[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3126-3137]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




EXPRESSING SENSE OF SENATE REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN PEOPLE'S 
                           REPUBLIC OF CHINA

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). Under the previous order, the 
clerk will report the resolution.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A resolution (S. Res. 45) expressing the sense of the 
     Senate regarding the human rights situation in the People's 
     Republic of China.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators 
Specter, Hagel, Collins, and Thurmond be added as cosponsors of the 
resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I yield to Senator Wellstone for a unanimous consent 
request.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that John 
Bradshaw and Sarah Nelson, a fellow and an intern, be granted the 
privilege of the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I am grateful to our leadership for 
affording us this time this morning to debate and to vote on Senate 
Resolution 45. Some would say this is a sense-of-the-Senate resolution 
so this isn't important and that this is filling time, or whatever. I 
suggest that there are a couple of things that have happened just 
recently which underscore the

[[Page 3127]]

value and the importance of the time we are spending on the Senate 
floor this morning and the vote on this resolution.
  Mr. President, just this morning the Associated Press reported that 
two more members of the Chinese Democracy Party were detained. They 
were taken from their homes for trying to set up a human rights meeting 
in Wuhan. That was reported just this morning. It has become all too 
frequent, and almost daily, that there are news reports of the 
continued crackdown on human rights in China.
  These today were detained only for being members of the Chinese 
Democracy Party, the fledgling opposition party advocating democracy 
and human rights in China. I think this incident, just reported this 
morning, underscores the value and the importance of what we are doing 
and what we are about today.
  Then it is reported this morning as well that Secretary of State 
Madeleine Albright, in her testimony before the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee yesterday, said the administration is still 
deciding the most effective way for the United States to persuade China 
to improve its human rights record.
  The fact that the Secretary of State admitted before the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee yesterday that the administration has not 
yet decided what they are going to do, that they have not yet 
determined what course of action they will take to try to persuade the 
Chinese to improve their human rights record, I believe, underscores 
the importance and the value of the resolution that is before us, one 
that is incredibly important.
  One of my colleagues yesterday, in seeing the agenda for today, said, 
``Well, Tim, there you are slamming the Chinese again.'' Let me say 
that I have the utmost respect and admiration for the Chinese people. 
In fact, I cannot think of any group that I have higher admiration for 
than those Chinese citizens today who are fighting courageously and 
standing up for human rights within their own country and fighting for 
the democracy movement in China.
  This resolution today has nothing to do with the Chinese people, but 
it has everything to do with the intolerable practices of the Chinese 
Government in which they continue to abuse the basic fundamental human 
rights of the Chinese people. This resolution is important because the 
administration has all but said they are looking for a signal from 
Capitol Hill. They are looking for direction from the Congress as to 
whether or not they should sponsor a resolution in Geneva this summer 
calling the world's attention to those abuses that are ongoing in China 
today. We need to send them that signal. This resolution affords us 
that opportunity.
  If there is one thing the Chinese Government does take seriously, it 
is international opinion. To the extent that by this resolution and by 
our Government offering a resolution in Geneva this summer we can 
marshal the international community in protest to the ongoing human 
rights crackdown in China, we will have done something very significant 
and very worthwhile.
  Mr. President, the resolution before us today urges the 
administration to sponsor a resolution at the United Nations Human 
Rights Commission critical of China's human rights abuses. The 
Commission will meet in March and April in Geneva, Switzerland.
  By passing this resolution, which enjoys very strong bipartisan 
support, we give Secretary Albright a clear message to bring with her 
to China when she travels there in the beginning of March. That message 
is that the United States will not accept China's wholesale violation 
of internationally accepted human rights standards. It is an important 
signal. I have had discussions with the administration and with the 
Department of State, and I know they are looking for the sentiment of 
the Senate and the Congress on this issue.
  The Communist Government of China has long committed a litany of 
human rights abuses. Thousands of political prisoners remain in prison, 
many of them sentenced after unfair trials, others today languishing in 
prison without any trial at all. At least 200 of these prisoners are 
still suffering because of their participation in or their support of 
the 1989 Tiananmen Square demonstrations.
  Religious persecution runs rampant in China. People who dare to 
worship outside the aegis of officially sponsored religious 
organizations face fines, they face detention, arrest, imprisonment 
and, too often, torture as well.
  And the human rights movement in China, the democracy movement in 
China, and the house church movement are very much intertwined. And 
many of these home churches have become, in fact, bases of the 
democracy movement and human rights efforts within China today. 
Thousands of peaceful monks and nuns have been detained and tortured in 
Tibet where the Chinese Government is imposing a harsh patriotic so-
called education campaign.
  Mr. President, under China's one-family-one-child policy, couples 
face punitive fines and loss of employment for having unapproved 
children. But it does not stop with monetary penalties. Local 
authorities, with or without the approval of the Communist Party cadre, 
forcibly perform abortions or sterilizations on women who are pregnant 
with their second child. Relatives are held hostage until couples 
submit to this coercion.
  Furthermore, incredibly, prisoners are executed in China after 
grossly unfair trials, and then their organs are sold on the black 
market. The pattern of abuse is clear. And in the eyes of the Chinese 
Communist Government human life seems to bear no value at all.
  What has been this administration's response to these abuses? Under 
President Clinton's policy of so-called constructive engagement, the 
administration effectively disengaged human rights practices from trade 
practices in 1994, while promising that efforts to pass a resolution at 
the U.N. Human Rights Commission would be increased.
  However, Mr. President, last year, President Clinton further unhinged 
his policy by deciding not to pursue a resolution at the Commission in 
Geneva, Switzerland, which was critical of China. We historically had 
done that. Year after year, we offered that resolution, but last year 
supposedly the administration said in a good-faith gesture we withheld 
offering that resolution.
  That commitment was given to China in exchange for their promise to 
sign the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 
ICCPR, a covenant which affirms free speech and free assembly. It is 
highly ironic that the ICCPR itself is a product of U.N. Human Rights 
Commission meetings. China did sign the ICCPR in October, only to turn 
around and violate its every principle since they put their signature 
to that document.
  Since the President's trip to Beijing in July 1998, the Communist 
Government of China has renewed its crackdown on all who would dare to 
oppose the Communist Party. Some 100 members of the fledgling Chinese 
Democracy Party, the CDP, have been detained, excluding the two that 
were announced this morning. Some have been released, others await 
trial, and the most unfortunate have been sentenced to very long prison 
sentences.
  Three visible leaders of the CDP, Xu Wenli, Qin Yongmin, and Wang 
Youcai were sentenced to 13, 12 and 11 years in prison, respectively, 
on charges of subversion and endangering state security, after highly 
dubious trials. In reality, these democracy activists exercised their 
legal rights under Chinese law to create and to form a political party. 
Their true crime, in the eyes of the Communist Party, was simply their 
love for democracy.
  But the crackdown does not end there. In fact, incidents of 
harassment and imprisonment are almost too numerous to list. I will 
highlight just a few examples.
  The Communist Government sentenced businessman Lin Hai to prison for 
2 years for--listen to this crime--providing e-mail addresses to a 
prodemocracy Internet magazine.
  Zhang Shanguang is in prison now for 10 years for this crime: 
Providing Radio Free Asia with information

[[Page 3128]]

about farmer protests in Hunan Province.
  The Government sentenced poet and writer Ma Zhe to 7 years in prison 
on charges of subversion for publishing an independent literary 
journal.
  In addition, the Communist Government is cracking down on film 
directors, artists, computer software developers and the press, and 
continues to harass and detain religious activists. The list goes on.
  In 1998, police imprisoned 70 worshipers from house churches in Hunan 
Province. And the pattern of human rights violations is undeniable. 
Rather than improving since the good-faith gestures of the American 
Government and our rewarding of the Chinese Government with favorable 
trade status, we have seen not a favorable response on the part of the 
Chinese Government but an exacerbated attack upon those who would 
simply advocate freedom and democracy.
  I see that my friend and colleague from Florida, Senator Mack, has 
come to the floor to speak on this resolution. I appreciate his 
outstanding leadership on this issue. He was the lead sponsor of a 
similar resolution last year. And if Senator Mack is prepared to speak 
at this time, I will yield to Senator Mack. Is the Senator ready to 
speak now?
  Mr. MACK. I am prepared.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I ask Senator Mack, how much time would you desire?
  Mr. MACK. No more than 3 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. President, if there is ever a time and place to raise 
human rights concerns, it is at the annual meeting of the United 
Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva, Switzerland. That Commission 
is meeting right now. And I rise today to urge my fellow Senators to 
join with me and the 17 other cosponsors of this resolution to make a 
simple statement. We disapprove of the human rights abuses occurring in 
China and in Tibet.
  Since last year, when we passed this resolution with 95 votes, the 
President has engaged in two summits with Chinese President Jiang. 
During that time, many promises were made and agreements were 
concluded, and the United States did not introduce a human rights 
resolution in Geneva.
  We were told the United States would make progress by not introducing 
a resolution. And Wei Jingsheng, a prominent dissident, was released. 
Tomorrow, Mr. Wei will be here in Washington, DC, and he will urge the 
United States not to make the same mistake as last year. Mr. President, 
we must now make this statement of condemnation of China's human rights 
practices.
  We received many promises from the Chinese Government last year as 
well. But we know that the human rights conditions have only 
deteriorated. The State Department's human rights report clearly 
delineates the atrocities occurring in China and Tibet. And we know 
from press accounts that the crackdown on human rights and political 
activists has hardened.
  It is unconscionable that the United States would not take a stand 
against these blatant atrocities, especially when they are documented 
by our own State Department. By remaining silent, we do a great 
injustice to those fighting for freedom, democracy, and the rule of law 
inside China and Tibet.
  Mr. President, I want to quote from a statement made by Mr. Wei not 
long after he was released and exiled from his country. And this is 
what he said:

       Democracy and freedom are among the loftiest ideals of 
     humanity, and they are the most sacred rights of mankind. 
     Those who already enjoy democracy, liberty and human rights, 
     in particular, should not allow their own personal happiness 
     to numb them into forgetting the many others who are still 
     struggling against tyranny, slavery and poverty, and all of 
     those who are suffering from unimaginable forms of 
     oppression, exploitation and massacres.

