[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 63 (Monday, May 18, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4950-S4952]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NEW EVIDENCE OF PLA MONEY GOING TO THE DNC
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, last week the Senate, by adopting two
of the remaining eight House-passed China provisions, I believe took an
important first step in reversing this Nation's failed, flawed and
counterproductive policy of so-called ``constructive engagement'' with
the People's Republic of China.
The first amendment we adopted last week, an amendment to the Defense
Department authorization bill, requires the Department of Defense to
monitor enterprises which are owned by the People's Liberation Army and
gives the President increased authority to take action against these
companies should circumstances warrant. It does not mandate the
President to act, but it would give him enhanced authority to act
should the evidence warrant it.
The second amendment we adopted gives the U.S. Customs Service
increased funding and authority to stop the importation of goods
produced in Chinese slave labor camps. The importation of goods
produced by slave labor has been prohibited in this country for half a
century, and yet the practice is continuing, unfortunately, and thus,
this enhanced monitoring and enhanced authority for the Customs Service
is essential.
These were two very, very important amendments, I believe, but there
are six bills still remaining in the Foreign Relations Committee. I
believe the Foreign Relations Committee will be taking those bills up
tomorrow. I hope they will. But the votes that we cast last week could
not possibly have been more timely. Their importance is best seen by
new information uncovered last Friday by the New York Times, one day
after we cast those two important votes on the floor of the U.S.
Senate.
That story, covered by the New York Times, and now by every major
newspaper in the country, revealed that Johnny Chung, the central
figure in the Justice Department's campaign finance investigation, has
now told investigators that a large part of the nearly $100,000 that he
gave to the DNC and to other Democratic causes in the summer of 1996
came from the People's Liberation Army of the People's Republic of
China.
Let me say that again. A large part of the $100,000--in fact, $80,000
of it--went to the DNC, and that money came from the Chinese Red army.
This was the front-page story in the New York Times on Friday, May 15.
Then inside the newspaper the headline is: ``Fund-raiser is Said to
Tell of Donations from China Military to Democrats.''
This is a very, very serious allegation that Mr. Chung has made in
his cooperation with the Justice Department alleging that this money
came not just from Chinese sources, but came from the Chinese Red
military. Worse yet, this was no low-level PLA effort. It wasn't low-
level figures in the People's Liberation Army, but according to Chung,
these monies were provided by a Chinese lieutenant colonel and
aerospace executive whose father, General Liu, was at the time China's
top military commander and a member of the leadership of China's
Communist Party.
This reaches to the very top echelon of the Chinese Government and to
the very top levels of the PLA command system. Their very top
leadership apparently hatched, planned, and carried out this so-called
``China plan.''
Let us not forget, Mr. President, that this whole investigation was
started after an interception of a telephone communication suggesting
that the People's Republic of China was considering a covert plan to
influence United States elections. It would now appear that this so-
called ``China plan'' was actually carried out by the top leadership of
the PLA and the Communist Party.
Why would China and the PLA want to influence American elections?
What motive would they have to pick and choose winners and losers in
our own Presidential sweepstakes? The answer appears to be given in
this very same New York Times article:
At the time (of these payments from the PLA), President
Clinton was making it easier for American civilian
communications satellites to be launched by Chinese rockets,
a key issue for the PLA and for Liu's company, which sells
missiles for the military and also has a troubled space
subsidiary.
There was a very, very vested interest by Lieutenant Colonel Liu in
ensuring that Chinese rockets would be able to launch American
satellites. Thus, while the DNC and the Democratic Party was being
flooded with money from the head of the PLA, the head of the Democratic
Party, President Clinton, was making it easier for the PLA to receive
advanced technological support for its missile and space programs. The
only question left to be answered seems to be, was it a quid pro quo?
To put the harmful effects of this ``missiles for money" trade into
context, or more appropriate, the ``PLA Gate,'' it is important to note
that until last year, China lacked the intelligence or technologies
necessary to manufacture boosters that could reliably strike such long
distances. This made China a weaker adversary.
In fact, in a debate that I had on the campus of the University of
Mississippi at Oxford, a Firing Line debate that was carried nationwide
by public television, Dr. Kissinger made this statement:
[[Page S4951]]
I also do not believe that it is possible to argue that
China can represent a military threat to the United States
for the next 20 years.
I remember very vividly Secretary Kissinger making that statement. He
almost ridiculed and disdainfully dismissed those who said that China
could pose a military threat to the United States at any time in the
next two decades. That is a direct quote from the Firing Line
transcript.
My how time flies, because now we find, less than a year later, that
all but five of the Chinese nuclear missiles are aimed and directed at
the United States and, in fact, they do pose a threat. According to
this article in the Washington Times, China targets nukes at the United
States, according to a CIA report that was recently released. China now
appears to pose a very real threat to the United States. This article
noted that 13 of China's 18 long-range strategic missiles with ranges
exceeding 8,000 miles and have single nuclear warheads are aimed at the
United States. These missiles are in addition to China's growing
arsenal of other weapons that can now reach the United States, many of
which are mentioned in this article regarding the CIA report.
