[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 11]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 14829]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 DISAPPROVAL OF NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS TREATMENT TO PRODUCTS OF VIETNAM

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 23, 2002

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member would like to express his 
opposition to H.J. Res. 101, which would provide for the disapproval of 
the Bush Administration's extension of the waiver of Jackson-Vanik 
trade restrictions on Vietnam. In considering the disapproval 
resolution, it is important, of course, for us to recognize what the 
Jackson-Vanik waiver actually does and does not do.
  By law, the underlying issue here is about emigration--the freedom 
for their citizens to leave Vietnam in order to live in another 
country. Based on Vietnam's record of progress on emigration and its 
continued cooperation on U.S. refugee programs over the past year, 
renewal of the Jackson-Vanik waiver will continue to promote greater 
freedom of emigration. Disapproval would, undoubtedly, result in the 
opposite.
  Actually continuing the Jackson-Vanik waiver for Vietnam is really 
also reflective of an American interest in further developing a 
positive relationship with that country and its people. Having lifted 
the trade embargo and established diplomatic relations five years ago, 
the United States has tried to work with Vietnam to normalize, 
incrementally, our bilateral political, economic and consular 
relationships. Such an effort, if it brings positive results, is in 
America's own short-term and long-term national interest. It 
complements and tests Vietnam's own policy for political and economic 
re-integration into the world. No doubt such a re-integration will be a 
difficult and perhaps lengthy process. However, there is certainly no 
compelling rationale for reversing course on gradually normalizing our 
relations with Vietnam.
  Now, for example, Vietnam reportedly continues to cooperate fully 
with our priority efforts to achieve the fullest possible accounting of 
American POW-MlAs. The granting of a Jackson-Vanik waiver has 
contributed to this cooperative process.
  Mr. Speaker, the Jackson-Vanik waiver certainly does not constitute 
an endorsement of the Communist regime in Hanoi. Of course, we have 
made it abundantly clear that we do not approve of a regime that places 
severe restrictions on basic freedoms, including the right to organize 
political parties, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion. We 
condemn such restrictions. On many occasions, with this Member's 
support, this body passed resolutions condemning just such violations 
of civil and human rights.
  The Jackson-Vanik waiver does not provide Vietnam with any new trade 
benefits, including Normal Trade Relations (NTR) status. However, with 
the Jackson-Vanik waiver, the United States has been able to 
successfully negotiate and sign a new bilateral commercial trade 
agreement with Vietnam. Congress will have an opportunity to decide in 
the future whether to again grant a waiver and decide, eventually, 
whether Vietnam deserved to be considered for NTR. But, that is a 
separate process--for the future. The renewal of the Jackson-Vanik 
waiver only keeps this process of improved cooperation and progress 
going forward.
  Finally, it also is important to note that the renewal of the 
Jackson-Vanik waiver does not automatically make American exports to 
Vietnam eligible for possible coverage by U.S. trade financing 
programs. The waiver only allows American exports to Vietnam to be 
eligible for such coverage.
  Mr. Speaker, the Vietnam War is over and we have embarked cautiously 
on a new and expanding set of relationships with Vietnam. Now is not 
the time to reverse course. Accordingly, this Member supports the 
Administration's request by voting ``no'' on the resolution of 
disapproval.

                          ____________________