  Mr. President, this is an easy one. It does not matter whether the 
world votes with us or against us or abstains in Geneva. It does not 
even matter if this resolution will change the minds of anyone in 
Beijing. We do know, however, from the firsthand testimony of released 
dissidents, that the actions of the United States are important to 
those engaged in the struggle for freedom. We know from those released 
that by simply making this statement we demonstrate our solidarity with 
those who are engaged within the daily struggle for freedom, justice, 
and the respect for human dignity.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in calling for this expression of 
solidarity--this stand for freedom.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I thank the Senator from Florida. He has truly been a 
champion for human rights around the world, not just in China but 
around the world. I thank him for his leadership on this issue and his 
willingness to urge the administration to take this very appropriate 
action in Geneva this summer. And I thank him for his very eloquent 
statement.
  Mr. President, at this time I reserve the balance of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank my colleague, 
Senator Mack, and I am certainly pleased to be here on the floor with 
Senator Hutchinson.
  Mr. President, I want to build on the remarks of Senator Mack for a 
moment. He was talking about Wei Jingsheng. Wei Jingsheng wrote an op-
ed piece in the New York Times in December. I ask unanimous consent to 
have this printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the New York Times, Dec. 24, 1998]

                      China's Diversionary Tactics

                           (By Wei Jingsheng)

       Last Saturday, when Liu Niachun, a prominent dissident, 
     left his Chinese prison cell and arrived in the United 
     States, many Western reports said he had been ``freed'' or 
     ``released.'' One year ago, after 18 years in a Chinese 
     prison, I, too, was ``released'' and sent here. A Chinese 
     official said that if I ever set foot in China again, I would 
     immediately be returned to prison. I cannot identify any 
     legal principle that explains how my expulsion or Mr. Liu's 
     could be construed as a release.
       Yet the State Department, in a report last January, used my 
     forced exile as evidence that China was taking ``positive 
     steps in human rights'' and that ``Chinese society continued 
     to become more open.'' These ``positive steps'' led the 
     United States and its allies to oppose condemnation of China 
     at a meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights 
     in April. In the months that followed, President Clinton and 
     other Western leaders traveled to China, trumpeting increased 
     economic ties and muting criticism on human rights.
       Thus, without fear of sanction, the Chinese Government 
     intensified its repression in 1998. Once the leaders achieved 
     their diplomatic victories, they turned to their main 
     objective: the preservation of tyrannical power. This year, 
     about 70 people are known to have been arrested, and in 
     recent weeks the Government has greatly stepped up that pace.
       On Monday, Xu Wenli, another dissident, was sentenced to 13 
     years in prison for ``subversion of state power.'' He was 
     given only four days to prepare for his trial and was denied 
     a lawyer of his choice. Two others, Wang Youcai and Qin 
     Yongmin, were sentenced to 11 and 14 years, also for 
     subversion. Both were denied legal representation.
       It was widely believed that Mr. Liu's ``release'' was an 
     attempt to deflect world attention from these harsh 
     punishments. This time, at least, the State Department didn't 
     buy the deception. Deploring China's actions, a spokesman 
     called the sentences ``a step backward.''
       Whether this statement constitutes a change of American 
     policy or merely a cosmetic change remains to be seen. If the 
     American Government really wanted to punish China, it could, 
     say, restrict Chinese imports to the United States. Or it 
     could halt all questionable technology transfers to China.
       Despite the Chinese Government's occasional lip service to 
     ``openness,'' the authorities have consistently and swiftly 
     moved to quash not only political organizations but also 
     trade unions, peasants' associations and unapproved religious 
     gatherings.
       As Li Peng, the speaker of the National People's Party 
     Congress, declared recently, ``If an organization's purpose 
     is to promote a multiparty system in China and to negate the 
     leadership prerogatives of the Chinese Communist Party, then 
     it will not be permitted to exist.''
       This statement clearly shows that the Communist Party's 
     primary objective is to sustain its tyranny, and to do so it 
     must deny the people basic rights and freedoms. We must 
     measure the leaders' progress on human rights not by the 
     ``release'' of individuals but by the people's ability to 
     speak,

[[Page 3129]]

     worship and assemble without official interference and 
     persecution. Only that can be called progress.

  Mr. WELLSTONE. The article talks about the release of Mr. Liu, a 
prominent dissident, who left his cell. He will be with us at a press 
conference tomorrow. What Wei Jingsheng had to say is that after Mr. 
Liu was released,

       . . . many Western reports [the administration talked about 
     this as a triumph] said he had been ``freed'' or ``released" 
     [to Wei Jingsheng].

  He goes on to say,

       One year ago, after 18 years in a Chinese prison, I, too, 
     was ``released.''

  Of course, the problem is he was told by the Chinese Government that 
if he ever set foot in the country again, he would be immediately 
returned to freedom. It is hard to argue that this is what in the 
United States we would call freedom at all.

       Yet the State Department, in a report last January, [Wei 
     Jingsheng goes on to say] used my forced exile [and that is 
     what it is] as evidence that China was taking ``positive 
     steps in human rights'' and that ``Chinese society continued 
     to become more open.''

  These ``positive steps'' led the United States and its allies to 
oppose condemnation of China at a meeting of the United Nations 
Commission on Human Rights last April. Senator Hutchinson, I, and 
Senator Mack came to the floor. We got 95 votes calling on our 
Government to take the lead with the resolution condemning these 
widespread violations of human rights in China.
  Here is the key part of Wei Jingsheng's piece:

       Thus without fear of sanction, the Chinese government 
     intensified its repression in 1998. Once the leaders achieved 
     their diplomatic victories, they turned to their main 
     objective: The preservation of tyrannical power. This year, 
     about 70 people are known to have been arrested, and in 
     recent weeks the government has greatly stepped up the pace.

  My colleague, Senator Hutchinson, talked about Zhong Ji and Shao She 
Chang today. I want to quote from the Washington Post: ``Chinese police 
detained two dissidents.'' What did they want to do? Why are they now 
detained? Why do they face imprisonment? They want to meet with our 
Secretary of State when she visits China to talk about human rights. 
For that, they have been detained and face possible, probable 
imprisonment.
  We have offered a resolution today that condemns China's human rights 
record. We call upon our Government to introduce a resolution 
condemning China's human rights record at the next session of the U.N. 
Commission on Human Rights which meets in March. We also call on our 
Government to begin immediately contacting other governments to ask 
them to cosponsor such a resolution.
  When President Clinton formally delinked trade and human rights in 
1994, he pledged on the record that the United States would ``step up 
its efforts, in cooperation with other states, to insist that the 
United Nations Human Rights Commission pass a resolution dealing with 
the serious human rights abuses in China.'' That is what the President 
of the United States of America has said.
  Now, he also said that we would speak out on human rights, but the 
fact of the matter is, we have increased our trade, our military 
contacts, we have gone forward with high-level summits. In the 
meantime, Chinese Government leaders continue to crack down on every 
last dissident in a country of over 1 billion people. We have seen what 
has happened this past year.
  It is time for our country, the United States of America, which 
stands for democracy and freedom, to go to this United Nations 
Commission on Human Rights and to introduce this resolution supporting 
the brave people in China who stand up for human rights. That is what 
this resolution is all about.
  The Chinese Government--and my colleague has talked about this--
continues to commit widespread abuses and, since the President's visit 
in June, has flagrantly violated international human rights agreements.
  Examples: Recently it sentenced three of China's most prominent 
prodemocracy advocates, Xu Wenli, Wang Youcai, and Chin Yougmin, to a 
combined prison term of 35 years. These disgraceful arrests were part 
of a crackdown by the Government on efforts--to do what? These Chinese 
citizens wanted to form a political party. For that, they face a 
combined 35-year prison sentence.
  Further, a businessman in Shanghai, Lin Hai, is now being tried for 
providing e-mail addresses to a prodemocracy Internet magazine in the 
United States. Bill Gates, America Online, it is time for you to get 
engaged in this. You ought to be supporting human rights in China.
  Another democracy activist, Zhang Shanguang, was convicted and 
sentenced to 10 years in prison for giving Radio Free Asia information 
about protests by farmers in the Hunan province. This is all about 
organizing. I say to labor, this is all about the right of people to 
organize and to speak out. And for this, this man is now been sentenced 
to 10 years in prison.
  These events are all part of a pattern of growing repression, with 
legislation passed, when artists and press are told: If you do anything 
to ``endanger social order'' or attempt to ``overthrow state power,'' 
we will round you up and we will throw you in prison.
  Mr. President, these dissidents and these courageous men and women in 
China deserve our full backing.
  At the June meeting in Beijing, President Clinton engaged in a 
spirited debate on human rights with President Jiang Zemin. In light of 
this brutal recent crackdown, all of which has taken place since the 
President visited China, all of which has taken place since the United 
States refused to bring a resolution before the Human Rights Commission 
in the United Nations, I and my colleague, Senator Hutchinson, urge, 
and I think we will have 90-some votes that will urge, the 
administration to bring a resolution at Geneva in March and to continue 
to register our deep concern about the absence of freedom of expression 
and association and the use of arbitrary detention in China. Past 
experience has shown that if we apply the pressure, it can make a 
difference. By sponsoring a resolution at the United Nations Human 
Rights Commission, the United States will be showing our commitment to 
international human rights standards.
  Mr. President, my colleague from Arkansas spoke about this. On 
October 5, 1998, China finally signed the International Covenant on 
Civil and Political Rights. When I talked to Sandy Berger, a friend, 
last year, he said to me: Look, we don't think we need to go forward 
with this resolution condemning China on human rights abuses at the 
U.N. Commission on Human Rights, because they are going to make a 
commitment, and they will sign this International Covenant on Civil and 
Political Rights.
  What have they done? They have not taken the steps to make it 
binding, and, more importantly, they violated what the whole agreement 
is.
  We have seen in this last year a very clear pattern of more and more 
and more repression, Chinese citizens imprisoned for trying to form a 
political party, Chinese citizens imprisoned for writing articles, 
Chinese citizens in prison for trying to organize so they can get a 
better price as farmers, so they can get better wages as workers. It is 
time for the United States Government to provide the leadership which 
the courageous people in China depend upon.
  Mr. President, I have had the great honor--and I don't know about 
Senator Hutchinson, but I think he would say the same thing--of 
becoming friends, and I feel almost small saying that, because Wei 
Jingsheng is such a great man, I have to pinch myself to remind me 
there is somebody who spent over 20 years in prison because he had the 
courage to stand up against a government, he had the courage to write 
and to speak out for what he thought was good and right for people in 
China. I don't think I could ever have the courage to do so. Thank God, 
I live in the United States of America. He is a Chinese dissident who 
spent so much time in prison because of his courage.
  In an article published shortly after his release, Mr. Wei Jingsheng 
stated,

