[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 32 (Wednesday, March 16, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H1527-H1529]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    EXPRESSING GRAVE CONCERN OF CONGRESS REGARDING PASSAGE OF ANTI-
  SECESSION LAW BY NATIONAL PEOPLE'S CONGRESS OF PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF 
                                 CHINA

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 98) expressing the 
grave concern of Congress regarding the recent passage of the anti-
secession law by the National People's Congress of the People's 
Republic of China.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 98

       Whereas on December 9, 2003, President George W. Bush 
     stated it is the policy of the United States to ``oppose any 
     unilateral decision, by either China or Taiwan, to change the 
     status quo'';
       Whereas in the past few years, the Government of the United 
     States has urged both Taiwan and the People's Republic of 
     China to maintain restraint;
       Whereas the National People's Congress of the People's 
     Republic of China passed its anti-secession law on March 14, 
     2005, which constitutes a unilateral change to the status quo 
     in the Taiwan Strait;
       Whereas the passage of China's anti-secession law escalates 
     tensions between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China 
     and is an impediment to cross-strait dialogue;
       Whereas the purpose of China's anti-secession law is to 
     create a legal framework for possible use of force against 
     Taiwan and mandates Chinese military action under certain 
     circumstances, including when ``possibilities for a peaceful 
     reunification should be completely exhausted'';
       Whereas the Department of Defense's Report on the Military 
     Power of the People's Republic of China for Fiscal Year 2004 
     documents that, as of 2003, the Government of the People's 
     Republic of China had deployed approximately 500 short-range 
     ballistic missiles against Taiwan;
       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 given the recent positive developments in cross-
     strait relations, including the

[[Page H1528]]

     Lunar New Year charter flights and new proposals for cross-
     strait exchanges, it is particularly unfortunate that the 
     National People's Congress adopted this legislation;
       Whereas since its enactment in 1979, the Taiwan Relations 
     Act (22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.), which codified in law the basis 
     for continued commercial, cultural, and other relations 
     between the people of the United States and the people of 
     Taiwan, has been instrumental in maintaining peace, security, 
     and stability in the Taiwan Strait;
       Whereas section 2(b)(2) of the Taiwan Relations Act 
     declares that ``peace and stability in the area are in the 
     political, security, and economic interests of the United 
     States, and are matters of international concern'';
       Whereas, at the time the Taiwan Relations Act was enacted 
     into law, section 2(b)(3) of such Act made clear that the 
     United States decision to establish diplomatic relations with 
     the People's Republic of China rested upon the expectation 
     that the future of Taiwan would be determined by peaceful 
     means;
       Whereas section 2(b)(4) of the Taiwan Relations Act 
     declares it the policy of the United States ``to consider any 
     effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than 
     peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat 
     to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of 
     grave concern to the United States'';
       Whereas section 2(b)(6) of the Taiwan Relations Act 
     declares it the policy of the United States ``to maintain the 
     capacity of the United States 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 on 
     Taiwan''; 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 it is the sense of the Congress that--
       (1) the anti-secession law of the People's Republic of 
     China provides a legal justification for the use of force 
     against Taiwan, altering the status quo in the region, and 
     thus is of grave concern to the United States;
       (2) the President of the United States should direct all 
     appropriate officials of the United States Government to 
     reflect the grave concern with which the United States views 
     the passage of China's anti-secession law in particular, and 
     the growing Chinese military threats to Taiwan in general, to 
     their counterpart officials in the Government of the People's 
     Republic of China;
       (3) the Government of the United States should reaffirm its 
     policy that the future of Taiwan should be resolved by 
     peaceful means and with the consent of the people of Taiwan; 
     and
       (4) the Government of the United States should continue to 
     encourage dialogue between Taiwan and the People's Republic 
     of China.

