Global InformationUnited States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade information
| United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade | |
|---|---|
| Part of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and the Kosovo War | |
 The Embassy Building ten years after the bombing | |
| Location | Belgrade, Serbia, Yugoslavia |
| Coordinates | 44°49′30″N 20°25′08″E / 44.8250°N 20.4190°E |
| Date | May 7, 1999 |
| Target | Disputed |
Attack type | Aerial bombing |
| Weapons | B-2 Spirit JDAM Bombs |
| Deaths | 3[1] |
| Injured | At least 20[1] |
| Perpetrators |  NATO CIA |
On May 7, 1999, during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (Operation Allied Force), five U.S. Joint Direct Attack Munition guided bombs hit the People's Republic of China embassy in Belgrade, killing three Chinese journalists and outraging the Chinese public.[2] According to the U.S. government, the intention had been to bomb the nearby Yugoslav Federal Directorate for Supply and Procurement (FDSP). President Bill Clinton apologized for the bombing, stating it was an accident.[3][4][5] Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director George Tenet testified before a congressional committee that the bombing was the only one in the campaign organized and directed by his agency,[6] and that the CIA had identified the wrong coordinates for a Yugoslav military target on the same street.[7] The Chinese government issued a statement on the day of the bombing, stating that it was a "barbarian act".[8]
In October 1999, five months after the bombing, The Observer[a] of London along with Politiken of Copenhagen, published the results of an investigation citing anonymous sources which said that the bombing had actually been deliberate as the Embassy was being used to transmit Yugoslav army communications.[9][10] The governments of both the U.S. and the U.K. emphatically denied it was deliberate, with U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright calling the story "balderdash" and British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook saying there was "not a single shred of evidence" to support it.[11] In April 2000, The New York Times published the results of its own investigation for which, "the investigation produced no evidence that the bombing of the embassy had been a deliberate act."[12]
Right after the bombing, most Chinese believed it was deliberate, and many continue to believe that it was deliberate.[13] On the other hand, according to structured interviews conducted in 2002 of the 57% of Chinese relations experts who believed that the bombing was deliberate, 87.5% did not suspect President Clinton's involvement.[14]
In August 1999, the United States agreed to compensate the victims of the bombing and their families.[15] In December 1999, the United States agreed to pay China for the damage to the embassy, and China agreed to compensate the United States for damage to U.S. property that occurred during the resulting demonstrations in China.[16][17][18]
In May 2000, a major U.S.-China trade bill passed the United States House of Representatives which became the United States–China Relations Act of 2000[19] integrating with China's entry into the World Trade Organization.[20][21][22] By June 2000, during a visit to China by U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, both sides said that relations between them had improved.[23]
- ^ a b Ponniah, Kevin; Marinkovic, Lazara (May 7, 2019). "The night the US bombed a Chinese embassy". BBC News. Retrieved October 12, 2021.
In total, three people were killed and at least 20 injured.
- ^ Ponniah, Kevin; Marinkovic, Lazara (May 7, 2019). "The night the US bombed a Chinese embassy". BBC News. Retrieved October 12, 2021.
- ^ "CNN - Clinton apologizes to China over embassy bombing - May 10, 1999". CNN. May 10, 1999. Retrieved October 12, 2021.
- ^ "Youth Violence and Embassy Bombing Apology | C-SPAN.org". C-SPAN. May 10, 1999. Retrieved October 12, 2021. Begin time: 00:34 End time: 01:54
- ^ Dumbaugh, Kerry (April 12, 2000). "Chinese Embassy Bombing in Belgrade: Compensation Issues". EveryCRSReport.com. Archived from the original on October 28, 2021. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
U.S. officials offered a number of apologies for the attack...May 10, 1999 – President Clinton, in opening remarks at a White House strategy meeting on children and violence, began with "I would like to say a word about the tragic bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. I have already expressed our apology and our condolences to President Jiang and to the Chinese people...."
- ^ Schmitt, Eric (July 23, 1999). "In a Fatal Error, C.I.A. Picked a Bombing Target Only Once: The Chinese Embassy". New York Times. Retrieved October 22, 2009.
- ^ Tenet, George (July 22, 1999). "DCI Statement on the Belgrade Chinese Embassy Bombing House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Open Hearing". Central Intelligence Agency. Archived from the original on June 13, 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2006.
- ^ "Chinese demand U.N. meeting after Belgrade embassy attacked". CNN. Archived from the original on April 2, 2015.
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
observer1was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ Holsøe, Jens; Larsen, Jørgen; Leijonhufvud, Göran (October 17, 1999). "Kina hjalp Jugoslavien" [China helped Yugoslavia]. Politiken (in Danish). pp. 1, 10.
