[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 56 (Monday, April 29, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4276-S4278]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON CHINA

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, 100 years from now, I have no doubt 
that when historians look back, the remarkable rise of China as a world 
power will be considered one of the most important international events 
in the latter half of the 20th century. Even more than the tragic war 
in Bosnia, more than the fragile attempts at peace in the Middle East, 
more than the collapse of the Soviet Union, I believe that China's 
ascendance as a great power and its impact as such--and the content and 
quality of the United States relationship with China--will shape the 
direction of global history in the Pacific century.
  In recent months, Sino-American relations have reached perhaps their 
lowest level since President Nixon's historic trip to China in 1972. 
Our relationship has been plagued by tensions in nearly every area in 
which we interact--trade, nuclear nonproliferation, concerns about 
Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Tibet to name just a few. But most often the 
Sino-American relationship has been buffeted by clashing visions of 
human rights. And it is that which I wish to speak about today.
  Last month, the State Department issued its annual report on human 
rights which contained a highly critical section on China. Having read 
the report and the attendant media coverage that interpreted its 
contents, I wish to address what I perceive to be a number of grave 
misjudgments and, frankly, a double standard in American foreign policy 
when it comes to China.
  Let me begin with some examples of that double standard. The 
liberation of Kuwait following the Persian Gulf war is viewed as a 
triumph of freedom and a high point in recent American foreign policy. 
Yet, how many Americans are aware of the fact that upon their return 
the Kuwaitis expelled thousands of Palestinians and denied repatriation 
of thousands more who had fled during the war for their suspected--and 
I say suspected--support of Iraq. Before the war, there were over 
400,000 Palestinians in Kuwait. Now there are 33,000, according to the 
Human Rights Watch/Middle East.
  What happened to them, and who cares? At times, it seemed that there 
was more attention in the American press given to the number of wives 
of certain members of the Kuwaiti royal family than of how many 
Palestinians were expelled in political reprisal.
  There has been, however, some media coverage and American criticism 
of Russia's brutal suppression of Chechnya's move toward independence. 
The Russian military decimated the city of Grozny with tremendous loss 
of life among civilians and the Chechnyan rebels alike. And the battle 
goes on today. Conservative estimates are that 30,000 people have been 
killed. Yet, our President just visited Russia, and our relations with 
Russia have never been better.
  The cover story in the April 22 Washington Post puts America's blind 
eye in perspective: ``Clinton, Yeltsin Gloss Over Chechen War.''

       . . . [the two leaders] declared their admiration for each 
     other and brushed off criticism of Russia's war against 
     Chechen separatists.

  Our relationship with the former Soviet Union is of such 
unquestionable importance that, muted criticism aside, American support 
of the Russian President has never really been in question. So how can 
China's importance be any the less?
  Recent tragic events in Liberia, where an unknown number of people 
have been killed, is only the latest slaughter to emerge from that 
continent. Not long ago, the news media recounted the massacre of 
hundreds of thousands of Tutsi and Hutus in Rwanda, and the regime of 
Gen. Sani Abacha in Nigeria continues to suppress political dissent 
with lethal force. And yet, each of these countries enjoys the most-
favored-nation trading status with the United States.
  Even some of our closest allies have deeply flawed human rights 
records.
  In Egypt, a legitimate effort to crack down on Islamic extremists has 
at times crossed the line into abuse, such as extended detention 
without charge, torture, and even summary executions.
  In Brazil police just 2 weeks ago killed 19 people who were 
protesting the slow pace of land reform.
  Turkey, a close NATO ally, has made considerable progress on human 
rights in recent years, but freedom of expression is still suppressed, 
torture is still widespread, and there have been numerous documented 
cases of the excessive use of force against the Kurds in recent years, 
about which we are all familiar.
  I do not mean to suggest that human rights should not occupy an 
important place in our Nation's foreign policy. In each of the cases 
cited above we have, rightly, protested to the governments involved and 
worked with them to improve their human rights records.
  The status of human rights in the countries I have just mentioned is 
or has been questionable, yet our relations with them do not fluctuate 
wildly based on human rights violations. We are able to recognize that 
the United States also has other important interests that must be taken 
into account, and we must constantly weigh these interests and values 
as we try to construct an effective foreign policy.
  No one, for example, would suggest that we cut off relations with 
Kuwait, Russia, Egypt, Brazil, or Turkey based solely upon their record 
of human rights abuses. The United States simply has too many security, 
diplomatic, economic and other interest at stake to contemplate such a 
course of action.
  And yet, that is exactly the case with what is probably our most 
important bilateral relationship in the world today.
  Fundamental to the instability in the relationship between the United 
States and China is the lack of any conceptual framework or long-term 
strategy on the part of the United States for dealing with China. 
Instead, U.S. policy has been reactive and event-driven, responding to 
whatever happens to be the current revelation--generally about human 
rights. Each time we lurch from crisis to crisis, we call into question 
our entire relationship with China.
  A whole host of events has contributed to the current deterioration 
in Sino-American relations, but it is important to recognize the role 
played by the media in this process.
  I recognize that the Chinese government does not treat the 
international press well. But virtually everything we read, hear or see 
in the American press about China is negative. Yes, there is much that 
happens in China that is worthy of scrutiny and criticism, but there is 
also much that is positive as well, and it is largely ignored. The real 
danger in this is Americans know so little about China. They know only 
what they read and, particularly since Tiananmen, most of it is 
negative.

