“Chinese spy balloon” or “Chinese unmanned civilian airship”? - ΚΕΔΙΣΑ

By Yang Xiao Tong 杨晓童, Intern at KEDISA

On the 28^th of January, 2023, a balloon of Chinese origin entered American airspace via the Aleutian Islands in Alaska. The balloon crossed into Canada briefly before emerging once again in American airspace, it traversed through much of the continental United States before it was finally disabled by a single missile fired from an F-22 fighter jet, 6 nautical miles off of the coast of the American state of South Carolina.[1] The event saw the further deterioration of an already tense relationship between the United States and China. On the US side, the US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin voiced his displeasure regarding the incident, describing it as an “unacceptable violation of our (American) sovereignty” perpetrated by Beijing while the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken postponed his visit to China as a result.[2]^{, [3]} On the Chinese side, Beijing has condemned the US’ response to the incident and promised to take “necessary” retaliatory measures, describing the “spy balloon” in question as being merely an “unmanned civilian airship” on a weather research mission that has only strayed into the American airspace by accident.^[4] However, this was refuted by the United States, whom argues that what China claims to be “unmanned civilian airship” are in fact “spy balloons”.[5]^{, [6]} So, who is right? Was the balloon intended for civilian or for military use?

In order to answer this question, I will begin by laying out the benefits of the military using balloons for surveillance purposes. Although experts have argued that balloons are not exactly a sophisticated piece of technology and their surveillance values are limited by a number of constraints which will be mentioned later on in this article, balloons were never intended to be used by themselves. When used in conjunction with other more sophisticated technology, such as drones or satellites, balloons can enhance a country’s overall intelligence gathering, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities. This is because balloons offer a number of advantages satellites and drones do not have.

For example, balloons can intercept communication and electronic signals which would have been otherwise impossible to achieve with satellites due to them orbiting at too high an altitude, not to mention that balloons are considerably cheaper than satellites.^{^[7], [8]} Furthermore, according to Bryan Clark – the Director of the Hudson Institute’s Centre for Defence Concepts, unlike with satellites, which have a predictable path and thus can be easily avoided if you either cease all activity or implement a form of disguise for the brief duration that the satellite passes overhead, balloons are considerably more difficult to avoid due to their ability to remain relatively stationary in one location for an extended period of time and less predictable by nature.^{^[9]}

Balloons also offer a number of advantages when compared to drones as well. For example, drones are relatively difficult to detect via radars which is due to several reasons. Firstly, drones are relatively small which means that they possess a small radar cross section and therefore, they are often filtered out as noise. Secondly, drones usually fly at a relatively low altitude, which means that they are virtually invisible to most radars, because most radars are preoccupied with scanning higher altitudes for more conventional threats such as adversarial planes or missiles. Drones are not impervious however. For example, drones are susceptible to being detected by the naked eye precisely because they are flying at such low altitudes, which also makes them vulnerable to attacks from anti-aircraft missiles, anti-aircraft guns or being jammed.[10]

In comparison, even though balloons can be quite large, the Chinese “spy balloon” had a height of approximately 60 metres and carried a payload that exceeded a ton, they can be surprisingly difficult to detect via radars due to the balloon being primarily comprised of non-metallic material which renders them virtually invisible to radars as well.[11]^{, [12], [13]}Furthermore, balloons can fly at an altitude of approximately 37 kilometres above the Earth’s surface, which means that they are well beyond the range of most anti-aircraft missiles and anti-aircraft guns that is not fixed to an aircraft and intercepting fighter jets have to perform dangerous manoeuvres that could endanger the life of the pilot in order to destroy the balloon because fighter jets can only fly at a height of approximately 20 kilometres above the Earth’s surface.[14]

However, even though balloons offer a number of advantages compared to other technologies that could supplement Beijing’s overall intelligence gathering, surveillance and reconnaissance ability and China has a motive to acquire more intelligence on the United States, it still does not mean that the balloon in question definitely belongs to the Chinese military. Firstly, there is a number of inconsistencies with the ways in which Washington responded to this incident.