       Democracy and freedom are among the loftiest ideals of 
     humanity, and they are the most sacred rights of mankind. 
     Those who already enjoy democracy, liberty and human

[[Page 3130]]

     rights in particular, should not allow their own personal 
     happiness [this is what he said, Mr. President] to numb them 
     into forgetting that many others who are still struggling 
     against tyranny, slavery and poverty, and all those who are 
     suffering from unimaginable forms of repression, exploitation 
     and massacres.

  We shouldn't forget such people. We shouldn't take our freedom for 
granted. And we, the United States of America, ought to take the lead 
in bringing this resolution before the United Nations Commission on 
Human Rights.
  When you talk to people around the world--and we are talking about 
China today--Senator Hutchinson, they will tell you that maybe Senators 
don't realize this, maybe we have this debate on the floor of the 
Senate, and then we have a vote, but what a difference this makes to 
the people in these countries who have the courage.
  We are going to get a strong vote at 12 o'clock today and we are 
sending a signal to the White House it is time for our Government to 
take the lead. I hope we will get the leadership from the White House. 
I hope we get the leadership from the Secretary of State. I certainly 
hope that the U.S. Senate will go on record today with a strong 
bipartisan vote.
  I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas is recognized.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Wellstone for 
his commitment to the issue of human rights. When Paul Wellstone comes 
to the floor and I come to the floor and we work own human rights 
issues together, we both want to make it clear that we can agree very 
rarely. There are few political issues that we are going to be united 
on, and our votes will more often than not cancel each other out on the 
issues coming before the U.S. Senate. But I admire and respect Paul 
Wellstone for his deep commitment to democracy and to human rights 
around the world, and for his involvement in this issue. I am glad to 
be able to work with him on this. I think it is a very important 
resolution.
  I reiterate that this resolution is important, and it is important 
for several reasons. It is important because it will be a message to 
the administration. It is very timely, and I appreciate our majority 
leader for ensuring that this vote occur this week because our 
Secretary of State will be traveling to China next week. It is 
important for this vote to occur. It is important for it to be a strong 
bipartisan vote and for our Secretary of State to have that message as 
she goes to China. So I think it is important from that standpoint.
  It is also a very, very important message to our European allies. 
Many of our allies in Europe are looking for our leadership. Germany 
has had a change in government. They are much more sympathetic to the 
cause of human rights, in my estimation. The French press reported that 
this vote in the U.S. Senate was going to occur today. They are looking 
for a message and a signal from political leaders in the United States. 
So it is important from that standpoint as well. It is a message to the 
Chinese Government, not just through our Secretary of State, but that 
we as the elected Representatives of the people--the U.S. Senate, the 
House of Representatives--as we speak out on this issue, it conveys a 
strong message to the Chinese Government, and they are concerned about 
what this country thinks.
  I think one of the great failings of this administration has been 
that it has rewarded human rights abuses and crackdowns in China, 
whether it is religious freedom crackdowns, press crackdowns, Internet 
crackdowns, or any host of human rights abuses; they have, in effect, 
rewarded that by increasing economic opportunities through trade with 
the United States--most recently, their plan to bring China into the 
World Trade Organization, almost as a reward for the very terrible 
abuses that have occurred during the last several months.
  And then, may I say that this resolution is critically important 
because of the message it sends--as my colleague from Minnesota said, 
the message that it sends to the Chinese activists for democracy and 
human rights within China today, which is that when we take the floor 
of the U.S. Senate and speak on this issue, they are listening--Radio 
Free Asia--through the Internet and through other means by which our 
activities and the news of our activities gets into China. They are 
listening and they are interested and it is an encouragement to them to 
know that there are those who stand with them in the cause of freedom 
in our country and our Government.
  Mr. President, in my opinion, it is wholly appropriate for the United 
States to advance a resolution at the Commission in Geneva critical of 
China's ongoing human rights abuses. The Commission is a multilateral 
forum authorized to deal with the very abuses perpetrated by the 
Chinese Government today--a resolution that the Commission will pierce 
any notions that China's violations of human rights will be quietly 
accepted by the world community.
  There are some in the administration--and I think it is reflected in 
Secretary Albright's statement yesterday--that are undecided on how 
they are going to proceed, and whether or not they are going to offer 
this resolution. There are some within the administration who argue 
that a resolution critical of China at the Human Rights Commission 
should not be pursued and is in effect pointless because, as they put 
it, it is certain to fail.
  I think Senator Mack said, ``Well, I don't believe it is certain to 
fail''; but whether it was certain to fail or not, it should be offered 
on the basis of principle, on the basis of the encouragement and the 
emboldenment it will provide for those within China. But the very 
sentiment that the administration expresses when they say it is certain 
to fail becomes a self-fulfilling sentiment, a self-fulfilling 
prophecy. The more halfhearted the administration is in its attempts to 
advance such a resolution, the less chance that such a resolution will 
have to pass.
  The longer the administration refrains from exercising leadership in 
the international community on this matter of human rights, the less 
likely it is that the resolution will be successful. Bringing forth a 
resolution at the Commission is, as Senator Mack so accurately put it, 
a matter of principle. Success will be measured by the statements of 
truth that flow from the debate at the Commission. A resolution at the 
Commission this summer will proclaim boldly that the human rights 
abuses in China are an affront to the international community and its 
values.
  Mr. President, these values are not uniquely American values. There 
are those who have argued in the past that it is wrong for us to speak 
of these values and to try to, as they put it, force these values upon 
the Chinese Government. But I would assert--and I believe that this 
country is built on this belief --that these values are not uniquely 
American values, that they transcend any national boundary, that they 
are fundamental human values and human rights. Thus, it is highly 
appropriate that we pursue such a resolution. The U.S. must take steps 
to protect internationally recognized human rights, or we will take a 
back seat to those who openly and blatantly abuse them.
  As Senator Wellstone said, last year, this body passed a resolution 
very similar to the one before us today by an overwhelming bipartisan 
vote of 95-5. I hope we can send an equally strong signal to the 
administration again this year. In light of the affront to the 
administration's policy that the Chinese Government has committed in 
the recent crackdown of the last 2 to 3 months, I think it is a very 
timely resolution and an appropriate time for the administration to 
reverse field, to reverse its decision last summer in not pursuing such 
a resolution and, in fact, to say the abuses, the crackdowns, have been 
so flagrant that now the administration will pursue with a new 
aggressiveness a human rights resolution in Geneva, Switzerland.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, promoting human rights is now, and must 
remain, an important component of our overall relationship with China. 
That is why I support Senate Resolution 45, calling on the 
administration to voice our concerns about China's human rights abuses 
before the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva.

[[Page 3131]]

