Intelligence Considerations of PRC Surveillance Balloon
With the People’s Republic of China sending a high-altitude surveillance balloon over the United States and part of Canada, including sensitive U.S. military sites—and the subsequent AIM-9X warhead shot from a U.S. F-22 bringing down the balloon on Feb. 4—leaders will be delving into intelligence about the balloon’s operations and equipment as well as the broader intelligence considerations of China’s intrusive actions, military and legislative leaders said this week.
Speaking to reporters over the last couple of days, Gen. Glen VanHerck, USAF, commander, North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), thanked the active duty, reserve, National Guard and civilian personnel who planned and executed the operation on Saturday, including partners from the U.S. Coast Guard, Federal Aviation Administration and FBI. “I am proud of the exceptional professionalism the NORAD and USNORTHCOM team displayed throughout this operation, and the dedication they bring every day to defending our homelands,” Gen. VanHerck stated.
Without identifying the specific approaches, the commander emphasized that the United States took “maximum precautions to prevent any intel collection” by China’s balloon, outside of what the United States already understands of China’s space surveillance capabilities.
“We did not assess it presented a significant collection hazard beyond what already exists in national technical means from the Chinese,” Gen. VanHerck stated. “I was in close coordination with the commander, United States Strategic Command, and we provided counterintelligence messages out of our intelligence shop across the entire Department of Defense, in the interagency, so that we could take maximum protective measures while the balloon transitioned across the United States.”
Normally, the U.S. military does not perform intelligence gathering within America, as part of human rights protections and adherence to international rules-based order. Given that the PRC had violated U.S. airspace, certain provisions of Title 10 allowed for intelligence gathering in the United States in regard to the balloon. “I think it's important to talk about this, day to day, we do not have the authority to collect intelligence within the United States of America,” the commander clarified. “In this case, specific authorities were granted to collect intelligence against the balloon specifically, and we utilized specific capabilities to do that.”
The commander opined that it was prudent for the military to wait to take the balloon after it had flown across the country, for safety reasons as well as for “maximizing our ability” to recover the payload, Gen. VanHerck stated.
“You always have to balance that with the intel gain opportunity, and there was a potential opportunity for us to collect intel, where we had gaps on prior balloons, and I would defer to the intel community on that,” he said. “But this gave us the opportunity to assess what they were actually doing, what kind of capabilities existed on the balloon, and what kind of transmission capabilities existed. And I think you'll see in the future that the timeframe was well worth its value to collect.”
Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, was optimistic that the Navy and Coast Guard recovery efforts—including the use of an unmanned underwater vehicle—would yield more of the balloon and its payload. Sen. Reed spoke to reporters with the Defense Writers Group on a Feb. 7 call.
The next step after that is for the military to brief legislators on Capitol Hill in a secure forum. Part of that discussion, naturally, would be to glean insights into China’s actions, Sen. Reed emphasized.
“The question now is, what was the motivation?” he asked. “Who ordered it by the Chinese? What were they trying to accomplish? And what does that signal to us about the Chinese relationship? And I think based on that analysis, we can take steps.”
This gave us the opportunity to assess what they were actually doing, what kind of capabilities existed on the balloon, and what kind of transmission capabilities existed. And I think you'll see in the future that the timeframe was well worth its value to collect.
And although Sen. Reed was confident in how U.S. situational awareness about the balloon “was picked up very quickly and transmitted to the President, with a national security [response that] came very, very quickly,” he noted that the Senate would look for any capability gaps in airspace domain awareness. “That's something obviously we want to check, [but] again, I think the reaction specifically to the balloon is to ensure that no object can enter our airspace without being discovered in a reasonably adequate time.”
Sen. Reed ventured that China’s intrusion does not yet go “to the point of changing basic policies. I think it is more in terms of how more effective we can be in denying any access to our airspace by China and anyone else.”
Canadian military and civilian officials provided strong partnership with U.S. leaders to address the PRC balloon incursion, which also flew over parts of Canada. And should any activities occur in the Indo-Pacific region, the United States would similarly be involved with allies from that region.
“We understand that ultimately our strength can be multiplied by partnerships,” Sen. Reed stated. “And that's why the concept of interoperability, sharing intelligence, being able ideally, to get information from an Australian or Japanese source that we can filter instantaneously to a shooter on either a ship or plane or land, based on what we're working on.”
In a statement on Feb. 7, Pentagon spokesman Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, USAF, noted that the PRC was declining to speak with the U.S. military.
"On Saturday, 4 February, immediately after taking action to down the PRC balloon, the Department of Defense submitted a request for a secure call with Secretary Austin and the PRC Minister of National Defense Wei Fenghe," the general indicated. "We believe in the importance of maintaining open lines of communication between the United States and the PRC in order to responsibly manage the relationship. Lines between our militaries are particularly important in moments like this. Unfortunately, the PRC has declined our request."
Our commitment to open lines of communication will continue."
