Chat with Nancy Bernkopf Tucker on U.S.-China Relations

By CBSNews.com staff CBSNews.com staff

May 11, 1999 / 6:28 PM EDT / CBS

On May 10, 1999, CBS News and the AOL audience chatted with Nancy Bernkopf Tucker about U.S.-China relations in the wake of the accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. Tucker is an American diplomatic historian at Georgetown University. She has served in the Office of Chinese Affairs in the U.S. State Department and at the U.S. embassy in Beijing.

Audience question: Can you give us an update on China's reactions to the accidental NATO bombing of the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia?

Prof. Tucker: News from Beijing today indicates the 4th day of demonstrations is somewhat less than those of the past 3 days, but demonstrations do continue around the American Embassy. The Chinese government has demanded an apology from President Clinton, as well as an investigation of what happened and the punishment of whoever is to blame.

The government is under pressure to be tough with the U.S. for two major reasons: one is the upcoming 10th anniversary of the massacre at Tiananmen Square and the government's desire to distract its people from commemorating that event.

The second reason to appear to be tough with the U.S. is the recent visit of the Premier Zhu Rongji during which Zhu made significant economic concessions to facilitate China's entry into the world trade organization. The U.S. nevertheless did not accept those concessions and insisted there would have to be further negotiations. Some feel this embarrassed the Premier and humiliated China. So the government feels under pressure to be seen as being tough with the U.S. for political reasons, as well as humanitarian reasons that include some of their people being killed and others wounded in the attack.

Audience question: I understand that none of the Clinton or NATO apologies have been made public in China. Has information of the mistake been made available to the protesting Chinese?

Prof. Tucker: No. The Chinese government has not made public the U.S.'s explanation or its apologies for the error. In fact, the Chinese government in its reporting of the events in Yugoslavia has covered what has happened to the Serbs in the NATO bombing, but not what the Serbs have done to the Kosovars. So many of the demonstrators are unaware of the murders, the rapes and the efforts of Milosevic to drive the people of Kosovo out of the province.

Audience question: How great of a danger is there to the Americans in the embassy in China?

Prof. Tucker: The danger now seems to have been significantly reduced. Over the weekend the staff felt the danger was serious enough that the Ambassador ordered sensitive documents destroyed in case the crowds were able to break into the embassy. Reportedly today people have been able to lave and demonstrators have significantly reduced. What remains unclear is how long the Chinese government will allow the demonstrations to continue. The U.S. has issued a travel advisory warning Americans not to travel to China, and Americans in China have been advised to stay home or in their hotels.

Audience question: Has China been active in pursuing peace in the conflict in Yugoslavia. (Note: China was a missing ingredient in last week's Russian/Western agreement on plans for peace in Kosovo.)

Prof. Tucker: China is historically very concerned about intervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign country. That follows from China's history as a victim of imperialism. So China has disapproved of international intervention in Yugoslavia from the beginning and China would prefer that NATO stop bombing and go home.

However, China has rarely used its veto in the U.N. Security Council and prefers not to be isolated from the rest of the international community. So if there were a peace keeping plan to which all members including Russia subscribe, the Chinese would probably prefer not to oppose it. But they are also unlikely to come forward with their own plan for peace.

Audience question: Do you see the possibility of a "new cold war" between the U.S. and China in the next millennium?

Prof. Tucker: Many people have talked about the possibility of a new cold war, to some degree that can be a self fulfilling prophecy. There is a sufficient number of issues on which they disagree that there will be many opportunities for serious conflict.

On the other hand, it is not in the national interest of either the U.S. or China for relations to degenerate enough for the situation to be considered a new cold war. China's most pressing need is their economic engagement with the international committee and their access to American market and technology. We can create a cold war atmosphere but it isn't inevitable for that to develop and I think it is not in American interest for us to allow the relationship to decline that far.

Audience question: If China wanted to get belligerent now, what type of military threat are they currently to the U.S.?

Prof. Tucker: China is not a significant military threat to the U.S. today. China's entire force of intercontinental ballistic missiles probably number less than 20, and ours is in the thousands. But China's navy is weak, and it can't project naval force much beyond its coast. Its air force is no where near as technologically sophisticated, but China has purchased some advanced air craft from Russia. So China is no real military threat to us now.

China is however, to some degree, a threat to some of our friends and allies in Asia. And of course, China is growing rapidly ad investing in modernization in military forces. It also understands that it cannot hope to catch up with the U.S. across the board. So it is trying to create pockets of excellence in particular areas in hopes eventually to compete with or deter American power. For example, it cannot face the U.S. Navy in the Taiwan Straight, but it could hope to modernize forces in the area to deter an American president from sending ships into harms way the way Bill Clinton did in 1996.

Audience question: Is any of this a convenient distraction to the China espionage story?

Prof. Tucker: The China espionage story is a very complicated one because it involves not just the alleged stolen secrets at Los Alamos, but possible earlier efforts to gain American technology from U.S. companies using Chinese rockets in China. The U.S. Congress had looked upon these possible breaches of American national security with considerable alarm. The current crisis, I believe, will tend to aggravate that situation. The Chinese are already upset by the allegations. They are also concerned about the issue of their entry into world trade, they are facing Tiananmen in June, and also the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Peoples Republic of China in October 1.

This is an important year for China, therefore a year in which attacks on China's sovereignty and status in the world community are particularly unwelcome. It seems quite certain that with the U.S. Presidential campaign starting up that we will hear a lot more about Chinese espionage and about alleged Chinese campaign contributions and so there will be a drum beat of anti-china news in the U.S. That will be very unwelcome to the authorities in Beijing, and this will be a very difficult period for U.S. - China relations.

Audience question: Is the current administration doing anything wrong in its response to the embassy bombing? If so, what?

Prof. Tucker: The Clinton administration should probably have apologized much more quickly, probably issued its apology separately from its declaration that the bombing will continue. To many in China, the American apology has not sounded sincere.

Beyond that, the U.S. must come to some conclusion as to how this happened and be able to explain it in a convincing manner the world and Chinese community. The US has pointed to its vast technological superiority, its ability to place smart bombs exactly where we want them to go. It has been particularly difficult for the Chinese to believe the U.S. made a mistake, so some Chinese think we did this on purpose. Of course, this is not true. There is no way this would be in the U.S.'s best interest, to bomb the Chinese embassy. We need China's cooperation. But I do think that we will have to be as forthcoming as possible in explaining what went wrong.

My wife and I are going to China on June 11 to adopt a baby. Will we still be able to go?

Prof. Tucker: Probably. At the moment, the U.S. government is advising against travel to China, and the Chinese government has suspended official talks on arms control and human rights issues. I've also been told that some private delegations from U.S. think tanks have been told not to make the trip to China now. But, I would think and sincerely hope that by the middle of June the situation would have calmed down and it would be safe to travel to China. It would be wise to keep in touch with the State Department before taking a trip there.

CBS News hosts a forum on AOL every Monday through Thursday evening at 7:30pm ET / 4:30pm CT. On AOL, go to Keyword: Live.