  Even as we try to expand cooperation in areas of mutual interest--
stability on the Korean peninsula, nonproliferation, trade, and the 
environment--we must take note of China's violation of international 
norms in the area of human rights.
  Last year, the administration decided to remain silent in Geneva, 
arguing that more progress could be achieved through quiet diplomacy 
than through public pressure. China did, in fact, release some high 
profile political prisoners. China also signed the International 
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
  In recent months, however, we have witnessed a crackdown on dissent, 
including the arrest of prominent democracy party organizers. China 
continues to jam the broadcasts of Radio Free Asia and to closely 
monitor China's domestic media.
  With respect to Tibet, China's leaders have yet to establish a 
dialogue with the Dalai Lama, and they refuse even to meet with U.S. 
officials responsible for coordinating U.S. policy on Tibet.
  Mr. President, we should not stand mute in the face of China's 
continuing violation of basic human rights. Our silence would be 
deafening.
  If we are not going to call on China to respect human rights before 
the UN Human Rights Commission, where will we make our concerns known?
  And if we must act alone, without support from our European and Asian 
allies, so be it. There is no shame in being alone on the right side of 
history.
  Ten years ago this June the world watched in horror as Chinese 
authorities used lethal force to suppress the Tian-an-men democracy 
movement. I am convinced that the gradual improvement in human rights 
in China over the past decade would not have occurred without concerted 
diplomatic pressure--public and private.
  Now is not the time to let up.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the resolution. 
In the past, the U.S. has rightfully been the strongest critic of human 
rights abuses in China. So I was disappointed, as I think most in the 
Senate were, that the President chose not to sponsor a resolution 
condemning China's human rights practices at last year's annual meeting 
of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. The United States has 
sponsored such a resolution at each of these annual meetings since 
1990.
  Although I didn't agree with that decision, I understood the 
reasoning behind it. China seemed to be making some progress. It had 
signed the UN Covenant on Social, Economic, and Cultural Rights, and 
committed itself to signing the International Covenant on Civil and 
Political Rights (ICCPR). Perhaps reform was at hand. And I certainly 
favor building a constructive and mutually beneficial relationship with 
China.
  But recent history indicates that China often makes such concessions 
until the world's attention is focused elsewhere, and then quickly 
reverts back to it's policy of severe intolerance and repression. In 
1993, for instance, when human rights became an issue in Beijing's bid 
to host the Olympics, China released its most prominent dissident, Wei 
Jingsheng. The Olympics were awarded to Australia, and Wei was detained 
again the following year.
  Similarly, just last December, 6 months after signing the ICCPR, 
China sentenced three democratic activists to prison terms of 10 years 
or more for trying to organize a political party. A fourth dissenter 
was given a 10-year sentence for allegedly ``providing intelligence to 
hostile foreign organizations.'' His crime? He gave an interview to 
Radio Free Asia about farmer protests. And the Chinese premier, Jiang 
Zemin, recently stated that China needed to ``nip those factors that 
undermine social stability in the bud, no matter where they come 
from,'' and that ``the Western mode of political systems must never be 
copied.''
  However, this is not about ``western political systems,'' it is about 
internationally recognized human rights. Respect for these rights must 
be real, and it must be systemic. Empty commitments and token gestures 
are meaningless, and we should not allow them to sway us from 
advocating on behalf of those who are imprisoned in China, or will be, 
for exercising freedoms acknowledged by the world community. An 
international resolution condemning China's human rights practices is 
strongly supported by human rights groups like Amnesty International 
and Human Rights Watch. By passing such a resolution, the international 
community can demonstrate that we will no longer be duped by false 
promises.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs, I rise in begrudging support for S. 
Res. 45. I say begrudging only because while I agree that the UN Human 
Rights Commission should address China's human rights record, I neither 
believe that the UNHRC will place the issue on its agenda nor do I feel 
that this resolution has been brought to the floor in the most 
constructive manner.
  I agree with the other Senators who have spoken this morning that 
there has been a disturbing increase in China in the last six months in 
crackdowns on the freedom of expression, crackdowns evidenced by an 
increase in the number of arrests and convictions of prodemocracy 
activists. Moreover, despite attempts to establish a dialog with 
Beijing, China still refuses to meet with His Holiness the Dalai Lama 
to discuss the future of Tibet and instead continues to facilitate the 
increasing immigration of Han Chinese into Tibet and the jailing of 
Buddhist nuns and lamas. Christian churches not registered with the 
central government continue to be subject to harassment and closure and 
their congregants subject to arrest.
  I believe I understand, although I certainly in no way condone, the 
impetus behind the crackdown. China has recently embarked on a program 
to restructure its economy to a market-oriented system and to open more 
to the world around it. These changes are obviously potentially 
destabilizing for a communist regime governing 1.3 billion people. And 
as with other campaigns in China's past designed to restructure 
society, such as the ``Let 100 Flowers Bloom'' campaign, once the 
program took hold and began to accelerate, the central authorities got 
anxious about continuing to be able to control the pace of reform and 
about it getting out from underneath them. They have consequently begun 
slamming on the brakes and stifling any perceived dissent. And it is 
that movement to stifle peaceful dissent and universal human freedoms 
that should prompt the US to press this issue before the UNHRC.
  In a perfect world one would think that these are exactly the type of 
actions the UNHRC would want to address, but sadly we all know the 
reality of the eventual outcome. This year, as in years past, the 
United States will fail by a significantly wide vote margin to place 
China on the Commission's agenda. We will be deserted by most of our 
purported allies who, while nominally paying lip service to the 
sanctity of human rights, appear more interested in securing their 
commercial interests in the PRC. Well Mr. President, so be it. As 
Senator Biden has noted, there is no shame in standing alone on the 
right side of history, and I fully support that stand under the 
conditions prevailing in China this year.
  But Mr. President, while I support the consideration of this 
resolution today, I am less enthused about the terms of the unanimous 
consent agreement which brought it here. As the Chairman of the 
subcommittee of jurisdiction, in past Congresses I have strongly 
disfavored the practice of discharging the Foreign Relations Committee 
from the consideration of legislation which the Committee has not had 
the opportunity to address first. My disapproval of discharges is 
especially acute when the legislation in question is sponsored by a 
Senator not a member of the Committee. I intend this to be my practice 
in this Congress as well.
  I have, however, made exceptions in the case of legislation which is 
completely non-controversial or is somehow time-sensitive. Since the 
UNHRC meetings this year in Geneva are imminent, and since there was 
not enough time to consider the legislation in Committee, it made sense 
in this

[[Page 3132]]

narrow case and for those reasons I agreed to the discharge.
  I am also uneasy with the terms of the unanimous consent agreement 
because they preclude any amendment to the resolution, thereby 
preventing members from offering what I feel would be constructive 
changes to the text. In addition, Mr. President, I am unsure why--when 
the Senate should be focused on more pressing domestic issues such as 
the Y2K problem or Social Security--we are taking the Senate's time to 
debate and then vote on a resolution about which there is no difference 
of opinion and which will most likely pass 100 to 0. This could have 
just as easily been disposed of by unanimous consent yesterday. For 
those that argue that a unanimous roll call vote somehow sends a 
stronger signal than passing legislation by unanimous consent, I would 
note that it is my longstanding experience that very few people if any 
outside the Beltway--especially in foreign countries--understand the 
nuanced differences between the two.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, how much time is remaining that I 
control?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. A little over 7 minutes.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, how much time do I have?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. A little over 19 minutes.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I yield 5 minutes to my colleague from Wisconsin, 
Senator Feingold. I think his model is one of consistency. He is 
consistent on human rights questions, and he is absolutely one of the 
most forceful and effective leaders in the U.S. Congress for human 
rights.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin is recognized.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I thank the Chair. I especially thank my 
friends from Arkansas and Minnesota. I am extremely proud of their 
leadership on this issue. Having this matter become one of the first 
matters we take up in this Congress is exactly the right way to go. We 
need to be as aggressive as we can on this issue. That is why I am 
cosponsoring the resolution. I strongly commend them for their 
leadership on this.
  The resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that the United 
States should initiate active lobbying at the United Nations Commission 
on Human Rights for a resolution condemning human rights abuses in 
China. And it calls specifically for the United States to introduce and 
make all efforts necessary to pass a resolution on China and Tibet at 
the upcoming session of the Commission, which is due to begin next 
month in Geneva.
  This resolution makes a simple, clear statement of principle: The 
Senate believes that there should be a China resolution in Geneva, 
period.
  The Commission is a focal point for the protection of human rights, 
and as such, is an ideal multilateral forum in which the United States 
should voice its concerns. Under the pressure of previous Geneva 
resolutions, China has finally reacted. China signed the U.N. Covenant 
on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights in 1997 and the International 
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in October 1998. Unfortunately, 
neither of these important documents has been ratified or implemented.
  But at least the kind of pressure the United States put on this 
situation led them to sign these documents.
  The effort to move a resolution in the Commission is particularly 
important this year, in light of the Administration's decision, 
contrary to the nearly unanimous sentiment of the Senate, not to 
sponsor such a resolution last year. That was a real disappointment for 
all of us.
  Their misguided belief that progress could be achieved by other means 
was clearly not borne out by events in 1998, when, particularly in the 
last quarter, China stepped up its repression.
  As we all know, for the past few years, China's leaders have 
aggressively lobbied against efforts at the Commission earlier and more 
actively than the countries that support a resolution. Last year, 
Chinese officials basically succeeded in getting the European Union 
Foreign Ministers to drop any European cosponsorship of a resolution. 
In the past, China's vigorous efforts have resulted in a ``no action'' 
motion at the Commission.
  I will say, on a bright note, that in 1995 a ``no action'' motion was 
defeated and a resolution was almost adopted. But, unfortunately, on a 
downbeat note, it lost by only one vote. A little more effort could 
have made the difference. I sincerely hope that we do not end up with 
that kind of a loss at this year's meeting.
  Nearly five years after the President's decision, which I deeply 
regretted, to delink most-favored-nation status from human rights, we 
cannot forget that the human rights situation in China and Tibet 
remains abysmal. While the State Department has not yet provided its 
most recent human rights report, I have no doubt it will be as critical 
of China as the 1997 report was when it noted that ``the Government of 
China continued to commit widespread and well-documented human rights 
abuses in violation of internationally accepted norms, including 
extrajudicial killings, the use of torture, arbitrary arrest and 
detention, forced abortion and sterilization, the sale of organs from 
executed prisoners, and tight control over the exercise of the rights 
of freedom of speech, press, and religion.'' I encourage Secretary 
Albright to actively raise these concerns with her counterparts during 
her visit to Beijing next week. Unfortunately, in the past bilateral 
discussions have produced only empty promises from China's leaders on 
the subject of human rights. Regardless of what assurances China may 
provide to the Secretary, we should not let Beijing's easily abandoned 
promises deter us from seeking international condemnation of its 
practices. Only through strong US leadership can we gain the broad 
international consensus necessary to maintain the pressure on China to 
demonstrate sustained progress in providing the basic human rights its 
people deserve.
  Mr. President, again my thanks to these two Senators. The time is 
now, and the place is Geneva. We are going to keep pushing this until 
it gets done.
  I thank the President, and I thank my colleagues.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I want to say to my colleague from 
Wisconsin that we are really going to put the pressure on. We are going 
to have this vote today. It is going to be an overwhelmingly strong 
vote.
  Tomorrow, the State Department will be releasing its report on human 
rights conditions in other countries. It surely has to be critical 
about China, because of the action we are going to take.
  The Chinese Embassy is going to have a press conference here in 
Washington as well. We are going to have a press conference tomorrow 
bringing together any number of different people--those Senators and 
Representatives who are still here. We are going to be joined by Mr. 
Wu, a very courageous man, Harry Wu, Wei Jingsheng, and human rights 
organizations.
  We are going to keep the pressure up. We are going to keep the 
pressure on.
  The end of our resolution says:

       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that at the 
     55th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Commission in 
     Geneva, Switzerland, the United States should introduce and 
     make all efforts necessary to pass a resolution calling upon 
     the People's Republic of China to end its human rights abuses 
     in China and Tibet.

