[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 29 (Wednesday, March 16, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 16, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                          STANDING UP TO CHINA

                                 ______


                           HON. CHARLIE ROSE

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 16, 1994

  Mr. ROSE. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply disturbed by the humiliating 
fiasco evident in the Chinese rebuff of Secretary of State Warren 
Christopher on the human rights issue in recent days.
  I now believe that with the calculated insult to our Secretary of 
State evident in the mass arrests of dissidents immediately prior to 
the visit and arrogant statements by the Chinese Government, we would 
have been better advised to cancel the visit and reaffirm our 
commitment to withholding most-favored-nation status. We should let 
Beijing know that we mean business.
  Chinese persecution of the Buddhist faith in Tibet and the 
suppression of the culture and identity of the Tibetan people has now 
reached the point where the peaceful Tibetans are driven to consider 
taking up arms in a peoples' liberation resistance movement against 
their Chinese oppressors. When Afghan rebels arose against Communist 
invaders from the Soviet Union we provided rebels with Stinger missiles 
and other weapons. Perhaps we should do the same for the Tibetans if 
this gentle people find themselves forced to take up arms against 
Chinese Communist tyranny.
  Beijing has not met the conditions for MFN enunciated by President 
Clinton. They believe that American business interests will be more 
influential at the White House level than human rights concerns. Taiwan 
and Hong Kong investors are also weighing in to protect Beijing.
  Thirty-eight percent of China's total exports go to the United 
States. Last year we bought goods worth $31.5 billion from China while 
they purchased only $8.8 billion in American exports. America's trade 
deficit with China is second only to its deficit with Japan.
  We are upset about Japan and have expressed ourselves with some 
effect. But we have heard very little about the trade deficit with 
China. China is growing rapidly in the realm of commerce while 
backsliding in its respect for human rights, religious freedom, and 
such matters as the use of prison labor and the brutal occupation of 
Tibet.
  Mr. Speaker, the time has come for a review of our trade policy with 
China. The Chinese Government has shown that it will make pragmatic 
concessions only if we show firm resolve.
  We should stop talking about sanctions and MFN if it is only empty 
rhetoric. President Clinton expressed himself in a forthright manner to 
the Chinese at Seattle. He should now take an equally firm stand with 
his own State Department which has waffled and wavered. Secretary 
Christopher's fiasco in Beijing caused national embarrassment. I cannot 
believe that the President will sustain a diplomatic policy that is 
more responsive to financial interests than human interests.
  I am also concerned that if we wish to avert a bloody revolt of the 
Tibetan people against tyranny we have no time to lose. The film 
``Schindler's List'' recalls how world indifference facilitated the 
murder of 6 million Jews. Now we have the spectacle of 6 million 
Tibetans facing national extinction and cultural and religious 
genocide.
  In light of recent developments I do not see how our Government can 
go on honoring China as a most favored nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I wish to insert in the Record a number of articles from 
the Washington Post and New York Times.

                From the New York Times, Mar. 11, 1994]

                Dalai Lama Reassesses Effort With China

       New Delhi, March 10.--The Dalai Lama warned today that 
     pressures from Tibetans who are tiring of his efforts to 
     negotiate with China for broader rights for Tibet may force 
     him instead to seek international backing for an independent 
     Tibet.
       In a statement to mark the 35th anniversary of the 1959 
     uprising, the exiled spiritual leader said he was reassessing 
     the basis of his approach to the Chinese Government. His plan 
     envisions Tibet as gaining extensive autonomy within China, 
     including the right for Tibetans to choose their own 
     government, with the Chinese authorities retaining control of 
     foreign relations and defense.
       In New Delhi, a few hundred Tibetans, some hoisting banners 
     calling for an independent Tibet, protested Chinese rule in 
     their homeland. Among them were some student leaders who have 
     been increasingly critical of the Dalai Lama, faulting his 
     commitment to nonviolence in the struggle for Tibetan rights. 
     Some militants have advocated a guerrilla war against Chinese 
     rule.
                                  ____


               [From the Washington Post, Mar. 15, 1994]

