[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 42 (Monday, March 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S2800]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             EVENTS IN ASIA

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I rise today as the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs to briefly address two 
events which transpired in Asia over the weekend, one which bodes well 
for the continued growth and vitality of democracy in Asia and one 
which, unfortunately, does not.
  First, as I'm sure my colleagues are by now aware, despite 
unprecedented military threats and vituperative media pressure from the 
People's Republic of China, the people of Taiwan have elected Lee Teng-
hui as their President. The election, aside from its practical result, 
was important for several reasons. First, for the first time in its 
almost 5,000 year history, China --or, more precisely, a portion 
thereof--has elected its paramount leader in a free, fair, and open 
democratic election. With the election, the ideals of human rights and 
representative democracy--which some in Asia, especially authoritarian 
regimes, have argued are peculiarly Western inventions with little or 
no applicability in their region--have taken a dramatic step toward 
universality.
  Second, Taiwan's electorate clearly demonstrated to Beijing that its 
bellicose campaign of threats and intimidation was ill-conceived and 
ineffectual. Rather than diminishing support for President Lee, as 
Beijing and the PLA had hoped, the People's Republic of China's recent 
round of missile tests and live-fire military exercises seems only to 
have served to solidify his support; President Lee won with some 54 
percent of the vote. In other words, the People's Republic of China's 
plans backfired, much as I and others of my colleagues predicted. I 
would hope that they come away from the past month having learned that 
the best course is not one of brazen threats, but open bilateral dialog 
across the Taiwan Strait.
  I wish to convey my personal congratulations to the Government and 
people of Taiwan, and hope to do so in person to President Lee when I 
travel to the People's Republic of China and then on to Taipei next 
week.
  Mr. President, in contrast the second issue I'd like to discuss today 
is not so encouraging. On Sunday at its second plenary session, China's 
Hong Kong Preparatory Committee--the body charged by Beijing with 
overseeing the transition of the British Colony to a Special 
Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China in 1997--voted 
by a margin of 148 to 1 to scrap the elected Legislative Council and 
install in its place an appointed body.
  Members of Hong Kong's Legislative Council, or Legco, have 
traditionally been elected not by universal suffrage but by a narrow 
group of functional constituencies. In other words, the trade unions 
had a certain number of votes, the civil service had a certain number 
of votes, lawyers had a certain number of votes, et cetera. Last year, 
in a move to increase the representation of the average citizen on the 
Council, a number of changes were made by the colonial government in 
the way elections are conducted.
  Beijing objected to the changes in the election process, ostensibly 
because they were made unilaterally by the British; of course, Beijing 
overlooked the fact that they themselves had refused to seriously 
negotiate on the issue. However, most observers--correctly I believe--
felt that the real reason for Beijing's opposition was that the changes 
made the Legco even more democratic, a status that they would then be 
forced to acquiesce to after 1997.
  The reason that increased democracy is a problem for the People's 
Republic of China is fairly obvious; the government presently installed 
in Beijing is antithetical to democracy. Despite lip service to its 
promises that it would ensure the continuation of Hong Kong's rights 
and civil liberties after 1997, the People's Republic of China has 
taken a number of steps over the last 2 years to call that commitment 
to democratic norms into serious question. It's opposition to the 
reconstituted Legco is one of the more visible.
  Another is the fate of the lone dissenting vote, by Mr. Frederick 
Fung, in the 148 to 1 vote tally on the Legco question. As a result of 
his dissenting vote, the head of the Preparatory Committee--Lu Ping--
announced that because of his vote Mr. Fung should be disqualified from 
the transitional bodies planning Hong Kong's post-1997 government and 
from any governing role after the British withdraw. What does this 
petty and vindictive statement say about the People's Republic of 
China's commitment to democracy; that instead of tolerating dissent the 
Chinese will seek to punish those who express their opinions and fail 
to follow the party line.
  Actions and statements such as this are not, sadly, surprising. The 
People's Republic of China has made several moves in the past year to 
exclude pro-democracy figures from the transition process; it even 
prevented one pro-democracy legislator from entering China to attend a 
conference, solely on the basis of his being a critic of the Government 
in Beijing. I believe that moves like these call into question the 
People's Republic of China's commitment to the Basic Law, and its 
commitment to safeguard the rights of Hong Kong's citizens after 
retrocession. It would behoove them to remember that each move they 
make is under very close scrutiny by Hong Kong's--and the world's--
commercial community. How Beijing acts will be directly reflected in 
that community's confidence, or lack thereof, and its willingness to 
maintain its investments there.
  This is the People's Republic of China's reaction.

                          ____________________