The Spy in the Sky: How the Chinese Spy Balloon is Changing the Conversation about Land Ownership
By Katie Cheung · Cogito XIV ·On January 31, 2023, civilians in Montana spotted a 200-foot-tall surveillance balloon that floated from the West to the East across the United States. While the discovery of this airship was shocking to the public, U.S. military agencies had been tracking it for nearly a week prior to the first civilian spotting, watching as it lifted off from its home base on Hainan Island near China’s south coast. While officials believe the balloon intended to gather intelligence about military activities in the Southern Pacific, the balloon floated over Alaska’s Aleutian Islands on January 28, thousands of miles off its intended trajectory. After drifting over Canada, intense winds pushed the balloon south into the continental United States. The spy balloon saga has reintroduced contentious topics such as China’s international military presence, however, more concerningly, it has contributed to a rise of xenophobic policy and anti-Chinese sentiment, especially regarding U.S. land ownership.
On February 4, five days after its first civilian sighting, a U.S. F-22 fighter jet took down the balloon approximately six miles off the coast of South Carolina. The balloon possessed the ability to record high-resolution video and intercept electronic transmissions. Some believe that the balloon’s path fell off track due to unforeseen weather conditions, but ultimately its flight over sensitive nuclear development sites in Montana breached American sovereignty. Whether an accident or not, China’s People’s Liberation Army seized the opportunity to try to gather intelligence through their sophisticated satellite systems.
How will this balloon saga exacerbate the rising tensions between the U.S. and China? Reports of mass surveillance within China’s borders raise alarm over the seemingly dystopian practice. The deployment of similar technology to gather intelligence about American military developments raises questions about the expanding scope of this technology. Over the weekend of February 18, Chinese and American diplomats engaged in over an hour-long conversation concerning a slew of controversial topics. Most notably, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that “we had a very direct, very clear conversation about the Chinese surveillance balloon being sent over our territory in violation of our sovereignty, in violation of international law… I told Wang Yi, my Chinese counterpart, that that action was unacceptable and must never happen again.” Their discussion “showcased deep fractures between the two superpowers and prompted fears that what’s often described as the world’s most consequential bilateral relationship could be deteriorating to dangerous lows” according to a review of Blinken’s conversation. The volatile relationship between China and the U.S. has created anxiety over if/when the U.S. will respond with economic, political, and social penalties towards China and Chinese Americans.
Regarding discussion within American borders, there has been steadfast bipartisan criticism of China, the balloon, and Biden’s delayed response to stopping its flight. Differentiating between the Chinese government and Chinese Americans is crucial in addressing concerns regarding China’s actions without targeting a group of people with little to no connection to China’s leadership. While the House of Representatives supported the Senate’s unanimous passing of two resolutions condemning China’s sending of the surveillance balloon, this unusual unity raised questions about the power of a “common enemy.” This chain of events has surfaced as a tool for agreement among Americans who criticize China’s domination over the international political and economic stage, yet simultaneously, the balloon has ignited more anti-Asian attitudes. Themes of political divisiveness and polarization have plagued the past couple of years. Whether it is race, gender, abortion, policing, the pandemic, affirmative action, or gun violence, the U.S. has rarely found stability in a consensus. However, with the Senate and House coming together to disapprove of China’s actions, fears of growing anti-Chinese sentiment consistently rise following the spike in anti-Asian hate crimes during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In particular, many states have proposed bills to restrict foreign ownership of American land. Currently, Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) is sponsoring legislation to include agriculture as a factor in national security decisions as it pertains to foreign real estate investments. Supporters of these initiatives have concerns about foreign buyers’ motives and whether people with ties to adversaries such as China intend to use the land for spying or exerting control over the U.S. food supply. Despite this, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, foreign entities and individuals control below 3 percent of American farmland. Of that, those with ties to China control less than 1 percent, or around 600 square miles (340 square kilometers). The current situation illustrates the insignificant impact that Chinese-owned farmland has on the food economy compared to the rest of the landowners. Caitlin Welsh, director of the Global Food Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, shared concerns about U.S. adversaries purchasing land near military bases but said worries about China controlling the food supply were overblown. Despite this, public opinion, which argues that China’s impact on American affairs will damage domestic markets, fails to acknowledge the nuance between differences in the Chinese government’s decisions and the range of Chinese-American beliefs. The inability to separate these entities opens the door for anti-Chinese sentiment directed at those who do not support the Chinese administration.
Beyond agricultural land ownership, a Chinese army veteran and real estate tycoon bought over 130,000 acres of land to create a wind farm in a town bordering a U.S. Air Force base, pressuring Texas to specifically ban infrastructure deals (vs. agricultural developments) with individuals tied to hostile governments, including China, in 2021. This year, Texas Republicans want to expand this ban to restrict the purchasing of land. It is not just Texas; according to PBS, “in Utah, concern has centered on a Chinese company’s purchase of a Speedway near an army depot in 2015 and Chinese-owned farms exporting alfalfa and hay from drought-stricken parts of the state.” Concerns regarding the presence of individuals affiliated with the Chinese-government continued to heighten after another transaction of 300 acres near an Air Force base in North Dakota by the Chinese company Fufeng Group.
Although there are no states that fully prohibit foreign land ownership, there are fourteen states with many military bases near agricultural land that already impose restrictions. Experts report that, “of the five states where the federal agriculture department says entities with ties to China own the most farmland, four don’t limit foreign ownership: North Carolina, Virginia, Texas and Utah.” Missouri, the fifth state, has a cap on foreign land ownership that state lawmakers want to make more stringent. The range from having no restrictions to having strict rules highlights the lack of a uniform approach under state law. As such, how states address restrictions on the amount of land that can be owned, confusion over the duration of ownership, the debate over private versus public land, and differences related to enforcement/penalties, illustrate the possibility of state-biased responses to Chinese ownership. Allowing states to regulate who can own certain land sets a dangerous precedent regarding how states can impose anti-Chinese control over the food, technology, and housing sectors.
The spy balloon saga has intensified discourse over national security, but what is more concerning for Chinese Americans is the narrative of xenophobic policy and anti-Chinese sentiment. The restrictions currently being implemented will be deleterious to immigrants who hope to buy homes and build businesses. While the debate over American foreign policy towards China will continue to develop, drawing a line between the actions of the Chinese government and Chinese-Americans will become more important than ever. Reflecting on the past, Japanese internment camps during World War II provide an eerie context for the present. While forcing Chinese Americans to live in uninsulated barracks furnished only with cots and coal-burning stoves might seem unrealistic right now, restricting Chinese land ownership is likely to snowball into widespread anti-Chinese attitudes and policies.
