Congressional Record, Volume 151 Issue 9 (Wednesday, February 2, 2005)

[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 9 (Wednesday, February 2, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H299-H303]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

URGING THE EUROPEAN UNION TO MAINTAIN ITS ARMS EMBARGO ON THE PEOPLE'S
REPUBLIC OF CHINA

Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to
the resolution (H. Res. 57) urging the European Union to maintain its
arms embargo on the People's Republic of China.
The Clerk read as follows:

H. Res. 57

Whereas the United States and the European Union (EU) have
maintained arms embargoes on the People's Republic of China
since 1989, following the decision of the Chinese Government
on June 4, 1989, to order an unprovoked, brutal, and
indiscriminate assault on thousands of peaceful and unarmed
demonstrators and onlookers in and around Tiananmen Square by
units of the People's Liberation Army, which resulted in an
untold number of deaths and several thousand injuries;
Whereas the People's Republic of China has yet to
acknowledge and make amends for the 1989 massacre at
Tiananmen Square and an estimated 2,000 Chinese citizens
remain in prison as a result of their participation in those
peaceful demonstrations according to the Department of
State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2004;
Whereas the National Security Strategy of the United States
approved by President George W. Bush on September 17, 2002,
concludes that the People's Republic of China remains
strongly committed to national one-party rule by the
Communist Party and is not truly accountable to the needs and
aspirations of its citizens, while preventing the Chinese
people to think, assemble, and worship freely;
Whereas for several years the People's Republic of China
has also been engaged in an extensive military buildup in its
air, naval, land, and outer space systems, including the
deployment of approximately 500 short range ballistic
missiles near the Taiwan Strait according to the Department
of Defense's Report on the Military Power of the People's
Republic of China for Fiscal Year 2004;
Whereas the military buildup by the People's Republic of
China and the strategic doctrines and policies that underpin
such a buildup remain shrouded in secrecy and imply
challenges for strategic deterrence between the United States
and China, United States Armed Forces deployed in the Asia
and Pacific region, United States commitments and interests
related to the defense of numerous friends and allies in the
region, particularly Taiwan and Japan, and regional stability
more broadly;
Whereas the European Union and the People's Republic of
China released a joint statement on December 8, 2004,
following their seventh summit meeting at The Hague in which
the two sides recognized each other as ``major strategic
partners in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation''
and the EU confirmed its ``political will to continue to work
towards lifting the EU arms embargo against China'';
Whereas the European Union and the People's Republic of
China also released a joint declaration on non-proliferation
and arms control on December 8, 2004, at The Hague in which
the EU stated its support for China's entry into the Missile
Technology Control Regime (MTCR);
Whereas on December 20, 2004, the Government of the United
States determined that seven entities of the People's
Republic of China, including several entities that play major
roles in China's military-industrial complex, should be
subject to sanctions under section 3 of the Iran
Nonproliferation Act of 2000, which provides for penalties on
entities for the transfer to Iran of certain controlled
equipment and technology, reflecting a time span of more than
a decade in which the United States Government has made
repeated determinations regarding Chinese firms engaged in
illicit transactions involving strategic technology;
Whereas on December 17, 2004, the Council of the European
Union ``reaffirmed the political will to continue to work
towards lifting the arms embargo'' on the People's Republic
of China and invited the next Presidency of the EU ``to
finalize the well-advanced work in order to allow for a
decision'';
