Four points of view on the Chinese balloon that I have encountered in news reports or comments:

1. The balloon is on a spy mission.
2. The balloon’s mission is not to collect information. China launched it into US airspace to test the US government’s reaction.
3. It’s nothing more than a weather balloon that was blown off course.
4. The whole thing is a non-event. Besides, the US flies spy missions over China all the time.

The US military appears to believe the first statement.  In that case, why did they wait until Saturday, February 4 to deflate the balloon?  It entered US airspace over Alaska on Saturday, January 28.  It cut a corner over Canada and then re-entered the Unites States over Idaho on Monday, January 30.  By Wednesday, February 1 it was over Montana.  President Biden gave an order that day to destroy the balloon.  The order was carried out three days later on Saturday, February 4, after the balloon had transited the continental United States.

It seems obvious that the failure to shoot it down immediately is a demonstration of weakness.  Demonstrating weakness to an aggressor provokes more aggression.

Uniformed spokespersons have told us that by waiting until the balloon was over water, they avoided the possibility of injury to persons or damage to property on the ground.  Did the military check with their lawyers before destroying the balloon?  It sounds like a lawyer’s decision.

Alaska has 1.3 people per square mile.  Montana has 7.5.  I have driven on roads in eastern Montana where 30 minutes can pass without the appearance of a vehicle coming from the opposite direction.  This is empty country.

The risk that anyone would be injured or killed by falling debris in Alaska or Montana is minuscule.  It’s minuscule, but it’s not zero.  If someone were to be killed by debris, there would be headlines for days, not to mention congressional hearings.  Is that why the United States military decided to allow a spy mission to continue across the breadth of the continent even after receiving authorization from the commander-in-chief to shoot it down three days earlier?

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin seemed to take pride that the balloon had been shot down over US territorial waters when he announced the success of the mission.  The accomplishment of destroying the balloon without any injury, loss of life, or damage to property must be weighed against the possible alteration in China’s calculations of the risks it can take in the future.  The danger is that the “red line” (to borrow a phrase from President Obama) is not as far back as it appears to be.

The idea is similar to broken windows policing.  Some potential offenders may be deterred from significant violations of the law if the police demonstrate that they won’t tolerate minor infractions.  The same principle translated to international affairs means that a show of resolve now in the face of an act of aggression can help to discourage an act of war later.

From China’s standpoint, this incident may fit neatly with what they learned from phone calls that General Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, made to his counterpart in October 2020 and January 2021.  US intelligence believed that China was concerned that the unsettled political situation in the United States might lead the US to attack China.  General Milley told China’s General Li that the United States had no plans to attack China.  Unfortunately, he went further and said that he, Milley, would personally inform Li if an attack were imminent.

When word of this statement made it to the public, General Milley’s damage control followed a familiar trajectory.  First, he denied that it happened.  Then he pointed out that high-level talks among military leaders take place frequently.  Then he stated that the conversations had been authorized by the Secretary of Defense and had been attended by eleven other individuals.  Only after receiving a direct question in a Congressional hearing did the General confirm that he had made this statement to his Chinese counterpart.

Think about the impression that these high-level conversations made on China’s military and political leadership.  Isn’t it likely that they would believe that China could push a little harder without risk against a nation whose highest military staff officer would make a promise like that?  I think we can assume that General Li did not call General Milley before China sent the balloon into US airspace.

Political leaders here in the United States have begun to circle the wagons.  Mr. Biden has received praise from Senate Majority Leader Schumer for the president’s stalwart and measured response.  An unnamed senior official in the Department of Defense is reported to have said that three such balloons entered United States airspace during the Trump administration.  That information does not appear to have reached Mr. Trump, either of his Directors of National Intelligence, or his CIA Director.  That’s good enough for Politico, Newsweek, AP, and others to run headlines of the variety “Republicans deny . . . . .”.  These folks know how to float a trial balloon even if they are slow to shoot down a real one.

Meanwhile, in chanceries around the world, leaders will examine the incident and make small adjustments to their contingency plans.  Nations that feel the gravitational pull of two competing powers may lean away from the competitor that has failed once again to show resolve.

—  Gerry Bresslour