[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 70 (Friday, May 23, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5125-S5129]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself and Mr. DeWine):
  S. 810. A bill to impose certain sanctions on the People's Republic 
of China, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations.


          the china sanctions and human rights advancement act

  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise today to address United States 
policy toward China. When Ronald Reagan visited China in 1984, he 
declared in a speech that:

       Economic growth and human progress make their greatest 
     strides when people are secure and free to think, speak, 
     worship, choose their own way and reach for the stars.

  While China has made great strides since Ronald Reagan spoke those 
words, it is clear today that the people of China are not free to 
think, speak, worship, or choose their own way.
  The question is how the United States, a nation conceived in liberty, 
should respond to continuing violations of basic human rights in China 
and other actions of the Chinese leadership.
  Religious persecution, abuses against minorities, coercive family 
planning, military threats, and weapons proliferation and attempts to 
improperly influence American elections. All of these policies have 
been and continue to be undertaken by the Chinese Government. And all 
of them must stop.
  One thing is clear, Mr. President: As the world's leading democracy, 
the United States cannot simply look the other way, ignoring the 
Chinese Government's record on human rights.
  And, despite the real and measurable expansion of freedom in some 
spheres in China, problems remain. The organization Amnesty 
International has stated that:

     a fifth of the world's people are ruled by a government that 
     treats fundamental human rights with contempt. Human rights 
     violations continue on a massive scale.

  In addition, there have been numerous reports of religious 
persecution in China. These reports by Amnesty International and Human 
Rights Watch/Asia do not state that China has recently been targeting 
religious leaders for execution. But some religious leaders have been 
executed along with others in remote provinces. And long and arduous 
sentences have been handed out to certain Chinese religious leaders.
  For example, Tibetan abbot, Shadrel Rimposh, was in charge of the 
original search in that country to find the missing child whom the 
Tibetans consider the reincarnation of the Pansen Lama.
  The abbot was missing for more than a year, officially labeled ``a 
criminal and a scum of Buddhism'' by the government. Recently the 
government sentenced him to 6 years in prison. Other religious leaders 
have been sent to labor camps.
  The people of Tibet have been subject to particularly harsh abuse 
from the Chinese Government because their form of the Buddhist religion 
is so closely tied to their independence movements; movements that have 
met with brutal suppression.
  Allow me to quote at length from a 1997 Human Rights Watch/Asia 
report:

       In the Tibetan Autonomous Region and Tibetan areas of 
     Chinese provinces the effects of a July 1994 policy 
     conference on Tibet combined with the Strike Hard campaign 
     produced more arrests of suspected independence supporters, a 
     stepped-up campaign to discredit the Dalai Lama as a 
     religious leader, crackdowns in rural areas as well as towns, 
     a major push for ridding monasteries and nunneries of 
     nationalist sympathizers, and the closure of those that were 
     politically active.
       Monks who refused to sign pledges denouncing the Dalai Lama 
     or to accept a five-point declaration of opposition to the

[[Page S5126]]

     proindependence movement, faced expulsion from their 
     monasteries.
       In May 1994, a ban on the possession and display of Dalai 
     Lama photographs led to a bloody confrontation at Goneden and 
     to searches of hotels, restaurants, shops, and some private 
     homes. Over 90 monks were arrested; 53 remained in detention 
     as of October despite Chinese official reports that none of 
     the 61 arrested were still being held. At least one person 
     and perhaps two others are known to have died in the melee.
       Chinese authorities acknowledge that they are holding 
     Jendune Yee Kneema the child recognized by the Dalai Lama but 
     rejected by Chinese authorities as the reincarnation of the 
     Pansen Lama, under the protection of the government at the 
     request of his parents.

