Congressional Record, Volume 150 Issue 97 (Wednesday, July 14, 2004)

[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 97 (Wednesday, July 14, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H5757-H5761]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

REAFFIRMING UNWAVERING COMMITMENT TO TAIWAN RELATIONS ACT

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 462) reaffirming
unwavering commitment to the Taiwan Relations Act, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:

H. Con. Res. 462

Whereas April 10, 2004, marked the 25th anniversary of the
enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 3301 et
seq.), codifying in law the basis for continued commercial,
cultural, and other relations between the United States and
Taiwan;
Whereas it is and will continue to be United States policy
to further encourage and expand these extensive commercial,
cultural, and other relations between the people of the
United States and the people of Taiwan during the next
quarter century;
Whereas since its enactment in 1979 the Taiwan Relations
Act has been instrumental in maintaining peace, security, and
stability in the Taiwan Strait;
Whereas when the Taiwan Relations Act was enacted, it
affirmed that the decision of the United States to establish
diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China was
based on the expectation that the future of Taiwan would be
determined by peaceful means;
Whereas the Government of the People's Republic of China
refuses to renounce the use of force against Taiwan;
Whereas the Department of Defense report entitled ``Annual
Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of
China,'' dated July 30, 2003, documents that the Government
of the People's Republic of China is seeking coercive
military options to resolve the Taiwan issue and, as of the
date of the report, has deployed approximately 450 short-
range ballistic missiles against Taiwan and is adding 75
missiles per year to this arsenal;
Whereas the escalating arms buildup of missiles and other
offensive weapons by the People's Republic of China in areas
adjacent to the Taiwan Strait is a threat to the peace and
security of the Western Pacific area;
Whereas section 3 of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C.
3302) requires that the United States Government will make
available defense articles and defense services in such
quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a
sufficient self-defense capability;
Whereas the Taiwan Relations Act requires the United States
to maintain the capacity to resist any resort to force or
other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security,
or the social or economic system, of the people of Taiwan;
Whereas the Taiwan Relations Act affirms the preservation
and enhancement of the human rights of the people of Taiwan
as an objective of the United States;
Whereas Taiwan serves as a model of democratic reform for
the People's Republic of China;
Whereas Taiwan's 1996 election was the first time in five
millennia of recorded Chinese history that a democratically
elected president took office;
Whereas Taiwan's democracy has deepened with a peaceful
transfer of power from one political party to another after
the presidential election of 2000;
Whereas the relationship between the United States and
Taiwan has deepened with Taiwan's evolution into a full-
fledged, multi-party democracy that respects human rights and
civil liberties;
Whereas high-level visits between government officials of
the United States and Taiwan are not inconsistent with the
``one China policy''; and
Whereas any attempt to determine Taiwan's future by other
than peaceful means and other than with the express consent
of the people of Taiwan would be considered of grave concern
to the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That--
(1) Congress reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the
Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.) as the
cornerstone of United States relations with Taiwan;
(2) the military modernization and weapons procurement
program of the People's Republic of China is a matter of
grave concern, and particularly the current deployment of
approximately 500 missiles directed toward Taiwan;
(3) the President should direct all appropriate United
States Government officials to raise these grave concerns
regarding military threats to Taiwan with officials of the
Government of the People's Republic of China;
(4) the President and Congress should determine whether the
escalating arms buildup, including deployment of offensive
weaponry and missiles in areas adjacent to the Taiwan Strait,
requires that additional defense articles and services be
made available to Taiwan, and the United States Government
should encourage the leadership of Taiwan to devote
sufficient financial resources to the defense of their
island;
(5) as recommended by the U.S.-China Economic and Security
Review Commission, the Department of Defense should provide a
comprehensive report on the nature and scope of military
sales by the Russian Federation to the People's Republic of
China to the Committees on International Relations and Armed
Services of the House of Representatives and Committees on
Foreign Relations and Armed Services of the Senate;
(6) the President should encourage further dialogue between
democratic Taiwan and the People's Republic of China; and
(7) the United States Government should not discourage
current officials of the Taiwan Government from visiting the
United States on the basis that doing so would violate the
``one China policy''.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each
will control 20 minutes.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, is either gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. LANTOS. No, Mr. Speaker. I am strongly in support of this
legislation.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I seek time in opposition.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul) will
control 20 minutes in opposition.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my
time be equally divided with the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 462, a
resolution reaffirming the unwavering support of the Congress for the
Taiwan Relations Act. This year marks the 25th anniversary of the
enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act, one of Congress' most important
and enduring pieces of legislation. Over the past quarter century, the
Act has served as the foundation of the United States' relationship
with the people of Taiwan and has ensured the island's security. On
this anniversary, it is fitting and appropriate for the Congress to
review the cross-strait issue and reassess the needs of our friends in
Taiwan.
In contrast to many other pieces of 25-year-old legislation, the
Taiwan Relations Act has exceeded expectations. The Act has allowed the
United States to maintain its close ties with the people of Taiwan
while actively engaging Asia's rising power, the People's Republic of
China, on a myriad of fronts, including human rights. In doing so, the
measure has been important to the maintenance of peace and stability
across the Taiwan Strait and throughout the entire Western Pacific
region.
The Taiwan Relations Act has also played an indirect role in
promoting democracy in Taiwan by providing the conditions of external
security that have allowed the people of Taiwan to focus on internal
reform and democratization.
In the years since Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act in 1979,
Taiwan has developed into a lively and successful democracy, a tribute
to the courage and determination of the island's remarkable people. The
1996 presidential election in Taiwan was the

