[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 34 (Wednesday, March 13, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1991-S1992]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      INDICTING CHINA'S TERRORISM

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, A.M. Rosenthal has a thoughtful 
column on the situation regarding China in the New York Times, and I 
ask that it be printed in the Record.
  I am not as certain as he is that the case should be brought to the 
United Nations because I'm not sure what the other countries would do. 
But at the very least, that possibility should be explored.
  A firmness is needed in this present situation. The Rosenthal column, 
among other things, cites a sentence from the recent State Department 
human rights report: ``The experience of China in the past few years 
demonstrates that while economic growth, trade and social mobility 
create an improved standard of living they cannot by themselves bring 
about greater respect for human rights in the absence of a willingness 
by political authorities to abide by the fundamental international 
norms.''
  There are times when the international situation demands clear-cut 
policies. This is one of them.
  The column follows:

                [From the New York Times, Mar. 12, 1996]

   Indicting China's Terrorism--Bring the Case to the United Nations

                          (By A.M. Rosenthal]

       By firing missiles into the waters off Taiwan, Communist 
     China is committing open, deliberate international terrorism 
     of enormous danger.
       Americans count on Beijing's survival instincts to stop the 
     terrorism short of the disaster of war with the U.S. That may 
     happen--this time.
       But every day that Washington fails to bring the missile 
     blackmail and blockade of Taiwan before the U.N. increases 
     the chances it will happen again, or something worse, until 
     the disaster does take place.
       The Communists' rage and fear at the example of Taiwan's 
     democracy off their shores will not let them rest unless the 
     Taiwanese give it up.
       That is not likely. If any pro-democracy majority is 
     elected in the March 20 voting, before long there will be 
     another round of terrorism.
       That may include some Chinese military landings on Taiwan. 
     U.S. vessels will have to move in to live up to American word 
     and legislation that the Taiwan-China relationship will not 
     be changed by force.
       So far, the U.S. has had to act alone. The Japanese do not 
     have the political courage to make any strong public protest 
     against the terrorism. I have not heard our European allies 
     warn the Chinese that if it comes to it, they will 
     immediately line up with the U.S.
       U.S. failure to bring the Chinese before the U.N. will 
     destroy a basic purpose of the U.N. The U.N. was not created 
     simply to end wars but to stop them before they begin. 
     Article 34 of its charter authorizes the Security Council to 
     take up any matter that might lead to ``international 
     friction or dispute.''

[[Page S1992]]

       Any member of the U.N.--or the Secretary General--can bring 
     a threat to the peace before the Council. China's veto power 
     cannot be used to prevent putting a threat to peace on the 
     Council agenda.
       Separately, the U.S. and any country that considers itself 
     a friend both of peace and America can condemn Chinese 
     terrorism. Together they can present a resolution speaking 
     for the U.N.
       China will veto that. But if Beijing is so out of control 
     as to threaten more terrorism in the face of a U.N. 
     condemnation prevented only by a veto, we should know it as 
     soon as possible.
       Meantime, President Clinton should consider one sentence 
     that tells how his Administration got to this point.
       ``The experience of China in the past few years 
     demonstrates that while economic growth, trade and social 
     mobility create an improved standard of living they cannot by 
     themselves bring about greater respect for human rights in 
     the absence of a willingness by political authorities to 
     abide by the fundamental international norms.''
       The sentence in itself is not remarkable. It sums up the 
     message of human rights victims around the world: 
     strengthening our oppressors empowers them to torture us 
     further. But it comes from the latest report on human rights 
     of the State Department. It took courage by those officials 
     who wrote or agreed to it.
       Since 1993, the Administration has based its China policy 
     on a contrary vision of morality and history. It insisted 
     that economic growth in China would create a willingness by 
     the dictatorship to live up to those ``fundamental 
     international norms.'' Beijing would give Chinese more human 
     rights. It would stick to agreements against selling nuclear 
     weapon technology. It would allow the people of territories 
     it claims as its own, such as Tibet and Taiwan, to live in 
     peace and dignity.
       China's economy certainly has grown, stimulated nicely by 
     $40 billion more that it sells to America than it buys from 
     America.
       So: Torture and political repression have increased. And so 
     have oppression of religion, and forced abortion. The choke-
     leash around Tibet tightens. The chief economic beneficiary 
     of the trade that led to economic growth has been the 
     Communist army, which owns vast parts of the economy, 
     including the forced-labor camps.
       The new, richer China has sold nuclear technology to 
     Pakistan and has become the missile salesman to the world's 
     dictatorships.
       President Clinton promised to struggle for human rights in 
     China. He did not.
       Now his China policy lies adrift in the Strait of Taiwan. 
     He owes us a new one. Its moral principle and historic 
     reality were written for him by the meaning of that sentence 
     in the State Department report: enrichment of dictators 
     enchains their victims.

                          ____________________