Whereas the largest member states of the European Union--
France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom--have steadily
increased their arms sales to the People's Republic of China,
such that from 2002 to 2003 the value of reported arms sales
to China doubled to approximately $540,000,000, according to
the most recent annual report, dated November 11, 2004, of
the EU on its Code of Conduct on Arms Exports;
Whereas in order to assist member states of the European
Union to close the gap in defense capabilities with the
United States and to enhance the interoperability of the
armed forces of such member states and United States Armed
Forces, the United States has provided a framework in its
laws, particularly under the Arms Export Control Act and
chapters 138 and 139 of title 10, United States Code, in
which the United States has pursued a policy of expanded
transatlantic armament and defense industry cooperation
involving increasingly sophisticated levels of sensitive
United States military technology, which becomes subject to
increased risks of diversion to the People's Republic of
China due to armaments cooperation between the EU and China;
Whereas despite the chronically low defense spending of
member states of the European Union, EU member states have
decided to develop, with the participation of the People's
Republic of China, a new global radio navigational satellite
system, known as Galileo, at a cost of more than
$3,000,000,000, which will have military applications, even
though such system purports to serve civil applications
already served by the United States Global Positioning
Satellite (GPS) System; and
Whereas the United States has numerous national interests
in the Asia and Pacific region, including the security of
Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and other key areas, and United
States Armed Forces which are deployed throughout the region
could be jeopardized by the People's Republic of China
because it is increasingly well-armed and may seek to settle
long-standing territorial and political disputes in the
region by the threat or use of military force: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) reaffirms the United States arms embargo on the
People's Republic of China and related findings and
statements of policy set forth in title IX of the Foreign
Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991
(Public Law 101-246);
(2) finds that policies by the United States and other
countries which promote the development of democracy in the
People's Republic of China, and not the development of
Chinese military capabilities, will help assure a stable,
peaceful, and prosperous Asia and Pacific region;
(3) deplores the recent increase in arms sales by member
states of the European Union (EU) to the People's Republic of
China and the European Council's decision to finalize work
toward lifting its arms embargo on China, actions that place
European security policy in direct conflict with United
States security interests and with the security interests of
United States friends and allies in the Asia and Pacific
region;
(4) declares that such a development in European security
policy is inherently inconsistent with the concept of mutual
security interests that lies at the heart of United States
laws for transatlantic defense cooperation at both the
governmental and industrial levels and would necessitate
limitations and constraints in these relationships that would
be unwelcome on both sides of the Atlantic;
(5) requests the President in his forthcoming meetings with
European leaders to urge that they reconsider this unwise
course of action and, instead, work expeditiously to close
any gaps in the European Union's arms embargo on the People's
Republic of China, in the national export control systems of
EU member states, and in the EU's Code of Conduct on Arms
Exports in order to prevent any future sale of arms or
related technology to China; and
(6) requests the President to inform Congress of the
outcome of his discussions with European leaders on this
subject and to keep Congress fully and currently informed of
all developments in this regard.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gallegly) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly).