How could one of this country's leading China experts and most
respected foreign policy adviser have been so far off when Secretary
Kissinger said it would take two decades? Like those of us in the
Senate, Dr. Kissinger may not have known that two U.S. companies, Loral
Space and Communications and Hughes Electronic, illegally gave China
space expertise during cooperation on a commercial satellite launch
which could be used to develop an accurate launch and guidance system
for ICBMs.
I am sure Dr. Kissinger would not have foreseen that this
administration, in the middle of investigating this illegal transfer,
would allow Loral to launch another satellite on a Chinese rocket and
provide them the same expertise at issue in the criminal case. Nor is
it likely that Dr. Kissinger would know that Motorola, under a waiver
from this administration, has also been involved in ``upgrading''
China's missile capability, this according to the chairman of the House
Science Subcommittee on Space and Technology.
The New York Times ran a follow-up article today providing some
insight into this administration's policy on China and the transfer of
sensitive technology. According to the article that appeared today in
the New York Times, United States and China industry groups urged that
satellite technology be taken off the list of banned exports, known as
the munitions list.
The State Department sided with the Defense Department and the
intelligence agencies, and the President's key advisers and noted that
satellite technology holds secrets that hold ``significant military and
intelligence'' information and thus should remain banned for export.
That was the position of key advisers to the President. That was the
position of the Department of State and the Defense Department. The
Clinton administration, though, sided with business groups and
transferred this decision away from the State Department and left the
decision up to the Commerce Department, which was then headed by his
close friend, Ron Brown. In the end, satellite technology was removed
from the munitions list. China was free to negotiate with U.S.
businesses to obtain assistance with its space program.
The People's Liberation Army is engaged in a massive military buildup
which has involved a doubling since 1992 of announced official figures
for military spending by the People's Republic of China. This is
incredible. It is amazing that we would at this time be circumventing
our own ban on technology transfers and the launching of American
satellites and the sharing of that valuable, valuable missile
technology at the very time we see this massive military buildup.
The PLA is working to coproduce the SU-27 fighter with Russia. It is
in the process of purchasing several substantial weapons systems from
the Republic of Russia, including the 633 model of the Kilo-class
submarine and the SS-N-22 Sunburn missile system specifically designed
to incapacitate United States aircraft carriers and Aegis cruisers.
Mr. President, this increasingly aggressive military, the PLA, which
cracked down on its own citizens in Tiananmen Square, killing over
2,000 Chinese students, that we are aware of, which held threatening
war games off the coast of Taiwan, closing two of its largest ports,
which has taken over disputed islands once claimed by the Philippines,
which now has all but five of its long-range nuclear missiles pointed
at the citizens of the United States, is being coddled, pampered and
pandered to and appeased by this administration.
The gross irony here is that while the administration continues to
allow the transfer of technology to China and the PLA, the People's
Liberation Army, U.S. consumers are unwittingly funding China's
military by purchasing items sold by PLA-owned enterprises operating in
the United States.
The PLA operates literally thousands and thousands of businesses. It
is unlike any other military in the world. It is not just funded from
the general revenue of the Chinese budget, the Chinese Government
budget. It rather is funded partially through enterprises and business
operations by the military itself. It is estimated that the PLA earns
between $2 billion and $4 billion annually through the many enterprises
that it operates that deal in nonmilitary commodities, and that these
enterprises profit handsomely from their activities right here in the
United States of America.
A report released earlier this year indicated that vast quantities of
goods, as varied as toys, ski gloves, garlic, iron weight sets, men's
pants, car radiators, glassware, swimsuits, and much more, are being
sold to U.S. consumers by PLA-owned firms and almost always without the
knowledge of the American consumer.
Mr. President, this country was shocked last week by India's
explosion into the nuclear family. We were all dismayed that a new
threat to world security loomed on the horizon in India's completed
nuclear tests. Why? Why would a country suffering from rampant poverty
and class instability choose to spend its limited and valuable
resources on a new nuclear weapon's program? The answer, I believe,
lies in the failed policies of this administration.
It was just over 35 years ago that China last invaded India in an
attempt to take over disputed territory. Since that time, there has
been an uneasy and often hostile relationship between India and China,
its larger neighbor to the north.
In addition to China's own military buildup, China was assisting
other enemies of India in the development of their own nuclear and
military capabilities, particularly the nation of Pakistan. In fact,
the People's Liberation Army transferred technology relevant to the
refinement of weapons-grade nuclear material, including the transfer of
ring magnets, to the nation of Pakistan.
Mr. President, as this country moves closer to China, as we continue
to assist its military machine, as we continue to turn a blind eye to
China's transfer of technology to Pakistan, why would we be surprised
that India would move to arm itself with nuclear weapons? Why are we
surprised that a country that is surrounded by a much larger and better
armed neighbor, that that nation would develop a defense similar to our
own policy of ``mutually assured destruction,'' a policy that prevailed
during the cold war? Mr. President, it was U.S. policy that led to
these tragic, sad developments in that entire arena in the world.
