[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 1371-1376]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




URGING THE EUROPEAN UNION TO MAINTAIN ITS ARMS EMBARGO ON THE PEOPLE'S 
                           REPUBLIC OF CHINA

  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to 
the resolution (H. Res. 57) urging the European Union to maintain its 
arms embargo on the People's Republic of China.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H. Res. 57

       Whereas the United States and the European Union (EU) have 
     maintained arms embargoes on the People's Republic of China 
     since 1989, following the decision of the Chinese Government 
     on June 4, 1989, to order an unprovoked, brutal, and 
     indiscriminate assault on thousands of peaceful and unarmed 
     demonstrators and onlookers in and around Tiananmen Square by 
     units of the People's Liberation Army, which resulted in an 
     untold number of deaths and several thousand injuries;
       Whereas the People's Republic of China has yet to 
     acknowledge and make amends for the 1989 massacre at 
     Tiananmen Square and an estimated 2,000 Chinese citizens 
     remain in prison as a result of their participation in those 
     peaceful demonstrations according to the Department of 
     State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2004;
       Whereas the National Security Strategy of the United States 
     approved by President George W. Bush on September 17, 2002, 
     concludes that the People's Republic of China remains 
     strongly committed to national one-party rule by the 
     Communist Party and is not truly accountable to the needs and 
     aspirations of its citizens, while preventing the Chinese 
     people to think, assemble, and worship freely;
       Whereas for several years the People's Republic of China 
     has also been engaged in an extensive military buildup in its 
     air, naval, land, and outer space systems, including the 
     deployment of approximately 500 short range ballistic 
     missiles near the Taiwan Strait according to the Department 
     of Defense's Report on the Military Power of the People's 
     Republic of China for Fiscal Year 2004;
       Whereas the military buildup by the People's Republic of 
     China and the strategic doctrines and policies that underpin 
     such a buildup remain shrouded in secrecy and imply 
     challenges for strategic deterrence between the United States 
     and China, United States Armed Forces deployed in the Asia 
     and Pacific region, United States commitments and interests 
     related to the defense of numerous friends and allies in the 
     region, particularly Taiwan and Japan, and regional stability 
     more broadly;
       Whereas the European Union and the People's Republic of 
     China released a joint statement on December 8, 2004, 
     following their seventh summit meeting at The Hague in which 
     the two sides recognized each other as ``major strategic 
     partners in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation'' 
     and the EU confirmed its ``political will to continue to work 
     towards lifting the EU arms embargo against China'';
       Whereas the European Union and the People's Republic of 
     China also released a joint declaration on non-proliferation 
     and arms control on December 8, 2004, at The Hague in which 
     the EU stated its support for China's entry into the Missile 
     Technology Control Regime (MTCR);
       Whereas on December 20, 2004, the Government of the United 
     States determined that seven entities of the People's 
     Republic of China, including several entities that play major 
     roles in China's military-industrial complex, should be 
     subject to sanctions under section 3 of the Iran 
     Nonproliferation Act of 2000, which provides for penalties on 
     entities for the transfer to Iran of certain controlled 
     equipment and technology, reflecting a time span of more than 
     a decade in which the United States Government has made 
     repeated determinations regarding Chinese firms engaged in 
     illicit transactions involving strategic technology;
       Whereas on December 17, 2004, the Council of the European 
     Union ``reaffirmed the political will to continue to work 
     towards lifting the arms embargo'' on the People's Republic 
     of China and invited the next Presidency of the EU ``to 
     finalize the well-advanced work in order to allow for a 
     decision'';
       Whereas the largest member states of the European Union--
     France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom--have steadily 
     increased their arms sales to the People's Republic of China, 
     such that from 2002 to 2003 the value of reported arms sales 
     to China doubled to approximately $540,000,000, according to 
     the most recent annual report, dated November 11, 2004, of 
     the EU on its Code of Conduct on Arms Exports;
       Whereas in order to assist member states of the European 
     Union to close the gap in defense capabilities with the 
     United States and to enhance the interoperability of the 
     armed forces of such member states and United States Armed 
     Forces, the United States has provided a framework in its 
     laws, particularly under the Arms Export Control Act and 
     chapters 138 and 139 of title 10, United States Code, in 
     which the United States has pursued a policy of expanded 
     transatlantic armament and defense industry cooperation 
     involving increasingly sophisticated levels of sensitive 
     United States military technology, which becomes subject to 
     increased risks of diversion to the People's Republic of 
     China due to armaments cooperation between the EU and China;
       Whereas despite the chronically low defense spending of 
     member states of the European Union, EU member states have 
     decided to develop, with the participation of the People's 
     Republic of China, a new global radio navigational satellite 
     system, known as Galileo, at a cost of more than 
     $3,000,000,000, which will have military applications, even 
     though such system purports to serve civil applications 
     already served by the United States Global Positioning 
     Satellite (GPS) System; and
       Whereas the United States has numerous national interests 
     in the Asia and Pacific region, including the security of 
     Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and other key areas, and United 
     States Armed Forces which are deployed throughout the region 
     could be jeopardized by the People's Republic of China 
     because it is increasingly well-armed and may seek to settle 
     long-standing territorial and political disputes in the 
     region by the threat or use of military force: Now, 
     therefore, be it
       Resolved,  That the House of Representatives--
       (1) reaffirms the United States arms embargo on the 
     People's Republic of China and related findings and 
     statements of policy set forth in title IX of the Foreign 
     Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 
     (Public Law 101-246);
       (2) finds that policies by the United States and other 
     countries which promote the development of democracy in the 
     People's Republic of China, and not the development of 
     Chinese military capabilities, will help assure a stable, 
     peaceful, and prosperous Asia and Pacific region;
       (3) deplores the recent increase in arms sales by member 
     states of the European Union (EU) to the People's Republic of 
     China and the European Council's decision to finalize work 
     toward lifting its arms embargo on China, actions that place 
     European security policy in direct conflict with United 
     States security interests and with the security interests of 
     United States friends and allies in the Asia and Pacific 
     region;
       (4) declares that such a development in European security 
     policy is inherently inconsistent with the concept of mutual 
     security interests that lies at the heart of United States 
     laws for transatlantic defense cooperation at both the 
     governmental and industrial levels and would necessitate 
     limitations and constraints in these relationships that would 
     be unwelcome on both sides of the Atlantic;
       (5) requests the President in his forthcoming meetings with 
     European leaders to urge that they reconsider this unwise 
     course of action and, instead, work expeditiously to close 
     any gaps in the European Union's arms embargo on the People's 
     Republic of China, in the national export control systems of 
     EU member states, and in the EU's Code of Conduct on Arms 
     Exports in order to prevent any future sale of arms or 
     related technology to China; and
       (6) requests the President to inform Congress of the 
     outcome of his discussions with European leaders on this 
     subject and to keep Congress fully and currently informed of 
     all developments in this regard.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Gallegly) and the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lantos) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 57, the resolution 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution that was 
introduced yesterday by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), 
expressing the strong concern of the House that the EU may