[[Page H5758]]

first time in China's 5 millennia of recorded history that a fully
democratically elected government assumed office. The election of 2000,
which resulted in a peaceful transfer of power from one political party
to another, evidenced a deepening democratic system. Two months ago,
Taiwan completed its third direct presidential election.
The U.S. has watched this island nation develop into a mature,
robust, vibrant democracy that respects human rights and civil
liberties. Knowledge of our shared values has strengthened the
commitment of Americans to stand by the people of Taiwan.
In contrast to Taiwan, Mr. Speaker, the mainland has failed to
implement meaningful political reform, and the PRC's respect for
fundamental human rights has deteriorated. Furthermore, the People's
Republic of China has adopted a more aggressive military posture
towards Taiwan. Over the past 5 years, the PRC has dramatically
increased its stockpile of weapons. Today, China has approximately 500
missiles aimed at Taiwan, a matter of grave concern to the freedom-
loving people of Taiwan and to all of us here in the United States.
Given China's refusal to renounce the use of force against Taiwan, the
arms buildup is a threat to peace and security in the Taiwan Strait and
to the stability of the entire region.
Changes in cross-strait relations, Mr. Speaker, including
democratization of Taiwan and an arms buildup by the People's Republic
of China, requires that the United States continue to strengthen its
support for the people and the democracy of Taiwan. H. Con. Res. 462
reinforces America's commitment to help Taiwan defend itself from
outside coercion and intimidation. Continuing the tradition established
by the Taiwan Relations Act, H. Con. Res. 462 urges the President and
the Congress to reevaluate the defense needs of Taiwan and encourages
the government of Taiwan to devote sufficient financial resources to
defense of its island.

