رویکرد اقتضایی به حل مناقشه بین چین و ایالات متحده

Taking the dispute between the United States and China over the collision of a U.S. Navy plane with a Chinese jet in April 2001, the research confirmed at certain the Contingency Theory variables that affect the U.S. government's stance in resolving the conflict. It supported the postulates of the theory: Symmetry through a dialogue may not be inherently ethical; in a morally intractable conflict, accommodation may be impossible.

With the rapid growth of international news media and globalization, disputes and conflicts between countries are more than ever subject to the shaping influence of increasingly diverse publics. Taking the dispute between the United States and China over a midair collision in April 2001, this research aims to identify the factors that affect the dispute resolution of the U.S. government. The dispute was sparked by the incidental collision of a U.S. Navy reconnaissance plane with a Chinese fighter jet sent to intercept it over the South China Sea. The U.S. spy plane made an emergency landing on the Chinese island of Hainan after the collision, while the Chinese fighter jet crashed into the sea, with its pilot missing. The collision evolved into a tense standoff between the two countries. China demanded apology, while the United States urged returning of its plane and crewmembers. Both sides found in the beginning no room to make any shift toward a more accommodative stance. However, the conflict was resolved and the relations between the two powers resumed. Throughout the dispute, both sides employed a welter of public relations techniques to advance their own rhetoric. Public opinions on both sides were enflamed as the countries competed on the world stage for credence and support. The dispute provides an ideal case for understanding conflict resolution under the dynamics of international public diplomacy as played out in major media outlets.

In conclusion, through a case study of the midair collision that led to a dispute between China and the United States, the case study confirmed the Contingency Theory variables that affect the stance taken by the Bush administration throughout the conflict. The research supported two postulates of the Contingency Theory. It supported the argument that symmetry through a dialogue may not be inherently ethical, and in a morally intractable conflict, accommodation may be impossible. This research is the first test of the Contingency Theory in a context of international conflict.