Ini ada yg lumayan objektif dari Sidney Morning Herarld. Ringkasnya: - AS kirim pesawat mata-mata ke Cina, Cina tidak pernah kirim pesawat ke AS. - AS mempreteli pesawat MIG-25 Sovyet yg dibelotkan ke Jepang tahun 1976. Pesawat sama sekali tidak pernah menyentuh atau mendekati perairan AS. Tambahan: - Apakah nyawa bule yg diperlakukan dengan baik oleh Cina lebih berharga dari nyawa pilot Cina yg hilang? Di mana nilai human right AS? Sekarang ini tidak ada secuilpun ucapan human right dari orang AS. - Buat apa AS melintasi perairan di dalam jarak 200 mil dari daratan Cina padahal tahu Cina mengklaim jarak segitu masih milik Cina? Saya tidak pernah baca ulasan semacam, tetapi mari kita pikir, bukankah ini semacam provokasi? - Bila ini sekaligus tindakan provokasi, apakah salah bila fighter Cina bereaksi? Apa ukuran unsafe manner yg dituduhkan oleh AS? Bukankah mereka yg punya unsafe manner dengan memasuki wilayah berjarak kurang dari 200 mil. Konklusi: - AS cari perkara, jadi bukan Cina yg cari perkara sebagai mana dituduhkan AS seperti cari nilai tambah untuk ber-bargain against penjualan persenjataan ke Taiwan ataupun untuk masuk WTO. - Negara besar selalu menang sendiri. Makin kecil suatu negara, makin rendah segala macam posisinya. Kesimpulan yg sederhana ini kelihatan silly untuk ditulis, tetapi ingatlah apa yg pernah ditulis oleh para pembela Timtim dan pembela tindakan makar lainnya, yg menyatakan semua nilai-nilai strategis tradisional sudah tidak relevan lagi, dan sebaliknya kekuatan informasi yg menjadi kekuatan suatu bangsa. Menurut saya ini pasti pengagum futurists. Anjasmara ------------------- For Bush, it's a case of all allies on deck By Brian Toohey Australian policy makers have spent years pretending China is not run by a bunch of geriatric communists who might welcome the chance to peek inside a US spy plane. Mesmerised by the promise of a huge new Asian market, our policy makers have insisted the day would never arrive when they would have to choose between China and the US. Now, they are in for a rude awakening. Hawkish officials in the Bush Administration have made it brutally clear they expect nothing less than 100 per cent support from allies such as Australia. But the last thing Australian officials wanted so soon after George W Bush took over in January was for a big US spy plane to make an emergency landing on Chinese territory. The plane, and its crew of electronic eavesdroppers, will no doubt be returned to the US. The hawks on each side, however, will be left in a much stronger position. The US is in no position to claim the high moral ground. Its EP3 prop jet was engaged in electronic espionage while flying provocatively close to Chinese territory. As was always on the cards, a collision with a Chinese fighter forced it to land on Hainan island. The Chinese do not make similar flights along the US coast. If they did, there is no question US intelligence agencies would grab the chance to examine any Chinese plane which landed on US territory. After all, the US completely dismantled a MiG-25 fighter after it landed in Japan in 1976. It was not until 76 days later that the pieces were returned in crates to the Soviet Union. As a result, the US could hardly expect the Chinese to take much notice of the claim they should not examine the plane on the grounds that it was sovereign US territory. A number of legal experts say this is not true. Nor is it at all clear that electronic eavesdropping is sanctioned by international law. In any event, the Chinese can't really be expected to look a gift horse in the mouth. If they get a chance to look inside a US spy plane, they are going to do so. Not that they are likely to discover much they don't already know - that it contains equipment for eavesdropping on phone calls, faxes, e-mails, radar and radio signals along with just about any other electronic transmission imaginable. Despite hysterical commentary to the contrary, giving the Chinese the opportunity to poke around inside the plane is not a major disaster for US intelligence. Even if some incriminating computer discs were not destroyed before landing, this will not prevent the US from conducting similar spy flights in future. But this did not stop one over-excited editor from Jane's Defence Weekly claiming the crew should have ditched the plane in the ocean rather than save their own lives by landing at a Chinese air force base. The problem is not one of cowardice. The trouble is the incident has severely set back the chances of China becoming a normal, democratic member of the international community. Influential Republican members of Congress now want Bush to take a tougher line with China. Not that his team needs much urging to look for enemies. Bush's National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, for example, dismayed European allies in February by branding Russia a threat to American security. Rice seems to have trouble with the fact that the Russian people have thrown off communism and embraced democracy. Given that China is still run by members of the Communist Party, it should be easier to treat it as a replacement enemy for the now defunct Soviet Union. The process had already begun before the spy plane incident. Bush wasted no time dropping former president Bill Clinton's description of China as a strategic partner, describing it instead as a strategic competitor. He also vowed to push ahead with a National Missile Defence system which the Chinese regard - with good reason - as undermining the nuclear balance which depends on the ability to retaliate if attacked. Now, the Chinese are more likely to expand their small nuclear missile force to counter the US anti-missile system. Worse still, they are likely to harden their demands that Taiwan must come under Beijing's political control. At this stage, there is no plausible way that this could happen without the use of force. The Taiwanese are not about to opt for being governed by some crusty Beijing autocrats. Although Australian diplomacy has not sanctioned the use of force, it has encouraged the Chinese to believe that they are entitled to claim sovereignty over Taiwan. The game can't go on for much longer with Australia standing on the sidelines. The Bush Administration is going to demand Australia choose sides. The choice will not be fun for a whole generation of diplomats and lobbyists who have built their careers on closer ties with China. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