General Leave

Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 57, the resolution
under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution that was
introduced yesterday by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde),
expressing the strong concern of the House that the EU may lift its
arms embargo directed at China.
In his recent inaugural address, President Bush reaffirmed America's
commitment to democracy and freedom throughout the world. Yet, by
selling advanced weapons systems to the People's Republic of China, the
EU is directly undermining the security of one of Asia's most vibrant
democracies, our close ally, Taiwan.
Over the last decade, Taiwan has moved strongly in the direction of
becoming a full-fledged democracy, with free elections, a free press
and respect for the rule of law. If the arms embargo is lifted, the EU
would be further tilting the military equation against the

[[Page H300]]

people of Taiwan at the very time they are embracing human rights and
democratic values.
Furthermore, if our soldiers were ever called upon to defend Taiwan,
they could potentially be facing weapons systems manufactured by our
own European allies. This would be an intolerable development.
Finally, the lifting of the arms embargo would also have other
negative consequences. In the past, China has demonstrated its
willingness to sell weapons to nations that cannot be trusted with
advanced military gear. This includes countries such as Iran that
support international terrorist groups and countries such as Sudan,
Burma and Zimbabwe that are among the world's worst violators of human
rights. The last thing these countries need is additional weapons.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important measure.
I also urge Secretary of State Rice and President Bush to raise this
issue during their upcoming visit to Europe.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to commend my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr.
Gallegly), for his strong and powerful statement. I particularly want
to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the distinguished
chairman of the Committee on International Relations, my good friend,
for leading us on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I just returned from a very substantive mission to North
Korea, China and Taiwan, where I met with many of the key leaders of
those countries. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's security interests in the
Asia-Pacific region, including the national and economic security of
our friends and allies in the Asia-Pacific area, were paramount on my
agenda.
While the Asia-Pacific region remains calm at the moment compared to
other parts of the world, this calm can be deceiving. The United States
has tens of thousands of troops deployed in Asia, and their security is
directly threatened by the shortsighted and greed-driven initiative
emanating from Europe. This initiative, Mr. Speaker, is the European
Union's current effort to lift its ban on arms sales to the People's
Republic of China.
I, therefore, commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the
chairman of our full committee, for introducing this important
resolution and for moving it forward so expeditiously.
Mr. Speaker, it is frightening to contemplate that American Armed
Forces may one day be deployed in the Taiwan Strait to defend the
island nation for a possible invasion by mainland China, and if key
leaders in Paris, Berlin and Brussels have their way, our soldiers may
very well be facing the latest in high-tech weaponry manufactured by
our allies in Europe.
Mr. Speaker, based upon my recent meetings in China and Taiwan, I
remain optimistic that tensions across the Taiwan Strait can be
resolved peacefully and that the United States will not be drawn into
Taiwan-related conflict.
Key policymakers in Beijing fully understand that military action
against Taiwan would spark international isolation, possible military
conflict with the United States and a certain boycott of the much-
prized 2008 Olympics in Beijing.
Taiwan's leaders, for their part, fully understand that the
increasing economic ties between Taiwan and the mainland would be
threatened by provocative steps.
President Chen and Vice President Lu in Taiwan fully understand that
Taiwan must negotiate with the mainland from a position of strength,
which requires immediate approval by Taiwan's legislature of a
supplemental defense package.
Despite these factors working in favor of peace across the Taiwan
Strait, it is possible that mainland hard-liners might push for
military action against Taiwan after the 2008 Olympics or that conflict
in the Strait may begin because of miscalculation by either side.
It is in this context that the European Union's current deliberations
on lifting its arms embargo on China are so outrageous. With enormous
loss of human life, the United States liberated the Nations of Europe
during World War II, including France and Germany. For the new
generation of European leaders to turn their backs on American national
security interests and consider opening up the floodgates of weapons
sales to the People's Republic of China shows that they have truly lost
their moral compass.
Europe's leaders have argued that they will continue to restrict most
arms sales to Beijing, even if the ban is lifted. Mr. Speaker, I simply
do not believe this assertion. If there is money to be made in a
troubled part of the world through arms sales, key European arms
manufacturers are the first through the door to make that sale.
Mr. Speaker, the decision by the European Union is not final, and it
is my strong hope that President Bush and our new Secretary of State
Condoleeza Rice will make it a top priority to convince the European
Union to reverse this dangerous course. Sadly, the key reason for the
imposition of the arms embargo, China's horrendous human rights record,
remains unchanged, more than 15 years after the massacre at Tiananmen
Square.