  The most blatant example of this unbalanced reportage of China was 
evident when the State Department released its human rights report last 
month. I read the newspapers. The coverage of the section on China was 
100 percent negative.
  Then I read the report itself, and I am deeply troubled by what can 
only be described as America's blind eye when it comes to China.
  Let me read you some of the press coverage following the release of 
the

[[Page S4277]]

State Department's Human Rights report.

       China's economic reforms have failed to alter the 
     government's pattern of systematic disregard for basic human 
     rights, according to the State Department's annual report . . 
     .--Washington Post (3/6/96).
       The State Department outlined Wednesday what it described 
     as a nightmarish human rights situation in China. . .--Dallas 
     Morning News (3/7/96).
       The U.S. report released Wednesday found Chinese 
     authorities guilty of widespread and well-documented human 
     rights abuses--San Francisco Examiner (3/7/96)
       China Dismal on Human Rights, U.S. Admits--Chicago Tribune 
     (3/7/96).

  Reading these articles, one could only conclude that there have been 
virtually no changes or improvements on human rights in China in 
decades, save for a modest increase in the standard of living among 
some.
  But anyone who has any knowledge of China can see that in fact 
dramatic changes have taken place in that country over the course of 
the last 20 years, and that those changes, by their very nature, have 
opened the door to major improvements in human rights.
  Let me read you sections of the unbound version of the State 
Department's report supplied to the Foreign Relations Committee that 
were not widely reported on:
  On page 3 it notes that:

       In many respects, Chinese society continued to open up: 
     greater disposable income, looser ideological controls, and 
     freer access to outside sources of information have led to 
     greater room for individual choice, more diversity in 
     cultural life, and increased media reporting.

  On page 13 it says that:

       Economic liberalization is creating diverse employment 
     opportunities and introducing market forces into the economy, 
     thus loosening governmental monitoring and regulation of 
     personal and family life, particularly in rural areas.

  On page 9 it notes that, ``Chinese legal scholars and lawyers 
acknowledge the need for legal reform,'' and notes that development 
toward a system of due process--the most fundamental guarantee for 
human rights is due process of law--a system of due process and other 
legal reforms are under way.

       For example, an experimental trial system tested in 1994 
     has now been approved for use in Shanghai and for most civil 
     cases. The new system introduces an adversarial element into 
     trials by giving attorneys more responsibility for presenting 
     evidence and arguing facts.

  On page 5 it says:

       In December 1994, China enacted a new prison law designed, 
     in part, to improve treatment of detainees and respect for 
     their legal rights.

  Farther down on the same page it says:

       In February, the National People's Congress passed three 
     new laws designed to professionalize judges, prosecutors, and 
     policemen.

  On page 2:

       In October the Ministry of Justice promulgated implementing 
     regulations for 1994 legislation that allows citizens to sue 
     government agencies for malfeasance and to collect damages.

  Where do we see any of this reported? We do not.
  Page 3:

       The Government has also drafted a lawyers law that would 
     clarify the nature of the attorney-client relationship, 
     improve professional standards, separate most lawyers from 
     state employment, and improve the ability of citizens to 
     defend their legal interests.

  The report also cites some positive development in religious freedoms 
in China. On page 19, it says:

       After forcefully suppressing all religious observances and 
     closing all seminaries during the 1966 to 1976 cultural 
     revolution, the government began in the late 1970's to 
     restore or replace damaged or confiscated churches, temples, 
     mosques and monasteries and allowed seminaries to reopen. 
     According to the government, there are now 68,000 religious 
     sites in China and 48 religious colleges. The government has 
     also adopted a policy of returning confiscated church 
     property.

  Where is any of that reported?
  On page 17, the report cites the growth and development of two 
specific areas of a freer press:

       Despite official admonitions, China's lively tabloid sector 
     continued to expand in 1995. Radio talk shows remained 
     popular and, while generally avoiding politically sensitive 
     subjects, they provided opportunities for citizens to air 
     grievances about public issues.

  The report characterizes a nascent movement toward democracy in China 
on page 24:

       Direct election for basic level or village government is 
     legally sanctioned for all China's 1 million villages. 
     Foreign observers estimate that more than one-third of 
     China's 900 million rural residents--which is three times the 
     population of the United States--have already participated in 
     elections for local leaders. . . Successful village elections 
     have included campaigning, platforms and use of secret 
     ballots. . . There were credible reports that candidates most 
     favored by the authorities were defeated in some local, 
     village elections.