  As I said to my colleague, Senator Hutchinson, we haven't talked much 
about Tibet. Let me just say in deference to some of the work of 
Senator Helms, who really wanted us to have an ambassador to Tibet, the 
compromise agreement was to have Julia Taft become our Special 
Coordinator on Tibet out of the U.S. State Department. The Chinese 
Embassy has refused to meet with Julia Taft. They won't even meet. The 
Chinese Embassy, whatever they say in their press conference tomorrow, 
will not even meet with Julia Taft, State Department Special 
Coordinator on Tibet. What we were told last year was, no, we shouldn't 
go forward as a government and introduce this resolution on

[[Page 3133]]

human rights at the Human Rights Commission in Geneva.
  Senator Hutchinson is right. This is the forum. This is the place. 
This is the international body. When we do, as an international 
community, focus on human rights issues--and we were silent last year. 
Silence is betrayal. And we are insisting today on the floor of U.S. 
Senate that our Government no longer be silent on these questions.
  We were told last year, first of all, there will be a lessening of 
repression. The Chinese Government is going to sign this covenant. They 
did. We see more repression. We were told that in Tibet that visitors 
would be allowed to Tibet. You know what happened. Mary Robinson, who 
was our ambassador on human rights to the United Nations, went to 
China. Her visit took place in September 1998. But Chinese officials 
produced none of the information she requested on prisoners, denied her 
access to Panchen Lama. Panchen Lama is the youngest political prisoner 
that we know of in the world. She had no access to him. And they made 
no specific commitments on ratification of two U.N. human rights 
treaties. They signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political 
Rights, but they produced no timetable for ratifying it. And they 
clearly violated it.
  I ask you. I ask the administration. I ask the President. The 
President made a commitment that when we deal in trade in human 
rights--that is what this debate is about. This is not a debate about 
MFN. It is not about whether or not trade should be linked to human 
rights. I think that it should and others don't. I don't know if 
Senator Hutchinson and I agree or not agree. This is about a different 
issue. The President of the United States of America said he would put 
the pressure on at Geneva at the Human Rights Commission. That is the 
place. And we haven't done it.
  Last year we had this vote. We have a stronger vote this year. And in 
spite of our vote, our Government ignored the wishes of the U.S. 
Senate. This time we are saying don't do that. We are saying you can't 
argue, our Government can't argue, the State Department can't argue, 
the President can't argue, the Secretary of State can't argue--that 
what has happened is, after the President's visit, we have seen now 
more respect for human rights. They can't argue that there is less 
repression. They can't argue that there is progress in China or Tibet.
  We are saying today that if our Government does not introduce this 
resolution condemning the widespread violations of human rights by the 
Chinese Government at this important U.N. Human Rights Commission 
gathering in Geneva in March, then our silence will be betrayal.
  We should introduce this resolution. As Senator Hutchinson said, we 
should garner support for it. We should urge the European Community 
also to come out with a strong resolution.
  I want to tell Senator Hutchinson that I understand the German 
Government is looking at the wording of this resolution, and they may 
very well lead the way with other European countries. It is time to do 
so.
  I feel strongly about this. I don't want to be self-righteous at all, 
but my father fled persecution in Russia in 1914 when he was 17 years 
of age with czarist Russia. Then there was the revolution. And he 
thought all the country would be better. And then his parents wrote and 
said, ``Don't come back.'' The Communists had taken over. And he never 
went back.
  My dad passed away in 1983. Sheila and I finally visited where my dad 
grew up in 1991. It was pretty clear to us that his family was probably 
all murdered by Stalin. All communication was broken off during the 
Stalin era. The letters stopped.
  I was raised in a home where I was told by my dad really almost every 
day--every night, at 10 at night, starting in high school--he was kind 
of an embarrassment when I was younger, because he was very ``old 
country.'' He was almost 50 when I was born, and he wasn't ``cool.'' 
But when I got to be high school age, I realized what a treasure he 
was. He could speak 10 languages fluently, and was the wisest, best 
person I ever knew in my life.
  We would have hot tea and sponge cake at 10 at night--not on the 
weekend, but Monday through Thursday, and I would listen to him talk 
about the world. My father Leon would talk about the importance of the 
first amendment rights, about the importance of human rights, and about 
the importance of freedom.
  I am telling you that I feel as if that is what our Government is all 
about. That is what the United States of America is all about. That is 
what we are all about. And we ought to be speaking out on this and we 
ought to be taking the lead in Geneva. That is what our resolution 
says, I say to the Senator.
  Mr. President, I think what I will do, we will have a vote coming up 
soon, and although I love to speak on this and I am very committed to 
this, I would like for Senator Hutchinson to make our concluding 
remarks, because I want to say to Senator Hutchinson, he is right, we 
don't agree on everything. In fact, this could be the end of my 
reputation, being out on the floor of the Senate with him.
  Actually, being a little more serious, it has been a labor of love, 
working with Senator Hutchinson on this. We are just starting. We are 
not going to let up. I would like the Senator to conclude on this. I 
thank the Senator very much for his leadership.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is the Senator yielding back his time?
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I yield back the rest of my time.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I am also glad to join in this effort, 
one that we will continue to fight and one on which we will ultimately 
prevail, I believe.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Bunning be added 
as a cosponsor to this resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I think we have covered many of the reasons why this 
is important. We have reiterated them. I do believe we will have a 
strong vote today.
  One of the individuals whose name has been mentioned several times by 
Senator Mack, by myself, Senator Wellstone, is Wei Jingsheng, truly one 
of the courageous heroes of our generation. And I, too, am glad to be 
able to call Wei Jingsheng a friend. Wei Jingsheng has been in my 
office on numerous occasions, and he will be at our press conference 
tomorrow.
  As I am able to conclude our presentation of this resolution today, I 
want to just mention a little bit about Wei Jingsheng.
  I see Senator Feinstein has come to the floor.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. I have a little problem in that Senator Wellstone has 
yielded his time.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. If possible, I would like to speak in favor of this 
resolution for 5 minutes, if I may.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I wonder if I could ask unanimous consent to gain my 
time back. I would like Senator Hutchinson to finish. How much time do 
I have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, we can yield back 6 
minutes.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. May I give 5 minutes to the Senator from California?
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Absolutely. Certainly.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I thank you. I would like to thank the 
Senators for their courtesy.
  I rise to add my support to the resolution offered by the Senator 
from Minnesota and the Senator from Arkansas.
  I do so with a considerable sense of disappointment because for much 
of 1998, politics in the People's Republic of China appeared headed 
toward an authentic transformation. The government began to tolerate--
and even encourage--discussion among intellectuals, academics, and 
reformers of the gradual development of democracy in China, to the 
point that many began to speak of a ``Beijing Spring.''
  After many years of stalling, China signed the U.N. International 
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which,

[[Page 3134]]