{time} 1115

Europe's leaders must understand that there will be severe
ramifications for the transatlantic relationship if they fail to do
what is right and just, if they fail to respect internationally
recognized human rights and the national security interests of their
historic liberator and their most important ally, the United States of
America.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support our resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time, and I rise as a proud cosponsor of House Resolution 57 and
ask my colleagues to render their strong support to this resolution.
It is unconscionable that the European Union has decided to lift its
arms embargo against the People's Republic of China, a regime that is a
gross human rights violator and a country of proliferation concern,
given its assistance to terrorist states like Iran.
The arms embargo was implemented in response to the Chinese regime
turning its tanks against peaceful demonstrators in Tiananmen Square on
that fateful day of June 4, 1989. The PRC has yet to acknowledge or
even make amends for this massacre. The PRC harasses, intimidates,
imprisons, and tortures religious worshipers, human rights dissidents,
and any who seek to exercise their fundamental freedoms and who oppose
the repressive apparatus of the regime in Beijing.
For the EU to remove the ban and for its largest members to steadily
increase their arms sales to the PRC is an affront to all of China's
victims, particularly to the victims of Tiananmen Square. It also
undermines global efforts to hold other human rights violators
accountable for their deplorable practices. How can the EU's so-called
human rights dialogue with Iran or its discussions with Syria, for
example, have any credibility when the EU has given a pass to the PRC
for this massacre?
It is critical we also look at the implications for U.S. policy
priorities on other issues. As the resolution before us articulates,
the United States has significant security interests in the Asia and
Pacific regions, including the security of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea,
and other critical areas. The EU decision could alter this delicate
strategic balance in this region.
An even more daunting implication is how the EU's removal of the arms
embargo on China could undermine counterproliferation efforts. Chinese
entities have been sanctioned under U.S. law for transferring missile
technologies to Iran. Concurrently, Iran has paraded its long-range
Shahab-3 missiles that could reach and threaten U.S. allies in the
Middle East and American forces stationed in the region.
Yet the EU decides to facilitate China's military buildup by lifting
its arms embargo on the PRC. Within this context, is the EU complicit
in the threat posed by Iranian missiles targeting U.S. interests with
Chinese technology? For that matter, how will the EU respond to Iran
missile threats when they reach European capitals,

[[Page H301]]