[[Page 1372]]

lift its arms embargo directed at China.
  In his recent inaugural address, President Bush reaffirmed America's 
commitment to democracy and freedom throughout the world. Yet, by 
selling advanced weapons systems to the People's Republic of China, the 
EU is directly undermining the security of one of Asia's most vibrant 
democracies, our close ally, Taiwan.
  Over the last decade, Taiwan has moved strongly in the direction of 
becoming a full-fledged democracy, with free elections, a free press 
and respect for the rule of law. If the arms embargo is lifted, the EU 
would be further tilting the military equation against the people of 
Taiwan at the very time they are embracing human rights and democratic 
values.
  Furthermore, if our soldiers were ever called upon to defend Taiwan, 
they could potentially be facing weapons systems manufactured by our 
own European allies. This would be an intolerable development.
  Finally, the lifting of the arms embargo would also have other 
negative consequences. In the past, China has demonstrated its 
willingness to sell weapons to nations that cannot be trusted with 
advanced military gear. This includes countries such as Iran that 
support international terrorist groups and countries such as Sudan, 
Burma and Zimbabwe that are among the world's worst violators of human 
rights. The last thing these countries need is additional weapons.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important measure. 
I also urge Secretary of State Rice and President Bush to raise this 
issue during their upcoming visit to Europe.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to commend my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Gallegly), for his strong and powerful statement. I particularly want 
to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on International Relations, my good friend, 
for leading us on this issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I just returned from a very substantive mission to North 
Korea, China and Taiwan, where I met with many of the key leaders of 
those countries. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's security interests in the 
Asia-Pacific region, including the national and economic security of 
our friends and allies in the Asia-Pacific area, were paramount on my 
agenda.
  While the Asia-Pacific region remains calm at the moment compared to 
other parts of the world, this calm can be deceiving. The United States 
has tens of thousands of troops deployed in Asia, and their security is 
directly threatened by the shortsighted and greed-driven initiative 
emanating from Europe. This initiative, Mr. Speaker, is the European 
Union's current effort to lift its ban on arms sales to the People's 
Republic of China.
  I, therefore, commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the 
chairman of our full committee, for introducing this important 
resolution and for moving it forward so expeditiously.
  Mr. Speaker, it is frightening to contemplate that American Armed 
Forces may one day be deployed in the Taiwan Strait to defend the 
island nation for a possible invasion by mainland China, and if key 
leaders in Paris, Berlin and Brussels have their way, our soldiers may 
very well be facing the latest in high-tech weaponry manufactured by 
our allies in Europe.
  Mr. Speaker, based upon my recent meetings in China and Taiwan, I 
remain optimistic that tensions across the Taiwan Strait can be 
resolved peacefully and that the United States will not be drawn into 
Taiwan-related conflict.
  Key policymakers in Beijing fully understand that military action 
against Taiwan would spark international isolation, possible military 
conflict with the United States and a certain boycott of the much-
prized 2008 Olympics in Beijing.
  Taiwan's leaders, for their part, fully understand that the 
increasing economic ties between Taiwan and the mainland would be 
threatened by provocative steps.
  President Chen and Vice President Lu in Taiwan fully understand that 
Taiwan must negotiate with the mainland from a position of strength, 
which requires immediate approval by Taiwan's legislature of a 
supplemental defense package.
  Despite these factors working in favor of peace across the Taiwan 
Strait, it is possible that mainland hard-liners might push for 
military action against Taiwan after the 2008 Olympics or that conflict 
in the Strait may begin because of miscalculation by either side.
  It is in this context that the European Union's current deliberations 
on lifting its arms embargo on China are so outrageous. With enormous 
loss of human life, the United States liberated the Nations of Europe 
during World War II, including France and Germany. For the new 
generation of European leaders to turn their backs on American national 
security interests and consider opening up the floodgates of weapons 
sales to the People's Republic of China shows that they have truly lost 
their moral compass.
  Europe's leaders have argued that they will continue to restrict most 
arms sales to Beijing, even if the ban is lifted. Mr. Speaker, I simply 
do not believe this assertion. If there is money to be made in a 
troubled part of the world through arms sales, key European arms 
manufacturers are the first through the door to make that sale.
  Mr. Speaker, the decision by the European Union is not final, and it 
is my strong hope that President Bush and our new Secretary of State 
Condoleeza Rice will make it a top priority to convince the European 
Union to reverse this dangerous course. Sadly, the key reason for the 
imposition of the arms embargo, China's horrendous human rights record, 
remains unchanged, more than 15 years after the massacre at Tiananmen 
Square.