when ratified, would require China to allow much closer international 
scrutiny of its human rights practices. Cross-strait discussions 
resumed with Taiwan.
  And during President Clinton's visit to China last summer, President 
Jiang Zemin, an old friend of mine, did two extraordinary things; he 
allowed the Chinese people to hear President Clinton directly by 
televising both his speech at Beijing University and the two leaders' 
joint press conference; and, in the press conference, President Jiang 
implied that the Chinese leadership would be prepared to meet with the 
Dalai Lama to discuss the question of Tibet if the Dalai Lama would 
make certain statements about the principle of One China and Tibet and 
Taiwan's status as a part of China.
  That was a major step forward for many of us who have advocated this 
for years.
  Each of these developments seemed to represent a hopeful shift toward 
a new, more open attitude by the Chinese government. It seemed to 
reflect the confidence of a new generation of Chinese leaders, firmly 
in control, unafraid to allow their people to stretch their minds, and 
willing to deal forthrightly with difficult political questions like 
Tibet and Taiwan through negotiations. But now these hopes appear to be 
in abeyance.
  I now believe that the hardliners appear to be strengthening their 
hand, and in so doing are causing their President, Jiang Zemin, to lose 
face as they prevent him from allowing a further opening-up of Chinese 
society and from carrying out a negotiation to solve real issues of 
deep concern to six million Tibetans.
  The recent spate of arrests of dissidents of China, followed by 
summary trials and convictions of several of the most prominent among 
them--Xu Wenli, Wang Youcai, and Qin Yongmin--raise the ugly specter of 
a renewed tightening on political freedom in the months leading up to 
the tenth anniversary of the Tiananmen Square tragedy.
  On Tibet, the Dalai Lama abandoned plans to use his recent visit to 
the United States to make far-reaching statements intended to open the 
door to negotiations with China, amid unmistakable signals from Beijing 
that it was not prepared to begin a dialog regardless of what he said. 
Meanwhile, China's persecution in Tibet has only intensified. The 
brutal tactics of brainwashing, intimidation, and torture--tools of the 
Cultural Revolution--are now in use in Tibet.
  The United States can continue to make contributions toward systemic 
changes that will instill the rule of law in China, which would, for 
example, make summary trials a thing of the past. Congress failed to 
fund the President's rule of law initiative last year; we should not 
repeat that mistake this year. Congress and the Administration should 
continue to resist sanctions and economic penalties that will only make 
the situation worse, but we must develop a stronger policy to put 
pressure on China to begin a dialog with the Dalai Lama on providing 
autonomy for the people of Tibet. An important step was taken last 
month when Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees and 
Migration Julia Taft was named the State Department's Special 
Coordinator for Tibet.
  This resolution argues for an additional step the United States can 
take. It urges the Administration to support and work for the passage 
of a resolution condemning China's human rights abuses at the U.N. 
Human Rights Commission in Geneva.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that precise individual 
documentation and statements of this be printed in the Record following 
my remarks. These statements were recently given by refugees coming out 
of China directly to some of our friends in Nepal.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See Exhibit 1.)
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Chair.
  Whatever the reason for China's entrenchment, it now presents a 
serious challenge to strengthening of relationships between our two 
countries.
  I happen to remain convinced that sustained, active dialog and 
engagement with the Chinese leadership is the wisest course, but in 
these discussions we must be frank and open and the interests of both 
our Nations must be served. The United States can continue to make 
contributions towards systemic changes that will instill the rule of 
law in China which would, for example, make summary trials a thing of 
the past.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Is it possible----
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I say to my colleague, the problem is we are going to 
have a vote soon.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. May I ask unanimous consent just for 2 minutes?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and 
it is so ordered.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Congress failed to fund the President's rule of law 
initiative last year. We should not make that mistake this year. 
Congress and the administration should continue to resist sanctions and 
economic penalties that will only make the situation worse, but we must 
develop a stronger policy to put pressure on China to begin a dialog 
with the Dalai Lama and providing autonomy for the people of Tibet.
  An important step was taken last month when Assistant Secretary of 
State for Population, Refugees, and Migration Julia Taft was named as 
the State Department's Special Coordinator for Tibet.
  This resolution argues for an additional step the United States can 
take. It urges the administration to support and work for the passage 
of a resolution condemning China's human rights abuses at the United 
Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva. While we should acknowledge 
China's progress in many areas and continue to encourage China in 
search of greater progress, we should also use the forum of the United 
Nations Human Rights Commission to let China and the world know that 
China's human rights abuses are unacceptable.
  Ultimately, China's leaders must come to understand that the economic 
freedom that they have until recently championed--and which they still 
know is necessary for China to fully modernize its economy--must 
advance together with social and political freedom. As in Hong Kong and 
Taiwan, China's ability to withstand economic turmoil will depend in 
part on the ability of Chinese citizens to make judgments for 
themselves. Political leaders cannot expect to draw a line between 
economic and political judgments. Both must be allowed to flourish 
hand-in-hand. And that means viewing the efforts of Xu Wenli, Wang 
Youcai, and Qin Yongmin to organize a more pluralist Chinese polity, 
and viewing the efforts of the Dalai Lama to promote dialogue and 
religious and cultural freedom, as encouraging signs of China's 
modernization, not as dangerous signs of China's instability.

                               Exhibit 1

         Testimony of Tibetan Refugees in Nepal--November 1998

             (Names have been removed for their protection)

       I rode on trucks and other vehicles many days' travel from 
     Kham to Lhasa, where I purchased a business permit for Yuan 
     250 to travel onward. There, a younger cousin and I paid Yuan 
     1,200 each to a Nepali guide to smuggle us across the border 
     at night. We completed our walk mostly at night.
       I was a monk at Rinchen Lingpa monastery in Dzong, and had 
     to leave because of a new policy reducing the number of monks 
     from 45 to a maximum of 30. But already, severe economic 
     conditions were forcing me to look for other opportunities; 
     my father, who was imprisoned for 15 years after 1959, is 73 
     years old now and unable to support me and himself. Because 
     of Dzong's proximity to the recent summer's flooding along 
     the Yangtse, officials were coming and ``shaking down'' the 
     monasteries for contributions to the relief efforts. Also, 
     livestock, farm product and head taxes and other fees have 
     increased steeply and consistently over the past few years, 
     and especially so recently. So many people want to escape 
     from Tibet, but most are afraid of getting caught, shot at or 
     encountering great hardship along the way.
       I would like to go to Drepung Monastery, in southern India, 
     and resume my Buddhist practice there.
                                  ____

       In Tibet, I lived for many years in Ko-lung, a Nyingma sect 
     nunnery, except for one trip

[[Page 3135]]

     to India in 1994. Earlier, there were 60 nuns, and recently 
     that number was officially reduced and limited to 45, along 
     with enactment of other strictures such as a ban on all 
     morning prayers [an important foundation of Tibetan Buddhist 
     practice].
       In April of 1998, I was drawn into an argument with the 
     head nun, who accused me of being aligned with the Tibetan 
     community in exile. (When I returned to Nagchu from my trip 
     to India in '94, I was kept in solitary confinement for 20 
     days before being released). As a result, I was turned over 
     to the authority in charge of the political re-education 
     program, which I was inducted into. I, and others, were 
     forced to renounce our allegiance to and relinquish all 
     photos of the Dalai Lama (which we tried to hide), and to 
     state in writing that Tibet is and always has been an 
     inalienable part of China. However, knowing that I faced 
     imprisonment in doing so, I refused to write that I agreed 
     with their ``re-education'' points. I was not imprisoned, but 
     fined Yuan 1,400. My parents and I realized that we were 
     unable to pay my fine, and that without the nunnery there was 
     nothing left for me there, so I decided to leave.
                                  ____

       From the age of 15, I had been a monk at Ganden monastery, 
     and a teacher and part time translator for tourists. I was 
     expelled in September, 1996, along with 200 other monks as a 
     result of suspicions that authorities had developed following 
     the Ganden uprising on May 6 of that year: 50 officials had 
     arrived at Ganden, and the monks began throwing stones. That 
     night, the monastery was surrounded and about 100 monks were 
     arrested the next morning; most of those are now serving 9-15 
     years sentences. During the night, I had helped a 
     photographer escape with film, resulting in a news story that 
     was broadcast on VOA wherein the photographer thanked the 
     Ganden teachers for advising him to escape that night. I 
     became very cautious, careful to clean my quarters and hide 
     all my Dalai Lama photographs, but officials tracked me down 
     on the basis of that VOA news report.
       The situation in Tibet is getting worse, month by month. 
     Monks are being expelled from monasteries, and now and 
     entrance exam in which you have to write well in Chinese is 
     required for every job, even low level jobs. The culture of 
     Lhasa has also deteriorated, with Chinese prostitution and 
     other vices found everywhere, now.
                                  ____

       In Lhasa, I bought a fake internal travel pass to the 
     border, and came with my pregnant wife. We paid Rs. 30,000/--
     and were smuggled across.
       When I was 15, I left Amdo to train as a monk at Ganden, 
     but I was there for less than 2 years. In 1987 and '89, I 
     witnessed the uprisings and demonstrations in Lhasa, and was 
     emotionally very moved by them. That's when I realized that I 
     had to stand up to the Chinese, and I have been helping the 
     Tibet cause since that time.
       After 1992, I was constantly on a PSB (Public Security 
     Bureau) watch list, and several times was harassed, 
     interrogated and detained. I was first arrested in 1992, and 
     was held in solitary confinement and interrogated and beaten 
     for 8 days. Continuously, three policemen had me kneel on a 
     cement floor and kicked me on the body and face. One of them 
     did all the kicking and beating, one watched, and the other 
     sat at a desk and took notes. They were Chinese and Tibetan, 
     but I don't harbor ill feelings toward the Tibetans because I 
     feel their circumstances in being there were not their fault.
       They couldn't get any information out of me, so they fined 
     me Yuan 6,700 and made me swear that I would never reveal the 
     place of confinement--which looks like a normal government 
     office, but with confinement rooms attached at the back. I 
     believe that there are many other such places of confinement; 
     I know others who have been similarly interrogated and 
     beaten.
       In 1993, I went on pilgrimage to India to attend His 
     Holiness's Kalachakra initiation in Sikkim, and when I 
     returned to Lhasa I had to hide and move my residence 
     frequently, in order to avoid being arrested. Even my parents 
     were being watched, in Amdo. I had opened a shop in Amdo with 
     a friend, and he was arrested and sentenced to five years 
     imprisonment, so I realized that I was in imminent danger of 
     arrest.
       In 1994, I returned to Amdo and changed my name, stopped 
     wearing monks' robes, and stayed mostly in remote areas. But 
     in August of 1995 I came back to Lhasa, and in October opened 
     a restaurant there. In December of 1995, right at the time 
     when the Chinese appointed their selection for the Panchen 
     Lama, one of my teachers was arrested and kept in 
     confinement, and I was arrested shortly thereafter. The PSB 
     questioned me about my time in India, and tried to force me 
     to agree that the Chinese-selected Panchen Lama was the 
     genuine one. They closed and ransacked my restaurant, which 
     they suspected of being a meeting place for people to talk 
     about freedom for Tibet.
       I was sentenced to 2 years in prison on 3 counts: for going 
     to India to see the Dalai Lama, for running a restaurant 
     suspected of being connected to the Tibet freedom movement, 
     and for being suspected of engaging in political activity. I 
     was first held at Gutsa prison, about 5 kilometers from 
     Lhasa, for 10 months. I was kept chained and was beaten for 
     the first 15 days (one of my testicles was crushed), and was 
     given no food or water for the first 5 days. They offered 
     food and water, trying to tempt me to tell them what I had 
     been doing. I was beaten so much that I really thought I had 
     died and gone to Hell. I had a cell that was only big enough 
     to lie down in, with a pan to use as a toilet. Our child died 
     during delivery, in June, 1996, when I was in prison.
       On January 10, 1997, I was transferred to Tolong Dzong 
     prison, where I stayed for the remaining 14 months of my 
     sentence. I was released on April 2 of 1998, and then on May 
     30 was re-arrested by a plain clothes PSB officer, on 
     political grounds, and held for 45 more days. After that, I 
     had to report every month to the police, and was not allowed 
     to travel. That's when my wife and I decided to leave for 
     Nepal.
       My wife gave birth to a boy on November 3. Now, my first 
     priority is to find work, in order to repay a large loan that 
     I own in Lhasa. I'd also like to learn at least some 
     rudimentary English, to work for the Tibet cause, and to help 
     my friends who are still in Tibet, many of them in prison.
                                  ____