thanks to Chinese technology? How can the EU be taken seriously in its
efforts to halt Iran's pursuit of a nuclear capability?
This is a matter of utmost urgency. The EU's decision to lift the
arms embargo on the PRC can have grave repercussions. It could trigger
a domino effect that could undermine our efforts to address and curtail
threats across multiple sectors. It will only serve to emboldened
oppressors and proliferators. We must stand together against such
threats.
As the resolution underscores, this development in European security
policy is inherently inconsistent within the concept of mutual security
interests. Let us, through the overwhelming adoption of the resolution
of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), strongly urge European
leaders to reconsider this unwise course of action. I ask my colleagues
to render their strong support for this resolution.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as she may
consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Democratic
leader who has long been our leader on policy with respect to China.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time, my colleague from California, and also for his distinguished
service and for bringing this to the floor today. I am pleased to join
our Republican colleagues. It is one area where we can work together to
make the world freer, people freer, the world safer, and, hopefully,
trade fairer one of these days.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution urging the
European Union to maintain its arms embargo in the People's Republic of
China. I commend the Committee on International Relations chairman, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and our ranking member, the
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for bringing this resolution to
the floor. They are tremendous leaders on behalf of human rights in
China and, indeed, all over the world.
Almost 16 years ago, the Chinese regime shocked the world as it
unleashed its army on its own defenseless people and crushed the
peaceful pro-democracy movement in Tiananmen Square. We know that the
human rights situation in China has not significantly improved since
the arms embargo was imposed.
At the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre, it was seared into our
conscience. One of the most enduring images of the 20th century was a
picture of a lone man standing before a long line of military tanks. We
remember how millions of ordinary students, workers, and citizens
marched in peace; how they raised the goddess of democracy, an image of
our own Statue of Liberty; and how they quoted our own Founding
Fathers.
The United States and the European Union imposed complementary arms
embargoes as a direct response to the Tiananmen Square massacre.
Civilized governments were outraged at the brutality of the Chinese
regime and took a course of action to ensure our weapons would not be
used to harm innocent people in China, Tibet, East Turkistan, Inner
Mongolia, and Taiwan.
For a billion Chinese and Tibetans, freedom remains a dream deferred.
Journalists, activists, academics, workers, and religious believers are
still persecuted and tortured. Beijing is still harassing and arresting
dissidents and families of the Tiananmen victims.
The most recent State Department ``Country Report on Human Rights''
states that the Chinese Government's ``Human rights record remains
poor, and the government continued to commit numerous and serious
abuses. There was backsliding on key human rights issues.''
The recent passing of Zhao Ziyang, the former Secretary General of
China, reminds the world of the courage of the heroes of Tiananmen.
Zhao dared to resist the Chinese Communist Party's decision to crush
the pro-democracy movement. And I remind my colleagues that at the time
he was the chairman of the Chinese Communist Party. He very
courageously, just weeks before the massacre, made a very crucial
appeal to the students to leave Tiananmen Square to prevent bloodshed.
With tears in his eyes and bullhorn in his hands, he apologized to
them for having come too late. His courage in opposing military force
resulted in his dismissal from the government, his name erased from
Chinese history books, and almost 16 years under house arrest, until
his recent death. The Chinese Government has tried to erase the history
of Tiananmen and Zhao's legacy, but the world will remember.
For all their power, the regime is afraid of Zhao. They were afraid
of him in life; they are afraid of him in death. But the more they try
to suppress his message and his courage, the stronger they make him.
Today, we are once again calling on Beijing to release thousands of
Tiananmen activists held to this day and all the prisoners of
conscience, whose only crime was to demand their basic human rights.
I commend the Bush administration for reiterating its support of the
U.S. arms embargo. The European Union has showed leadership in fighting
for human rights all over the world. Now is not the time for them to
abandon those principles.
I just would like to make this point, because I mentioned trade in
the beginning. Since the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre, for
many years we have had debate on the floor as to whether we could use
economic leverage to improve the human rights situation in China; that
we could use economic leverage to improve the performance of the
Chinese regime in regard to fairness and in trade with our country and
to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by the regime
to unsafeguarded countries.
That idea was rejected by the Congress, and I may say in a bipartisan
way: President Bush, President Clinton, President Bush all shared the
same view. But it was wrong, and it is still wrong.
The fact is that we did not use the leverage, and everyone said
economic reform is going to lead to political reform; this trade is
going to enable the Chinese people to be freer. The fact is that has
not worked. And the trade deficit, which we thought was giving us
leverage in 1989 of $2 billion, $2 billion, this enormous amount of
money we thought was going to give us leverage for human rights,
improve trade relations, as well as stopping the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, well, the trade deficit today, thanks to
this policy, is now $2 billion a week, not a year, a week. Over $2
billion a week.
The point I want to make in relationship to the European Union,
though, is the following: for a long time over that time the Chinese
Government was very clever. They took advantage of the U.S. because we
welcomed them with open arms. Just flood our markets with your
products, maintain your barriers to our products going into China, and
you have this. China has a huge trade surplus. And where did they spend
that surplus? They spent it in Europe, and they spent it in other parts
of the world using economic leverage for a political purpose: just
exactly what they argued against when we wanted to do it to improve
human rights, to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
and to improve the trade situation.
So it is no wonder the European Union does not have the kind of trade
deficit with China that we have, because China buys from the European
Union, or they did for at least long enough to get them with the
program. And what the program is is a giant economic power using its
economic power to suppress initiatives that make the world safer, that
make people freer, and make trade fairer.
So I applaud again the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida for her
remarks and the leadership of the committee for their initiative in
bringing this to the floor; and I would hope, I would hope that the
Bush administration's statements will now be met with firmness in
dealing with the EU that this is important to us. Because the trade
embargo is there for a reason, and now that it is lifted, if it is
lifted, the world will be a less safe place.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Rarely in human history have so many been armed by so few in a crass
and cynical pursuit of profit at the expense of Asia's peace. The word
should go forth that the French President is

