A Chinese high-altitude balloon wandered over the United States for days before it was finally shot down. The so-called “spy balloon” seemed to have hampered a rapprochement between the two powers, but there is no need to worry about any serious deterioration of the bilateral relations.
Is It A Spy Balloon?
Balloons or airships have a long history in the military. Such hovering platforms do have some advantages over satellites, which move regularly and can be avoided with caution. But the ICBM (Intercontinental ballistic missile) sites are not time-sensitive targets; it is pointless to use balloons to spy on them.
The operational heights of such weather (or “spy”) balloons are lower than satellites. Hence, some argue that balloons can collect radio signals and sharper images. However, the freight capacity of balloons is usually limited. They have to spare the weight for more complicated control systems than the satellites if they were to be used to survey certain areas.
Lesser payloads usually mean the balloon can carry fewer or less sophisticated surveillance devices. It is questionable whether the lower height can compensate for the inferior spying capability. Compared to satellites, it is also more difficult for balloons to send back information. Larger balloons certainly can carry more load but they can be easily spotted and targeted.
Balloons are much cheaper than satellites. Ironically, the US government has always been perturbed with the ever increasing PLA’s (People’s Liberation Army) expenses and budget. Therefore is it really necessary for PLA to use balloons in order to save money? On the other hand, enterprises or research institutes are more likely to be concerned about costs. This somewhat supported the explanation by the Chinese government that the balloon was in civilian use.
Furthermore, balloons are not easy to control, not to mention the retrieval. The Pentagon knows this well as it tried to exploit the advantages of balloons and had developed at least two types of balloons for military use during recent years. One project was canceled in 2017. The blimp-style balloons were designed to detect cruise missiles. The US Army didn’t bother to solve the tough problem of controlling the balloons and just moored them. But one balloon flew away.
The Pentagon has invested 3.8 million dollars in another program called COLD STAR and plans to spend 27.1 million dollars in the fiscal year 2023. At least for the Americans, it appears that balloons are not cheap at all. The program was originally intended to locate drug traffickers, but Politico.com revealed that it had transitioned to become a military services program used to track hypersonic missiles. These balloons can indeed travel very long distances. In the test the COLD STAR blimp-like balloons travelled for about 250 miles from South Dakota to Illinois, But when it comes to controlling these balloons for surveillance purposes, it is more difficult once they have traveled to another continent far from their originated locations.
There’s one more thing that the Pentagon might know well, too. This is not the first time that a Chinese balloon intruded the American airspace. If they were truly spy balloons, the Pentagon should have opened fire years ago. China’s air force shot down a balloon of uncertain nationality in 2019 and reported the incident. There was no reason for the US to do nothing this time and keep silent when its airspace was violated.
Two Psychological ‘Wars’
So you don’t need to look up to confirm if the balloon is civilian or military. I presume that neither governments could provide any solid evidence to back their own stories. The real shows were on the ground, mainly in Washington.
Prior to the balloon incident, the US Secretary of State, Blinken was preparing to visit China. But China’s foreign ministry has never confirmed the visit. It was not unusual for the Chinese state media to announce such a schedule days later than their counterparts. However, there might be other reasons this time.
Although both countries wished to ease the tension and reach some consensus during the visit, the recent negotiation between the US, Netherlands and Japan to limit chip export to China has cast shadows. The tripartite agreement was not only provocative but could be somewhat harmful to China in the short term. China might show reluctance towards Blinken’s visit and bargain for more actual concessions from the US. With almost no cards in his hands, Blinken’s visit is destined to be fruitless.
The US tried to psychologically press China to confirm the visit. The officials talked about the visit and the presumed meeting of Xi and Blinken on the US media. Boeing was even openly anticipating more orders from China. All of that didn’t work. Then the balloon incident presented as a perfect excuse for Blinken to postpone the visit and gain more negotiation time.
It seemed that the US had an upper hand in the diplomatic ‘withdrawal’. China could only fight back by accusing the US of using excessive force on a civilian target. Far from a crisis, the incident was just a diplomatic engagement. After all, the visit was postponed, not canceled. The market didn’t believe the balloon incident could lead to a diplomatic crisis either. Gold price plummeted due to the US Non-Farm Payroll which is a reflection of the overheating economy.
Therefore, the US politicians in Washington successfully waged another psychological ‘warfare’ against the American people. They intimidated the people that the threat of China is real and imminent. It was a pity that the visual contact of the balloon was quite ‘convincing’. Only a few people were questioning the real intentions of military-industrial complex and the ill effect on the US economy if the US-China relations were to deteriorate. In the future, there might be even fewer. All of US’s domestic tragedies such as increasing gun violence, police brutality, drug abuse and the bipartisan struggle… can all be hidden behind a manufactured ‘evil’ China.
China didn’t beg for Blinken to visit. I would say that the outcome of the psychological ‘warfare’ in the diplomatic arena this time was a draw. But the American people are definitely the losers of this psychological ‘war’ initiated by the manipulative American political elites. Is it really good for the US as a nation?