- ^ Ponniah, Kevin; Marinkovic, Lazara (May 7, 2019). "The night the US bombed a Chinese embassy". BBC News. Retrieved October 12, 2021.
US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright decried the story as "balderdash", while British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook said there was "not a single shred of evidence" to support it.
- ^ Steven Lee Myers (April 17, 2000). "Chinese Embassy Bombing: A Wide Net of Blame". New York Times. New York. Retrieved October 18, 2021.
While the investigation produced no evidence that the bombing of the embassy had been a deliberate act, it provided a detailed account of a broader set of missteps than the United States or NATO have acknowledged...All of the officials interviewed by the Times said they knew of no evidence to support the assertion, and none has been produced.
- ^
- That most Chinese believe that the bombing was deliberate was mentioned in the BBC News coverage at the twentieth anniversary of the bombing in May of 2019:
- Ponniah, Kevin; Marinkovic, Lazara (May 7, 2019). "The night the US bombed a Chinese embassy". BBC News. Retrieved October 12, 2021.
But, as former Nato officials point out, in 20 years no clear evidence has come to light proving what almost all of China believes and America strenuously denies: that it was deliberate.
- It was also mentioned in these two academic papers from 2010 and 2001:
- Moore, Gregory J. (2010). "Not Very Material but Hardly Immaterial: China's Bombed Embassy and Sino-American Relations". Foreign Policy Analysis. 6 (1): 23–41. doi:10.1111/j.1743-8594.2009.00100.x. ISSN 1743-8586. JSTOR 24909876.
While Americans explained that the embassy bombing was a horrible mistake, most Chinese are convinced to this day that it was an intentional attack.
Preprint version of the content of the published paper publicly available via SSRN. - Peter Hays Gries (July 2001). "Tears of Rage: Chinese Nationalist Reactions to the Belgrade Embassy Bombing". The China Journal (46). Canberra, Australia: Contemporary China Center, Australian National University: 25–43. doi:10.2307/3182306. ISSN 1324-9347. JSTOR 3182306. OCLC 41170782. S2CID 145482835.
Few accepted America's explanation that the bombing (and subsequent death of three Chinese journalists) was a mistake caused by the CIA's use of outdated maps
- And in this PhD thesis from 2005:
- Wu, Xu (2005). Chinese Cyber Nationalism: How China's Online Public Sphere Affected Its Social and Political Transitions (Thesis). University of Florida.
Most Chinese people with some political consciousness believed, and still believe till today, that this bombing was an intentional attempt, by the U.S. Department of Defense or maybe some lower-level officials, to humiliate China or to stop China's intervention.
- ^ Moore, Gregory J. (2010). "Not Very Material but Hardly Immaterial: China's Bombed Embassy and Sino-American Relations". Foreign Policy Analysis. 6 (1): 23–41. doi:10.1111/j.1743-8594.2009.00100.x. ISSN 1743-8586. JSTOR 24909876.
Of the 57% of the Chinese experts who believed the bombing was intentional, 87.5% believed President Clinton had no motives to do it and consequently they did not suspect his involvement.
Preprint version of the content of the published paper publicly available via SSRN. - ^ Chu, Henry (July 31, 1999). "U.S. to Pay $4.5 Million for Bombing of Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on December 21, 2021. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ Laris, Michael (December 16, 1999). "U.S., China Reach Deal On Embassy Payments". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ Rosenthal, Elisabeth (December 16, 1999). "U.S. Agrees To Pay China $28 Million For Bombing". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ Dumbaugh, Kerry (April 12, 2000). "Chinese Embassy Bombing in Belgrade: Compensation Issues". EveryCRSReport.com. Archived from the original on October 28, 2021. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ "HR 4444 - U.S.-China Relations Act of 2000 - National Key Vote". Vote Smart. Archived from the original on July 1, 2021. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ Vita, Matthew; Eilperin, Juliet (May 25, 2000). "House Passes China Trade Bill". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ Lardy, Nicholas R. (May 10, 2000). "Permanent Normal Trade Relations for China". Brookings Institution. Archived from the original on December 10, 2021. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ "China Trade bill (2000 - H.R. 4444)". GovTrack. Archived from the original on April 26, 2021. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
- ^ Perlez, Jane (June 23, 2000). "With Relations Warming, Albright Presses China on Taiwan". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved December 21, 2021.
More than a year after the NATO bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Serbia, the United States and China officially declared today during a visit by Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright that the interlude of bitterness had given way to an era of improved relations.
Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).