  The whereabouts of this missing child should be a major source of 
concern for every one who cares about religious liberty.
  But Tibetan Buddhists are not the only people of faith who face 
persecution at the hands of the Chinese Government. Under a 1996 state 
security law, all religious institutions must register with the state. 
Those who do not so register and choose instead to operate underground 
face the government's wrath.
  Human Rights Watch/Asia reported recently that:

       Unofficial Christian and Catholic communities were targeted 
     by the government during 1996. A renewed campaign aimed at 
     forcing all churches to register or face dissolution, 
     resulted in beating and harassment of congregants, closure of 
     churches, and numerous arrests, fines, and sentences. In 
     Shanghai, for example, more than 300 house churches or 
     meeting points were closed down by the security authorities 
     in April alone.
       From January through May, teams of officials fanned out 
     through northern Haybay, a Catholic stronghold, to register 
     churches and clergy and to prevent attendance at a major 
     Marian shrine. Public security officers arrested clergy and 
     lay Catholics alike, forced others to remain in their 
     villages, avoid foreigners, refrain from preaching, and 
     report to the police anywhere from one to eight times daily. 
     In some villages, officials confiscated all religious medals. 
     In others, churches and prayer houses were torn down or 
     converted to lay use.

  In addition to religious belief and practice, there are other 
troubling issues of moral conscience. I am referring in particular to 
the Chinese Government's birth control policies.
  Mr. President, the Chinese Government claims that family planning is 
voluntary in that nation. Yet, according to Amnesty International, 
birth control has been compulsory since 1979. As a result:
  Pregnant women with too many children have been abducted and forced 
to have abortions and/or undergo sterilization.
  Pregnant women have been detained and threatened until they have 
agreed to have abortions.
  Above-quota new-born babies have reportedly been killed by doctors 
under pressure from officials.
  The homes of couples who refuse to obey the child quotas have been 
demolished.
  Relatives of those who cannot pay fines imposed for having had too 
many children have been held hostage until the money was paid.
  And those helping families to have above-quota children have been 
severely punished.
  Just one example, if I may, Mr. President, this one provided by 
Amnesty International:

       An unmarried woman in Haybay Province who had adopted one 
     of her brother's children was detained several times in an 
     attempt to force her brother to pay fines for having too many 
     children. In November 1994 she was held for 7 days with a 
     dozen other men and women. She was reportedly blindfolded, 
     stripped naked, tied, and beaten with an electric baton.

  These stories bespeak an often brutal disregard for the rights of 
conscience, for the sanctity of marriage and family, and for human life 
itself. They are evil acts, Mr. President, nothing less than government 
perpetrated evil.
  Let me now shift to the military sphere.
  Here, Mr. President, we see Chinese Government practices that include 
military intimidation and the selling of advanced weaponry to rogue 
states.
  For example, on the eve of Taiwan's 1996 elections, China engaged in 
threatening missile firings unnecessarily close to Taiwanese cities. 
The Taiwanese were not cowed, they are a brave people. But these 
provocations, so soon after China's 1995 military exercises and missile 
launches in direct proximity to Taiwanese territory, have led the 
Taiwanese people to consider whether they need nuclear weapons to 
defend their homes.
  In addition, the Chinese Government has threatened international 
stability through its weapons sales to regimes, including Iran and 
Iraq, that sponsor terrorism and pose a direct threat to American 
military personnel and interests. Most dangerous has been the Chinese 
willingness to supply the Iranians with the technology and basic 
materials for their own chemical weapons program.
  Mr. President, these weapons pose a direct threat to American troops 
as well as stability and peace in the Middle East.
  Moreover, the Chinese Government apparently does not limit itself to 
military means as it tries to influence the policies of other nations.
  Allegations of Chinese involvement in our political system are 
disturbing, particularly considering the various implications that this 
has for our relations with that country. These allegations may involve 
both civil and criminal violations of our laws by individuals 
associated with the Chinese Government.
  The press has reported serious allegations that the Government of 
China attempted to influence last year's Presidential election by 
diverting illegal campaign contributions to the Democratic National 
Committee.
  FBI investigators have found significant evidence that the Chinese 
Government targeted 30 legislators, and that it funneled money through 
businesses it controlled in America to the DNC. If proven, these 
allegations would signal violations of Federal Election Commission laws 
regarding foreign campaign contributions by the Chinese Government.
  Mr. President, this is a damning list, a list that cries out for 
action. As the world's sole remaining superpower and, perhaps more 
important, as the birth place of liberty and individual rights, we have 
a duty to uphold the principles of liberty wherever possible.
  Liberty continues to suffer abuse from the Chinese Government. And we 
should do something about it.
  In response to the serious problems I have raised some have called 
for an end to China's most-favored-nation trading status with the 
United States. In fact, the debate has focused almost exclusively on 
MFN.
  I believe that is the wrong approach. I support a 1-year extension of 
MFN for China.
  Why? First, because it is the best policy for American consumers. 
Those consumers will have a wider choice of affordable goods with MFN 
than without. To revoke MFN would be to increase tariffs on goods 
purchased by the American people. It would amount to a tax hike, and I 
am not in favor of tax hikes, particularly ones imposed on the basis of 
another government's behavior.
  Second, I am convinced that revoking MFN would target the wrong 
parties for punishment. We should keep in mind, in my view, that it is 
not the people of China with whom we have a quarrel; it is their 
government.
  Trade and United States investment in China have a positive effect in 
providing more opportunities for average Chinese citizens.
  Even in the short term, we should not underestimate trade and 
investment's positive impact.
  In China,