{time} 2015

The resolution also, Mr. Speaker, encourages greater interaction
between Taiwan and the U.S. with the goal of strengthening democracy on
the island. Visits between the officials of the U.S. and Taiwan are not
inconsistent with the One-China Policy. As such, officials of Taiwan
should not be discouraged from visiting the United States.
Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that increasingly warmer cross-strait
relations will ultimately transcend the need for the Taiwan Relations
Act, and resolutions such as this one would not be needed. In time, the
democracy which Taiwan has cultivated can take further root and
flourish throughout all of China. However, until that day comes,
resolutions such as this one are necessary to clearly promote peace and
security in the region and to ensure continuing democracy in Taiwan.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. PAUL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to start off by saying that I
really do not have a lot of disagreement with what the chairman has to
say, because I certainly think we should be friends with Taiwan. I
believe our goals are very similar. It is just that the approach I have
would be quite different.
I happen to believe that we have ignored for too long in this country
and in this body the foreign policy that was designed by our Founders,
a foreign policy of nonintervention. I think it is better for us. I
think it is healthy in all ways, both financially and in that it keeps
us out of wars, and we are allowed to build friendships with all the
nations of the world. The politics of nonintervention should be given
some serious consideration.
Usually, the argument given me for that is that 200 years ago or 250
years ago things were different. Today we have had to go through the
Cold War and communism; and, therefore, we are a powerful Nation and we
have an empire to protect; and we have this moral obligation to police
the world and take care of everybody.
But, Mr. Speaker, my answer to that is somewhat like the notion that
we no longer have to pay attention to the Ten Commandments or the Bill
of Rights. If principles were correct 200 years ago or 250 years ago,
they should be correct today. So if a policy of friendship and trade
with other nations and nonintervention were good 250 years ago, it
should be good today.
I certainly think the Taiwan Relations Act qualifies as an entangling
alliance, and that is what we have been warned about: ``Do not get
involved in entangling alliances.'' It gets us so involved, we get in
too deep, and then we end up with a military answer to too many of our
problems. I think that is what has happened certainly in the last 50
years.
I essentially have four objections to what we are doing. One is a
moral objection. I will not dwell on the first three and I will not
dwell on this one. But I do not believe one generation of Americans has
a moral right to obligate another generation, because, in many ways,
when we make this commitment, this is not just a friendly commitment;
this is weapons and this is defense.
Most people interpret the Taiwan Relations Act as a commitment for
our troops to go in and protect the Taiwanese if the Chinese would ever
attack. Although it is not explicit in the act, many people interpret
it that way. But I do not believe that we or a generation 25 years ago
has the moral right to obligate another generation to such an
overwhelming commitment, especially if it does not involve an attack on
our national security. Some say that if Taiwan would be attacked, it
would be. But, quite frankly, it is a stretch to say that settling that
dispute over there has something to do with an attack on our national
security.
Economics is another issue. We are running out of money; and these
endless commitments, military commitments and commitments overseas,
cannot go on forever. Our national debt is going up between $600
billion and $700 billion a year, so eventually my arguments will win
out, because we are going to run out of money and this country is going
to go broke. So there is an economic argument against that.
Also, looking for guidance in the Constitution. It is very clear that
the Constitution does not give us this authority to assume
responsibility for everybody, and to assume the entire responsibility
for Taiwan is more than I can read into the Constitution.
But the issue I want to talk about more than those first three is
really the practical approach to what we are doing. I happen to believe
that the policy of the One-China Policy does not make a whole lot of
sense. We want Taiwan to be protected, so we say we have a One-China
Policy, which occurred in 1982. But in order to say we have a One-China
Policy, then we immediately give weapons to Taiwan to defend against
China.
So this, to me, just does not quite add up. If we put arms in Taiwan,
why would we not expect the Chinese to put arms in opposition, because
they are only answering what we are doing? What happened when the
Soviets went to Cuba? They put arms there. We did not like that. What
would happen if the Chinese went into Cuba or Mexico? We are not going
to like that. So I think this part is in conflict with what the
National Relations Act says, because we are seeking a peaceful
resolution of this.
So I would urge my colleagues to be cautious about this. I know this
will be overwhelmingly passed; but, nevertheless, it is these types of
commitments, these types of alliances that we make that commit us to
positions that are hard to back away from. This is why we get into
these hot wars, these shooting wars, when really I do not think it is
necessary.
There is no reason in the world why we cannot have friendship with
China and with Taiwan. But there is something awfully inconsistent with
our One-China Policy, when at the same time we are arming part of China
in order to defend itself. The two just do not coexist.
Self-determination, I truly believe, is worth looking at. Self-
determination is something that we should champion. Therefore, I am on
the strong side of Taiwan in determining what they want by self-
determination. But what do we do? Our administration tells them they
should not have a referendum on whether or not they want to be
independent and have self-determination.

[[Page H5759]]

