[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 66 (Thursday, April 28, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2542-S2543]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
REMEMBERING HARRY WU
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, on Tuesday, the world lost a courageous
activist for international workers' rights, Harry Wu. Harry Wu spent 19
years in one of China's ``laogai'' prison labor camps. That word is
pretty much unknown in English--L-A-O-G-A-I. It is a word that the
Chinese made famous, at least in their part of the world, as the
terribly brutal labor camps where they sent political prisoners.
Mr. Wu was imprisoned in 1960 at age 23 because he spoke out against
Communist China's ally in 1960, the Soviet Union, after its invasion of
Hungary. Over those 19 years, from 1960 to 1979, Mr. Wu was brutalized.
He was sent to work on farms, mines, and prison camps. He was beaten
and forced into concrete cases. As he has written and told us, he
survived on food he foraged in rats' nests.
After his release, following Mao's death, Harry Wu dedicated the rest
of his life to exposing the horrors that his homeland leaders inflicted
on their own citizens. He risked his life to return to China under
cover and gathered secret footage of the abuses in China's laogai,
China's prison camps. He wouldn't let the world ignore Chinese
atrocities. He wouldn't let us forget that opening our doors to China--
demanded by U.S. corporations with few strings attached--came at a
steep price. Through the footage he collected, he helped show the world
that products like cheap wrenches and artificial flowers sold in the
United States were made with forced labor. Think about what this was
about. U.S. companies would shut down their production in Mansfield, my
hometown, or maybe in Baton Rouge or Cleveland, and move their
production to China and sell those products back to the United States.
The U.S. companies that moved to China never addressed the moral issue
of what that move did to our communities. They never addressed the
moral issue of, in some cases, using Chinese forced labor to make their
products. These companies could also sell their products a little bit
cheaper in the United States, and as a result, these companies could
reap much bigger profits. The moral question of U.S. trade relations
with China has rarely been touched in this body. It is just
inconvenient for us to think about. Well, Mr. Wu never let it be
inconvenient.
As we approach the 15th anniversary of China's entry into the World
Trade Organization this year and review China's nonmarket economy
status, we should not forget the lessons of Harry Wu. Over the past
decade, we have seen that prosperity in China does not lead to more
political freedom.
I knew Harry Wu. He testified before the Congressional-Executive
Commission on China when I was chairman. He had testified several
times.
As recently as 2012, Mr. Wu warned Congress:
The Laogai--
The forced labor camp--
system [is] deeply rooted into [China's] economic structure.
. . . China's working class is different from that of the
modern democratic countries. It includes not only ``workers''
in the ordinary sense, but also ``workers'' of the prison
enterprises.
These would be slaves. He warned that ``prisoners in Laogai, more
like state slaves than enterprise workers, provide the state with an
endless source of cheap or payless labor force.''
This system is an egregious human rights abuse against hundreds of
thousands of Chinese people. It hurts American workers who are then
forced to compete.
This system they have set up is one of the reasons that people are
really upset about what is happening in this country. Companies in my
State of Ohio shut down production in Lima, Zanesville, and
Chillicothe, then moved overseas to China in order to get a tax break,
hired Chinese workers--some of them were slave laborers for some of the
component manufacturing; some of them were just low-paid labor--to make
these products in a totalitarian system and sell them back in the
United States. American companies never talk about the moral dimension
of that.
I wrote a book a dozen or so years ago called the ``Myths of Free
Trade.'' I interviewed Harry Wu about this book. He told me:
``Capitalism must never be equated with democracy.'' Because our
country believes in capitalism and democracy, we think they always go
together. Well, they don't. According to Harry Wu:
Capitalism must never be equated with democracy. . . .
Don't believe it about China. My homeland is mired in
thousands of years of rule by one bully at a time, whether
you call him emperor or chairman. Don't be fooled by
electronics or air conditioning.
Before his death, I think Mr. Wu would have said: Yes, the United
States has been fooled. Maybe we choose to be fooled; maybe we choose
to not know how the products that we hold in our hands are made--by an
oppressive government using forced labor workers.
We have been on a continuous march toward more trade with China and
demanded far little in return. We have turned a blind eye to China's
labor practices for too long. When you hear Presidential candidates and
others complaining about China, it is always about putting American
workers out of work, which it should be, but the other part of that
moral question is about how we are using slave laborers in China to
undercut American workers. How could an American worker or company
possibly compete with slave labor in China? Obviously we can't, but we
leave that moral question because U.S. corporations don't want to
acknowledge and want to turn a blind eye toward slave labor. It reminds
me of something from a few years ago when an American drug company was
making a blood thinner--much of the production of that blood thinner
came from China--with contaminated ingredients, and a number of people
in Toledo, OH, died. The drug company didn't know where these products
came from. They knew they came from China, but they didn't know where
their supply ingredients came from. Think about that. They should be
liable for that--at least you would think they should--but they just
didn't think about the moral question there.
A year and a half ago I gave a speech to the Council on Foreign
Relations, warning that before we sign any bilateral investment treaty
with China, we need to demand that China comply with existing
international obligations in domestic law. We have given China chance
after chance, pushing for increased engagement, even though we know
that China will play by its own rules. In the past year and a half,
nothing has changed. We need to make clear the international
obligations we expect China to meet on cyber security, human rights,
forced labor, slaves making products that American children use,
international trade, workers' rights, and other issues. We need to
demand that China meet these standards now.
Increased engagement by the United States may have led to more
agreements on paper, and that is fine, but in reality the only thing it
has achieved is our ongoing tolerance of Chinese transgressions. It may
be tolerance, it may be ignoring, it may be shrugging our shoulders, it
may be burying our heads in the sand, but I don't think we want to
think much about slave labor in China. I don't think when we buy these
products at Walmart--specializing in Chinese products--that we want to
think much about where these products were made. We often know they
were made in China, but we don't really want to think about how those
workers produced these products.
Harry Wu's passing is a reminder that this needs to end. His legacy
includes the Laogai Museum here in Washington. I encourage my
colleagues to visit the museum and pay their respects to Harry Wu. The
best way they can pay their respects to Harry Wu is by changing our
policies. The thousands upon thousands of other nameless prisoners who
suffered in these Chinese prison camps should be honored equally. We
can't forget this tragic legacy, and we can't forget the human rights
abuses that continue to this day as they continue to make these same
products in these same working conditions with these same slave
laborers. It is shameful. It should not continue.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
[[Page S2543]]
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________