     employees at United States firms earn higher wages and are 
     free to choose where to live, what to eat, and how to educate 
     and care for their children,

writes China policy expert Stephen J. Yates of the Heritage Foundation.

       This real and measurable expansion of freedom does not 
     require waiting for middle-class civil society to emerge in 
     China; it is taking place now and should be encouraged.

  Third, Mr. President, I am convinced that terminating MFN would be 
damaging to the people of Hong Kong, currently involved in a transfer 
of power from British to Chinese rule.
  All of us in Congress are concerned that China may violate the 1994 
Sino-British Joint Declaration and squash political and economic 
freedom once Hong Kong again comes under Chinese rule.
  With 35,000 United States citizens and 1,000 United States firms in 
Hong Kong, America must be certain that China honors its agreement and 
we must remain watchful over the coming months and years.
  However, in formulating United States policy with regard to Hong

[[Page S5127]]

Kong we must remember that repealing MFN for China will hit Hong Kong 
hard, particularly because so much trade goes through there. Goods from 
Hong Kong would face the same steep tariff as those from other parts of 
China.
  Hong Kong Governor, Chris Patten, has said that rescinding MFN would 
devastate Hong Kong's economy.

       For the people of Hong Kong there is no comfort in the 
     proposition that if China reduces their freedoms the United 
     States will take away their jobs.

  The letter from Governor Patten also said:

       There is one particular contribution which the United 
     States of America, and Congress in particular, can make to 
     ensure that Hong Kong remains well-equipped to face the 
     future. That is to grant the unconditional renewal of China's 
     MFN trading status, on which the continued strength of Hong 
     Kong's economy depends. * * * This is one issue on which 
     there is complete unanimity in Hong Kong across the 
     community, and across the political spectrum.