  Where is this reported?
  And although the Chinese Government, like any government, is 
reluctant to accept criticism of its human rights record, on page 25, 
the report notes that:

       Since 1991, the government has promoted limited academic 
     study and discussion of concepts of human rights. Research 
     institutes in Shanghai and Beijing, including the Chinese 
     Academy of Social Sciences, has organized symposia on human 
     rights, established human rights research centers, and 
     visited other countries to study human rights practices in 
     those nations.

  Some may view these changes as modest and limited in scope, and 
perhaps they may be, but one has only to look back 30 years to the 
Cultural Revolution to understand how enormous these changes truly are.
  We must understand these changes in context: China is a nation which 
has been ruled by man for 5,000 years, by emperors in the most despotic 
system, by the national government in the most despotic manner. 
Changing to the rule of law will not happen overnight or even in a 
decade, but it is happening.
  Thirty years ago--just 30 years ago--20 to 30 million people died 
during the Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward. Millions lost 
their jobs, their families and were falsely imprisoned. The human 
rights and political situation in China has changed dramatically for 
the better over the last 20 years.
  When I first went to China in 1979, shortly after the end of the 
Cultural Revolution, no one would talk freely. You could not have a 
political conversation. It was a totally centrally controlled 
government. Now all of that has changed.
  So change in a country as huge as this, as different as this, where 
the urban eastern cities are very different from the isolated western 
areas, does not happen overnight, and sometimes it is even difficult to 
evaluate it on a year-to-year basis.
  As I think recent history and this State Department report indicates, 
China is changing and Americans need to recognize this. They need to 
know it and they need to encourage China's continued modernization.
  I should note for those in this body who consider themselves to be 
friends of Taiwan, as I do also, that the Taiwan whose democracy we 
celebrate in 1996 was not so very long ago considered to be one of the 
most egregious violators of human rights, during which we kept all 
contact with Taiwan.

  Beginning on February 28, 1947, thousands of political dissidents 
were killed and imprisoned by the nationalist government on Taiwan in a 
matter of weeks--the infamous ``2-28 incident.''
  In 1948, a state of emergency was declared allowing the President to 
rule by decree, and from 1950 to 1987, Taiwan was ruled by martial law. 
During this time, it is estimated that over 10,000 civilian cases were 
tried in military courts. Citizens were subjected to constant 
surveillance, individual rights and freedoms were compromised, and 
political opposition was silenced.
  To our credit, during this same period, the United States engaged 
Taiwan politically and economically, working to encourage the growth of 
democracy. Today, Taiwan is a democracy.
  To be sure, China has a long way to go, but China is growing so 
rapidly--with a 10-percent annual growth in gross domestic product. 
Today, China, as an export power, is where Japan was in 1980, the 11th 
largest exporter in the world, and it is growing much more rapidly than 
Japan was growing.
  To this end, the report also contains a number of constructive 
suggestions that I feel we should seek to develop as we encourage China 
to modernize. I believe we should work with the Chinese to develop 
national legislation governing organ donations, so as to bring to an 
end any question about current policies, but work with them, engage 
with them, discuss with them, counsel with them.
  We should encourage the Chinese to let the International Committee of 
the Red Cross monitor prisoners to assure

[[Page S4278]]

that their rights, under these new Chinese laws just now going in 
place, are not being abused. We should encourage the Chinese to allow 
the establishment of truly independent Chinese nongovernmental 
organizations to monitor and discuss the human rights situation.
  I also add to this list the development of a legal system that 
guarantees an independent judiciary, due process of law, and new civil 
and criminal codes. This will do more in protecting and advancing human 
rights than any other single thing the United States can do, and the 
Chinese have asked for help in this regard.
  In releasing the report, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy 
and Human Rights, John Shattuck, stated at the press conference on 
March 6:

       There is no question that economic integration enhances 
     human rights.

  As Secretary Shattuck also stated, isolating China will not enhance 
human rights--just the opposite. The continued improvement in the 
economic well-being of China's citizens is critical to the continued 
growth of human rights. And continued trade with the United States is 
critical for the continued development of China's economy.
  I do not mean to suggest that the free market by itself will improve 
human rights records. Assistant Secretary Shattuck once again was so 
right when he said--and I quote--

       Economic growth is not in and of itself the ultimate 
     sufficient condition for the full flowering of human rights.

  We must also pursue other forms of engagement with China.
  So it is in this context that I urge my colleagues to read in full 
the State Department's human rights report on China, but to do so not 
with a jaundiced eye and a focus only on those areas that still require 
improvement, but with a sense of appreciation for how far in 20 short 
years China has come, and with continued United States engagement, how 
much farther China can go in the next 20 years.
  That is our challenge today. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  Mr. COVERDELL addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, under the previous order I am to be 
recognized during morning business for a period of 90 minutes. I ask 
unanimous consent that during this period I be permitted to yield 
portions of my time to other Members without losing my right to the 
floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________