       My brother was killed by the Chinese in 1958, and since 
     then the situation in Tibet has only been getting worse. In 
     1975 and '76, the state took possession of all the private 
     farm lands in our area, and has been leasing them back to the 
     farmers. Beginning this year, we have not been allowed to 
     sell our crops (primarily barley and wheat) to the open 
     market, but are forced to sell 70-80% of it to the government 
     at a fixed rate that is about half the open market rate. And 
     now, we're not allowed to keep pictures of the Dalai Lama 
     even in our homes.
                                  ____

       I came over a high pass, though we started as a group of 
     only 18 and merged with other groups from Amdo and Lhasa.
       This year at the Gawa monastery, where I was a monk, 
     officials recently forced us to publicly denounce the Dalai 
     Lama, and they now prohibit monks younger than 18 from 
     joining the monastery. This is a very shrewd tactic on the 
     part of the Chinese, because they understand that by the time 
     young people are 18 they have already been exposed to modern 
     distractions and bad habits, such as drinking and gambling 
     and prostitution, which spoils their desire for religious 
     practice. Historically (before 1959), our monastery had 800 
     people, but in recent years it has remained at around 300. 
     About 3 months ago, though, 225 monks were expelled, 
     including me and most of the senior monks. It is now nearly 
     impossible to get admitted to a monastery--and entrance to 
     Sera, Drepung or Ganden is impossible--because the officials 
     are reducing the numbers of monks allowed at monasteries 
     everywhere. Some of the Gawa monks have nowhere to go, and so 
     they wait until the officials are gone and then discreetly 
     join the activities in the monastery, hiding when necessary.
       The Chinese have appointed their own Panchen Lama, and we 
     don't even know where the genuine Panchen Lama is. I have 
     been told that the public is prohibited from meeting the 
     genuine Panchen Lama's parents.
       Also, taxes have increased beyond what Tibetans can afford. 
     We used to pay pasture taxes of 7 per yak and Yuan 200 per 
     horse each year, but these have been raised recently, plus 
     farmers and herders have to pay in-kind taxes of meat and 
     butter each year to the authorities--taxes totaling about 30% 
     of our total production. I don't have parents, nor any 
     livestock, and all else that I owned I gave to the monastery. 
     But now my brother and I have had to repay many debts that my 
     parents accumulated, and we have no livestock as a source of 
     income for this.
       During the severe snowstorms of 1996, we heard on American 
     radio that we would be receiving relief in the form of 
     blankets and money. Some foreign donors did come, and in 
     front of them the officials handed us blankets and Yuan 200 
     each, but after they left the officials returned and 
     collected all the blankets and money. I think the Chinese are 
     very skilled at tricking outsiders.
       My brother (age 36) joined me on this trip, and we are 
     relieved to finally be outside of Tibet. After an audience 
     with His Holiness the Dalai Lama, I want to become a monk at 
     the Sera Monastery in southern India.
                                  ____

       Eighteen years ago, my parents owned a house near the 
     Mosque. A few years ago, the authorities said they would tear 
     down the house and provide us with improved housing there, in 
     the same place. The new complex was built, but then promptly 
     sold to developers. We did get compensation of Yuan 30,000, 
     but this is half what the old house was worth.
       My mother and I had a very small table on the Bargkor 
     (market area and circumambulation route) where we sold cloth 
     and shirts. We had to pay a Yuan 300 monthly fee to 3 
     different government departments--for a business permit, for 
     the space itself and also income tax.
       When I was around 10 years old, I remember getting tear 
     gassed during the rioting, and then staying inside for 
     several days. Nowadays, you might occasionally see a small 
     group of monks or nuns demonstrating, but they never make it 
     more than half a circuit around the Bargkor before being 
     arrested. In August of this year,

[[Page 3136]]

     the authorities entered all the homes in our area, banging on 
     doors loudly and threatening severe penalties, in a search 
     for Dalai Lama photos. We had hidden all of ours ahead of 
     time.
       My parents and I decided that if our family was to get 
     ahead financially, one of us would have to leave, and we 
     agreed that I should go, hopefully to get an education. I 
     wasn't able to study in Tibet because I didn't have a 
     residency permit for Lhasa, and studying there is very 
     expensive, anyway--as is living there, Right now we are 
     paying Yuan 450-500 for tuition for my younger brother, which 
     doesn't include his uniform or books. Each year it is getting 
     worse. We don't have a family member in government service, 
     but many Tibetans now are being fired, and you now have to 
     take a written exam in Chinese for even a low level job. 
     Tibetan language is hardly used in Lhasa, there are no high 
     lamas left there, there are far fewer monks than there used 
     to be, and anyone showing a sign to resistance to the Chinese 
     is sentenced to 6-7 years' imprisonment. The Chinese 
     immigrants are bringing infectious diseases to Tibet with 
     them [likely in reference to STDs], while prostitution, 
     gambling and night clubs are thriving.
                                  ____

       In October 1997, four women from our village were called 
     for sterilisation.
       Two had children already and two did not. One evening the 
     Chinese took the four of them to another place and sterilised 
     them. Two got sick and the others remained healthy. About one 
     month before this, officials from the birth control office 
     came and summoned a meeting. During the meeting the Chinese 
     said that they would operate on women from the age of 18 to 
     40. They said that those women who didn't undergo the 
     operation would be expelled from their jobs. All of them were 
     farmers.
       I heard from the people of the village that one evening a 
     truck belonging to the birth control office arrived in our 
     village and the 4 of them were taken away to get operated on, 
     totally by force. The officials told the 4 of them that the 
     government would pay everything and no problems would result 
     from the operations. They said that one needed rest for 7 
     days after the operation, and should take proper medicine, 
     and the food and expenses would be provided by the 
     government. But the women were in bed for more than 2 weeks 
     and hardly recovered, and the expenditures were paid by their 
     families and not by the government.
                                  ____

       I used to distribute booklets and other literature that 
     dealt with our cause and also I put up posters. As a result, 
     I was caught three times by the Chinese authorities and 
     suffered from imprisonment and torture.
       When I was first arrested, apart from handcuffing me, they 
     gave me a few kicks and slaps but I wasn't beaten very badly. 
     On the third day I was specifically charged with possession 
     of a book. It was Friday and I was given the ultimatum to 
     hand over any books or literature dealing with Tibetan 
     affairs by Monday. When I reported on Monday, I was asked 
     where the book was, I told them that I didn't have it and was 
     once again imprisoned.
       For the next two months I was interrogated by using all 
     sorts of tactics but I refused to hand over the book. In the 
     end, my friends paid 2000 yuan and I was released on the 
     conditions that I report daily to the police, confine myself 
     within the monastery and not engage in any subversive 
     activity. I was also told to be an informer. If I did well as 
     an informer, I would be paid secretly and if not I would be 
     rearrested. For the next year I was constantly harassed by 
     the police. Sometimes, they visited me in the middle of the 
     night in my monastic room and asked me questions like whether 
     I had been working sincerely for them and whether I was doing 
     any subversive work.
       In July 1994 I was arrested for the 3rd time by the Chinese 
     authorities. I was bound in chains both on my hands and feet 
     and taken to the local detention centre. This prison is an 
     interrogation centre for those prisoners who had not 
     confessed their crimes of mistakes. There were no permanent 
     prisoners there. The main reason I was taken to this prison 
     was to keep me away from contacting any Tibetans. While I was 
     being interrogated at this prison, no one knew anything about 
     my whereabouts. I learned later that on the day of my arrest 
     my grandmother died, out of shock and worry.
       The torturing began every day at 8 in the morning and went 
     on till 9 in the evening. They adopted all sorts of methods 
     to torture me. My hands were tied at the back in a most 
     painful manner and they put electric rods in my mouth. They 
     used the electric stick on me so many times, I can't say how 
     many times. They made me kneel on the floor with a stick 
     under my knees and another stick on the calves of my legs so 
     that the skin was rubbed off my knees. At the same time my 
     hands were handcuffed together on my back, with one arm over 
     my shoulder and the other arm over my lower back. In addition 
     to this, I received countless numbers of slaps and kicks 
     throughout the day.
       In the coldest month in Amdo, every morning before the sun 
     rose, I was subjected to 2 hour cold baths and I was told to 
     strip myself completely naked and then they kept on pouring 
     buckets of icy cold water on me until I completely blacked 
     out. Sometimes I was subjected to a treatment in which they 
     hit with me with thin, sharp bamboo all over my body. After 
     some time, my whole body became like a plucked chicken, very 
     blue with patches of white. Sometimes after throwing 
     countless buckets of ice cold water on me, they would bring 
     me before a red glowing fireplace, if they felt I was about 
     to faint. They gave me this type of torture for 15 days.
       I was also fed very poorly with 2 glasses of black tea and 
     some meagre food. I was almost starving because sometimes if 
     I could chew a single pea, I used to feel very happy. 
     However, no matter what type of torture that it was, I didn't 
     admit or confess anything except the possession of the book, 
     which I had already done earlier. I suffered rigorous torture 
     for about 4 months in this prison and since I didn't confess 
     anything they eventually transferred me. In the new prison I 
     was chained and made to sit on a chair, and the security 
     personnel kept me from sleeping for 14 days. The food given 
     to me was the same as they gave to their pigs. I was charged 
     for being a spy of the Tibetan government. The final verdict 
     was that I was a counter-revolutionary who had been engaged 
     in propagating their cause. Thus, I was sentenced for two 
     years and 7 months imprisonment. They took away my political 
     rights for a period of 2 years. After serving my imprisonment 
     I was finally released at the beginning of 1997. After my 
     release I was constantly harassed by the local police.
                                  ____