  It is not good policy to attempt to help Hong Kong by taking an 
action that is opposed by the people we say we are trying to help.
  Mr. President, I have another important reason for supporting a 1-
year extension of MFN: American jobs.
  Using the Commerce Department's rules of thumb, United States exports 
to China account for roughly 200,000 American jobs. Should we stop 
doing business with China, I have no doubt but that other nations will 
step in to take our place, and to take jobs now occupied by Americans 
both here and in China. Thus, we would not significantly punish the 
Chinese Government, but we would visit hardship on our own workers.
  Rather than eliminate jobs and stifle growth through increased 
tariffs, in my view, it would be better to take actions showing our 
displeasure with the Chinese Government, while encouraging China to 
become a more free and open society.
  I believe that Members of this body can agree on the need for strong 
American actions responding to human rights abuses in China. That is 
why I am introducing the China Sanctions and Human Rights Advancement 
Act.
  And I am convinced that Members on both sides of the MFN debate can 
agree that the sanctions I am proposing today are necessary and 
justified, and that they will be effective.
  The goal of these sanctions will be to show our disapproval of the 
actions of the Chinese Government, while at the same time encouraging 
worthwhile economic and cultural exchanges that can lead to positive 
change in China.
  This legislation would focus on: First, who the United States allows 
into the country from China; second, United States taxpayer funds that 
subsidize China; third, United States Government votes and assistance 
in international bodies that provide financial assistance to China; 
fourth, targeted sanctions of PLA companies; and fifth, measures to 
promote human rights in China.
  Let me be specific. Under my bill, the U.S. Government would take the 
following actions:
  First, it would prohibit issuance of U.S. visas to human rights 
violators.
  The bill would prohibit the granting of United States visas to 
Chinese Government officials who work in entities involved in the 
implementation and enforcement of China's law and directives on 
religious practices.
  Specifically, this targets high-ranking officials of the state 
police, the Religious Affairs Bureau, and China's family planning 
apparatus. The same would go for all those involved in the massacre of 
students in Tianenman Square.
  Written notice from the President to Congress explaining why the 
entry of such individuals overrides our concerns about China's human 
rights abuses would be required for such individuals to enter the 
United States.
  Second, the bill would prohibit direct and indirect United States-
taxpayer financed foreign aid for China.
  We can no longer ask U.S. taxpayers to subsidize a Communist 
leadership and government with which we have so many serious 
disagreements.
  Between 1985 and 1995 the United States supported 111 of 183 loans 
approved by the World Bank Group and 15 of 92 loans that the Asian 
Development Bank approved. In addition, the United States Government is 
providing assistance through international family planning institutions 
that provide money and services to support China's restrictive policies 
on reproduction.
  Under my bill, United States representatives would be required to 
vote ``no'' on all loans to China at the World Bank, Asian Development 
Bank, and the International Monetary Fund.
  An exception would be made in the case of humanitarian relief in the 
event of a natural disaster or famine.
  In addition, for every dollar a multilateral development bank or 
international family planning organization gives to China, my bill 
would subtract out a dollar in United States taxpayer funding to those 
bodies.
  Simply put, America should not be subsidizing current Chinese 
Government policies. If China continues its current behavior then it 
can fund programs by reducing the money it spends on building up its 
military or in propping up state enterprises. We do not want to 
encourage China to postpone tough decisions on moving to a free-market 
economy.
  Though we are standing on principle, we know from past experience 
that these measures will be more effective with help from our allies. 
That is why the bill requires the President to begin consultations with 
these allies on enacting similar measures and for the President to 
report to the Congress on the progress of those consultations.
  Third, the legislation includes actions targeted at companies 
associated with the Chinese military.
  There is increasing concern in America about Chinese companies backed 
by the People's Liberation Army.
  My bill would require the U.S. Government to publish a list of such 
companies operating in the United States. That would allow informed 
consumers and other purchasers to make a choice about whether they wish 
to do business with such companies.
  Most troubling have been the actions of two Chinese companies--
Polytechnologies Inc., known as Poly, and Norinco, the China North 
Industries Group.
  On May 22, 1996, officials from the United States Customs Service and 
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms arrested seven individuals and 
seized 2,000 Chinese-made AK-47 machine guns.
  On June 4, 1996, a grand jury in the U.S. District Court for the 
Northern District of California indicted these seven individuals, along 
with seven others not in the United States, for violating 12 different 
sections of Federal law, including conspiracy, smuggling, and unlawful 
importation of defense articles.
  Those indicted individuals worked for Poly and Norinco. Leading 
executives of the firms, as well as Chinese Government officials, were 
indicted.
  The People's Liberation Army owns a majority share of Poly, while 
Norinco's operations are overseen by the State Council of the People's 
Republic of China.
  Undercover agents were told by a representative of Poly and Norinco 
that Chinese-made hand-held rocket launchers, tanks, and surface-to-air 
missiles could also be delivered. And who were to be the ultimate 
purchasers of the AK-47's and other military hardware? According to 
Federal agents, California street gangs and other criminal groups.
  This type of activity cannot be tolerated by the U.S. Congress. These 
companies need to be held responsible for their actions.
  Under my bill, for a period of 1 year, Poly and Norinco will not be 
allowed to export to, or maintain a physical presence in, the United 
States. Senator DeWine plans to introduce a separate bill that will 
target these two companies and I applaud him and Representative Chris 
Cox for their leadership on this issue.
  Mr. President, these tough measures are justified and necessary. But 
even as we implement them we should not cut off valuable interchange 
with China. We must always be open to more contact and exchange of 
ideas with the Chinese people.
  That is why the legislation calls for a doubling of current United 
States funding for student, cultural, and legislative exchange programs 
between the United States and the People's Republic of China, as well 
as doubling the funding for Radio Free Asia and programs in China 
operated through the National Endowment for Democracy.