[[Page H302]]

determined to sell weapons that will be aimed at Japan and Korea and
Taiwan and the Philippines and the men and women of the United States
military. These weapons will be built in France and pointed directly at
the people who serve in the United States Navy.
In lifting the arms embargo against China, Europe will be making an
enormous mistake. Europe's short-term concern with the corporate bottom
line will lead to greater conflict and increased peril for Americans
serving in uniform. Since 1989, China has been almost cut off from
European technology, and China's leaders have responded by a
cooperative foreign policy designed to lift this embargo so they can
arm to the teeth as the rising power of Asia to challenge the other
powers, all democracies on her periphery.
If you are pro-U.S. Navy, you should be against this. If you are pro-
Japanese, you should be against this. If you are pro-Indian, you should
be against this. Because these European weapons will be directed at
each of these democracies.

{time} 1130

This is a very short-term decision for a very few profits, and it is
Jacques Chirac that is doing this. That will create greater insecurity
in Asia, lay the seeds for a conflict, and maybe the death of Americans
caused by French weapons sold for short-term profits.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just want to make a comment about my good friend's observations. He
is absolutely correct. This greed-driven policy by a Europe which was
twice liberated in the 20th century by the United States, a policy
which, by the way, this past year, in 2004, resulted in over a half a
billion dollars of military sales already to China, with again the
French leading the way. The degree of cynicism, the degree of greed
displayed by some European leaders turns one's stomach.
I strongly urge all of my colleagues to vote for our resolution.
Mr. Speaker, we have no additional requests for time, and we yield
back the balance of our time.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
(Mr. HOSTETTLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me
this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to wholeheartedly support this common-sense
resolution.
The U.S. and European Union, as we have heard, established arms
embargoes against the People's Republic of China following the June,
1989, Tiananmen Square Massacre.
The U.S embargo continues today in light of the widespread human
rights abuses that continue under the Communist regime. But the
European Union, in a move that can only be described as reckless, is
moving to lift its ban on weapons sales.
EU states are even today selling China so-called nonlethal
technologies that enhance its offensive capabilities. Advanced radar
systems sold to China, for example, allow its military to better target
U.S. warships and aircraft.
For this reason, I introduced in the defense authorization bill last
year a provision to prohibit the Defense Department from buying weapons
from foreign companies that sell weapons to the People's Republic of
China. My measure, which passed the House, also would have made it U.S.
policy to deny China defense technology that could threaten the U.S. or
destabilize the Western Pacific region.
Unfortunately, this provision was dropped in conference as a result
of Senate objections. But we are here again today discussing this
vitally important issue.
I strongly encourage the EU to place international security and human
rights ahead of any monetary benefits from selling weapons to China,
and I urge passage of this resolution.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. The
European Union imposed a ban on arms sales to the People's Republic of
China following the Tiananmen Square Massacre back in 1989. In recent
months it has become apparent that European nations, seeing an
opportunity to profit from China's large-scale military modernization
program, may well be prepared to lift that embargo in the near future,
and I believe that would be a terrible mistake.
In a November 30, 2004, letter to the President of the European