For instance, General Glenn VanHerk, whom has been in charge of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) since the August of 2020 and other officials, have revealed that at least three Chinese “spy balloons” had passed over the United States during the Trump presidency. From the information currently available, it seems that these balloons were neither detected immediately nor were they destroyed. If VanHerk’s claim is indeed true, then this means that the Chinese “spy balloon” which was shot down on the 4^th of February, 2023 was by no means the first incident of a Chinese “spy balloon” passing over the United States.^{^[15]} However, then why did Washington not respond to these previous incidents? Especially considering the fact that the Trump administration was by far more hostile towards China than the Biden administration? Why is former President Donald Trump and former Defence Secretary Mark Esper denying the existence of these incidents or claiming that they were never informed?^{^[16]} Or perhaps these previous instances of Chinese “spy balloons” were somehow less important than those that occurred after the 4^th of February, 2023?

This revelation by VanHerk and other officials is incredibly suspicious considering that immediately following the “first” incident on the 4^th of February, three more similar objects were subsequently detected and destroyed.[17] This suspicion is echoed by Senator Susan Collins, “if there are gaps that are caused by a lack of equipment or sensors or better radars, the Department of Defense needs to provide us with that information. The fact that the military was able to act so quickly on these subsequent objects raises very serious questions about why they did not act quickly on the first one”.^{^[18]}

Responding to Collins’ question, VanHerk explains that the sudden increase in NORAD’s detection ability can be attributed to the changing of the radar’s “velocity gates”, which has been changed in response to the “first” balloon incident. This change then allows the radars to detect low speed clutters which would have otherwise been filtered out.^{^[19]} However, then why did VanHerk not change the “velocity gates” following the actual first instance he himself has experienced while he has been in charge of NORAD during the Trump Presidency? Furthermore, if NORAD is able to detect the balloons which is evident from the later incidents, then why is VanHerk warning the Senate of a “domain awareness gap” caused by NORAD’s continued use of antiquated technology?[20]

One possibility is that since approximately 53% of unidentified aerial phenomena witnessed ultimately turned out to be normal aerospace material, which includes civilian balloons and civilian unmanned vehicles, it would have been awfully inconvenient not to mention awfully expensive if Washington was to dispatch fighter jets or reconnaissance aircrafts to manually inspect every instance of low-speed cluster in order to make sure that it is not an adversarial spy balloon or drone.^{^[21]} In addition, these balloons – at least the one that was shot down on the 4^th of February lacked a weapon system and therefore did not pose a physical threat to the United States according to one anonymous senior government official.^{^[22]} However, currently, this remains only a speculation and there is no definitive evidence to explain why there exists a discrepancy between the different way in which VanHerk responded to the alleged instances of Chinese “spy balloons” passing over the United States under the Trump presidency and those under the Biden presidency, and even this speculation is insufficient in explaining the causes. Regardless, what is certain is that VanHerk’s inconsistent response to these “spy balloon” incidents seriously place some doubt on whether or not the Chinese balloon is military in origin.

Furthermore, there is the question of the balloon’s effectiveness had it indeed been a “spy balloon”, which can reveal whether or not the balloon is civilian or military in origin. Currently, there are experts such as William Kim of the Marathon Initiative thinktank whom claims that the Chinese balloon appears to have had “advanced steering technology that the US military has not yet put in the air”, and that recent developments in AI has made it possible to control the direction of a balloon which does not have its own locomotion system by simply adjusting the attitude.^{^[23]} However, upon a careful examination of the contradictory claims coming from the various American government officials, I am more inclined to believe that Kim and other experts’ claim about the balloon possessing excellent propulsion capability is wrong.

In order to explain why these experts are wrong; I will begin by addressing the question of where was the intended destination of the “spy balloon”. While some American government officials have theorised that Chinese “spy balloon’s” intent was to conduct reconnaissance mission over the various missile silos dotting the landscape of continental United States, other argues that the balloon’s original destination had been American military installations such as Guam or Hawaii and that it has merely passed over continental United States by accident.^{^[24]}^{, ^[25]}

My own assessment in this dispute is that had the balloon been indeed a spy balloon, then its destination would likely have been either Guam or Hawaii because there is simply no need for Beijing to spy on the various American intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) silos in continental United States since the little information that can be discerned about these silos via an instrument as rudimentary as a balloon is already public knowledge. This hypothesis is supported by Hans Kristensen – the Director of the Nuclear Information Project, who argues that with the advent of modern technology, it is entirely possible for Beijing to simply use civilian technology such as Google Earth to accurately track the location and the construction of the various American ICBM silos, and this is not considering the fact that Beijing has more sophisticated technology other than Google Earth under its belt, such as the Beidou system.^{^[26]} Kristensen is certainly not alone in his belief that the “spy balloon” had little to no value if their intended purpose had been to spy on the various ICBM silos. According to an anonymous senior American defence official, the balloon “does not create significant value added over and above what the PRC (People’s Republic of China) is likely able to collect through things like satellites in Low Earth Orbit”.[27]^{, [28]}