With all but five of China's long-range nuclear missiles pointed at
the citizens of the United States, it is obvious that the increasingly
aggressive People's Liberation Army views the United States as its most
serious adversary.
It is a sad paradox that U.S. consumers are unwittingly funding the
military that has their hand on the nuclear buttons which threaten our
very existence and that our leadership is accepting money in return for
relaxed controls on the transfer of military technology, or at least
that is the allegation that has been made. That is the source and the
subject of the investigation that is ongoing.
Not only is China an increasing threat internationally, but within
their borders they continue to oppress their own people. The latest
State Department report on human rights, to which I have referred
repeatedly, says
[[Page S4952]]
and shows that China is still a major offender of internationally
recognized human rights. You pick the category, whether it is coerced
abortion, the so-called one-child policy, whether it is slave labor and
the refusal to allow international inspection teams to go in and look
at these slave labor camps, whether it is the repression of all free
expression or criticism of the Government, or whether it is other forms
of human rights abuses like the repression of freedom to worship by
religious minorities in China, you pick the category, and you will find
that there is an absolute intolerance of freedom and that these ongoing
abuses show us that they have not made progress under the current
policy.
According to a recent report in the Washington Post entitled, ``U.S.-
China Talks Make Little Progress on Summit Agenda,'' we find that the
United States is getting very few concessions from China relating to
the inspection of the technology that we share with them. We are
getting very few concessions on limiting the proliferation of
technology to third parties like Iran. We are getting very few
concessions on human rights conditions, particularly in the nation of
Tibet.
So as we make our agenda, as we make the plans for the President's
trip to China, what are we getting? Out of the negotiations that have
been going on, what kind of concessions do we find from the Chinese
Government? There have been four major high-profile prisoners who have
been released. There are thousands that remain incarcerated, thousands
who remain languishing in Chinese laogai camps, yet we are expected to
say there is progress in human rights because four high-profile
individuals have been released.
So, Mr. President, with your administration currently under
investigation by your own Justice Department relating to this
``missiles for money'' transfer, it is inconceivable to me how you can
go forward with your planned June 24th trip to China. The cloud now
brewing over your administration's relationship with the leadership of
the People's Republic of China makes suspect any agreements that may be
reached or any statements that may be made during this summit.
Mr. President, until this cloud of criminal and ethical
investigations has blown over and been resolved, I urge you to delay
your planned trip in June, and to postpone it. It is imperative that
this country present a unified foreign policy. It is imperative that we
be united in our international relationships, and particularly our
relationship with this, the most populous nation on the globe.
But in order to have that kind of unity, one that is free of
partisanship, one that is untainted by allegations of illegal dealing,
it is imperative that this planned trip in June be postponed. It is
hard for me to imagine with such a cloud over our relationship with
China, with such allegations of an organized, planned, if you will,
conspiracy by the Chinese Government to influence the outcome of
American elections, how any good could come from this trip to China at
this stage. The atmosphere surrounding this summit has now been
polluted.
Mr. President, here again is what we know. We know that the CIA
intercepted a call which hinted at a plan by China to influence our
elections. And may I say, my colleague, Senator Thompson, should feel
vindicated. And those who ridiculed his allegation in this regard
should apologize to him personally, I believe. The American people owe
him a debt of gratitude for his untiring efforts to reveal this
nefarious plan.
We know that the CIA intercepted that call. We know that Johnny Chung
has testified that the PLA, through one of their top leaders, General
Liu, provided $80,000 to the DNC and $20,000 to other Democratic
causes.
We know that at the same time as these moneys were being given to the
DNC, the same time those contributions were being made, Loral and
Hughes provided key missile technology to China and the PLA--under a
waiver granted by the Clinton administration.
We know that the State Department has said that this technology
transfer ``harmed our national security.''
We know this, that an executive at Motorola also claims they are
assisting China's missile program under a waiver from the Clinton
administration.
We further know that the Clinton administration shifted the key
decisionmaking authority on satellite and missile technology from the
State Department to the Commerce Department, which was a much more
China-friendly agency or Department.
We know this, that China transferred key military nuclear technology
to Pakistan and to other rogue states like Iran, all without any action
or denunciation by this administration.
We know that all but five of China's long-range nuclear missiles are
pointed at the United States.
We know that the PLA continues to profit from selling consumer goods
in the United States. And we know that the PLA continues to profit from
slave labor.
We know that human rights continue to be abused in China and that
this administration has soft-pedaled very serious human rights
concerns.
This is an ugly list, detailing a tangled relationship that now
appears to have forever damaged our national security, a relationship
that now may have escalated the risk of nuclear war on the Asian
continent and that will forever make it more difficult to keep the
nuclear genie in a secure bottle.
This relationship must be investigated. I believe appropriate Senate
committees will be doing that investigation. We know that the Justice
Department is continuing this investigation, but all questions relating
to how this relationship progressed must be answered, and the President
should delay and postpone his planned trip to China until those answers
are forthcoming. The American people deserve to have those answers.
I yield the floor.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed as in
morning business for up to 15 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________