So in one sense we try to help them; and, in the other sense, we say do
not do it.
I am just arguing that we do not have to desert Taiwan. We can be
very supportive of their efforts, and we can do it in a much more
peaceful way and at least be a lot more consistent.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PAUL. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend for yielding.
I just want to correct the impression the gentleman left with his
observation, which implied that Taiwan is getting economic aid from the
United States.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I will answer that.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have not yet made my point. Taiwan is
getting no economic aid from the United States.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, that is correct. I did not
say that, so the gentleman has implied that; and that is incorrect that
I said it.
I do know that it is a potential military base for us, because when I
was in the Air Force, on more than one occasion I landed on Taiwan. So
they are certainly a close military ally.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this resolution and urge all of my
colleagues to do so as well.
The 25th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act is an exceptional
opportunity to understand the ongoing and growing relevance of this
critically important law and to discuss the future relations between
the United States and Taiwan.
I want to commend my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman
Hyde), and my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Smith),
for introducing this resolution and for highlighting the important
matters pending in the U.S.-Taiwan relationship.
Mr. Speaker, when I first visited Taiwan decades ago, Taiwan's people
were governed by an authoritarian regime which silenced independent
media, threw the political opposition in jail, and refused to live by
internationally recognized human rights.
Today, Taiwan has become a fully developed democracy, complete with
hard-fought elections, tight margins of victory, and a prosperous
economy. This is sort of the American Dream in foreign policy, to look
at totalitarian, dictatorial societies which are destitute and see them
develop into democratic, prosperous nations.
Under the Taiwan Relations Act, Taiwan's GDP has increased ten-fold
between 1979 and today. Two-way trade between Taiwan and the United
States has grown from $7 billion to over $65 billion during this
period. The Taiwan Relations Act has ensured that the United States
provides Taiwan with sufficient military equipment to defend itself.
Our Nation even sent aircraft carriers into the Taiwan Strait to make
it clear that the United States would not abandoned Taiwan to an
uncertain fate.
In short, Mr. Speaker, the Taiwan Relations Act has effectively
provided an institutional framework and a legal basis for a strong
political security and economic relationship between Taiwan and the
United States. It has proven to be an enormously flexible and durable
law which has prevented various administrations from selling out Taiwan
and its people due to pressure from Mainland China.
The 25th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act gives us a chance to
think about new directions in our relationship with Taiwan. We must
redouble our efforts to build closer ties to Taiwan, while at the same
time maintaining a mutually productive relationship with the PRC.
We can have a constructive relationship with Beijing while still
protecting Taiwan's core interests. Beijing must understand that, from
an American perspective, any settlement between China and Taiwan must
be arrived at through peaceful means, without coercion, and with the
full support of the people of Taiwan.
To ensure that the Taiwanese people are not forced into an unwise
deal with Beijing, we must continue to support Taiwan's legitimate
defense needs, and the leadership of Taiwan must devote sufficient
funds to defending their country. To that end, I strongly support the
possible sale of the Aegis system to Taiwan and the expansion of high-
level military and political exchanges between our two nations.
Mr. Speaker, when President Lee Teng-hui wished to give a speech at
his alma mater, Cornell University, it was my great pleasure and
privilege to win passage of a resolution demanding that the Department
of State grant him a visa. We won that battle, and the world kept
spinning.
Mr. Speaker, it was a great pleasure for me to host Taiwan's Vice
President, Annette Lu, during a recent visit to San Francisco. It is my
fondest hope that Congress will have the honor of greeting both
President Chen and Vice President Lu in Washington in the foreseeable
future.
Mr. Speaker, under the umbrella of the Taiwan Relations Act, the
United States and Taiwan have brought democracy to 25 million people,
secured their economic future and protected them from hostile military
threats.

{time} 2030

This, Mr. Speaker, is an amazing achievement. I strongly support this
legislation and urge all of my colleagues to do so as well.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Very briefly, let me mention that this last election was marred by
news revealing that there was an assassination attempt. It has been
very much in the news in question about the authenticity of this
assassination. And, actually, the election itself is believed to be
under a cloud with many people in Taiwan. So to paint too rosy a
picture on that, I am pleased that they are making progress, but it is
not quite as rosy as it has been portrayed here.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms.
McCollum).
Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, the policy of the United States of America
was articulately restated today by the Bush administration, and that
statement is that there is only one China. The one China policy and the
Taiwan Relations Act have resulted in stability and peace between China
and Taiwan for more than a generation. This policy has created security
for our allies, benefited U.S. interests in the region, and allowed for
unprecedented economic growth in the region, improving the lives of
millions of people.
While the Taiwan Relations Act allows for the U.S. to supply military
assistance to Taiwan to defend itself, this resolution ignores a very
important component of the U.S. policy that is critical to this debate.
In light of the rising tensions between China and Taiwan, potentially
dangerous tensions, Taiwan has a responsibility, in fact, the
obligation, not to pursue policies that would unilaterally alter its
current status.
The Taiwan Relations Act is intended to defend Taiwan, but it must
not be considered a blank check to commit U.S. forces to defend any
pursuit of independence by political leaders in Taipei.
I cannot and I will not support an ambiguous resolution that could
one day serve as a premise to commit American sons and daughters to
defend the reckless political actions of Taiwan's leaders. The
presidential elections earlier this year in Taiwan and the controversy
regarding how they were conducted should raise very serious concerns in
this House.
The future of Taiwan's relationship with the U.S. is dependent upon a
peaceful and stable Taiwan Strait. This is clear.
A similar message is absent from this resolution that also must be
sent to Taiwan's leadership. I will oppose this resolution today
because it fails to send a message of prudence and responsible behavior
to both China and Taiwan. That is the foundation of the one China
policy.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to
respond briefly, and I think it needs to be responded to.
The Taiwan Relations Act made it very clear in section 3 that there
is no ambiguity about the policy. It is very