Thus, given that the destination of the “spy balloon” had either been Guam or Hawaii, and that it has passed over continental United States merely by accident, not once, not twice, but multiple times if VanHerk’s claim were to be believed, and taking into account that Guam, Hawaii and continental United States are thousands of kilometres apart. It is safe to say that the balloon exhibited only limited locomotive capability at best. Although this does not necessarily mean that the balloon does not belong to the Chinese military, but it does raise the question of why would Beijing dispatch something as prone to malfunction as these “spy balloons”? In all likelihood, in combination with VanHerk’s inconsistent response to these “spy balloon” incidents, these balloons were civilian in nature. Although, of course, I cannot claim to be 100% accurate.

As to why the United States is so riled up with what is in all likelihood, an unmanned civilian airship is well beyond the scope of this article. However, I could give some theories, ranging from the American military needing a reason to demand more funding, to Biden using this event and the Democrats and the Republicans’ mutual antagonism towards China to acquire bipartisan support in preparation for the next year’s presidential election, to the Republicans using this event to criticise the Democrats for being too soft on China so that it will lose popular support… the list continues, though it should be noted that all these are merely speculations and not predicated on any tangible evidence.

Endnotes

[1] Politico, Timeline: A Chinese Spy Balloon’s Trip across the United States.

[2] Al Jazeera, China Condemns US Military Strike on Suspected Spy Balloon.

[3] Al Jazeera, Blinken Postpones China Trip as Balloon over US Fuels Tensions.

[4] Al Jazeera, China Condemns US Military Strike on Suspected Spy Balloon.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Jeremy Herb, Jennifer Hansler, Kylie Atwood & Manu Raju, US Officials Disclosed New Details about the Balloon’s Capabilities. Here’s What We Know.

[7] Courtney Albon, Why Stratospheric Balloons Are Used in Era of Space-Based Intelligence.

[8] Haley Britzky, Pentagon Releases Selfie Taken by US Pilot Showing the Chinese Spy Balloon in Air.

[9] Courtney Albon, Why Stratospheric Balloons Are Used in Era of Space-Based Intelligence.

[10] Daniela Pistoia, Detecting and Neutralizing Mini-Drones.

[11] The Straits Time, Chinese ‘spy’ balloon may be guided by advanced AI technology, says expert.

[12] Bernd Debusmann Jr., Suspected Chinese Spy Balloon Was 200ft Tall – US Defence Official.

[13] Haley Britzky, Pentagon Releases Selfie Taken by US Pilot Showing the Chinese Spy Balloon in Air.

[14] The Straits Time, Chinese ‘spy’ balloon may be guided by advanced AI technology, says expert.

[15] Joe Goud & Bryant Harris, After UFO Shoot-Downs, Senators Fret over Holes in Homeland Defences.

[16] Natasha Bertrand, Chinese Spy Balloons under Trump Not Discovered until after Biden Took Office.

[17] Joe Goud & Bryant Harris, After UFO Shoot-Downs, Senators Fret over Holes in Homeland Defences.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid.

[21] Ryan Finnerty, US Lawmakers Describe Unknown Objects as Nothing New after Classified Brief.

[22] Helene Cooper, Pentagon Says It Detected a Chinese Spy Balloon Hovering over Montana.

[23] The Straits Times, Chinese ‘spy’ balloon may be guided by advanced AI technology, says expert.

[24] Natasha Bertrand & Katie Bo Lillis, US Intel Assessing Possibility That Chinese Spy Balloon’s Path over US Was Accidental.

[25] Reuters, Downed Chinese balloon aimed for Hawaii but was blown off course – U.S. official.

[26] Phil McCausland, Map: Here’s How Close the Chinese Spy Balloon Flew to the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal.

[27] Courtney Albon, Why Stratospheric Balloons Are Used in Era of Space-Based Intelligence.

