[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 204 (Thursday, December 14, 2017)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1702-E1703]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    THE LONG ARM OF CHINA: EXPORTING AUTHORITARIANISM WITH CHINESE 
                            CHARACTERISTICS

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, December 14, 2017

  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I made the following 
remarks at the hearing held by the Congressional-Executive Commission 
on China which I co-chair with Senator Marco Rubio:
  This hearing is the second in a series looking at China's foreign 
influence operations and the impact on universally-recognized human 
rights. With the Congress and U.S. public focused on Russian influence 
operations, Chinese efforts have received little scrutiny and are not 
well understood. This must change.
  Attempts by the Chinese government to guide, buy, or coerce political 
influence, control discussion of ``sensitive'' topics, and export its 
authoritarian practices globally are widespread and pervasive.
  Long-time allies Australia, New Zealand, and Canada have been rocked 
by scandals involving Chinese sponsored influence operations targeting 
politicians, businesses, and academic institutions.
  Australia in particular is in the midst of a national crisis and all 
like-minded democratic allies should be supporting their efforts to 
root out those elements intended to corrupt or coopt Australian 
political and academic institutions.
  All countries pursue soft power initiatives to promote a ``positive'' 
global image and build goodwill, but the Chinese government's use of 
technology, coercion, pressure, and the promise of market access is 
unprecedented and poses clear challenges to the freedoms of democratic 
societies.
  An example of Chinese rewards given to companies and individuals for 
abiding by the Chinese government's rules is the case of publisher 
Springer Nature, the world's largest academic book publisher.
  Springer Nature removed more than 1,000 articles from the websites of 
the Journal of Chinese Political Science and International Politics in 
order to comply with China's censorship directives and was later 
``rewarded'' for its censorship by signing a lucrative strategic 
partnership with the Chinese tech giant Tencent Holdings.
  In addition to academic publishers, the Chinese government is going 
to school on college and universities. American institutions are being 
seduced by the promised infusion of much-needed wealth from China.
  But one always has to pay a price--play by China's rules, don't 
ruffle feathers and don't discuss or write about ``sensitive topics.'' 
Universities committed to academic freedom are bound to run into 
problems eventually.
  I have held two hearings on the threat to academic freedom posed by 
Confucius Institutes and the creation of U.S. campuses in China.
  We should all be for creative research partnerships and expanding 
educational opportunities for U.S. students, but not at the cost of 
fundamental freedoms.
  I have asked the General Accounting Office (GAO) to investigate 
academic partnerships between the U.S. colleges and the Chinese 
government. The first report came out last Spring.
  The GAO is now in the process of conducting investigations of 
Confucius Institutes. I have written to all U.S. colleges with 
Confucius Institutes and asked them to make their contracts public and 
available for public inspection.
  Many foreign businesses in China have already faced similar dilemmas. 
Some, like Apple, which recently removed from its Chinese app store 
applications that help users

[[Page E1703]]

bypass China's ``Great Firewall.'' The networking site LinkedIn agreed 
to censor content and Facebook is promising to do the same in order to 
get access to the Chinese market.
  Chinese operations to curtail the activities of dissidents and 
critics of the Communist Party are also pervasive, troubling, and must 
be stopped. We have heard multiple stories from U.S. citizens and 
foreign nationals living in the U.S. about efforts to intimidate, 
censor, and silence them.
  The case of Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui is just the latest example 
of egregious behavior. High-ranking Chinese security ministry 
officials, in the US on transit visas no less, met with Mr. Guo 
multiple times in order to threaten and convince him to leave the U.S.
  Chinese agents have repeatedly violated U.S. sovereignty and law 
according to the Wall Street Journal report on the incident.
  These incidents and those we will discuss today are just the tip of 
the iceberg.
  The Commission's 2017 Annual Report contains several recommendations 
to counter Chinese foreign influence operations--including expanding 
the mandate of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) to include 
Chinese government media organizations and think-tanks, expanded 
Internet Freedom initiatives and efforts to counter Chinese propaganda 
and disinformation at the State Department. I encourage those 
interested to look at our recommendations.
  As we start to grapple with the scale and scope of Chinese influence 
operations, we will be looking for new legislative ideas and I hope our 
witnesses today can provide recommendations for the Commission's 
action.
  We must be clear from the outset that we support better relations 
with the people of China and the United States. The issues we are 
discussing here today are part of influence operations conducted by the 
Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese government.
  President Xi Jinping, who has concentrated more power than any 
Chinese leader since Mao, is determined to make the world safe for 
authoritarianism. Beijing is intent on exporting its censorship regime, 
intimidating dissidents and their families, sanitizing history, and 
stifling critical discussions of its repressive policies.
  These actions pose direct threats to deeply held core values and 
fundamental freedoms enjoyed by all democratic societies. We must find 
ways to effectively and resolutely push back. Doing so should be a 
critical national interest.

                          ____________________