Union, 25 Members of this body who opposed the lifting of the arms
embargo stressed that such a decision would alter the current fragile
military balance across the Taiwan Straits. It would rapidly tip the
balance in the PRC's favor. In the last year alone, China has added
more than 100 missiles to its arsenal, bringing to more than 600 the
number pointed directly across the Taiwan Straits at Taiwan.
The EU's imminent decision to lift the arms embargo would further
isolate that island nation and endanger its sovereignty and the safety
of its citizens.
A lifting of the European arms embargo and further modernization of
China's army would also create new dangers for the United States and
its Asian allies. If we were ever to be called upon, and I hope this
never happens, but if we were ever called upon to intervene in an Asian
military crisis, the lives of our servicemen and women would be
increasingly endangered.
Mr. Speaker, our European neighbors need to think long and hard about
the short- and long-term negative effects of the lifting of the arms
embargo. Stability in Asia is all too important to dismiss for the sake
of short-term profits for European arms dealers.
I thank the chairman for bringing this important resolution to the
floor in such a timely manner. I particularly thank the gentleman from
California (Mr. Gallegly) for doing this, and I urge my colleagues to
support the resolution.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I would like to close by thanking the gentleman from California (Mr.
Lantos) and those on the other side of the aisle for their strong
support for this important issue. I ask all of my colleagues to join in
strong bipartisan support of this critical resolution, H. Res. 57.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House
Resolution 57.
Mr. Speaker, while I support passage of this resolution, I am
disappointed that events require us to debate it today. How any
European leader could seriously contemplate the notion of arms sales to
the regime in Beijing is, frankly, a mystery to me.
Beijing's abysmal human rights record has scarcely improved since the
massacre at Tiananmen Square that prompted the EU to institute the
embargo in the first place. The communist authorities in China continue
to detain hundreds upon thousands of political prisoners. Torture
remains widespread and systemic. Political freedom is nonexistent, as
are the right to worship freely and the rule of law. The flow of
information is rigidly controlled by government authorities and there
is no independent media or judiciary.
And the Chinese regime has shown no signs of changing course. They
have backpedaled on promises of democratic reform in Hong Kong and
routinely threaten the peaceful democratic nation of Taiwan with
military force. And these threats have only become louder and more
belligerent in the years since the imposition of the embargo. In fact,
the Chinese have become so bellicose and bold in their threats to
``crush'' Taiwan's self-determination that they no longer make any
secret of their buildup--some 500 and counting--of missiles pointed
directly at Taiwan.
So we must ask why? Why would any freedom loving European nation
entertain the idea of selling weapons to a regime like the one
currently ruling on the Chinese mainland? How could any nation that
calls itself a friend of the United States seriously consider selling
weapons to a regime whose stated goal is to annex, by force, Taiwan--a
democratic ally of the United States? Perhaps most importantly, why
would any European country sell weapons to the People's Liberation Army
knowing that someday U.S. servicemen could be drawn into a conflict in
the Taiwan straits?
Does the EU honestly believe it is in the best interests of the
trans-Atlantic alliance to create a possible situation that could pit
U.S. soldiers and sailors against Chinese soldiers wielding European
weapons? Haven't enough U.S. soldiers been killed by European weapons
in the last two World Wars? The European Union member nations should
think very seriously about that last question before they decide to
lift this embargo.

