, SW South Dakota, or Nebraska. Now maybe there's a hypothesis that impact damage would be less at sea, but at that altitude, I doubt it.
d. Speaking of Canada, the fact that we heard nothing of this while it traversed the NWT and Alberta sort of underscores to me that the political angle was played badly, perhaps indicative of a plan/hope to keep this hush-hush.
4. Finally, my personal instinct is that this whole affair was more about response testing than intelligence gathering. While a balloon obviously can loiter in a way that a satellite can't, it's, as we've seen, pretty obvious. Having a hard time considering the response as one that would concern or impress the Chinese.
 
Last edited:
Boot is a hoot. No more - no less. A reliable journoleftist mouthpiece - and this article is a comical illustration of the term “whistling past the graveyard”.
 
By Max Boot
Columnist|
February 6, 2023 at 6:00 a.m. EST



So the Battle of the Balloon is over — and, not surprisingly, America won. On Saturday, one of the most advanced U.S. weapons systems — an F-22 Raptor — shot down one of China’s most primitive surveillance systems: a balloon that had been traversing the United States during the previous week.


Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates

The whole incident leaves me feeling unsettled and alarmed. Oh, I’m not worried about the spy balloon. The violation of U.S. airspace was unacceptable, but it did not pose any actual threat, and it’s doubtful that it gathered any intelligence that Chinese spy satellites cannot. What concerns me is the hysterical overreaction on the part of so many Americans to the balloon’s progress.
Former president Donald Trump claimed that President Biden now “has surrendered American airspace to Communist China,” even though the Pentagon reports that Chinese balloons had crossed into U.S. airspace at least three times during Trump’s own presidency. “The president failed on this one,” said New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu (R). “Tough guy, Joe. Too little, too late,” huffed talk-show host Mark Levin. “Bought and paid for by the Communist Chinese government.”






http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...?itid=mc_magnet-cartoons_inline_collection_18
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...?itid=mc_magnet-cartoons_inline_collection_19
What is it that Biden was supposed to have done? Should he have personally climbed into an F-22 cockpit and led the attack on the balloon like the president played by Bill Pullman in “Independence Day”? Should he have launched a nuclear strike against China in retaliation? Republicans didn’t have any clear alternatives, but that did not stop their hyperventilating. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) argued that China sent the balloon to show “that the United States is a once-great superpower that’s hollowed out, it’s in decline.”

Follow Max Boot's opinionsFollow

The reaction was so overwrought that Biden felt compelled to postpone Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s trip to China. That’s too bad, because the frenzy over the spy balloon underlines the need to establish better lines of communications with Beijing to prevent U.S.-China tensions from spiraling out of control.
The balloon-mania, after all, comes only a few days after Air Force Gen. Michael A. Minihan, head of Air Mobility Command, sent out a memo to his subordinates predicting war with China within two years: “I hope I am wrong,” he wrote. “My gut tells me we will fight in 2025.” Sounding like one of the unhinged generals in Stanley Kubrick’s Cold War satire “Dr. Strangelove,” he advised his airmen — who operate and maintain cargo aircraft — to “fire a clip into a 7-meter target” and “aim for the head.”
David Ignatius: The inside story of how the U.S. shot down the Chinese balloon
Minihan and everyone else who thinks that war is imminent (e.g., House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Michael McCaul [R-Tex.]) needs to get a grip. CIA Director William J. Burns said last week that Chinese leader Xi Jinping had ordered his military to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027, but “that does not mean that he’s decided to conduct an invasion in 2027, or any other year.” Indeed, Burns noted, Russia’s bungled invasion of Ukraine might give Xi pause before launching a risky attack of his own.



War with China can and should be avoided — but we make it more likely by assuming it’s inevitable or by giving vent to exaggerated fears about Chinese power. The kind of anti-Chinese paranoia we are now seeing reminds me of the early days of the Cold War. Back then, there was also a sense that the United States was losing a global struggle with the Communists and that World War III might be nigh. That was a dangerous, destructive mind-set that led to anti-Red witch hunts at home and to ill-fated, costly military interventions such as the one in Vietnam. It almost led, during the Cuban missile crisis, to nuclear Armageddon.
In reality, the Soviet Union was never as strong or as reckless as so many imagined — and neither is Communist China. Xi presides over a country with an aging population, a slowing economy and few friends. That helps to explain why he has lately been trying to mend ties with the United States and Europe.
Sebastian Mallaby: China’s alleged spy balloon is the perfect symbol of its clumsiness
The United States, while it has a smaller population than China, is actually stronger by most measures of hard or soft power. Indeed, Australia’s Lowy Institute, in its annual survey of the balance of power in Asia, finds the United States still in first place ahead of China. The index notes that the United States leads in “future resources, resilience, defence networks, cultural influence, and military capability.” Last week saw another reminder of one of our key advantages — we have a lot more allies than China — when the Philippines agreed to extend U.S. access to four more military bases.