[[Page H5760]]

clear to make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense
services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to
maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.
Nobody in their right mind or in their wildest dreams would ever
conceive of Taiwan attacking the mainland. It is all about a credible
deterrence so that that dialogue between Beijing and Taipei can go
forward, and that is why I think that this law has been so important in
helping to maintain that protective cocoon, if you will, so that this
dialogue again could go forward without an invasion from the People's
Republic of China.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Once again, I want to make the point about the inconsistency of our
policy. In 1979, the Taiwan Relations Act was put in place mainly
because we orchestrated getting them kicked out of the U.N., so we had
to do something, so we passed this act, and we ended official
relations. We do not have ambassadors to Taiwan. That is part of this
absurdity of the one China policy. Yet, at the same time, we feel this
obligation and this commitment to make sure they have these weapons for
defense. I mean, it just does not add up.
All we need is a consistent pattern saying that people have a right
to self-determination and encourage it and get out of the way. Those
people over there in Taiwan right now, they are investing in China. The
natural courses of events will take care of it. We have the South
Koreans wanting to deal with the North Koreans, and we tend to get in
the way; and here we have the Taiwanese who are investing, and they
would like to work some of this out, and too often we get in the way.
Now, the chairman mentioned a phrase in the resolution in defense of
his position, but it is one that I am concerned about. It says, in
section 3, requires the United States Government to make available
defense articles. We do not have any choice. We make an absolute
commitment that we are going to put those weapons there, and we are
looking for trouble. I mean, this is how you start wars, putting
weapons in there.
Once again, what if they did that in Cuba? What did we do when Russia
did it in Cuba? Can we not have any understanding or empathy of what
happens? And what if they did it in Mexico? We would have no part of
it.
So this, to me, just does not make any sense.
And then in the next phrase, I am also concerned about this, and it
restates the position in the Taiwan Relations Act, whereas the Taiwan
Relations Act requires the United States to maintain the capacity to
resist any resort to force.
Now, we have to think about that. Most people interpret that as, we
are on our way, the boys are ready to go. No matter how thinly we are
spread around the world, the capacity is now currently interpreted
that, yes, we would come to their aid, and it sounds like people in
support of this resolution would support that. But that is not the way
this country is supposed to go to war. And this, to me, is a preamble,
if there is a skirmish or a fight over there and it is going to be
bigger because we are there and providing the weapons.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), my distinguished colleague on the
Committee on International Relations.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, and I rise in strong support of this resolution.
We look at Taiwan today and, as the gentleman from California pointed
out before, it is a success story. Taiwan is a democracy. Taiwan has an
economy that is the 16th largest in the world. I come from the premise
that we should be supportive of countries that are supportive of us,
and Taiwan has been a good friend of the United States and has shown
that it is a true democracy.
I had the honor of meeting with President Chen in New York several
months ago, and I have always been a great admirer of a country that
took a system that was autocratic and undemocratic and transformed it
into a very democratic country.
Now the Taiwan Relations Act in 1979 was crafted very delicately
because, yes, we do have a one China policy, but we do not want to
abandon our friends in Taiwan. Therefore, I believe it is the
responsibility of our country to ensure that the people of Taiwan have
the capability not to be overrun by anyone else and to have the
capability to defend themselves.
Now, in the resolution, it says that the Department of Defense
report, our Department of Defense report entitled Annual Report on the
Military Power of the People's Republic of China dated July 30, 2003,
documents, and I am reading, that the government of the People's
Republic of China is seeking coercive military options to resolve the
Taiwan issue and, as of the date of the report, has deployed
approximately 450 short-range ballistic missiles against Taiwan and is
adding 75 missiles per year to this arsenal; whereas the Taiwan
Relations Act requires the U.S. to maintain the capacity to resist any
force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security or
the social or economic system of the people of Taiwan.
This is what the Taiwan Relations Act commits us to do. It is what we
should do. It is right. It is proper. We stand with the people of
Taiwan and their democratic ways, and I am proud to be a part of
reaffirming the unwavering commitment to the Taiwan Relations Act by
the United States Congress.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional requests for time. We
yield back the balance of our time, and I urge all of my colleagues to
support this legislation.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just restate my general position, because my defense is that
of a foreign policy of nonintervention, sincerely believing it is in
the best interests of our people and the world that we get less
involved militaristically.
Once again, I would like to make the point that if it is a true and
correct principle because of its age, it is not negated. If it is a
true principle and worked 200 years ago or 400 years ago, it is still a
principle today; and it should not be discarded.
I would like to just close with quoting from the Founders. First,
very simply, from Jefferson. His advice was, ``Equal and exact justice
to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political;
peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling
alliances with none.''
John Quincy Adams: ``Wherever the standard of freedom and
independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her
benedictions, and her prayers be. But she goes,'' and ``she'' is
referring to us, the United States, ``but she goes not abroad in search
of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and
independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her
own. She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her
voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.''
And our first President. He is well-known for his farewell address,
and in that address he says, ``Harmony, liberal intercourse with all
nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even
our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither
seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the
natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means
the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing.''
Force gets us nowhere. Persuasion is the answer. Peace and commerce
is what we should pursue.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the ROC. The Republic
of China, more commonly known as Taiwan, is a democratic haven perched
on the edge of Asia and confronted everyday with the scourge of
communism.
H. Con. Res. 462 reaffirms an unwavering commitment by the United
States to the Taiwan Relations Act and to the ROC.
From the moment the communists overran the Chinese mainland, the
Republic of China on Taiwan has been threatened with invasion and
destruction. The dictators in Beijing have sought to isolate Taiwan
from the rest of the world. They put pressure on Taiwan to be
subservient to Beijing's diktats. Despite this constant shadow, the
people of Taiwan have built a vibrant market economy and an equally
vibrant democracy based on the rule of law.