  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.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. 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 the concurrent 
resolution under consideration.
  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 today to voice strong support for a resolution 
authored by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) which expresses the 
grave concern of the Congress over the adoption by the National 
People's Congress of the People's Republic of China on March 14 of an 
anti-secession law. Beijing's ill-advised action constitutes not only a 
unilateral change in the current status quo in the Taiwan Strait, but 
also provides a legal framework for military action against Taiwan when 
``possibilities for a peaceful reunification have been completely 
exhausted.''
  Adoption of this law followed upon by a threat, made in China's 
Defense Policy White Paper, released on December 17, 2004, to ``crush'' 
any attempt to split Taiwan from China, noting its ``sacred 
responsibility'' of the People's Liberation Army to stop any attempt at 
splitting the country.
  We are all aware as to how seriously the PLA takes its ``sacred 
responsibility'' to further the goals dictated by the Communist regime 
in Beijing. When the PLA was presented with a clear choice between 
serving the people or obeying the orders of the leaders of the 
Communist party on June 4, 1989, a day of infamy, the tanks rolled into 
Tiananmen Square and Chinese blood was spilled by fellow Chinese.
  Thus, we should not assume that the attempt in the anti-secession law 
to provide a legal justification for the use of force against the 
people of Taiwan is an idle threat. History shows that this is not the 
case.
  Mr. Speaker, President Bush, in welcoming the Chinese Premier to 
Washington on December 9, 2003, made Chinese policy crystal clear with 
regard to this issue. President Bush stated, ``We oppose any unilateral 
decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo.'' At the 
time the President spoke firmly concerning attempts by Taiwan's 
President to unilaterally change the status quo.
  Well, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Beijing's 
unilateral attempt to change the status quo must be vigorously opposed 
by both the administration and the Congress. The Congress, in 
particular, is obliged, under commitments made in the Taiwan Relations 
Act, not to remain silent when confronted by this challenge from 
Beijing. The Taiwan Relations Act clearly and unequivocally states: 
``It is the policy of the United States to consider any effort to 
determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means a threat to 
the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern 
to the United States.''
  Beijing's new anti-secession law clearly qualifies as such an effort 
to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means and thus 
represents a grave concern to the United States of America.
  Mr. Speaker, Beijing's reckless action comes at a time when there 
were signs of renewed thawing in the cross-strait relations which gave 
some cause for optimism over the ultimate peaceful resolution of this 
issue.
  The commencement of the Lunar New Year's holiday of cross-strait 
charter flights, the continued movement of Taiwanese to the mainland, 
increasing cross-strait commercial investment, and the arrival of 
mainland representatives in Taipei to attend the funeral of a leading 
negotiator for Taiwan on cross-strait issues were all extremely 
positive signs.
  It is unfortunate, however, that Beijing has chosen once again to be 
its own worst enemy by dissipating all the goodwill generated through 
such gestures by stubbornly pursuing this provocative and ill-timed 
measure.
  Contrary to the observation of Chairman Mao, cross-strait issues will 
never be solved by resorting to the barrel of a gun.
  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 rise in strong support of this resolution, and first I 
would like to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Hyde) for introducing this important and timely resolution and for 
moving it so expeditiously to the floor. I also want to express my 
gratitude for his support to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith). 
I am proud to be the lead Democratic sponsor of this important measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I just returned from visiting both China and Taiwan a 
few weeks ago. I cautioned in both places prudence, moderation, 
stability, no precipitous action, no turmoil. The lives of the people 
of Taiwan and the People's Republic of China are increasingly 
intertwined. More than half a million Taiwanese now live on the 
mainland. Nonstop charter flights between Taiwan and the mainland were 
launched during the Lunar New Year, and both sides are actively 
exploring new options for a variety of exchanges across the Taiwan 
Strait.
  This is the main reason why the Chinese Government's decision to move 
forward with the so-called anti-secession law is so profoundly 
unfortunate. By codifying the potential use of force against Taiwan, 
Beijing has thrown a bucket of ice water on the warming relations that 
had been developing between the people of China and Taiwan.
  The Chinese Government should be using their best and brightest young 
leaders to build new bridges between the people of China and Taiwan. 
Instead, the government has bowed to pressure from hard-line elements 
in the Chinese military to ratchet up the pressure on Taipei.
  Passage of this law, Mr. Speaker, is a wasted opportunity. The anti-
secession

[[Page H1529]]

law mandates military action against Taiwan when ``the possibilities 
for a peaceful reunification would be completely exhausted.'' In other 
words, whenever Beijing decides there is no longer any point in talking 
to Taipei, the new anti-secession law requires the Chinese military to 
take action against Taiwan.
  Mr. Speaker, the passage of the anti-secession law is a threatening 
move by Beijing which will undoubtedly heighten tensions across the 
Taiwan Strait. It will decrease the chance that either side will be 
willing to resolve differences peacefully. The law is reprehensible, 
and it should be reconsidered by the National People's Congress in 
Beijing.
  Mr. Speaker, both Taipei and Beijing have a paramount responsibility 
to maintain restraint and to avoid any action which could increase 
tensions across the Taiwan straits. With passage of this law, Beijing 
has failed this critically important duty, and it is my profound hope 
that China's top leaders will find a way to repair the damage that the 
law's adoption has caused.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to vote for this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1215

