Hi everyone,
I don't expect to be taken very seriously as I'm just a wannabee. But since I'm Chinese and it looks to me that there is no other of my fellow countryman taking part in this discussion I would like to offer my two pennies' worth.
An analogy I would apply to this incident is that if one dangles a chicken over a crocodile pit for long enough sooner or later it's going to jump up and bite, even if it means risking losing a tooth or two. That can be because it wants the chicken, or it could also be because it thinks the chicken is a threat.
The croc has now taken a bite, lost a tooth in the process and at the same time the person whom for whatever reason was holding the chicken was also scratched. Who's to be blamed? It's a bit like the chicken and egg question which has led to a vicious cycle.
Maybe it's just me but I don't take this incident as seriously as some of your posts imply you do. A country would be silly not to fight for its own interests. And to me international affairs is no different from say the corporate world in that everyone tries to push as close to the limits as one can without actually breaking any laws.
Whether the Chinese government just wanted to protest against the spying or did they actually meant for the plane to fall(!) into their hands will probably never be known. But I believe the collision itself was an accident. The facts seem to be that there is no conclusive prove as to who should receive how much blame so in a way it's a better than normal opportunity to take advantage of what's on offer if one can manage to pull it off.
I have always thought that the most appropriate thing to do was to return the crewmember immediately but there might be reasons for not doing so, reasons that could be good enough for any military to do the same.
Finally, I remember someone mentioning a long time ago on this thread that if China doesn't want people to intercept their radio communications they should use digital rather than analogue systems. I'm wondering if that person has the relevant expertise to back that up.