[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 89 (Monday, June 23, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6072-S6074]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             COMMUNIST CHINA: AMERICA'S MOST FAVORED NATION

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Madam President, freedom is, and always has been, the 
great moving force of American history. It was freedom that inspired 
patriots to give their lives at Concord and Lexington. Freedom that 
compelled American Rangers to scale the cliffs at Normandy. And freedom 
that filled Ronald Reagan's heart in Berlin as he exhorted Mr. 
Gorbachev to ``tear down this wall.''
  Freedom. The essential ingredient of what Reagan called ``the 
American purpose.'' At our highest and best, we Americans are believers 
in the ``blessings of liberty,'' the idea that ``all men are endowed by 
their Creator with certain unalienable rights.'' And these rights are 
not America's alone, but extend to all those who would seek to know 
freedom's warm embrace.
  So today, from Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste on the Adriatic, the 
Iron Curtain has lifted, and a wave of democracy has descended on the 
globe. The ``simple, vivid, peaceable world'' of which John Cheever 
wrote is more a reality today than at any time in our history.
  But evil knows no resting place. The cold war is over. And still how 
many have yet to taste the fruit of freedom? For there is a regime in 
the world today that runs against the tide of history; that denies 
liberty and human dignity to its people; a regime whose brutal 
repression at home betrays its intentions abroad; a regime that aspires 
to superpower status.
  I am speaking of Communist China. And I rise today to say, ``No 
more.'' No more should we watch as China uses its illegitimate gains to 
purchase military hardware and weapons of mass destruction. No more 
should we ignore Beijing's mercantilist trade policies that block U.S. 
products and destroy American jobs. No more should we accept a playing 
field for our products that is not level. No more, Mr. President. No 
more unconditional most-favored-nation status for Communist China.
  My decision to oppose most-favored-nation status was not an easy one. 
It was reached after countless meetings with foreign policy experts, 
economists, and the CEO's of major corporations. To the businessmen 
whose passion for the status quo was surprising, I posed many 
questions.
  Has China embraced the rule of law, put their regulations and laws in 
writing, stopped subjecting them to differential application? No. Are 
her people more free? Well, not really. Is America more secure with 
China selling weaponry to rogue nations and extending its own influence 
far beyond appropriate levels into the South China Sea? Tragically, 
those I questioned could only plead for more time. But time alone 
cannot heal these wounds. We must say: No more.
  The truth is, America has dedicated over two decades to the policies 
of engagement, and the results have been far from compelling or 
convincing. Less than 2 percent of United States exports went to China 
last year. America sold more goods and services individually to 
Belgium, Brazil, and Singapore than to the People's Republic of China. 
Meanwhile, the United States took more than 30 percent of China's 
exports creating a $39.5 billion merchandise trade deficit. This 
represents a threefold increase since 1990. A 200-percent increase in 
just 6 years!

  On Friday, more bad news. The Commerce Department reported that our 
trade gap is widening--fully 41 percent higher in the first 4 months of 
this year than in 1996. This led the Wall Street Journal to speculate 
that China will soon have the largest deficit of any United States 
trading partner, surpassing even Japan.
  If our growing trade deficit has been the source of great attention, 
the causal factors behind the inequity have gone all but ignored. At 
their core, they are twofold. The first element is the anti-American, 
predatory trade practices of the Chinese Government. The second is a 
United States-China policy that has been an abject failure,

[[Page S6073]]

a case study in what not to do. A United States policy that has, in 
truth and reality, made Communist China America's most favored nation.
  American access to the other Asian market is growing every day. The 
Mongolian Government has aggressively sought United States investment, 
and soon will allow foreign ``stakes in infrastructure'' and the 
purchase of ``shares in privatized companies.'' In Taiwan, AT&T and GTE 
have won stakes in cellular telephone licenses that will allow both to 
provide telecommunications services to the Taiwanese.
  China is the exception, erecting barriers to entry surpassed only by 
the Great Wall itself. This begs the question: if United States 
products are good enough for Mongolia, Taiwan, and the other Asian 
democracies, developing and developed, why are they not good enough for 
Communist China? And when will we have the courage to say, ``No more''?
  Consider China's treatment of information technologies. The United 
States tariff on cellular phones from China is 1.6 percent. China's 
tariff? Seven times as high. Chinese telephone answering machines: 1.6 
percent. The tariff on United States firms? A whopping 50 percent, over 
25 times as high. Chinese-made computers: 2.7 percent. The import tax 
on Silicon Valley? Almost six times as high. And the list goes on and 
on and on.
  In March, 39 countries, including Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, and 
South Korea, signed the Information Technology Agreement which will 
phase out all tariffs on such products as semiconductors, computer 
hardware, and electronic components by century end. China's concession 
was nowhere to be found. And yet, we rewarded China's belligerence by 
providing the same access to our market as we do to those Asian 
countries that have agreed to welcome our goods.
  Now the administration and the ivory tower academicians like to whine 
about how misleading the ``most-favored-nation'' designation is. ``If 
we could only change the name,'' they wail, ``our China troubles would 
be over.'' But if ever there were a country that deserved the label 
``most favored nation,'' it is Communist China. It is time for America 
to say, ``No more.''
  Unfortunately, rather than sound a clarion trumpet for American 
goods, the administration has hoisted the flag of defeat. Today, the 
United States allows China to slap punitively high tariffs on our goods 
while other countries are trying to treat us equitably. Australia, for 
instance, has tariffs on United States goods that are roughly equal to 
America's 4-percent rate. And yet, Australia's access to the United 
States market is no better than China's.

