[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Page 1363]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



           IN SUPPORT OF THE TAIWAN SECURITY ENHANCEMENT ACT

  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, I was deeply distressed with the news 
over the weekend of China's new ultimatum regarding Taiwan and the 
front-page, above-the-fold story in the Washington Post today. I think 
the headline summarizes the situation:

       China Issues New Taiwan Ultimatum: Delay in Reunification 
     Would Spur Use of Force.

  It seems that mainland China cannot stand democracy. It is almost as 
if they have a visceral antipathy to freedom. I went to Taiwan last 
month--the Presiding Officer accompanied me on that visit to the 
Pacific rim--and had the opportunity to visit with the President of 
Taiwan and numerous officials. One of the things that struck me as we 
disembarked the plane and I looked off the tarmac was a whole press 
contingent, more than we had seen in, say, Japan or South Korea; a 
media contingent--cameras, reporters--shouting questions at us. I 
thought, even as we walked toward them, democracy has certainly arrived 
and democracy has blossomed in Taiwan because one of the signal 
signposts, I believe, of democracy is an independent and a vigorous and 
aggressive media. That was certainly evident in Taiwan.
  One of the first questions shouted to our delegation, the Senator 
from Wyoming will remember, was: Will China attempt to disrupt our 
Presidential elections as they did before?
  My answer was: I certainly hope not because it did not succeed before 
and it won't succeed this time.
  Four years ago, China launched missiles off the coast of Taiwan, 
hoping to disrupt a cornerstone of democracy in Taiwan, its 
Presidential elections. That effort failed both because of American 
aircraft carriers and the determination of the Taiwanese people not to 
be intimidated out of their freedom.
  Next month, on March 18, the thriving democracy of Taiwan will once 
again hold Presidential elections, and once again it seems that the 
Chinese Government hopes to disrupt those elections.
  Just yesterday, China issued a new threat to democratic Taiwan. In an 
official new white paper on Taiwan, the Chinese Government stated that:

       If the Taiwan authorities refuse, sine die, the peaceful 
     settlement of cross-Straits reunification through 
     negotiations, then the Chinese government will be forced to 
     adopt all drastic measures possible, including the use of 
     force.

  In other words, ``Negotiate or face invasion'' was effectively the 
ultimatum issued by the Chinese Government.
  No longer is the bar set at a declaration of independence or 
occupation by a foreign power; now it includes refusing to negotiate 
reunification--a dialog that was broken off by the Chinese Government. 
This is, in effect, a blank check that the Chinese Government has 
written themselves, making a subjective judgment on this new, ambiguous 
standard they have established.
  Taiwan is not a military threat to China, and no one in the world 
believes it is. If it is a threat, it is an ideological threat. A 
burgeoning Chinese society, less than 100 miles across the Strait, with 
increasing freedoms of religion, speech, and press--freedoms that are 
stifled on the mainland--the Chinese Government can't stand this 
shining contrast to its own totalitarian system. That is why China is 
pulling down the threshold for invasion and building up its arms 
pointed at Taiwan.
  I suggest it is no accident that earlier this month the first of four 
Russian Sovremenny-class guided missile destroyers sailed into Chinese 
waters. I suggest it is no accident this destroyer is equipped with 
surface-to-surface missiles designed specifically to destroy American 
Aegis ships and aircraft carriers, America's ships that would come to 
the defense of Taiwan.
  It is no accident that China has ordered Kilo-class submarines 
equipped with torpedoes designed to evade detection. It is no accident 
that China has deployed short-range ballistic missiles in the provinces 
just across the Taiwan Strait. It is no accident that China has flown 
over 100 sorties over the Taiwan Strait, many with Russian-bought SU-
27s.
  We must not tempt intimidation with ambiguity. We must not tempt 
aggression with weakness.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1838, the Taiwan Security 
Enhancement Act.
  Opponents of this act have held this out as being somehow bellicose, 
somehow threatening. I suggest to all my colleagues in the Senate they 
simply read what the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act says. Our 
colleagues in the other body passed this legislation by an overwhelming 
vote of 341-70 earlier this month. The Taiwan Security Enhancement Act 
will bring greater clarity to our relations with Taiwan and China by 
increasing military exchanges with Taiwan, by establishing a direct 
military communications link with Taiwan, and by reestablishing 
Congress as a consultant in the annual arms sales process--as intended 
and required by the Taiwan Relations Act--which at least, supposedly, 
governs our relations with Taiwan.
  Just last month, General Xiong Guangkai, the Deputy Chief of the 
General Staff of the People's Liberation Army and a former head of 
Chinese intelligence said, ``. . . we will never commit ourselves to 
renouncing the use of force.'' The irony is that this general did not 
make this statement while he was in China. He said this right here in 
Washington while he was being hosted by the Clinton-Gore 
administration.
  This reveals the irony of the situation. We have greater military 
exchanges with a country that points ballistic missiles at us than we 
do with a democratic ally. The State Department prohibits our senior 
military officers from meeting with their Taiwanese counterparts. 
Instead, the focus is on their Chinese counterparts.
  Isn't it ironic. I was visiting--I will not mention their names--with 
leading Army officials, some of whom had served in Taiwan many years 
ago, and they pointed out to me the irony that while they can hold 
talks with leading Communist Chinese military leaders, they cannot so 
much as go to Taiwan and meet with the military leadership in Taiwan, a 
democratic entity.
  It is only a matter of common sense that in the event of a crisis--a 
crisis now more likely--we should be able to communicate with the 
Taiwanese military--the people we may be called to defend.
  Opponents of this bill claim that ambiguity is good. But there is 
nothing ambiguous about the Chinese position. The Chinese White Paper 
even specifically opposed the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act.
  I suggest we should not be ambiguous about our support for democracy 
in Asia, nor should we apologize to China for helping Taiwan to defend 
itself.
  I believe China has made itself clear on the Taiwan issue. So should 
we.
  I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from 
Illinois.

                          ____________________