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), a distinguished member 
of the Committee on International Relations, chairman of the 
Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, and 
cochair of the House Taiwan Caucus.
  Mr. CHABOT. I very much thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I want to first, Mr. Speaker, commend the distinguished gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), chairman of the full committee, for bringing 
this timely and important resolution to the floor. The so-called anti-
secession legislation adopted by the National People's Congress of the 
People's Republic of China will unilaterally change the status quo in 
the Taiwan Strait, in direct contradiction of the policy of the United 
States Government.
  The Taiwan Relations Act, enacted by this Congress in 1979, declares 
that peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait are in the political, 
security and economic interests of the United States. The legislation 
adopted by the Chinese People's Congress which states that China 
``shall employ nonpeaceful means'' in the event of Taiwan's moving 
toward independence clearly threatens that peace and stability.
  The people of Taiwan want peace. Taiwan's democratically elected 
President, Chen Shui-bian, whom I have met with many times, has 
repeatedly shown his determination to maintaining peace, stability and 
the status quo across the Taiwan Strait, and the Beijing dictatorship 
has responded by pointing over 600 missiles at Taiwan, and now by 
enacting a threatening anti-secession law.
  The future of Taiwan should be determined by the people of Taiwan. 
Any effort by the Communist leadership in the People's Republic of 
China to deny a free people in Taiwan a safe, prosperous and democratic 
future should be condemned.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a very important issue. I am very pleased that 
it is being taken up by the Congress here today. It deserves the utmost 
attention. I want to thank again the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) 
for bringing this forward. I also want to thank the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos) for whom I have great respect and has been a 
leader in this area for many years and the gentleman from New Jersey 
(Mr. Smith) as well.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to 
thank the committee members and the staff, especially Dennis Halpin, 
Sarah Tillemann and Peter Yeo, for their work on this resolution and 
Dan Freeman, who is our counsel and parliamentarian, for his work, and 
his expertise on this and so many other resolutions. We are so grateful 
for them.
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my distress over 
anti-secession legislation recently passed by the National People's 
Congress of the People's Republic of China (PRC). The new law reaffirms 
the PRC's sovereignty over Taiwan and threatens peaceful and non-
peaceful means to defend its ``One China'' policy. In passing this law, 
the PRC imperils the status quo and durability of the delicate cross-
strait truce that has been established.
  The United States has consistently maintained that differences 
between Taipei and Beijing should be resolved diplomatically and with 
the full involvement of the people of Taiwan and China. I subscribe to 
this position and the view that the status quo must be preserved until 
a peaceful resolution can be achieved. The anti-secession law disturbs 
the status quo and creates and unnecessarily tense situation that may 
lead to an escalation of hostilities.
  While the anti-secession law may have originated as a reaction to 
political rhetoric in Taiwan, the Taiwanese government supports the 
status quo, further obviating the need for the anti-cession law. The 
new law also seems at odds with recent positive developments between 
China and Taiwan that seem to signal closer relations. For example, 
direct flights between Taiwan and mainland China were initiated during 
the Chinese New Year holidays and two senior representatives from the 
People's Republic of China attended the memorial services for Koo Chen-
fu who was instrumental in moving cross-strait dialogue forward 10 
years ago.
  Mr. Speaker, in light of these positive events, it is unfortunate 
that the PRC has chosen to take a step backwards in the effort to 
improve cross-strait relations. The anti-secession law has made it 
necessary for us today to pass this resolution, which expresses the 
Congress' grave concern that China is establishing legal justification 
for the use of force against Taiwan. The resolution rightly urges U.S. 
officials, through appropriate diplomatic channels, to express our 
nation's grave concern to the PRC, and it reaffirms U.S. support for 
fostering cross-strait dialogue in an effort to resolve this 
international issue peacefully.
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the resolution, 
House Concurrent Resolution 98, which expresses the concern of the U.S. 
House of Representatives regarding China's Anti-Secession Law. This 
misguided law effectively authorizes use of military force against 
Taiwan if Taiwan moves toward formal independence.
  I believe the anti-secession law is a dangerous and unnecessary 
escalation of tensions between China and Taiwan. The future of Taiwan 
should be resolved by peaceful means and with the consent of the people 
of Taiwan. The United States should continue to encourage dialogue 
between Taiwan and China. In today's world, we should strive to ensure 
peace, liberty and democracy. I am proud to join my colleagues in 
support of this resolution.
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). 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. 
98.
  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.

                          ____________________