[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 77 (Wednesday, May 26, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1097]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  BEIJING'S BRINKMANSHIP IS DANGEROUS

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 26, 1999

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, in April, during Chinese Premier Zhu 
Rongji's visit to Washington, and after thirteen years of off-and-on 
again negotiations, China finally agreed to the kind of comprehensive 
trade concessions necessary to gain U.S. support for Beijing's entry 
into the World Trade Organization. For what this Member believes were 
political reasons, President Clinton did not accept Premier Zhu's offer 
despite the offer appearing to meet the commercially-viable standard we 
set for acceptance. That was a mistake. China's accession to the WTO in 
the context of a commercially-viable agreement is in the short, medium 
and long-term national interest of the United States.
  Since Premier Zhu returned home to Beijing, Sino-American relations 
have worsened, particularly following our accidental bombing of the 
Chinese embassy in Belgrade. China should be careful, though, and 
temper its growing overreaction to this unfortunate incident as 
overplaying its hand could jeopardize China's WTO accession and China's 
relations with the foreign investors it needs to attract for further 
economic growth. Such developments would certainly not be in the 
national interests of either China or the United States. Mr. Speaker, 
it is in this context that this Member recommends to his colleagues the 
following editorial from the May 24, 1999, edition of Business Week.

                   Beijing Is Playing a Perilous Game

       China's anti-U.S. rage over the accidental bombing of its 
     embassy in Belgrade should be a sobering moment for the 
     American business community. Despite decades of economic and 
     social change, China is still governed by an authoritarian 
     regime fully capable of wielding all the tools of a 
     dictatorship. The markets may be more open and people may be 
     freer to travel, but Beijing is still able to control the 
     media and cynically manipulate the truth to whip people into 
     a nationalistic anti-American frenzy. By treating the U.S. as 
     an enemy, China's leaders run the risk of turning America 
     into just that.
       This kind of brinkmanship was last seen when China lobbed 
     missiles over Taiwan to protest its president's visit to the 
     U.S. A pattern of repeated quick-to-anger behavior could 
     begin to raise the political risk factor for foreign 
     corporations investing in China. It may already have put 
     China's entry into the World Trade Organization in jeopardy.
       Washington's own blunders haven't helped. After years of 
     boasting about smart bombs, the U.S. must now explain how it 
     accidentally bombed China's clearly marked embassy. This 
     disaster follows hard on the heels of President Clinton's 
     humiliation of reform-minded Premier Zhu Rongji. Clinton made 
     a huge mistake when he rejected a generous offer to U.S. 
     business in exchange for Beijing's entry into the WTO. Zhu 
     went over the heads of conservatives in state companies, the 
     bureaucracy, and the military to make the deal. But Clinton 
     sent him home empty-handed. The organized demonstrations are 
     part of an effort by these conservatives to roll back Zhu's 
     economic concessions. They might also reflect Zhu's own anger 
     at Clinton.
       Unfortunately, the intense wave of anti-Americanism may 
     change China's investment climate for years to come. U.S. and 
     European corporations must now include in their financial 
     calculations the possibility of Beijing lashing out against 
     foreigners whenever international disputes arise. This higher 
     political risk compounds a basic business problem: Most 
     investments in China have yet to turn a profit.
       For Americans who believe that China was quickly moving 
     toward a market-driven democracy, recent events should signal 
     a new caution. Clearly, the seeds of a civil society run 
     according to law have been planted in China. The country is 
     far more open today than 20 years ago. But it took Taiwan and 
     Korea nearly 50 years to evolve into democracies. It may take 
     China that long as well. Or China could become a far more 
     threatening country. The point is, no one knows.
       The long-term goal of U.S. policy should continue to be the 
     peaceful integration of China into the global economy. If Zhu 
     can still deliver on the WTO deal, Washington should sign it. 
     And certainly, Washington owes China a full and detailed 
     explanation of the bombing error. It is also incumbent upon 
     the U.S. to clarify its policy of humanitarian 
     interventionism. Is the U.S. the defender of last resort for 
     every minority anywhere in the world? Is it willing to 
     sacrifice good relations with Russia and China, both of whom 
     have restive minorities, for a foreign policy of unfettered 
     global moralism?
       China, for its part, should realize that virulent 
     nationalism can only lead down a historic dead end of 
     isolation and international conflict. Its willingness to go 
     to the brink time and again with the U.S. rules out the very 
     kind of normal relations with other nations that it claims to 
     seek.

     

                          ____________________