[[Page S5128]]

  In addition, adopting a measure advocated by Representatives Frank 
Wolf and Chris Smith, the bill requires additional and extensive 
training for U.S. asylum officers in recognizing religious persecution.
  The legislation would require an annual report by the President on 
whether there has been improvement in China's policy of religious 
toleration and in its overall human rights record, including during the 
transition in Hong Kong.
  The sanctions would sunset after 1 year. This will allow Congress to 
evaluate the situation to determine whether and in what form sanctions 
should be continued.
  In my judgment, the combination of these sanctions and a 1-year 
extension of MFN offers the best approach to change the behavior of the 
Chinese Government.
  Mr. President, these measures will direct punishment where it 
belongs, with the Chinese Government, not the Chinese people.
  By refusing to allow known violators of basic human rights to enter 
this country we can signal our revulsion at these practices.
  By refusing to use taxpayer money to subsidize Chinese activities we 
can show our disapproval of their military actions and make them choose 
between prosperity and belligerence.
  By banning Chinese companies from this country for attempting to sell 
weapons to violent street criminals we can show our willingness to 
defend our streets and our insistence that the Chinese Government cease 
its intrusive, illegal practices.
  In closing, Mr. President, we should not forget the government-led 
massacre of students in Tianenman Square. It has been less than 10 
years since the atrocity, and we should not let it slip from our minds.
  Let me read you a dispatch filed from Beijing by New York Times 
reporter Nicholas Kristoff on June 4, 1989:

       The violence against students and workers in Tianenman 
     Square was most obvious today, because for the most part they 
     were the ones getting killed * * * To be an American on the 
     square this morning was to be the object of fervent hope and 
     inarticulate pleas for help. ``We appeal to your country,'' a 
     university student begged as bullets careened overhead. ``Our 
     Government is mad. We need help from abroad, especially 
     America. There must be something that America can do.''

  Through this legislation, America can stand with the Chinese people, 
and stand by the principles of political, religious, and economic 
liberty on which our Nation was founded.
  Let's not punish American and Chinese families by raising tariffs. 
Instead, let's punish specific abuses and encourage the further 
development of the economic and political liberties we cherish.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a summary of this bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the summary of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