[28] U.S. Department of Defense, Senior Defence Official Holds a Background Briefing on High-Attitude Surveillance Balloon.

Bibliography

Albon, Courtney, Why Stratospheric Balloons Are Used in Era of Space-Based Intelligence, Defense News, Defense News, 7^th February, 2023, https://www.defensenews.com/battlefield-tech/space/2023/02/06/how-stratospheric-balloons-could-complement-space-based-intelligence/.
Bertrand, Natasha & Katie Bo Lillis, US Intel Assessing Possibility That Chinese Spy Balloon’s Path over Us Was Accidental, CNN Politics, CNN, 15^th February, 2023, https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/15/politics/us-intel-china-balloon/index.html.
Bertrand, Natasha, Chinese Spy Balloons under Trump Not Discovered until after Biden Took Office, CNN Politics, CNN, 6^th February, 2023. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/05/politics/chinese-spy-balloons-trump-administration/index.html.
Britzky, Haley, Pentagon Releases Selfie Taken by US Pilot Showing the Chinese Spy Balloon in Air, CNN Politics, CNN, 23^rd February, 2023, https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/22/politics/pentagon-china-balloon-selfie/index.html.
China Condemns US Military Strike on Suspected Spy Balloon, Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 5^th February, 2023, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/2/4/biden-says-us-will-take-care-of-suspected-chinese-spy-balloon.
Chinese ‘Spy’ Balloon May Be Guided by Advanced AI Technology, Says Expert, The Straits Times, The Straits Times, 4^th February, 2023, https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/chinese-spy-balloon-may-be-guided-by-advanced-ai-technology.
Cooper, Helene, Pentagon Says It Detected a Chinese Spy Balloon Hovering over Montana, The New York Times, The New York Times, 3^rd February, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/02/us/politics/china-spy-balloon-pentagon.html.
Debusmann Jr., Bernd, Suspected Chinese Spy Balloon Was 200ft Tall – US Defence Official, BBC News, BBC, 6^th February, 2023, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64548140.
Downed Chinese Balloon Aimed for Hawaii but Was Blown off Course – U.S. Official, Reuters, Reuters, 16^th February, 2023, https://www.reuters.com/world/us/downed-chinese-balloon-aimed-hawaii-was-blown-off-course-us-official-2023-02-15/.
Finnerty, Ryan, US Lawmakers Describe Unknown Objects as Nothing New after Classified Brief, Flight Global, Flight Global, 16^th February, 2023, https://www.flightglobal.com/military-uavs/us-lawmakers-describe-unknown-objects-as-nothing-new-after-classified-brief/152074.article.
Gould, Joe & Bryant Harris, After UFO Shoot-Downs, Senators Fret over Holes in Homeland Defences, Defense News, Defense News, 15^th February, 2023, https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2023/02/14/after-ufo-shoot-downs-senators-fret-over-holes-in-homeland-defenses/.
Herb, Jeremy, Jennifer Hansler, Kylie Atwood & Manu Raju, US Officials Disclosed New Details about the Balloon’s Capabilities. Here’s What We Know, CNN Politics. CNN, 10^th February, 2023, https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/09/politics/spy-balloon-technology/index.html.
McCausland, Phil, Map: Here’s How Close the Chinese Spy Balloon Flew to the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal, NBC News, NBC News, 7^th February, 2023, https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/map-close-chinese-spy-balloon-flew-us-nuclear-arsenal-rcna69376.
Pistoia, Daniela, Detecting and Neutralizing Mini-Drones, Joint Air Power Competence Centre, Joint Air Power Competence Centre, 5^th May, 2022, https://www.japcc.org/articles/detecting-and-neutralizing-mini-drones/.
Senior Defense Official Holds a Background Briefing on High-Altitude Surveillance Balloon, U.S. Department of Defense. U.S. Government, 2^nd February, 2023, https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3287204/senior-defense-official-holds-a-background-briefing-on-high-altitude-surveillan/.
Blinken Postpones China Trip as Balloon over US Fuels Tensions, Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 4^th February, 2023, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/2/3/blinken-postpones-visit-to-china-because-of-balloon-incident?traffic_source=KeepReading.
Timeline: A Chinese Spy Balloon’s Trip across the United States, POLITICO, POLITICO, accessed 15^th March, 2023, https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/05/timeline-a-chinese-spy-balloons-7-day-trip-across-the-united-states-00081222.