The media report of a Chinese-sponsored high-altitude balloon, the follow-up reports of its flight path over U.S. geography, and the "shoot-down" event that followed are all subject to factual testing, but on its face, the story represents one overwhelmingly incoherent assertion: that a slow-moving midlevel atmospheric balloon could violate U.S. airspace.

How could a Chinese (or any other) foreign object enter U.S. national airspace (the "NAS" or national airspace system, controlled by the DOD and the civilian FAA) without its presence known far beforehand, and its flight path not tracked and projected?  And if a very slow-moving balloon, let alone a supersonic aircraft, or a hypersonic missile, is not announced over a public communication system until it is already over U.S. airspace, loitering over the Midwest, what does this say about our entire national defense system and about NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command), or about general civil defense and public notification systems?

It is of interest that the September 11, 2001 tragedy was defined in part by a still unexplained failure of the entire NORAD system, declared in the final 911 Report to be systematically preoccupied with joint simulations and drills.  In the case of the Chinese balloon incident, what then is offered as an explanation for its apparently unknown presence over the U.S., and its casual trajectory over military installations, nuclear facilities, industrial operations, dense population centers, and civil infrastructure?  Moreover, why was it supposedly shot down over the Atlantic Ocean, and its recovery made problematic, when it could have been captured through routine in-flight procedures, and towed effectively to a defense installation for examination?  It could also have been easily compromised in its ability to maintain altitude, without destroying it, and recovered intact.

So its undeclared presence until it was reported through a purported chance observation by a civilian airline passenger near the U.S.-Canadian border, its casual observation as it trekked across America, and its effectively botched capture and examination all point to a command structure that is operating a low-level psychological operation; a domestic project labeled a foreign source (which is a traditional military and intelligence practice); a simplistic pretextual exercise for eventual military escalation; or a reflection of a defense bureaucracy apparently preoccupied with political, racial, and biomedical interferences, and otherwise led by a civilian commander who qualifies for 25th Amendment, Section 3 removal (fitness).

Or is the current Biden administration perhaps so ideologically allied with China that it continues to see its leadership, political system, and philosophical ideology as a model and roadmap for U.S. domestic control, and is acting in concert with it?  As the current administration continues to violate the Constitution in explicit acts characterized under Article III, cooperating with a foreign enemy who has declared a 100-year strategic war against the United States, it would not be inconsistent.

One thing is sure: whenever an event has any military or national security implications, the story that is released to the public is carefully crafted as a public relations communication and not as a report of fact. 

Matthew G. Andersson is a former executive adviser in the Aerospace and Defense practice of Booz Allen Hamilton and is a jet-rated airline transport pilot.  He has testified to the U.S. Senate on aircraft in the National Airspace System.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.