 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
David Ensor: Words do matter in U.S.-China standoff
David Ensor is CNN's national security correspondent. He has been following the progress of negotiations to free the 24 U.S. crewmembers who were forced to land on Hainan Island after their plane collided with a Chinese military jet. Q: The U.S. diplomats had an opportunity to meet with the crew members for the fourth time today. What is known about that meeting? Ensor: Gen. Sealock, the military attache at the U.S. embassy in Beijing, met with all of the crew members and reported that they are in high spirits and good form. The Chinese government is giving the crew members printed copies of e-mails that family members are sending them. They have been getting toiletries and have been able to clean up their uniforms. Generally, the situation is okay. The U.S. is pushing for unrestricted, unfettered access to the crew members. Obviously, they are also pushing for them to be freed, but so far they haven't gotten that.
Over the weekend, U.S. officials were only allowed to meet with eight crew members. Today, they were able to meet with all 24, so there's a feeling that this 40-minute meeting went okay. Q: What message did President Bush send to the wife of the missing Chinese pilot? How have the pilots widow and Chinese officials reacted to this letter? Ensor: We haven't yet heard of any reaction from either the Chinese or the pilots widow. I gather the letter was simply a response to her expressions of grief or offering condolences on what looks like her husband's death. I'm told it responded to one or two points she made in a more positive sense about the long-term relationship needing to be kept strong. However, President Bush did not respond to the language in her letter in which she suggested that for him not to apologize was somehow cowardly. Q: Is this a battle of semantics? China wants an apology, but the United States isn't willing to go any further than to say it's "sorry." Ensor: It isn't really just words. There's more to it than just that. The trouble is words matter; they are the stuff of diplomacy. If the United States were to apologize and accept blame for this accident, I understand that there could be legal consequences, legal implications. There might be damages that the United States would have to pay to the pilot's family or to the Chinese government. Given that the U.S. government and the U.S. officials have repeatedly said that we are not at fault, they don't accept that the U.S. did anything wrong. They don't think they have anything to apologize for and shouldn't be liable in any way. The Chinese want an apology because they feel they are in the right and the U.S. is in the wrong. They want an apology for reasons of national pride or for saving face, but they're not going to get an apology outright. There might be some kind of language worked out that will somehow make them feel that that's what they've gotten. There's one proposal that's been suggested by one of the former Clinton people who follows China matters closely. He said why not apologize for landing in Hainan without landing permission, which after all the plane was forced to do because it was in such bad condition it was lucky to even land. He suggested that the U.S. apologize for that since normally one does need to get permission to land anywhere, but not apologize for anything having to do with the accident since the U.S. does not think it was at fault. We did get one interesting little signal in the Chinese press today, which of course is government controlled. For the first time Monday, the Chinese News Agency reported that Admiral Prueher, the U.S. ambassador, was going to be holding talks again with the Chinese foreign ministry, which respectfully called him the U.S. ambassador plenipotentiary. The news story said that he and Chinese officials are trying to work out a solution to this and spoke about the incident as an accident. This was very neutral language. We've been getting a lot of incendiary stuff about hegemony and a lot of very tough talk in the Chinese media. However, this story was a very straight report and it was put out even before the meeting occurred, suggesting to some who follow the tea leaves here in the State Department that maybe the Chinese government is preparing its people for a diplomatic solution to this sometime soon. But when is soon? No one knows the answer to that yet. Q: Is there any indication that the longer this standoff goes on, a new level of negotiations or diplomacy would begin? Ensor: Not yet. There are no such indications. One of the main messages being put out, from the U.S. president on down, is that this is going to have consequences for the U.S.-Chinese relationship as a whole if this situation goes on much longer. So far, there's been some damage, but it's been reversible damage, said spokesman Richard Boucher at the briefing today. However, there are some decisions that have to be made about China about arms sales to Taiwan that has to be made in a few weeks time. U.S. officials stress that that will be made as a separate decision without relationship to this, but it's hard to see how Congress won't tie the two together when it's deciding what to vote for in terms of arms sales. And there are a whole host of other issues. For instance, there is the matter of World Trade Organization membership for China -- there's another vote scheduled for that, I gather. Also, there's the question of whether the U.S. will really go after China on human rights issues again this year or not. RELATED STORIES:
Chinese pilot's wife sends Bush emotional letter RELATED SITES:
USCINCPAC Homepage |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Back to the top | |
© 2003 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. |