  In fact, the People's Republic of China is deriving more benefits 
from United States trade than even our closest trading partners. Mexico 
places tariff rates on American goods that are only 2 percent higher 
than comparable United States rates. China's tariffs, however, are 19 
percent higher. But again, Mexico and China enjoy virtually identical 
access to the United States market. We are literally inviting China to 
be involved in our market while China is slamming the door in the face 
of American business. China is truly ``America's most-favored-nation.''
  This stems at least in part from the willingness of the United States 
to trade with China under a bilateral agreement that was signed in 
1979--a time when Jimmy Carter still called the White House home. The 
agreement predates the commercial availability of information 
technologies such as cellular phones and portable computers.
  Madam President, this bilateral agreement is the first of a two-tier 
test that all nonmarket economies must meet if they are to be extended 
most-favored-nation status. The second deals with the emigration 
provisions of the Jackson-Vanik amendment. There are currently 15 
nonmarket economies, including China, that have technically complied 
with this two-tier test in order to get MFN status.
  All of the other 14 designees, however, have bilateral agreements 
that were developed in the 1990's. In fact, every United States trading 
partner save China has trade agreements that were negotiated in the 
last 7 years.
  Only China operates with a favorable status of not having to comply 
with a modern bilateral agreement. Only China enjoys this most favored 
among most-favored-nations position. It is this decades-old agreement 
that is failing to safeguard our capacity to deal on a level playing 
field with the Chinese. It is this agreement that is failing to allow 
for free and unfettered trade.
  Last Wednesday, Madam President, I asked Undersecretary of State for 
Economic, Business, and Agricultural Affairs, Stuart Eizenstat, to tell 
me why the administration has failed to hold the Chinese to the same 
standards as other most-favored-nation designees by requiring a modern 
bilateral trade agreement. ``This is,'' Eizenstat said, ``one of the 
things we are now negotiating.''
  Madam President, ``now negotiating?'' A bilateral trade agreement is 
a precursor to the extension of MFN. It was one of the basis upon which 
MFN is extended. It is a core requirement. Why is Congress being asked 
to renew most-favored-nation status before a modern bilateral trade 
agreement is in place? Why in the world is Congress being pushed to 
embrace an agreement that disadvantages U.S. products and ensures a 
trade imbalance into the foreseeable future? China's preferential 
status coupled with her discriminatory conduct has improperly made the 
PRC a nation favored above all others, the most-favored among most-
favored nations.

  Perhaps China's past and current transgressions could be overlooked 
if Beijing's ambitions were more humane. Instead, the hard currency 
created by China's trade surplus is being used to pursue a massive 
military modernization program, nothing less than a blue-water navy, 
long-range aircraft, and precision-guided munitions and missiles. The 
Russians alone have sold billions of dollars of military technology to 
the Chinese. And, as Prof. Arthur Waldron notes, this includes ``cruise 
missiles capable of defeating the anti-missile defenses of the U.S. 
Navy.''
  These force-projection technologies are not about ``providing for the 
common defense.'' They are about providing an uncommon capacity to 
project power--power all across Asia. They will threaten not just the 
Asian democracies, but also the sailors of the 7th Fleet who call the 
waters of the South China Sea home.
  I intend to address the emerging threat posed by Beijing's military 
build-up in the days and weeks ahead. I also plan to speak about an 
administration policy that fails to defend what Thomas Paine called the 
rights of man, all but ignoring Beijing's cruel campaign of persecution 
and repression aimed at crushing internal dissent.

  We will never tame the Chinese dragon--no more than we subdued the 
Soviet bear--with the policies of appeasement. The way to bring China 
into the community of nations is to talk truthfully and forcefully 
about the evils found there; challenge China to open her doors to the 
commerce of the Western world; and maintain an American military 
superiority that makes peace not only possible but probable.
  And to those who say this debate cannot be won, that the forces 
amassed against us are too great, I take issue. ``Any spot is 
tenable,'' said John Kennedy, ``if men--brave men--will make it so.'' 
It is time to turn retreat to advance; to fight for a new China policy 
steeped in the principles of our old American Republic. Because truly 
free trade can only exist between free peoples. And the Chinese who 
watched treachery take hold in Tiananmen Square are most certainly not 
free. It is time for America to say, ``No more.''
  In 1946, Winston Churchill came to America to warn of the Soviet 
subjugation of Eastern Europe. At the request of President Truman, he 
chose small Westminster College in Fulton, MO as the site where Britain 
would pass the baton of Western leadership to ``the American 
democracy.''
  In this most Churchillian of Churchill speeches--made famous by its 
``iron curtain'' coinage--he called America to her highest and best in 
defense of freedom and the rights of man. And if I might beg the 
Chair's indulgence, I would like to read a portion of the words he 
offered that warm and windy Tuesday a half century ago in Fulton, MO, 
my home State.
  Winston Churchill challenged the United States:
  ``The United States,'' said Churchill, ``stands at this time at the 
pinnacle of

[[Page S6074]]

world power. It is a solemn moment for the American democracy. For with 
this primacy in power is joined an awe-inspiring accountability to the 
future. As you look around you, you must feel not only the sense of 
duty done, but also you must feel anxiety lest you fall below the level 
of achievement. Opportunity is here now, clear and shining * * * To 
reject it or ignore it or fritter it away will bring us all the long 
reproaches of the aftertime.''
  Madam President, Churchill's words are America's words. For ours is a 
passionate belief in human possibility, an abiding devotion to freedom. 
``Opportunity is here now, clear and shining.'' Let us not trade 
liberty for the false idol of foreign commerce. Let us not allow 
freedom's song to die on our lips. ``For all sad words of tongue and 
pen, the saddest are these: `It might have been.' ''
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________