[[Page H5761]]

As Taiwan has prospered and worked to achieve full democracy, the
United States has stood shoulder to shoulder with Taiwan against the
potential onslaught of the so-called ``People's'' Republic of China.
Unlike in mainland China, the people of Taiwan enjoy many of the
freedoms that we in the United States also enjoy.
As mainland China develops economically, it would be easy for the
United States to focus on Beijing and forget about our longstanding
ally. This is not and never should be the case. The United States must
continue to be a partner with Taiwan. We must do what we can to help
Taiwan maintain its political and economic independence. Although the
United States does not maintain full diplomatic relations with the ROC,
our commitment, outlined in the Taiwan Relations Act, has never
wavered.
The communist government in Beijing has made it clear time and again
that it will not back away from its Taiwan policy. Whether it is naval
exercises in the Taiwan Straits or objecting to Taiwan's membership in
the World Health Organization, Beijing continues to menace the ROC.
When you look at a map of Asia, the PRC clearly dwarfs Taiwan. It is
many, many times bigger geographically and many, many times more
populated. Any time it chooses, the PRC could overrun Taiwan and end
the democratic experiment in that country. It is only the backing of
the United States and the U.S. commitment outlined in the Taiwan
Relations Act, that has kept the communists at bay.
As the PRC continues to develop economically and politically, it is
important that the United States have allies in the region with whom we
can work vis-a-vis mainland China. Taiwan is such an ally. They share
our values of democracy and market economics. We must ensure that
Taiwan remains free to act independently of China. The Taiwan Relations
Act ensures that they are able to do so.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res.
462, reaffirming our unwavering support to the Taiwan Relations Act,
and the people of the Republic of China or Taiwan.
For more than two decades, the Taiwan Relations Act has been the
basis for the U.S.-Taiwan relationship, and a cornerstone of stability
in Taiwan, and in the Western Pacific. And while the set of
circumstances that made the Taiwan Relations Act necessary remains a
regrettable chapter in U.S. history, its presence has helped ensure the
safety of the people of Taiwan for the last 25 years.
In stark contrast to his predecessor Jimmy Carter, President Reagan
worked to improve the mutual friendship and security between Taiwan and
the United States. A strong voice for freedom and democracy, President
Reagan sought to provide greater security to the people of Taiwan by
making a number of assurances to Taiwan. Among other things, President
Reagan promised not to set a date for ending defensive arms sales to
Taiwan; not to consult with the unelected leaders of Communist China
before making any arms sales to Taiwan; not to pressure Taiwan to
negotiate with Communist China on the issue of reunification; and not
to abandon the Taiwan Relations Act.
Over the last 25 years, Taiwan has made a full transition to
democracy. The Taiwan Relations Act, President Reagan's efforts, and
most of all the work of the people of Taiwan have helped to make these
changes a reality.
Mr. Speaker, the passage of this resolution will send a strong
message to the leaders of Communist China that America is a partner and
a friend to Taiwan, and that America has no plans to abandon our
commitment to the people of Taiwan or their fundamental right to self-
determination.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, we have no further requests for
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Renzi). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res.
462.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
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.

____________________