[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 33 (Tuesday, March 22, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: March 22, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
              DENY MOST-FAVORED-NATION TREATMENT FOR CHINA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
February 11, 1994, the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi] is 
recognized during morning business for 5 minutes.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, last evening a number of our colleagues, the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman], the ranking Republican on the 
Foreign Affairs Committee, the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. 
Rose], chair of the House Administration Committee, and leading voice 
for Tibet in this body, both of them, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Markey], a person with great knowledge and concern about the 
proliferation of weapons, both nuclear and nonconventional, as well as 
women on the streets of America sent in by the Chinese Government and 
Chinese Army, we joined together to have a special order to 
congratulate Secretary of State Christopher for standing firm when he 
went to Beijing presenting the President's policy and presenting the 
terms of his Executive order.
  As you may recall, Mr. Speaker, last year Congress was poised to pass 
legislation putting stern conditions on the renewal of most-favored-
nation status to China. Those conditions included improvement in human 
rights, addressed proliferation of weapons, and other trade issues. The 
President in his wisdom chose instead to issue an Executive order with 
reasonable and achievable conditions calibrated to be met by the 
Chinese within a 12-month period under which we could continue our 
trade. They would continue to have preferential access to the U.S. 
market, and we would have made a difference by using the leverage we 
have.
  Why do we think we have this leverage? We do believe it because the 
Chinese need access to the United States market to fuel their economic 
growth at home. Nearly 40 percent of all Chinese exports come to the 
United States. This nets for the Chinese Government, last year, $25 
billion in trade surplus. That is why we believe that we have an 
opportunity, while we have something they wanted, preferential access 
to our markets, and we have something they wanted, access to their 
markets as well, but also an improvement in human rights.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, even since last night, the situation as 
far as trade and the surplus is concerned has worsened. The figures are 
out this morning and saying that America's second biggest deficit--we 
hear a lot of talk about the deficit with Japan, and with China a great 
deal of the focus has been on human rights and proliferation. But the 
second biggest deficit is with China, and the second biggest deficit 
for January was $2.19 billion, a giant 69 percent larger than the month 
of December.

                              {time}  1110

  This is all happening at a time when we are arguing for more access 
to United States products to go into China, because most United States 
products are barred from China, a grave disservice to the American 
worker, as well as addressing other trade violations in our 
relationship by the Chinese.
  Ironically, Mr. Speaker, when our Secretary went there and was 
treated with great discourtesy by the Chinese Government, it was 
ironic, I think, that when he later met with the American business 
community in Beijing that they did not stand in solidarity with our 
Secretary of State.
  How refreshing it would have been if their statement coming out of 
Beijing to America as well as to the authorities in Beijing that ``Mr. 
Secretary, while we may not agree on your approach or the use of MFN 
for improving human rights, we stand with you in your effort to promote 
democratic values in China. We stand with you because they are 
America's values, and we stand with you because, frankly, it is good 
for business.''
  Do not take it just from me, Mr. Speaker. I was pleased to see that 
when the Secretary came back it was ironic, again, that instead of 
people rallying to him, some in the press decided that they would 
criticize his trip and say that he should not have delivered the 
message; while, at the same time, they had been criticizing the 
administration for not delivering a clear enough message. So we all 
know that you get criticized for whatever you do, and the Secretary is 
a capable, long distance runner. He understands that criticism follow 
actions, and he has to stick by his policy.
  I was pleased to see that in spite of all the public-relations-
generated articles that appeared in some of the newspapers inside the 
beltway, China spends a great deal of money here on lawyers and PR 
firms to effect policy, that in Los Angeles, a businesswriter for the 
Los Angeles Times wrote:

       Right now China's leaders are pushing American companies to 
     lobby the United States Government. And U.S. business people 
     seem a bit too ready to cooperate. Some of them lectured 
     Christopher at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Beijing, 
     criticizing his emphasis on human rights.

  Mr. Flanigan called this action by the business community there 
distasteful, disloyal, and dumb.
  Mr. Speaker, since the 5 minutes went by so fast for me, I will be 
sending out some of these other articles which praise the Secretary for 
his courage and the clarity of his message and rally to his side as he 
promotes democratic values while promoting United States trade in a 
very fair way with China.

                          ____________________