                           Trading With China

       If the Clinton administration finds it politically 
     impossible to cut off trade with China in the name of human 
     rights, it should not make threats. Secretary of State Warren 
     Christopher went to Beijing in the manner of a judge giving a 
     defendant one last chance before finding him in contempt of 
     court. Since the Chinese have remained adamant, he is now 
     reduced to looking for silver linings, and finding examples 
     of microscopic progress here and there, in anxious 
     preparation for the backdown that now looks probable.
       The Clinton administration has been saying for nearly a 
     year that if there is no significant improvement in the 
     practice of human rights in China by June, China will lose 
     the trade benefit known as MFN--most favored nation--
     treatment for the goods it sells in this country. Under MFN, 
     imports from China enter under the lowest tariff that any 
     other country gets. Without it, tariffs would shoot up to 
     levels that, for many kinds of goods would be prohibitive. 
     American exporters to China have been drumming on the 
     administration not to withdraw MFN, since the Chinese would 
     certainly retaliate. But American trade with China is 
     unusually lopsided. Last year China exported goods worth 
     $31.5 billion to this country, while importing only $8.8 
     billion in American goods. This country's trade deficit with 
     China is second only to its deficit with Japan. While the 
     United States complains endlessly about the Japanese deficit, 
     you have heard very little about the one with China.
       All of this country's relations with China are colored by 
     an odd but powerful emotion that you could call commercial 
     romanticism. It's an attitude that's smitten with the 
     grandeur of China as well as the size of its markets, and it 
     leads to a willingness to do business on China's own peculiar 
     terms. While that $8.8 billion a year in exports is 
     substantial, it is much less than this country exports to, 
     say, either South Korea or Taiwan. Oh, the romantics respond, 
     but China is growing much faster. True. That makes the 
     present moment a good one to clarify the rules for that 
     growing trade. If the United States insists on open markets 
     in Japan, how about China?
       A less romantic argument for doing nothing points out that 
     trade with the West promotes rapid economic growth, which in 
     turn undercuts the Communist regime. That's true, but the old 
     regime won't necessarily be replaced by anything like 
     democracy in the Western sense. Trade is a conduit for ideas, 
     but building influence is a slow process. In the aftermath of 
     Mr. Christopher's trip, the United States needs to consider 
     carefully exactly what it wants to accomplish in its trade 
     with China. First of all, it needs to stop talking about 
     sanctions if it does not intend to impose them.
                                  ____


               [From the New York Times, March 16, 1994]

                          Standing Up to China

       When dealing with China, it sometimes helps to see matters 
     through Chinese eyes. As Beijing views it, a great power must 
     always insist on being treated with due respect. To behave 
     otherwise is to acknowledge inferiority and therefore to 
     forfeit influence.
       During Secretary of State Christopher's weekend visit to 
     Beijing, Chinese leaders aggressively asserted what they see 
     as the prerogatives of China. They deliberately humiliated 
     America's highest-ranking diplomat by temporarily rounding up 
     some of the country's most prominent dissidents, and by 
     detaining several Western correspondents trying to report on 
     the crackdown.
       The purpose of the roundup was to prevent Mr. Christopher 
     from hearing any independent views on the human rights issues 
     he is required to evaluate before making a recommendation by 
     June on renewing China's access to the most favorable 
     American tariff schedules.
       For the sake of a healthy U.S.-China relationship, 
     Washington is now obliged to respond with equal firmness. To 
     kowtow to Chinese bullying would be to repeat the mistakes of 
     the Bush Administration, which squandered American influence 
     by its consistent refusal to press human rights issues. That 
     was what first provoked Congress to force annual showdowns 
     over linking continuation of China's trade privileges to 
     progress on human rights.
       The Clinton Administration needs instead to be forthright 
     abut its continued determination to insist on human rights 
     progress. It especially needs to dispel China's impression 
     that it can exploit differences between various policy makers 
     in the Administration, Congress and the business community. 
     Such miscalculation can only increase the likelihood of a 
     rupture both sides would prefer to avoid.
       China, despite its pose of cool indifference, desperately 
     needs the $20 billion hard currency surplus it earns from its 
     trade with the U.S. to carry on with its ambitious economic 
     development plans. And U.S. business frankly wants to 
     maintain access to one of the world's largest and fastest-
     growing economies. For their part, human rights advocates 
     recognize that China's continued economic growth and openness 
     contribute to domestic pressures for more responsive, less 
     dictatorial government.
       Even so, the Clinton Administration has a clear right under 
     international law, and an obligation under U.S. law, to link 
     China's trade status to minimum human rights goals. The 
     Administration has demanded nothing unreasonable or 
     demeaning, for the most part asking only compliance with 
     international agreements to which China already subscribes. 
     Washington seeks an end to the export of goods produced by 
     slave labor, freer emigration for relatives of exiles and 
     detainees, humane and lawful treatment of prisoners, and 
     respect for the cultural traditions of Tibet. On most of 
     these issues it has not set rigid benchmarks but is looking 
     for ``overall significant progress.''
       The Administration can use the remaining two and a half 
     months provided by last year's executive order to give China 
     the greatest possible incentive to demonstrate progress. But 
     Mr. Clinton must make clear that if Beijing continues to try 
     to blow past the whole issue with deliberate human rights 
     provocations, it will be making a very big mistake.

                          ____________________