None of those advantages are negated by China’s ability to send a balloon wafting over the United States. Indeed, it’s not clear that China accomplished anything other than alarming Americans about the threat it poses. A healthy concern about China’s growing power is warranted, but paranoia and alarmism are not. The United States is still the No. 1 power in the world, and we can remain that way as long as we do not blunder into a catastrophic and unnecessary war with a No. 2 power whose rise might have already peaked.

China violates our airspace with a spy balloon and our jackass President allows it .

Biden should be charged with treason and anyone else in the administration that helped him allow this to happen.
 
Set aside for the moment that Max Boot is a complete idiot who has precisely zero to contribute with respect to any discussion of security matters...

The reality is that nobody really knows whether we played this well or not from a military perspective. But a few thoughts and observations...
1. There is a certain humorous irony that in 1968, the phrase "national technical means of verification" was introduced to the lexicon, to refer to the fact that the US and the USSR would be monitoring each other's compliance with SALT I by virtue of satellites. Why such horrific bureaucratese? Well, simple. Because for the Soviets at the time, the very concept that the west was infringing their airspace, even at relatively infinite altitudes, was something that they were completely unwilling to let their population know about. So, this whole mindset that we are now apoplectic about - ie, that someone infringed our airspace - is very cold war, and very Soviet. But it does underscore a certain political expectation on the part of the population that is quite real indeed. So at least politically, FWIW, this was played exceptionally poorly.
2. Also regarding #1, one hypothetical question that occurred to me is whether it might even violate international obligations (or at least customs) to shoot it down. My sense is that NTMV have been implicitly (if begrudgingly) accepted as something you have to put up with. Now I have no idea whether that would rise to the level of a treaty or other obligation, but it's an interesting question to ponder.
3. Whether, and when, to shoot it down, depended on a couple of very practical facts.
a. Did we have the tech to, given its altitude? My sense is that at certain altitudes it's not actually that easy a target given minimal radar and heat profiles If that's the case, it is something to work on.
b. Did we have the effective capability to limit, or to monitor, its ability to either gather, or more importantly, transmit, data? I'm sure we had some capability and learned some things, but I also have the sense that, on the whole, we are operating at a real information deficit.
c. LZ. Honestly, this whole "danger of debris" line strikes me as BS. The debris area, from what I understand, was anticipated to be about 7 sq mi. You are unlikely to persuade me that no competent physicist could run a reasonably predictive model that could identify 7 sq miles of high-probability empty space over (i) Alaska, (ii) Western Canada, or (iii) Montana, NE Wyoming, SW South Dakota, or Nebraska. Now maybe there's a hypothesis that impact damage would be less at sea, but at that altitude, I doubt it.
d. Speaking of Canada, the fact that we heard nothing of this while it traversed the NWT and Alberta sort of underscores to me that the political angle was played badly, perhaps indicative of a plan/hope to keep this hush-hush.
4. Finally, my personal instinct is that this whole affair was more about response testing than intelligence gathering. While a balloon obviously can loiter in a way that a satellite can't, it's, as we've seen, pretty obvious. Having a hard time considering the response as one that would concern or impress the Chinese.
the response wasn’t meant to impress the chinese as much as shut up future (during election runup) accusations of inaction (even if that was adequate)
 
This was basically my thought. Yeah, they were spying and actually got very clever in doing it. I’m 100% certain we’re spying the sheet out of China, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fsu1jreed
The GOP reaction to this “threat” has been fabtabulous! Now there are reports that Trump Pooh-pooped these “weather balloons” more than once…But Senator Rubio’s response along with Ashley’s shock at Biden’s lack of action have been epoch. So glad these two warriors are overlooking the nation’s safety and interests here!
What a couple of total fluffs these two are.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT