[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 37 (Tuesday, March 9, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H1041-H1048]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENSE OF CONGRESS URGING CRITICISM OF PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA FOR
HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES IN CHINA AND TIBET AT ANNUAL MEETING OF UNITED
NATIONS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
concurrent resolution (H.Con.Res. 28) expressing the sense of the
Congress that the United States should introduce and make all efforts
necessary to pass a resolution criticizing the People's Republic of
China for its human rights abuses in China and Tibet at the annual
meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Con. Res. 28
Whereas the Government of the People's Republic of China
has signed two important United Nations human rights
treaties, the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social,
and Cultural Rights;
Whereas the Government of the People's Republic of China
recognizes the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, which calls for the protection of the rights of
freedom of association, press, assembly, religion, and other
fundamental rights and freedoms;
Whereas the Government of the People's Republic of China
demonstrates a pattern of continuous, serious, and widespread
violations of internationally recognized human rights
standards, including violations of the rights described in
the preceding clause and the following:
(1) restricting nongovernmental political and social
organizations;
(2) cracking down on film directors, computer software
developers, artists, and the press, including threats of life
prison terms;
(3) sentencing poet and writer, Ma Zhe, to seven years in
prison on charges of subversion for publishing an independent
literary journal;
(4) sentencing three pro-democracy activists, Xu Wenli,
Wang Youcai, and Qing Yongmin, to long prison sentences in
December 1998 for the announced effort to organize an
alternative political party committed to democracy and
respect for human rights;
(5) sentencing Zhang Shanguang to prison for ten years for
giving Radio Free Asia information about farmer protests in
Hunan province;
(6) putting on trial businessman Lin Hai for providing e-
mail addresses to a pro-democracy Internet magazine based in
the United States;
(7) arresting, harassing, and torturing members of the
religious community who worship outside of official Chinese
churches;
(8) refusing the United Nations High Commissioner on Human
Rights access to the Panchen Lama, Gendun Choekyi Nyima;
(9) continuing to engage in coercive family planning
practices, including forced abortion and forced
sterilization; and
(10) operating a system of prisons and other detention
centers in which gross human rights violations, including
torture, slave labor, and the commercial harvesting of human
organs from executed prisoners, continue to occur;
Whereas repression in Tibet has increased steadily,
resulting in heightened control on religious activity, a
denunciation campaign against the Dalai Lama unprecedented
since the Cultural Revolution, an increase in political
arrests, the secret trial and sentencing of former Middlebury
College Fulbright Scholar and Tibetan ethnomusicologist
Ngawang Choephel to 18 years in prison on espionage charges,
and suppression of peaceful protests, and the Government of
the People's Republic of China refuses direct dialogue with
the Dalai Lama or his representatives on a negotiated
solution for Tibet;
Whereas the annual meeting of the United Nations Commission
on Human Rights in Geneva, Switzerland, provides a forum for
discussing human rights and expressing international support
for improved human rights performance;
Whereas during his July 1998 visit to the People's Republic
of China, President Clinton correctly affirmed the necessity
of addressing human rights in United States-China relations;
and
Whereas the United States did not sponsor a resolution on
China's human rights record at the 1998 session of the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the
United States--
(1) should introduce and make all efforts necessary to pass
a resolution criticizing the People's Republic of China for
its human rights abuses in China and Tibet at the annual
meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights; and
(2) should immediately contact other governments to urge
them to cosponsor and support such a resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Gilman) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to thank the chairman and the ranking minority member of the
Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights and the
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific for acting expeditiously on H.
Con. Res. 28, a resolution expressing the sense of Congress that our
Nation should introduce and make all efforts necessary to pass a
resolution criticizing the People's Republic of China for its human
rights abuses in China and Tibet at the next annual meeting of the
United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
In a December 22, 1998 speech commemorating the 20th anniversary of
the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Communist Party Central
Committee, China's President and Party Secretary Jiang Zemin stated
that China needed to ``nip those factors that undermine social
stability in the bud, no matter where they come from.'' In that very
same speech Jiang emphasized, ``the Western mode of political systems
must never be copied.'' Soon after those remarks, arrests were made of
key dissidents. To this very day, the crackdown on China's fledgling
democracy movement continues.
The Democracy Wall movement in the late 1970s and the Hundred Flowers
Campaign in the late 1950s were periods when citizens were first
encouraged to express their beliefs, and then subsequently they were
severely persecuted for their criticism of the Communist Party and
their desire for democracy. Similarly, the period before President
Clinton visited China in June also saw an easing of political
repression by the authorities, though some of us were concerned that
this was only a temporary change and that the government would, as it
has, indeed, revert to form.
Some so-called China experts would have us believe that this is a
cyclical historical process. But having seen it done so many times, it
appears to us to be a method to flush out dissidents and to be able to
preserve power.
[[Page H1042]]
In the last 8 months, the Communist government in China has carried
out the most symptomatic crackdown on democracy activists since the
Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989. Scores of democracy activists have
been arrested, hundreds more have been detained, and three leaders, Xu
Wenli, Wang Youcai and Qin Yongmin have been sentenced to long prison
terms.
I ask, is the administration certain that it still wants a strategic
partnership with such a government?
In December, our Select Committee on U.S. National Security and
Military/Commercial Concerns with the People's Republic of China
released their report stating that China has been stealing weapons
designs from American nuclear laboratories and obtaining sensitive
computer missile and satellite technologies. A select committee
confirmed Pentagon and State Department findings that two American
companies not only helped the Chinese space industry, but also may have
helped improve the reliability of China's missiles. Yet, every year,
billions of dollars of more goods from Chinese sweatshops and from
their labor camps come into our Nation adding to our growing trade
deficit with China.
In a few months, flush with foreign currency reserves, the PLA, the
Chinese military organization, will be receiving SS-N-22 Sunburn
missiles that they bought from Russia. Those missiles are designed to
destroy our most sophisticated naval ships. If in the future China
blockades democratic Taiwan, I ask how effective will our Seventh Fleet
be? We question what the administration has done to prevent the Chinese
from obtaining such deadly missiles.
We have now learned that Beijing stole nuclear weapon technology from
our labs. The New York Times reported that the administration knew that
this was going on since 1997. Last weekend in Beijing, Secretary
Albright met with the Chinese leaders, and we were pleased that she
raised the issue of the ongoing crackdown of the democracy movement
there and in occupied Tibet. Regrettably, years of words not backed up
by any action has gone on much too long, through too many
administrations, and has permitted our Nation's security and our
economy to be weakened and our moral stand to be questioned.
If the administration seriously supports a resolution in Geneva, as
H. Con. Res. 28 recommends, then it would give some help to those brave
Chinese and Tibetan democracy advocates who are struggling against the
brutal dictatorship in Beijing, and it would give the American people
some hope that perhaps this administration has started to reformulate a
China policy that we feel has been misguided and has been a disaster.
Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support H. Con. Res. 28.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume
and I rise in strong support of this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I listened to the distinguished chairman of the
Committee on International Relations, and there are many observations
that he made with which I agree. He has been an effective champion of
human rights in China, and I pay tribute to him for his human rights
efforts as they relate to China and other countries.
But I need to correct the historical record as it comes to
administration policy. As one who has opposed administration policy
with respect to China under both Republican and Democratic
administrations because I believe they both have been ill-advised, as
the most recent spying episode so dramatically underscores, it is
important to keep the record straight and to keep the bipartisan voice
of Congress honest.
Our Republican colleagues are in no position to be surprised that
China has been spying on the United States. That spying has been going
on during the last many years. It did not originate last year or the
year before, and the previous 2 Republican administrations bear their
full share of the responsibility as we now see the chickens coming home
to roost.
So the historical record must be made clear. China's human rights
record is abominable. We have spent untold hours in committee and on
this floor denouncing China's human rights record, ranging from forced
abortion to the restriction of the right of individuals to practice
their religion, from the lack of press freedom to the lack of political
freedom, and recent developments in China clearly indicate that the
human rights condition has deteriorated in recent months. It is now
reaching a new low. There is not much dispute on this floor about the
abominable human rights record of China.
What this resolution calls for is for our administration to introduce
and support at Geneva at the United Nations Human Rights Commission
meeting a powerful resolution denouncing China's human rights record,
and to lobby and lead the way so we will have enough friends and allies
in that organization so that our resolution will, in fact, prevail. I
think it is important for this administration to understand that the
other body passed a similar resolution urging the administration to
denounce China's human rights policy in Geneva by a vote of 99-to-
nothing.
When this debate is over, I will ask for a recorded vote in this
body, and I suspect we will have a similar overwhelming vote calling on
our administration to introduce and to lead the fight to denounce
China's human rights record.
{time} 1400
We speak powerfully when we speak on a bipartisan basis. I am
critical of our administration for not having introduced this
resolution at last year's meeting, and I expect my Republican
colleagues to be equally critical of previous Republican
administrations for their attempt to sweep China's abominable human
rights policy under the rug.
Human rights transcend parties and differences. We should be
demanding human rights for the people of China, and we should demand,
whether we have a Republican or a Democrat in the White House, that the
United States stand up for our own principles.
I call on all of my colleagues to join me in urging our State
Department to introduce and to lead to a successful vote a resolution
denouncing China and China's abominable human rights policies.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as she may consume to my
friend and neighbor, the gentlewoman from San Francisco, California
(Ms. Pelosi) someone who has been a leader in the fight for human
rights in China.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank our colleague for yielding time to
me. I again applaud him for his great leadership on human rights
throughout the world. I associate myself with the remarks in his
statement, both in support of human rights and in clarifying the record
about the bipartisan nature of the security issues that were raised by
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
I also want to salute the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the
distinguished chairman of the committee. He has been a champion on
human rights throughout the world. He has worked tirelessly for human
rights in China and Tibet, and he has been an articulate voice that
should be a comfort for all of those who fight for freedom throughout
the world.
Mr. Speaker, this is a particularly significant year for us, the
U.S., to take the lead on the U.N. resolution in Geneva. It has been 40
years since the Dalai Lama fled Tibet. It has been 20 years since the
democracy wall repression in China, where those who dared speak out for
freedom in 1979 were arrested for very long prison terms.
It has been, can we believe it, Mr. Speaker, 10 years since the
tragedy of Tiananmen Square, since the massacre of those young people
who dared to take as their symbol our statute of liberty, and as their
clarion call the words of our Founding Fathers.
So it behooves the United States of America in this particularly
significant anniversary year that commemorates serious repression in
China and Tibet to take the lead, as our colleague, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) said, not only to introduce a resolution but to
urge other countries to support it, too.
In the absence of our leadership brave Denmark, in which the United
States is so ably represented by the son-in-law of the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) and his family as our distinguished ambassadors
there, brave Denmark introduced the resolution.
[[Page H1043]]
China's response? China said this resolution, at the U.N. commission,
will be the rock which smashes Denmark's head. How distinguished of
them to frame it in that way. But let us show the bravery of Denmark.
It is the very least, I think, that we can do.
Some of our allies, the Brits, for example, said they were not going
to introduce the resolution because they were going to give China this
year to demonstrate an improvement in human rights, and then make an
evaluation this year. Well, what did they see in that year but
increased repression?
Sure, there was a show when President Clinton went to China, and
there was just enough done on both sides for domestic consumption, both
in China and in the United States. But the fact is, and as the record
shows, it was not real.
I have been an ardent supporter of human rights in China, and foe of
the failed policy of both the Republican and the Democratic
administrations. The irony of it all is that we are diminishing our
voice in human rights for trade purposes, and ha, ha, ha, the Chinese
regime has the last laugh there, because they have refused to open
their markets to our products.
Our reward for ignoring their human rights violations and their
repression is a $60 billion trade deficit with China; $60 billion for
the Chinese regime to buy more weapons for their military and more
money to consolidate their position in power, and to continue to
repress those who speak out for democratic reforms, the same democratic
reforms, by the way, which they, in theory, signed up to support when
they signed the U.N. Technician resolution, which they have not
ratified and which they have not implemented.
Mr. Speaker, what is it that will happen if this resolution passes?
If this resolution passes on the Floor, we will be giving the Clinton
administration the leverage that they need, the leverage that they need
to go in to the U.N. Commission and say, the Congress of the United
States, speaking for the people of the United States, wants us not to
ignore the human rights violations in China any longer.
If we win, and if we are serious about our leadership there we will
win, because our failure will be indicative of our lack of enthusiasm
there, and we have to get moving soon, but if we win there, it will
make a serious difference to the pro-democratic reforms in China. We
lose all moral authority to talk about human rights anyplace in the
world if we refuse to speak up on it in a place because there are some
trade deals involved. Our ideals and our deals are important. We cannot
ignore our ideals.
So let us hope that when the President and the administration boast
of having a consensus for their trade policy with China, which they do
boast, that they will now also recognize the vote in Congress; as the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) indicated, 99 to nothing in the
Senate, and congratulations to them in the other body, and hopefully we
will have a unanimous vote in this House of Representatives. When we
do, we will be sending a very clear message to the Chinese regime that
we know what is going on there.
My colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) very
generously named many of the prisoners there. They say, Mr. Speaker,
the most excruciating form of torture to a prisoner of conscience is to
tell him or her that nobody in the world knows that they are there or
cares that they are there.
Today this Congress has the opportunity to say, we know you are
there, we salute your fight for freedom, we want to associate ourselves
with your aspirations, we want to live up to the legacy of our Founding
Fathers, and we are not going to be a prisoner, ourselves, of any trade
relationship; one, of course, that does not even advantage us. Because
what would it profit a country if it gained the whole world in terms of
money, but suffered the loss of its soul?
Today we have an opportunity, because of the leadership of the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Gilman), the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), and the
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson) to make our message a very
clear one, and urge the administration, in the strongest possible vote,
to support and take the lead on the resolution in Geneva.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank the gentlewoman from California
for her supporting remarks. As the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) indicated earlier, she has been a long-term fighter for human
rights around the world, and particularly in China. We are grateful for
her strong advocacy of this measure.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), a member of our committee.
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time
to me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Concurrent Resolution
28. This resolution is right on a number of counts. It is right
philosophically, it is right practically, it is right in terms of
trying to get the American people to think about the defense and
technology policies that bind us to the People's Republic of China.
First of all, in terms of the principle of House Concurrent
Resolution 28, the principle is that we are asking the United States,
and I commend the chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman)
for the strong leadership he has always had, and my good friends on the
other side of the aisle, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos),
the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi) and others who have long fought the battle that
human rights and democracy should mean more to the people of the United
States than just platitudes on the Fourth of July.
The fact is that human rights and democracy are the foundation of
what makes us, as Americans, different from people elsewhere in the
world. The United States of America, unlike other countries, is not
composed of a single religion or a single culture or a single ethnic
group. We are people who are made up of various races and various
religions. The one thing that binds us together is a love of liberty
and justice, and a sense of human decency and honor that is not found
as the basis of other societies.
This is the glue that ties together the United States of America.
When that glue is in some way loosened, or in some way becomes
unaffixed, it is a threat, it is a dire threat, not only to ourselves
but to people around the world that depend so dearly on the commitment
of our country to the founding principles.
In fact, the United States of America, without our commitment to
human freedom and democracy, there is no freedom and democracy anywhere
in the world that is not threatened by our own lack of commitment.
Today this resolution underscores that. It insists that even though
in other countries, for pragmatic reasons, they may be afraid of what
is going on in China, afraid to make the Communist Chinese regime in
Beijing mad at them, they are not willing to vocalize those concerns
about human rights abuses that are going on in the mainland of China,
this resolution insists that the United States take the principled
stand in these international bodies and officially oppose the
degeneration of the human rights situation in Communist China.
I know it has already been stated, but on February 26 the State
Department issued its human rights report and found that over the last
year, in terms of human rights, China's record has ``sharply
deteriorated.'' This is unfortunate, because the policies of the United
States have not kept pace with the deterioration of human rights that
is going on in China. At least this resolution will put us, in
principle, where we should be in terms of this vital issue.
There is a symmetry in this world. If we are not right on the issues
of human rights and democracy, if we base our principles on something
other than those principles that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson
laid out, no matter how imperfect we were in those days, and how we
have struggled to overcome our imperfections over these many decades
and into this century, those principles hold firm, and trying to use
those principles as a guiding light has served our country well, and
has served the world well.
[[Page H1044]]
One note. If it was not for the commitment of the people of the
United States to democracy and freedom, the Nazis and the Japanese
militarists would undoubtedly dominate this planet at this time.
Undoubtedly the millions of people who died under the genocide of the
Nazis, there would be millions more people who would have died under
the genocide of communists and Nazis and other dictatorships.
So it was our commitment, it was the Saving Private Ryan generation,
that not only saved Private Ryan but saved the world and provided us,
provided us with a message. It is now our job. They have done their
duty. We must do ours. So this goes a long way in establishing that
principle.
But there are practical issues when we set this principle down.
Although this is not dealt with specifically in this resolution, I will
mention them only in passing. We must, when setting down this
principle, that human rights counts, democracy counts, and that if a
country is the world's worst human rights abuser and is expanding its
military power, that that is a concern for us; that we must then look
at our policies and say, is it indeed right that we treat the People's
Republic of China, the world's worst human rights abuser, in the same
way that we treat Belgium or Italy or other democratic countries?
This is a national debate that we need to have. We need to know what
we should do in situations like this. Congress does not have all the
answers, but we do know that in the last 10 years, as the human rights
situation in China has continued to decline, as there has been more and
more repression, as there has been genocide, genocide in Tibet and
murders in the Muslim areas in the far reaches of China, as well as the
repression of people of religion in China, we have not changed our
trade policies or some of our other policies to deal with this.
We condemn those policies or actions today, but we need to have a
discussion, an honest and open discussion of what our trade policies
should be. As it is, our trade policy has provided the Communist
Chinese regime with billions of dollars worth of surplus which they are
using to upgrade their military capabilities and to increase the
control over their own people.
By the way, this trade policy is done at the expense of our own
people. Quite often we are subsidizing the investment of manufacturing
units in China which are then used to manufacture goods to put our own
people out of work. This may be a policy that we might not want to have
with a democratic country; but to a dictatorship, for a country that is
the world's worst human rights abuser, to a country that is expanding
its military power, I do not think so.
{time} 1415
Finally, we have to confront the issue as has become more evident
this weekend when, finally, word leaked out about the technology
transfers, the awesome technology transfers that have taken place over
these last few decades.
The Communist Chinese, not only have been able to obtain military
technology, sophisticated military technology, but they have obtained
technology that will permit them to produce weapons of mass destruction
that put in jeopardy the lives of millions of Americans.
Then we hear about American companies trying to keep down the cost of
putting in satellites by increasing the reliability and the efficiency
of Communist Chinese rockets to deliver those very same weapons of mass
destruction possibly to the United States if we are ever in a
confrontation.
These are items that can no longer be ignored. These are things that
should be on our agenda to discuss as a free and democratic people, a
people of goodwill on both sides of the aisle.
Today we express our concern for the principle, for the underlying
principle of human rights and democracy. We express this to reconfirm
our commitment to what George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and our
Founding Fathers talked about. But we should also reaffirm it as the
foundation of practical policy.
So today, as I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 28, I would also call
on my colleagues to begin a debate, a sincere debate on how this
positive stand for human rights should be interpreted in our trade and
technology and defense policies that guide our country.
I thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman Gilman) and for the
leadership he has provided, the leadership that the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos) has provided on human rights throughout the
years.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 3 minutes the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), my friend and colleague.
(Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate my
words with those stated by the gentleman from New York (Chairman
Gilman) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), and the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking member. Let me
acknowledge again the very dedicated, committed, and consistent voice
that the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) has been on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a little repentance and a question as
well, because I think, if the American people understand why we are
here on the floor of the House, there may be a wave of support for
having this resolution under our name in the United Nations, this
resolution to condemn the human rights abuses in China.
I say that because, as the weekend approaches, whether it is Friday
evening, whether, for Muslims, it is throughout the week at different
times, whether it is a Sabbath Saturday or a Sabbath Sunday, we are
unfettered by our ability to worship our God or our beliefs or express
those beliefs.
If there are those that would interfere with religious beliefs, we
can be assured that we have access to grievance and to a response. How
would we like to have a country, a Nation that we live in that
continues to turn up its nose on the issue of mere, simple and obvious
rights for their people?
China has continued to do this in a very arrogant manner, to the
extent that when Denmark offered to have this resolution presented to
denounce their human rights, they indicated that they would be crushed.
Where are our principles? Yes, I believe in trade. In fact, I have
been convinced on one or two occasions that China should be
constructively engaged. So my repentance is such that I have offered
them an olive branch. I have said, ``If we engage with you, will you
understand that Tiananmen Square meant something to Americans, that the
Dalai Lama means something to Americans? The Dalai Lama means something
to us. The people of Tibet need to be able to respect and acknowledge
their leader. Forced abortions mean something to us.''
So I think it is more than appropriate for a nation who has, time
after time, received from Republican administrations and Democratic
administrations the push for Most Favored Nation, of which it seems
that we have not benefited. My own city of Houston has just recently
returned officials from a trade mission because we are looking to
engage.
Now I believe, Mr. Speaker, is the time that we follow the other body
and unanimously engage with China and have this motion before the
United Nations, using every ounce of strength that the United States
has. We will not tolerate the human rights abuse. We will stand up and
be counted for all of the tragedies and the incarcerated persons and
the elimination of religious freedom. Now is the time.
Let me say on the floor of the House, I have repented. It is a time
now to address the question of human rights abuse for China to hear us
loudly and clearly before we go one step of the way.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 28, which urges
the introduction and passage of a resolution on the human rights
situation in the People's Republic of China at the United Nations
Commission on Human Rights.
I know that physically the United States can do very little to
relieve the suffering of people in other nations at the hands of their
own governments. However, we as members of this representative body on
the behalf of the American people and those without voices can advocate
our concerns regarding human rights policies which are inconsistent
with our own interest and values.
In its annual report on human rights, the State Department stated
that the human rights
[[Page H1045]]
situation in China has continued to ``deteriorate sharply.'' The
government in Beijing continues to commit ``widespread and well
documented human rights abuses.''
Despite China's recognition and signature on two United Nations human
rights treaties, China's government continues to commit widespread
violations of internationally recognized standards. These violations
include torturing prisoners, forcing confessions, restricting non-
governmental political and social organizations, and restricting the
press.
The Chinese government has continued its repression of religious
freedom outside of the official Chinese church. This religious
crackdown has manifested itself in Tibet, with the continued
denunciation of the Dalai Lama. Tibet continues to see an increase in
the number of political arrests and the Chinese suppression of peaceful
protests.
With these human rights abuses in mind this body must and should
encourage the Administration to support and make all efforts necessary
to pass a resolution at the annual meeting of the United Nations
Commission on Human Rights criticizing the People's Republic of China
for its human rights abuses in China and Tibet.
In the past the Government of China has made some modest improvements
in human rights just before the annual Human Rights Commission
consideration of a China resolution. For example, we know that
conditions for political prisoners improve when the resolution is being
debated and they deteriorate when the resolve of the United States
weakens.
China in the past has shown a willingness to respond to the concerns
of the United States regarding human rights, and I believe that this
resolution will prompt the attention of the Chinese government.
The Senate has already signaled its frustration and displeasure with
the Chinese government's human rights record by passing a similar
resolution to the one now being debated by a unanimous vote. Therefore,
Mr. Speaker, I strongly encourage my colleagues to support House
Concurrent Resolution 28.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Jackson-Lee) for her very powerful and eloquent statement.
Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield as much time as he might consume
to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), my friend, who has been a
champion of all human rights causes globally and will now speak on the
issue of China.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) very much for yielding me this time, and I appreciate the fact
that he is perhaps the conscience of this Congress in terms of human
rights. We thank him very much for his work, and we applaud the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) for his leadership as well.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution which
addresses the horrendous record that China has on human rights, both
within their own borders and within Tibet as well.
Under the 50 years of the Chinese occupation, the Tibetan people have
been denied most rights guaranteed in the universal declaration of
human rights, including the rights to self-determination, freedom of
speech, assembly, movement, expression, and travel.
In the 20 years after the 1959 Tibetan uprising, 1.2 million or 20
percent of Tibet's population was killed. Today the Chinese are further
undermining Tibet with a massive influx of ethnic Chinese into Tibet.
In some areas, Chinese outnumber Tibetans by two or three to one. With
this influx, the Chinese are controlling the cultural, economic, and
religious life as well as the political and military structure in
Tibet.
Religious repression is one of the cruelest aspects of the Chinese
regime in Tibet. Over 6,000 monasteries and sacred places have been
destroyed by the Chinese who are making a concerted effort to wipe
Tibetan Buddhism off the face of the Earth.
Interestingly, and one of the reasons I became involved in this
issue, is that the horrendous human rights record in China struck home
to the people of the State of Vermont, and specifically the people of
Middlebury College Community when the Fulbright scholar and former
Middlebury College student Ngawang Choephel was seized by the Chinese
authorities in 1995 for the crime of doing videotaping in Tibet.
He was charged for this horrendous crime of using a videotape to
record the culture of Tibet. He was charged with espionage, and the
result is that he was tried in secret. No evidence has ever been made
public to support the charges of espionage, which most of us think is
absolute nonsense.
Ngawang Choephel was sentenced to 18 years in jail for videotaping
cultural activities in Tibet. His frail elderly mother, Sonam Dekyi,
who I had the privilege of meeting in Middlebury, Vermont, is spending
all of her energy, not only trying to get her son out of jail, but
trying to visit him, to see what is going on, and she has up to this
point not been successful.
In July of last year, Ngawang Choephel was transferred to Puatromo
Prison, which is a high security facility in a remote isolated area.
Unlike other prisons, inmates are denied visitation rights. This is a
brutal treatment for an innocent young man. Yet it is treatment of
Tibetans, and worse occurs regularly under the Communist Chinese rule.
My friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), chairman of the
Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, recognizes
the plight of Ngawang Choephel and was kind enough to insert an
amendment into the resolution specifically citing Choephel's unjust
imprisonment as an example of China's violation of basic human rights.
I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) as well as the
gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. McKinney) who is the ranking member, for
their attention to the plight of this young man. I would also like to
thank the committee chairman, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman)
and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson) the ranking member,
for their commitment for human rights and for bringing this resolution
forward.
I would simply conclude, Mr. Speaker, by saying that, as the
gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher) mentioned a moment ago, I
think, as important as this action is, we have got to go further and
ask ourselves why we continue to provide Most Favored Nation status to
China, why we continue to sit back while major corporation after major
corporation throws American workers out on the street, runs to China
where people are paid 20 cents and hour and have no basic democratic
rights.
So I think that whole issue of trade and responsibility of an element
of corporate America to perpetuate and strengthen the regime in Peking
has got to be addressed as well.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, how much time do we have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kingston). The gentleman from California
(Mr. Lantos) has 30 seconds.
Without objection, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) will
control the time allotted to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman).
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith)
has 4\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that we
have 6 additional minutes equally divided between us.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
California (Mr. Lantos).
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), one of the most
effective and successful champions of human rights in this body.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very good friend, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Lantos) for yielding me this time. I want to thank
also the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Smith) for his graciously
asking for additional time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 28 and urge my
colleagues to do the same. We must make it clear to the government of
China that it will not be business as usual with the United States if
they continue to abuse their own citizens. Some of us frankly have been
voting that way consistently on MFN.
The government of China rhetorically recognizes the universal
declaration of human rights and, indeed, its own constitution and laws
provide for fundamental rights. That is, of course, on paper.
Obviously, and tragically, these laws are honored more in the breach
than in the practice. In fact, according to the recently released State
[[Page H1046]]
Department Country Report on Human Rights Practices in China, the
situation has substantially deteriorated since President Clinton's
visit in July of last year.
Beginning in the fall, dozens of political activists were arrested
for attempts to register a political party and engage in other
political activities which we believe to be fundamental to the rights
of individuals.
Over 30 members and supporters of the China Democracy Party were
detained, and three of its leaders were sentenced to lengthy jail terms
in closed trials that flagrantly violated due process.
The State Department report also reveals that the government of China
continues to commit widespread and well-documented human rights abuses,
including extrajudicial killings, torture, and mistreatment of
prisoners, forced concessions, and arbitrary arrests and detention.
At a minimum, Mr. Speaker, our government should take the steps
called for by H. Con. Res. 28 and formally rebuke the government of
China before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
Mr. Speaker, the Statute of Liberty stands at the gateway of America
and says, ``Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning
to breath free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, send these,
the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me.'' Millions have come seeking
freedom, seeking justice, seeking fundamental human rights.
{time} 1430
Mr. Speaker, we know that America cannot take all of the homeless,
all of those tossed by tempest within our borders. But what we can do,
and what we must do, as the leader not just of the free world but as
the leader of the world committed fundamentally to human rights, we
need to speak up, speak out, and act upon our principles, and make it
clear to the rest of the world that we will not do business as usual
with those who undermine human rights in this world.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I
urge strong support of this resolution.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
(Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Speaker, I am very proud to be a cosponsor
of H. Con. Res. 28, the Gilman-Gephardt resolution which urges the
United States to sponsor a human rights resolution regarding Chinese
violations at the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva and, equally
important, to work vigorously for the resolution, not just to introduce
it, but to work very hard with other member states to secure its
passage.
Mr. Speaker, on January 8, the Committee on International Relations
held a hearing on the ongoing and very deplorable state of human rights
in China today. Each of our witnesses was a prisoner of conscience who
had recently managed to get out of China. All of them called for the
United States to be far more forceful in responding to the human rights
violations in China than we had been in recent years. The following
week we heard from human rights organizations, and each and every one
of them agreed that our policy of constructive engagement has been a
failure.
I would remind my colleagues that last year, and the year before, and
the year before that, and even when the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) was chairman of the subcommittee that I now chair, we held
hearing after hearing--matter of fact, in the last 4 years alone, about
a dozen hearings--on the deplorable state of human rights in China. We
heard from Harry Wu, that great leader who spent years in the laogai,
who got out and actually went back to try to bear witness to the
ongoing oppression that comes the way of religious and political
prisoners in China.
We heard from Wei Jingsheng, and many other political prisoners, who
had been tortured, who had suffered unspeakable atrocities, both
psychological and physical. And they said that we need to know the true
nature of this regime; that it is oppressive.
We have heard about Tibet, and we heard from the representatives of
the Dalai Lama. Richard Gere came to one of our hearings on refugees
and spoke very eloquently about how the Buddist nuns and priests are
routinely tortured.
I will never forget when we heard from survivors of the laogai, the
gulag system. Six of them came before us: Catherine Ho, Palden Gyatso,
and many others. Palden Gyatso, a Buddhist monk, came in with some of
the implements routinely used to torture people. He could not even get
through security downstairs in the Rayburn Building. We had to escort
him through. And he told of the agony that is routinely visited upon
these individuals.
We heard from Mrs. Gao, a woman who used to run a forced abortion,
forced sterilization program in Fujian Province. She got out, with the
assistance of Harry Wu, and she told story after story about how women
as late as in the ninth month of their pregnancy would be forcibly
aborted.
We heard from women who had escaped on the Golden Venture at another
hearing, and how one woman, when 6 months into her pregnancy, was
forcibly aborted by the dictatorship, to comply with the one child per
couple policy.
We heard from another woman who found a baby girl who had been
abandoned, because very often girls are abandoned in China, when
couples are only allowed one child. She scooped up that child, like the
good samaritan that she was, only to have the family planning cadres
come knocking at her door to say that now that she had her one child,
she must be forcibly aborted and she needed to be sterilized.
These are the every day realities of what goes on in the People's
Republic of China: Religious persecution of the house church movement
and the Catholic church. All of them suffer unbelievable cruelty at the
hands of the Chinese dictatorship.
Amnesty International recently issued a report card, and they made it
known at our hearing on China. They listed a number of concrete
benchmarks and said let us look at these areas and determine whether or
not constructive engagement has indeed borne any fruit. In each one of
those categories, they found total failure.
For example, they spoke of the release of the Tiananmen Square
prisoners and other prisoners of conscience. Their verdict: Total
failure.
Review all counterrevolutionary prison terms. Bottom line, total
failure.
Allow religious freedom. Their bottom line: Continued strong
repression.
Prevent coercive family planning and the harvesting of organs: They
said, no improvement.
Amnesty then went on to speak of the implementation of the so-called
the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Chinese
government milked for all it was worth. They have not even implemented
it yet, as we all know. They signed it and got all these accolades in
the west, including the United States, with perhaps no intention of
following through on the rights that were enumerated in there.
Let us be mindful of this flimflam game they play. They sign a scrap
of paper here, an important treaty there, and then they do not follow
through, and there is no implementation.
Also, Amnesty International raised the issue of police and prison
brutality. We know--and the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
clearly documents this, as do report after report from the human rights
community--that torture is routinely used against dissidents and
prisoners of conscience and religious individuals. Routinely.
Mr. Speaker, the resolution that is before us today urges the
administration to do the very least it can do to try to rectify this
egregious situation. Indeed, in 1994, when President Clinton delinked
human rights from Most Favored Nation status for China, an annual
resolution at Geneva was going to be, by his own reckoning, the
centerpiece of what he would do to try to thwart the human rights
violations in that country.
As of today, the administration apparently still has not decided
whether or not it will proceed with a resolution this year. The Human
Rights Commission begins on March 22. And as we all know, the other
body has already gone on record unanimously--my hope is we will as
well--saying bring this resolution to Geneva, let us vote on it and,
hopefully, let us prevail.
[[Page H1047]]
Mr. Speaker, the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human
Rights of the Committee on International Relations, which I chair, did
add the amendment of the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), at his
request. And let me say there are many others that could be added as
well. But that just underscores the extent of the Chinese government's
barbaric behavior.
Last week, for example, 10 Uighur political and religious prisoners
were executed. We have heard from people who have talked about the
Uighur minority and how they are discriminated against. Everywhere we
look, the Tibetans, the Han Chinese themselves, and the Uighurs are all
singled out whenever they have a different religion, because,
obviously, China is an atheistic state, and those believers do not
conform to the very, very carefully circumscribed limits of the
officially recognized churches. Step across that line, and the full
weight of the Chinese dictatorship will be brought to bear against you.
Just so all Americans understand, one individual was given an 11-year
prison sentence for giving an interview, an interview, to Radio Free
Asia. He talked to the press. And for that he was yanked by the
dictatorship, by their cronies, and thrown into prison. He is now
serving an 11 year prison sentence.
This barbaric behavior has to stop. The minimum we should do is to
try to raise the issue rhetorically at the U.N. Human Rights
Convention. Not to do that would be an outrage. I hope the Clinton
administration will hear us, and I urge support for this resolution.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 28, a
resolution urging the United States to cosponsor a resolution
condemning China's human rights record at the United Nations Commission
on Human Rights. I commend Chairman Gilman for introducing this
resolution and moving it through the committee so quickly. A similar
resolution passed the Senate by a vote of 99-0. That should set an
example for this body. I hope H. Con. Res. 28 will pass the House
unanimously today.
The United Nations Human Rights Commission is the forum within the
United Nations system established for the express purpose of examining
and voicing concern about the human rights practices of member
countries. Its resolutions are not binding in any way, but they do have
the effect of raising awareness and holding countries accountable to
their international human rights commitments. China, as a member of the
United Nations, has agreed to the Universal Declaration on Human
Rights. It has also signed the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, a treaty-like document which obliges it to uphold
certain basic freedoms of its citizens. Among these are the freedom
from arbitrary arrest and detention; freedom of thought, conscience and
religion; freedom from torture; freedom of expression; freedom of
peaceful assembly, and the right to fair and speedy trial.
It agreed to sign this covenant last year at this time and doing so
enabled China to avoid criticism at the 1998 Commission. The Clinton
administration cited China's willingness to sign the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as the reason why it did not go
forward with a resolution in 1998.
Mr. Speaker, this year there is no excuse. China's human rights
record is as bad as ever.
Since July 1998, the Chinese government has arrested over 100
prominent democracy activists, giving many long prison sentences in
unfair trials. Their crime was expressing their views--acting on their
conscience. An intense crackdown earlier this year coincided with the
start of talks between U.S. and Chinese officials in a so-called--and
much touted--``human rights dialogue.'' The crackdown was a message--we
are willing to talk about human rights but we know we don't have to
take any action. Thousands of political prisoners remain in jail.
Religious believers in China have continued to suffer persecution.
Catholic bishops and priests continue to be jailed and tortured. The
Vatican reported earlier this year that Chinese authorities tortured a
31-year-old priest by subjecting him to physical and psychological
pressure. They brought in prostitutes to tempt him and then video-taped
his ordeal as a way to break his spirit.
Protestant house church leaders are on the run, fearful for their
lives and freedom. Reports indicate that almost all the leaders of
China's largest house churches--the name given to the vast network of
underground churches--are forced to move from place to place to avoid
arrest.
Though persecution of house churches varies from region to region, it
is Chinese government policy to crack down on China's underground
churches. A number of documents smuggled out of China in recent years
have revealed the local communist party's plans to eradicate the
underground church. For example, such a document revealed last year
that in July 1998, municipal authorities in Hua Shen complained to
their superiors about the activities of an ``illegal missionary'' whose
preaching has begun to attract more and more followers. ``He has been
arrested and educated many times, and yet his heart has not died and
his nature has not changed'' party officials report. His religious
gatherings draw people from neighboring towns--sometimes as many as
1,000 at a time--and has ``become the largest illegal religious group *
* * It has created an interference effect,'' the report says. It calls
on all local municipal units to coordinate their activities in order to
``effectively crack down illegal religious activities and create
favorable conditions for the stability and development of our town.''
That is not religious freedom, Mr. Speaker. This is religious
persecution.
In Tibet where the Buddhist religion is a deep part of the culture,
the communist party has begun a campaign to encourage Tibetan Buddhists
to become atheists. This is only the latest anti-religion campaign
waged by the PRC against the Tibetan Buddhists.
The Chinese Government has closed monasteries and nunneries and
expelled monks and nuns. Since 1996, some 9,977 monks and nuns have
been expelled from their monasteries--7,000 in 1998 alone. A reported
492 monks and nuns have been arrested since May, 1996--135 in 1998. Of
these, 13 died in prison from torture. Many others were released just
before they died. Torture is rampant in Tibetan prisons. Hundreds of
Tibetans continue to flee across the treacherous Himalayan Mountains to
reach freedom in Nepal and India. Some even send their children--
fearing there is no future left for them in Tibet.
Amnesty International reported that a group of young Uighurs were
sentenced to death recently on political charges. Uighurs are Muslim
people living in the Northwest province of Xinjiang. They have reported
severe persecution, the closing of mosques, and overall discrimination
against their population by the Chinese Government. It has also been
reported that Chinese nuclear weapons are tested in areas populated by
Uighurs--leading to birth defects and other problems.
But, Mr. Speaker, despite all these facts, the Clinton administration
sits on their hands when it comes to exerting multi-lateral diplomatic
effort to end China's human rights abuses. We dilly-dally and postpone
our decision about sponsoring a resolution at the U.N. Human Rights
Commission, making it almost inevitable that any such resolution will
be defeated.
China is not sitting on its hands. It is probably already lobbying
its friends hard against such a resolution. Human Rights Watch
documented China's efforts to defeat a resolution in 1997--by dangling
millions of dollars worth of contracts in front of governments willing
to vote with them.
But the Clinton administration is not even willing to exert
diplomatic leadership to generate support for a resolution of
condemnation.
This is not leadership and it does illustrate a commitment to human
rights on the part of U.S. Government.
We talk tough, then appease the PRC. We look the other way while
China steals American technology to enhance its military capability and
then appease the PRC by giving Chinese leaders state and high-level
visits to the United States. We say we care about human rights, but we
don't use multi-lateral frameworks to advance them.
Our policy is a failure.
I hope my colleagues will support H. Con. Res. 28 and I hope the
administration will not let China off the hook in Geneva.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in strong support of H.
Con. Res. 28, expressing the sense of the Congress that the United
States should introduce and seek to secure passage of a resolution
criticizing Chinese human rights abuses at the annual meeting of the
United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
There is no question that the recent actions by the Chinese
authorities to criminalize the activities of individuals seeking to
organize a new political party are in direct contradiction to China's
stated commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its
signature last year of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. The prosecution of some Chinese citizens for their
contacts with foreign individuals and their alleged passing of ``state
secrets'' in some instances also appear to be serious breaches of
China's obligation to respect universally recognized human rights
standards. Such efforts to control freedom of expression are deeply
disturbing, and reflect a government that is unsure about its
legitimacy.
Mr. Speaker, China's internal situation clearly remains a complex
mixture of positive and negative developments. The resolution correctly
refers to other areas of ongoing concern
[[Page H1048]]
with respect to China's human rights performance, including family
planning practices, the situation in Tibet, freedom of religion and the
penal system. At the same time, this Member believes it is important
not to lose sight of some of the progress being achieved, for example,
in the area of multi-candidate elections at the village level in
certain regions and in the continued trend toward increased personal
freedom of Chinese citizens to pursue their economic betterment.
While not discounting improvements where they are discernible, this
Member also believes that when China takes steps that are clearly
retrograde in the area of human rights, the Administration must condemn
such actions forthrightly, both bilaterally and in appropriate
multilateral settings. The Administration's decision not to introduce a
resolution on human rights in China at the 1998 meeting of the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights was a serious error, and was
correctly criticized at the time by a number of Members of this body.
This Member welcomes the clear statements by the Secretary of State
during her visit to China last week. The Administration must now
reverse the mistake it made last year in Geneva by introducing and
advocating strongly for a resolution critical of China's human rights
violations.
Mr. Speaker, this Member urges all of his colleagues to support H.
Con. Res. 28.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kingston). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, House
Concurrent Resolution 28, as amended.
The question was taken.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________