       I was arrested and imprisoned because I called for Tibet's 
     independence. At Gutsa detention center, we were placed in a 
     room with a cement floor where there were no beds and 
     blankets. It was mid winter, and they kept us for over 3 
     months without blankets, which they allowed only when our 
     relatives brought them from home. We were given small amounts 
     of food, just 2 dumplings per day. It didn't fill our 
     stomachs.
       When we were interrogated they questioned us about who was 
     behind the demonstration, but we told them that we had done 
     it independently. Then they beat us with the use of an 
     electric baton. They put it everywhere, on my head, hands, 
     mostly on the veins, and here where it is very painful. We 
     would lose memory because of that. They also kicked us and 
     slapped us in the face. They interrogated me three times a 
     day, every day for one or two hours at a time. They asked the 
     same questions and we wouldn't answer them properly. There 
     were 3 or 4 police questioning us.
       They kept us in Gutsa for one year and 9 months and 
     interrogated us. After that they brought us to court to pass 
     our sentences. I got 4 years imprisonment. They then took us 
     to a hospital where we were supposed to get a medical check 
     up. But they didn't give us any treatment and instead took 
     one bottle of blood from each of us forcibly. Because of that 
     we became thinner and thinner. Then finally they took us to 
     Drapchi prison where we had to do work with wool for making 
     carpets. There wasn't any education and the food was very 
     poor. They treated the political prisoners very harshly while 
     they treated normal prisoners better.
       We were kept in the prison for a very long time and were 
     not allowed to meet our family. We were able to receive small 
     things such as things to eat. They didn't allow us to meet 
     our family members except after we were sentenced. After our 
     sentencing, they allowed us to meet our family, but only one 
     person could visit at a time.
       I suffered from a stomach disorder while at Drapchi, from 
     food which was not properly cooked. We used to eat packaged 
     noodles which led to stomach ailments, and whatever I ate, I 
     had to vomit with blood. I suffered from this for about 8 
     months after I was released from prison. I start vomiting 
     when the weather turns cold. In prison I asked to visit the 
     hospital, but they only used to take (prisoners) to the 
     hospital when they were almost dead. Otherwise they don't 
     care for political prisoners.
       When I was in prison there were some foreign visits but we 
     were watched all the time so we couldn't talk to them. Before 
     they came we were made to clean the rooms and then we had to 
     do whatever work we had to do. They brought big pieces of 
     meat to the kitchen and stuck up list of food telling the 
     visitors that they give us such food. But in reality we 
     didn't get to eat this meat. After the heads had left they 
     took it away.
       They put at least one female common law prisoner in each 
     cell to watch the nuns so that we wouldn't talk about things 
     like independence. She would tell the authorities information 
     about us and because of that her sentence was decreased. They 
     were put in a separate room because they feared that we would 
     harm them. They were very happy in their rooms which were 
     better than ours.
       In Drapchi prison we were made to do exercises which were 
     not for the purpose of our health. It was like military 
     training. When we were doing the exercises we had to shout 
     something in Chinese which meant that we were confessing to 
     our mistakes and that we would come out to society as a new 
     person. Once we understood the meaning of the words we 
     protested and didn't say them.

[[Page 3137]]

     Then many soldiers came and beat us. It was during winter and 
     at that time it is very cold in Tibet. We were made to stand 
     on the cold cement floor in the shade barefooted for a whole 
     day, our shoes and socks removed. This made our feet cold as 
     ice. Then we had to run while they didn't give us any water. 
     Some of us fell unconscious. If someone fell down they said 
     we were not allowed to help. They also stopped the monthly 
     opportunity for our families to visit us. We had to stand in 
     the sun and put our faces in the direction of the sun as a 
     result of which some of us had blisters on our face.

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from California 
for her very significant statement. I know we have not always agreed on 
China, but I think that was a very candid and very honest statement. I 
appreciate her making it.
  I want to publicly thank, on behalf of Senator Wellstone and myself, 
our staffs: On Senator Wellstone's staff, Charlotte Oldham Moore and 
John Bradshaw, for their very persistent and hard work on this issue; 
on my staff, Samuel Chang, for his hard work and continued interest in 
the human rights issues in China.
  As I said, one of my heroes, and I think one that has been mentioned 
repeatedly, one that will be with us at the press conference tomorrow, 
is Wei Jingsheng, who spent about 20 years in solitary confinement in 
China back in the 1970s, arrested for his involvement at the Democracy 
Wall effort.
  At that time he was sentenced to spend 14\1/2\ years in solitary 
confinement, went out and was involved in Tiananmen Square. He was 
truly a friend and truly a hero. I thought, when I visited with him in 
my office, while I was going on annual vacations, while I was rearing 
three boys and seeing them grow up and going out and playing basketball 
with them and coaching their soccer games, this man, who is about my 
age, was languishing in a Chinese prison.
  I recently read the book ``China Live'' by Mike Chinoy. Mike was the 
CNN correspondent and before that, the NBC correspondent--in Beijing, 
then Hong Kong. He went to China as a young man in the seventies, very 
idealistic, believing the Chinese regime was going to bring human 
rights and democracy and freedom to the people of China. He left 
disillusioned to a great extent, but he tells about the trial of Wei 
Jingsheng. I want to read this as I conclude. He talked about Wei 
Jingsheng, on October 9, 1979, going on trial.

       Pictures from the proceedings were broadcast on Chinese TV. 
     They showed a youthful-looking Wei, dressed in prison garb, 
     his head shaved and bowed, listening to the verdict before a 
     panel of stony-faced judges and a carefully selected audience 
     of five hundred people. I had read his essays and seen for 
     myself the hope generated by Democracy Wall. Now, working 
     late at the NBC bureau in Hong Kong on the day Wei was 
     sentenced to fifteen years in jail for ``counterrevolutionary 
     incitement'', I was angry and upset.
       Although intellectually I recognized that profound changes 
     were still under way in China--holding out, over the long 
     term, the possibility of a more humane society--it was hard 
     to be neutral and dispassionate watching such a travesty of 
     justice. My feelings became even stronger when I acquired a 
     copy of the transcript of Wei's trial, which had been 
     surreptitiously tape-recorded and distributed by other 
     activists not yet under detention. Standing before his 
     accusers, Wei refused to admit to any crime. Instead he 
     forcefully defended his ideas of democracy. His courage in 
     the face of a certain guilty verdict and long prison term was 
     astonishing. I wished I could do something to help.

  He said, ``I wished I could do something to help.'' Twenty years 
after that trial, things are not better in China, and we see a new 
round of the same kind of show trials, phony trials and repression. 
Mike Chinoy said, ``I wished I could do something to help.'' Ladies and 
gentlemen of the Senate, we have a chance today to do a little 
something to help. This year marks the 10th anniversary of the 
Tiananmen massacre. This is an incredibly important year in China and 
for the democracy movement in China. We can take an important step and 
cast an important vote with overwhelming bipartisan support for this 
resolution today.
  I ask my colleagues to call upon the administration to sponsor this 
resolution in Geneva this summer, condemning the human rights abuses 
ongoing in China today.
  Mr. President, at this time I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Roberts). The distinguished majority 
leader is recognized.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I do have a unanimous consent request to 
propound, and I know we would, then, be prepared to go to a recorded 
vote. But before we do that, I want to take a moment to commend the 
distinguished Senator from Arkansas for the work he has done and the 
fact that he has been joined by the Senator from Minnesota in 
addressing this very important issue. I know they have been joined by a 
number of Senators on both sides of the aisle.
  This is not something new with the Senator from Arkansas. Senator 
Hutchinson has been trying to emphasize his concerns about the terrible 
human rights policies in the People's Republic of China ever since he 
has been in the Senate. I know he worked on it last year. He has been 
trying to make the point this is a serious problem, and I think the 
justification for this serious expression is the fact that it is still 
not what it should be. He has been talking about it for quite some 
time, as have others, and there continue to be terrible human rights 
violations.
  So I think it is appropriate that the Senate, in its second 
legislative action of this year, would express its very strong concern 
regarding this human rights situation in the People's Republic of 
China. I have read the resolution. I think it is well stated. And the 
timeliness is also very important. As we now are about to have the 
annual meeting of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in 
Geneva, Switzerland, for the Senate to go on record taking a stand for 
this human rights position, I think, is very commendable. I am glad I 
have been able to work with Senator Daschle and both sides of the aisle 
to make it possible for us to consider this separately, to highlight 
the fact that we are not just sticking this on as a sense-of-the-Senate 
resolution in a bill, this is a Senate resolution that states clearly 
our concern and our position. I am very pleased to be supportive of my 
colleague's efforts.
  I yield to the Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I know Senator Hutchinson thanked the majority leader. 
I also want to thank the majority leader for his support in doing this. 
He is right. It is timely. We do want to ask for the yeas and nays.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.

                          ____________________