Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

More Details Available on What Caused the U.S. Plane's Emergency Landing

Aired April 10, 2001 - 09:01   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We are -- though, are going to go ahead and start Lisa Rose Weaver in China -- Lisa.

LISA ROSE WEAVER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning.

Yes. Well, U.S. officials have just completed their fifth meeting with the 24 crewmembers. Like the last one, they were able to go directly to the military guest house where they are being detained. That guest house is in town here in Haikou, the provincial capital of Hainan. No Chinese officials were in the room during the meeting headed by General Neal Sealock.

He reported to us that they're doing very, very well physically and mentally. They are getting printed-out e-mail messages from friends and family for at least a third day. Now they're not able to write back, but they are able to see what their friends and families are telling them. They're getting English newspapers. They're able to exercise inside the compound and move about freely. They're well- fed.

Now, so far, the information about these talks have really been restricted to the -- to the pragmatic push to get an early release and also about their physical condition. What we don't know is to what extent the U.S. officials are trying to ascertain from the crew what happened more than one week ago when the surveillance plane had a collision with the Chinese jet. We also don't know if the Americans are trying to find out what the Chinese tried to find out. A few days ago, the Chinese government admitted that it was questioning the Americans as part of its own investigation.

Also, there's the issue of the plane. The surveillance craft remains on the Lingshui landing field -- that's in the southern part of island -- and we know that there's American concern that the Chinese might have removed surveillance equipment from the plane and that they might, in fact, be learning about how the United States does its surveillance work.

But we just don't know, in the overall picture of diplomacy and efforts going on in Beijing and in Washington, how much of it is really going on here at ground zero. What is very clear is the U.S. side continues to push for an early release.

KAGAN: That's our Lisa Rose Weaver reporting from Hainan Island using our video-phone technology.

We are learning more details about the collision that led to the standoff with China. Let's go now to our Jeanne Meserve who is in our Washington bureau -- Jeanne, good morning.

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, Daryn.

We know that there were close encounters between the EP-3 and Chinese fighter jets. Now we have found out just how close. Patty Davis is over at the Pentagon with the latest information -- Patty.

PATTY DAVIS, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jeanne, a senior Pentagon official tells CNN the Chinese fighter was on its third pass at the U.S. EP-3 when that midair collision occurred.

In each of the first two passes, I'm told, the plane -- the Chinese fighter jet was coming at -- at the EP-3 on 45-degree angles, some as close as three to five feet from the U.S. aircraft, and the collision occurred on the final pass, that third pass. I'm told that it clipped the left propeller on the U.S. plane with its tail causing that midair collision.

Now the collision knocked the U.S. plane off of autopilot. Pentagon officials say that the U.S. plane was on autopilot up to that point and really couldn't have swerved or -- sharply or banked sharply to get in the way of the fighter jet.

Now when that happened, the plane was knocked off autopilot, the plane -- the U.S. plane plunged some 5,000 to 8,000 feet by best guesses before the pilot could get that U.S. EP-3 under control -- Jeanne.

MESERVE: And, Patty, I understand you also have some new information on the damage to the American aircraft?

DAVIS: Yeah, Pent -- a senior Pentagon official saying that the damage much more extensive than even originally thought. The plane, of course, had no wing flaps. Its nose cone was gone buffeting that aircraft. But we also have found out that the part of the elevator that controls the up and down movements of that plane was jammed by the plane's antenna, so -- making it very difficult to move up and down. Also, the controls that turned -- allow the plane to turn left and right also broken.

So very, very difficult time that this pilot had landing this aircraft at all -- Jeanne.

MESERVE: Patty Davis at the Pentagon. Thank you.

Now the matter of the release of American crewmen and women seems increasingly to come down to the matter of finding the right words and avoiding the wrong ones.

Joining me now from London is the man who parsed words for the State Department in the Clinton administration, Jamie Rubin. Jamie, over the weekend, Congressman Hyde referred to the Americans as hostages, but the administration has studiously avoided using that term. Why?

JAMES RUBIN, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: Well, I think hostages is a politically-loaded, indeed a radioactive word. It harks back to the Iranian hostage emb -- situation, and I think to call them hostages is politically significant. Technically, I don't think it's really accurate either.

These -- at least after the first couple of days, these airman have been receiving visits. They're on to their fifth visit. They've been receiving supplies and goods. So they're detained. They might even be called prisoners in a sense. But hostage usually implies a breakdown in all law or any formality the way it would be in a kidnapping or in the Iranian hostage situation.

So it's a very politically loaded word, and I'm not sure it's a particularly accurate one either.

MESERVE: The administration has expressed regret. This weekend, it went so far as to say it was sorry. But he -- it has avoided issuing an apology. Explain the distinctions for us.

RUBIN: Well, the -- the real distinction here is what I would call guilt. Is it the American plane's fault that there was this incident? The Chinese have taken a particularly difficult to explain position. They want both an investigation to find out what happened and the U.S. to agree in advance that it was the U.S. fault.

What the administration has done is expressed regret. They've even said they were sorry a plane was lost but do so in a way which doesn't accept the Chinese position, which is that the American plane is at fault. Since there are a lot of questions as to why a large and slow-flying plane could have possibly caused this crash that led to the death of the Chinese pilot, I think it makes sense.

On the other hand, they've come awfully close in trying to help the Chinese government with its hard-liners inside deal with the fact that the United States has at least expressed regret, said they were sorry that the plane was lost, but doing so in diplomatic code that does not accept guilty or responsibility.

MESERVE: There already is some second-guessing going on, some people saying that President Bush was a bit too aggressive in his first remarks, others -- other commentators saying, no, he hasn't been tough enough with the Chinese. What's your critique?

RUBIN: Well, I think, by and large, this is a situation that there is no good answer to, and everyone will be smart or stupid until the day that the airmen are released.

I do think they probably rushed him out with some strong language, and the China experts in the administration probably told them that that was a little harsh and that they needed to give more flexibility and use more language that allows for different interpretations.

Ultimately, this is going to be resolved probably by translators where the United States and China can agree on language that in the English language appears to be what I said earlier, regret that a life has been lost, but in the Chinese language allows for a little more movement towards accepting responsibility.

I think early on there was a kind of a hard line, and I think that very quickly the Bush administration realized it was a little too hard. In the end, there'll be plenty of time for second-guessing when it's over. Right now, I think, by and large, they've handled the situation reasonably well.

MESERVE: James Rubin, former State Department spokesman. Thanks for joining us from London.

And some people, Daryn, telling us that it's a blessing for the administration that Congress is out of town for two weeks. That is keeping the rhetoric down for the time being. Back to you in Atlanta.

KAGAN: Jeanne, thank you.

This related story as well. The Reverend Jesse Jackson has offered to go to China to try to help get the U.S. servicemen and women released. We will talk with the reverend about his offer and his past efforts coming up at the half-hour -- Kyra.

KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: The White House is still ruling out the possibility of an apology in the China standoff, and the White House spokesman is repeating President Bush's statement that diplomacy takes time.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com