[[Page H303]]

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H. Res. 57,
which urges the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the
People's Republic of China. While I have been a supporter of increasing
trade and diplomatic relations with China, I am not nearly as
comfortable with the idea of lifting the arms embargo. I am also
disturbed by reports that China has sold weapons to Iraq that bolstered
the regime of Saddam Hussein and are now being used by insurgents who
have gotten a hold of the regime's weapons stockpiles. China needs to
take a giant step back in its weapons proliferation in order to become
a valuable ally instead of the menacing figure it often portrays.
Again, I want to reiterate that while I have many concerns about the
Chinese government, I have long recognized that trade with China has
value for Americans and the people of China, which is why I voted in
favor of Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) with China. My record
on trade measures since coming to Congress demonstrates my willingness
to evaluate each vote on its own merits, as long as worker and
environmental rights are protected. In addition, I have voted for most-
favored-nation status for China, while I have continued to raise my
voice against the ``undemocratic'' ways of China. Unlike during the
Cold War, we have unparalleled opportunities to bring the people of
China and America much closer together. Trade is one way to accomplish
this, however my desire to bring our two nations together is
overshadowed today by my concerns about China's role in the world,
especially in the form of weapons proliferation.
China's weapons exports remain the most serious proliferation threat
in the world. Since 1980, China has supplied billions of dollars worth
of nuclear weapon, chemical weapon and missile technology to South
Asia, South Africa, South America and the Middle East. It has done so
despite U.S. protests, and despite repeated promises to stop. The
exports are still going on, and while they do, they make it impossible
for the United States and its allies to halt the spread of weapons of
mass destruction. I am especially shocked by the role of China in
supplying Iraq with weapons, including chemical weapons that were used
against the Kurdish people by the Saddam Hussein regime. Now many of
those same weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents who are
targeting our military personnel. China must cease and desist
immediately from interfering in Iraq and bring itself into the
international circle of non-proliferation efforts.
I urge the European Union not to lift its Arms Embargo against China,
because doing so at this time will send the wrong signal. Relations
between the United States and China are a long term effort, one which
cannot be handled with a singular approach. I stand for trade and
diplomatic relations with China because this increases our person to
person contacts that can only serve to create friendly relationships.
However, lifting the Arms Embargo at this time will give the signal
that proliferation of these weapons is acceptable, and it is not.
Lifting the Arms Embargo will also signal that a bad human rights
record is acceptable, and likewise it is not. Lifting the Arms Embargo
against China will also signal to other nations who seek to gain access
to weapons of mass destruction that proliferation of these weapons is
acceptable, and to this point the whole world must stand up and say
that it is not. I will continue to support increased relations with
China because it is a key nation in the world, but I will forever
refuse to turn a blind eye to weapons proliferation that threatens the
security of all nations.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 57,
expressing the Sense of the U.S. House of Representatives that the
European Union should not lift its embargo on the sale of arms to
China.
After the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre the European Union imposed a
ban on arm sales to China. I support this embargo, as I believe it
helps ensure peace in the region and deters China from the use of arms
against Taiwan. In the world we live in we should strive to ensure
peace, liberty and democracy. I feel strongly that the European Union's
lifting of the arms embargo would be detrimental to the fragile peace
that we are striving to maintain, and I am proud to join my colleagues
in support of the embargo.
Ms. BORDALLO. I would like to thank Chairman Hyde, Ranking Member
Lantos, Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, and Congressman McCotter for
initiating this resolution urging the European Union to maintain its
arms embargo on the People's Republic of China. I rise today to give my
strong support to this resolution. The arms embargo we are discussing
today was placed on the People's Republic of China in response to the
massacre at the Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989. That singular event
succinctly demonstrated the oppression of those who suffer under a
closed society like the PRC. They suffered on that fateful day at the
hands of a brutal suppression. I urge our European friends to uphold
their principled stand against arms sales as they opposed arming
Eastern Germany and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. At that time
it was the safety of Europe that hung in the balance. Now it is the
peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region that is at stake.
The gathering of students and peaceful protesters at Tiananmen Square
that summer represented a value we in this country hold dear: the right
to freely assemble. If you believe in that freedom, then don't lift the
embargo. Let us remember the graphic image of the lone protester
stopping a line of People's Liberation Army tanks on a Beijing highway.
How will the governments of Europe explain that the next time this
occurs the People's Liberation Army could be using French or German
tanks to quell a protest for democracy?
One member of the PRC government recognized the plight of the Chinese
people on that fateful day and had the courage to admit that the brutal
suppression was a shameful tragedy. General Secretary Zhao Ziyang was
then stripped of power and placed under house arrest until his recent
passing. It is forbidden to discuss his heroism in China, but here on
the floor of Congress we can be candid because we enjoy the right to
free speech that the people of China do not. In his memory, I urge the
good nations of Europe to recognize that the work begun by the
protesters at Tiananmen is not done.
I admit that I have personal interest in keeping the arms embargo in
place. The People's Republic of China has had a history of aggressive
military acquisition. These forces may someday threaten our allies in
the Asia-Pacific region. It was only recently that a Chinese submarine
was detected circling our island. I urge the leaders of Europe to look
beyond their own self-interest and consider the cause of freedom in
making their decision concerning the arms embargo.
To this end, I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of House Resolution
57, to urge the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the
People's Republic of China.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 57.
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.

____________________