The China Sanctions and Human Rights Advancement Act--Executive Summary


                      american concerns with china

       The United States has serious policy disagreements with the 
     People's Republic of China. Such differences in the way China 
     treats its own people and U.S. interests requires appropriate 
     action by the United States Congress. Unfortunately, 
     Administration policy in this area has been lacking. That is 
     why the China Sanctions and Human Rights Advancement Act will 
     enable America to respond in a manner consistent with our 
     values and interests as a nation.
       As the world's leading democracy, the United Stats cannot 
     simply look the other way at the Chinese government's record 
     on human rights and religious persecution. ``A fifth of the 
     world's people are ruled by a government that treats 
     fundamental human rights with contempt,'' reports Amnesty 
     International. ``Human rights violations continue on a 
     massive scale.'' What is the best response to Chinese 
     government repression of its citizens, including increased 
     repression of religious believers? The status quo, it 
     appears, is not the answer.
       China's willingness to abide by international agreements is 
     already being tested in Hong Kong. The 1994 Sino-British 
     Joint Declaration is an international agreement registered 
     with the United Nations. In it, China promises that the 
     people of Hong Kong will rule Hong Kong with autonomy, except 
     in the areas of defense and foreign affairs. With 35,000 U.S. 
     citizens and 1,000 U.S. firms in Hong Kong America must be 
     certain that China honors its agreement.
       China's attempt to intimidate Taiwan and the activities of 
     its military, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), both in the 
     United States and abroad, are of major concern. In addition, 
     the efforts of two Chinese companies, NORINCO and POLY, 
     deserve special rebuke for their involvement in the sale of 
     AK-47 machine guns to California street gangs. Finally, there 
     are numerous press reports of Chinese government efforts to 
     influence the course of U.S. elections through political 
     donations.


                           the larger picture

       Trade, investment, and people-to-people exchanges must be a 
     part of America's relationship with China. Countries the size 
     of China and the United States will always trade with each 
     other, the debate over MFN is the terms of that trade. Yet 
     those who disagree on MFN should be able to unite behind 
     measures that, for example, end subsidies for China, yet seek 
     to promote democratic values and human rights in China. There 
     is no doubt that trade and U.S. investment in China has a 
     positive effect in providing more opportunities for average 
     Chinese citizens. Even in short term, we should not 
     underestimate trade and investment's positive impact. 
     ``Employees at U.S. firms earn higher wages and are free to 
     choose where to live, what to eat, and how to educate and 
     care for their children,'' writes China policy expert Stephen 
     J. Yates. ``This real and measurable expansion of freedom 
     does not require waiting for middle-class civil society to 
     emerge in China; it is taking place now and should be 
     encouraged.''


                         summary of legislation

       The time has come to take steps that would signal to 
     Chinese leaders that their current behavior is unacceptable 
     to the American people and the American Congress. In crafting 
     the best response to Chinese government policy we must be 
     careful not to punish the innocent with the guilty. Our 
     quarrel is with the Chinese political leadership, not with 
     the Chinese and American peoples.
       The Abraham ``China Sanctions and Human Rights Advancement 
     Act'' takes aim at U.S.-China government-to-government 
     programs and contacts. It is time for Congress to end U.S. 
     taxpayer subsidies and other foreign aid to China and to set 
     more appropriate limits on who we allow into this country 
     from the Chinese government.
       The legislation focuses on (1) who the United States allows 
     into the country from China; (2) U.S. taxpayer funds that 
     subsidize China; (3) U.S. government votes and assistance 
     in international bodies that provide financial assistance 
     to China; (4) targeted sanctions of PLA companies; and (5) 
     measures to promote human rights in China.
     Contents of China sanctions and human rights advancement act
       Under the legislation, the U.S. government will take the 
     following actions:
     No U.S. visas for human rights violators
       Prohibit the granting of U.S. visas to Chinese government 
     officials who work in entities involved in the implementation 
     and enforcement of China's laws and directives on religious 
     practices and coercive family planning. This measure would 
     deny visas to high ranking officials who are employed by the 
     Public Security Bureau (the state police), the Religious 
     Affairs Bureau, and China's family planning apparatus. An 
     exception is made in the case of individuals whose presence 
     in the United States is deemed necessary for an ongoing 
     criminal investigation or judicial proceedings as determined 
     by the Attorney General.
       Prohibit the granting of U.S. visas to Chinese government 
     officials found to be materially involved in the ordering or 
     carrying out of the massacre of Chinese students in Tiananmen 
     Square.
       The President of the United States must provide written 
     notification to Congress each time a proscribed individual is 
     to enter this country that explains why awarding such visas 
     is in the national interest of the United States and 
     overrides U.S. concerns about China's human rights practices 
     past and present.
       The legislation also mandates additional and extensive 
     training for U.S. asylum officers in recognizing religious 
     persecution.
     No U.S. taxpayer subsidies for China
       Require U.S. representatives to vote ``no'' on all loans to 
     China at the World Bank. Between 1985 and 1995 the United 
     States supported 111 of 183 loans approved by the World Bank 
     Group and 15 of 92 loans that the Asian Development Bank 
     approved. An exception in the legislation is provided for 
     human needs arising from a natural disaster or famine.
       Require U.S. representatives to vote ``no'' on all loans to 
     China at the Asian Development Bank.
       Require U.S. representatives to vote ``no'' on all loans to 
     China at the International Monetary Fund.
       Reduce U.S. contributions to multilateral development banks 
     (World Bank, etc.) by the amount of the loan commitments made 
     to China in the coming year. Stipulate the Secretary of 
     Treasury shall reduce the amount the World Bank can borrow in 
     U.S. capital markets to no more than 82% of what the World 
     Bank borrowed in the United States in the previous year.
       Require the Secretary of Treasury to oppose and instruct 
     the U.S. executive director of the World Bank to oppose any 
     change in the World Bank's rules that limit the total share 
     of the bank's lending that can be made in any one country.
       Require the President to begin consultations with major 
     U.S. allies and trading partners to encourage them to adopt 
     similar measures contained in this bill and to lobby our 
     allies to vote against loans for China at

