[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 41 (Friday, March 22, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E431-E432]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            RESOLUTION ON TAIWAN ILL-CONCEIVED AND ILL-TIMED

                                 ______


                          HON. DAVID E. SKAGGS

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, March 22, 1996

  Mr. SKAGGS. Mr. Speaker, when the House voted on House Concurrent 
Resolution 148 concerning the defense of Taiwan I voted ``present.'' 
This was the first time since I came to Congress that I voted this way 
on final passage of a piece of legislation. I want to explain why I did 
so.
  This measure should never have been brought to the floor of the House 
of Representatives for a vote in the first place. Both the timing and 
the content of the resolution could only create new doubts in the minds 
of people on both sides of the Taiwan Straits about a crucial aspect of 
American foreign policy. And creating new doubts inherently creates new 
dangers. That, at a time when our objective ought to be to defuse a 
situation that's already complicated and dangerous.
  What do I mean? Well, a vote in favor sends a dangerous and confusing 
message about the extent of the American commitment to defend Taiwan. 
It would encourage those in Taiwan who want to push for independence, 
leading them to believe the United States would intervene if China 
reacted militarily. A vote against, however, sends the wrong message to 
China, giving the Beijing Government the mistaken impression that the 
Congress is not united in its condemnation of China's recent aggressive 
attitude and behavior.
  Either a ``yes'' or a ``no'' was contrary to the interests of my 
country, so I voted ``present.''
  The distinguished chairman of the International Relations Committee, 
Mr. Gilman, has said that the resolution is meant to be a reaffirmation 
of current policy concerning United States relations with China and 
Taiwan as set forth in the Taiwan Relations Act [TRA]. Unfortunately, 
the resolution includes a commitment that does not appear in the TRA. 
Paragraph 7 states that the United States should ``assist in defending 
them (Taiwan) against invasion, missile attack, or blockade by the 
People's Republic of China.'' This language could confuse China and 
Taiwan by giving the appearance that the United States has ratcheted up 
our commitment to the defense of Taiwan.
  What is our policy toward Taiwan?
  For 24 years under six Presidents we have followed a one-China 
policy. This policy was set out in three communiques and was enacted 
into law as the TRA. It has been and continues to be the policy of the 
United States that any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by 
other than peaceful means is of grave concern to the United States. The 
TRA specifies that the United States ``will make available to Taiwan 
such defense articles and defense services as may be necessary to 
enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient defense capability.''
  This Congress and the American people are united in their opposition 
to attempts by the Government of China to bully and coerce the people 
of Taiwan. The President has said that the United States will promptly 
meet our obligation under the TRA to respond to any threat to Taiwan's 
security.
  A resolution reiterating our commitment to a peaceful resolution of 
differences across the

[[Page E432]]

Taiwan Straits would have been a helpful measure. But this resolution 
is different, and potentially seriously destabilizing. It can be read 
to imply a very significant change in policy, a change with extremely 
problematic consequences. It can be read to give the impression of a 
division between the President and the Congress. It is an irresponsible 
piece of legislation that should never have come up.

                          ____________________