[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 10]
[House]
[Page 13807]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 CONCERNS OF CHINESE AID FOR PAKISTANI BALLISTIC MISSILE PROGRAM STILL 
                               UNRESOLVED

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, last month disturbing reports surfaced that 
China is aiding Pakistan's missile development program. In response to 
this very destabilizing situation, I wrote to President Clinton on July 
5 urging that the administration immediately impose sanctions on China. 
I was encouraged to see that the administration dispatched a top arms 
control official to Beijing to address the growing concerns about 
China's proliferation activities. But the news out of the Chinese 
capital was not encouraging. John Holum, senior adviser to the 
Secretary of State on arms control, told the media that the United 
States has raised our concern that China has provided aid to Pakistan 
and other countries. According to an article in the Sunday, July 9 New 
York Times, Mr. Holum said, ``We made progress, but the issue remains 
unresolved.'' In the polite parlance of diplomacy, that is a clear 
indication that this issue continues to be a serious concern.
  Mr. Speaker, the Central Intelligence Agency and other U.S. 
intelligence agencies have reported that China has stepped up its 
provision of key components and technical expertise for the development 
of a new long-range missile that could carry nuclear weapons. This 
recent pattern of Chinese support for Pakistan's missile development 
program is a matter of concern for the United States and for the long-
term stability of the entire Asian continent.
  It is also a matter of particularly urgent concern for India. China 
and Pakistan both consider India to be their major strategic threat 
which is absurd, considering that India has been the victim of both 
Pakistani and Chinese aggression. But given that shared strategic 
outlook on the part of China and Pakistan, it is clear that these two 
nations have teamed up to surround India and create an alarming 
potential for instability in Asia.
  While Pakistan remains subject to U.S. sanctions as a result of its 
nuclear explosions and last year's military coup, the administration 
has been trying to influence China with its policy of comprehensive 
engagement. Clearly, at least in the case of Pakistan, the policy is 
not working. Mr. Speaker, I believe it is time to get tough with 
Beijing.
  To that end, I am drafting legislation similar to a bipartisan bill 
that has been introduced in the other body, the Senate, that would 
require the administration to monitor China's record on the spread of 
nuclear weapons and impose automatic sanctions on companies or states 
if there is credible evidence of exports of missile technology. The 
legislation is moving through the Senate and is part of the mix in the 
upcoming debate on extending permanent normal trade relations to China. 
I believe this connection is very appropriate to make. We cannot afford 
to completely separate our commercial and security interests.
  In my letter to President Clinton urging that sanctions be imposed on 
China forthwith, I noted that sanctions had been imposed on China in 
1991 and in 1993 for the provision of M-11 missiles with a range of 300 
kilometers. In my letter to the President, I wrote: ``A new era of 
cooperation between India and the United States has been ushered in, 
thanks in no small part to your recent trip to India that I was honored 
to be a part of. As we work to heighten our cooperation with India on 
such issues as security, nonproliferation and combating terrorism, it 
seems inconsistent not to hold China accountable for actions that 
directly threaten the security of India and which will inevitably spur 
a heightened arms race on the subcontinent.''
  I further stated in my letter, Mr. Speaker: ``In an effort to 
forestall action by Congress, the administration has tried to tout 
China's reduction of weapons exports to the Middle East, North Korea 
and other areas of concern. But it appears from the administration's 
own information that the flow of nuclear technology and delivery 
systems for weapons of mass destruction to Pakistan continues 
unabated.'' The latest news from our American envoy in Beijing only 
further confirms that this is in fact the case.
  I have long been concerned, as many of my colleagues in Congress have 
been, about transfers of technology by the People's Republic of China 
that contribute to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or 
missiles that could deliver them. For example, in 1996, many of us 
called for sanctions on China for the sale of ring magnets, which can 
be used to enrich uranium, to Pakistan. Since 1992, Beijing has taken 
some steps to mollify American concerns about proliferation, including 
promises to abide by the Missile Technology Control Regime, which it 
has not joined, and accession to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. 
But the Director of the CIA reports that the People's Republic remains 
a key supplier of technology inconsistent with nonproliferation goals.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to stress again that the issue of 
favorable trade benefits to China cannot be delinked from our concerns 
about nuclear and missile proliferation. If the administration 
considers PNTR passage so important, it must demonstrate to Congress 
that it is serious about cracking down on China's violation of 
nonproliferation agreements. I


hope the administration will give serious consideration to imposing 
sanctions on China. If not, there are those of us in Congress who are 
ready to mandate such sanctions through legislation.

                          ____________________