[[Page S5129]]

     multilateral development banks. Within 60 days of a G-7 
     meeting, the President shall submit a report to Congress on 
     the progress of this effort.
       Reduce annually U.S. financial assistance to international 
     bodies and organizations that provide family planning 
     assistance to China by the amount of such annual assistance 
     and services made by such institutions to China in the prior 
     fiscal year. This would include funding provided to U.N. 
     agencies and affiliates.
     PLA companies: targeted sanctions and more public information
       On an annual basis, the U.S. Government shall publish a 
     list of all companies owned in part or wholly by the People's 
     Liberation Army (PLA) of the P.R.C. who export to, or have 
     an office in, the United States.
       For a period of one year, China North Industries Group 
     (NORINCO) and the PLA-owned company China Poly Group (POLY) 
     will not be allowed to export to, nor maintain a physical 
     presence in, the United States. The attempted illegal sale of 
     AK-47 machine guns to street gangs in California warrant 
     these targeted sanctions against these firms.
     Promoting Democratic Values in China
       The U.S. government shall double the U.S. funding available 
     to existing students, cultural, and legislative exchange 
     programs between the United States and the People's Republic 
     of China.
       The U.S. government shall double the authorization of funds 
     available to Radio Free Asia.
       The U.S. government shall double the funding available to 
     the National Endowment for Democracy's programs in China.


    in one year: an opportunity to discontinue, maintain or add new 
                               sanctions

       The legislation requires an annual report by the President 
     on whether there has been improvement in China's policy of 
     religious toleration and in its overall human rights record, 
     including during the transition in Hong Kong. The sanctions 
     sunset after one year, allowing Congress an opportunity to 
     evaluate the situation and determine whether and in what form 
     sanctions should continue.


                               conclusion

       The legislation emphasizes appropriate limits on U.S. and 
     Chinese government-to-government contacts and U.S. taxpayer 
     subsidies, while seeking to promote greater freedom in China. 
     These measures would signal to China's leadership that it 
     cannot simply be business as usual with the U.S. government 
     so long as it mistreats its citizens and tramples on their 
     fundamental right to practice the religion of their choice. 
     It also applies appropriate measures with regard to PLA 
     companies. The United States must stay engaged with China, 
     and trade and investment is a valuable avenue for that 
     engagement, but there is no reason the U.S. government should 
     be subsidizing a government with whom we have so many serious 
     and fundamental disagreements. This approach is designed to 
     signal our displeasure with China's policies, encourage its 
     leaders to improve the treatment of its citizens, and to end 
     U.S. taxpayer subsidies for a repressive regime while 
     expanding basic interaction between the American and Chinese 
     people.
                                 ______