                              {time}  1115

  Europe's leaders must understand that there will be severe 
ramifications for the transatlantic relationship if they fail to do 
what is right and just, if they fail to respect internationally 
recognized human rights and the national security interests of their 
historic liberator and their most important ally, the United States of 
America.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support our resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time, and I rise as a proud cosponsor of House Resolution 57 and 
ask my colleagues to render their strong support to this resolution.
  It is unconscionable that the European Union has decided to lift its 
arms embargo against the People's Republic of China, a regime that is a 
gross human rights violator and a country of proliferation concern, 
given its assistance to terrorist states like Iran.
  The arms embargo was implemented in response to the Chinese regime 
turning its tanks against peaceful demonstrators in Tiananmen Square on 
that fateful day of June 4, 1989. The PRC has yet to acknowledge or 
even make amends for this massacre. The PRC harasses, intimidates, 
imprisons, and tortures religious worshipers, human rights dissidents, 
and any who seek to exercise their fundamental freedoms and who oppose 
the repressive apparatus of the regime in Beijing.
  For the EU to remove the ban and for its largest members to steadily 
increase their arms sales to the PRC is an affront to all of China's 
victims, particularly to the victims of Tiananmen Square. It also 
undermines global efforts to hold other human rights violators 
accountable for their deplorable practices. How can the EU's so-called 
human rights dialogue with Iran or its discussions with Syria, for 
example, have any credibility when the EU has given a pass to the PRC 
for this massacre?
  It is critical we also look at the implications for U.S. policy 
priorities on other issues. As the resolution before

[[Page 1373]]

us articulates, the United States has significant security interests in 
the Asia and Pacific regions, including the security of Japan, Taiwan, 
South Korea, and other critical areas. The EU decision could alter this 
delicate strategic balance in this region.
  An even more daunting implication is how the EU's removal of the arms 
embargo on China could undermine counterproliferation efforts. Chinese 
entities have been sanctioned under U.S. law for transferring missile 
technologies to Iran. Concurrently, Iran has paraded its long-range 
Shahab-3 missiles that could reach and threaten U.S. allies in the 
Middle East and American forces stationed in the region.
  Yet the EU decides to facilitate China's military buildup by lifting 
its arms embargo on the PRC. Within this context, is the EU complicit 
in the threat posed by Iranian missiles targeting U.S. interests with 
Chinese technology? For that matter, how will the EU respond to Iran 
missile threats when they reach European capitals, thanks to Chinese 
technology? How can the EU be taken seriously in its efforts to halt 
Iran's pursuit of a nuclear capability?
  This is a matter of utmost urgency. The EU's decision to lift the 
arms embargo on the PRC can have grave repercussions. It could trigger 
a domino effect that could undermine our efforts to address and curtail 
threats across multiple sectors. It will only serve to emboldened 
oppressors and proliferators. We must stand together against such 
threats.
  As the resolution underscores, this development in European security 
policy is inherently inconsistent within the concept of mutual security 
interests. Let us, through the overwhelming adoption of the resolution 
of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), strongly urge European 
leaders to reconsider this unwise course of action. I ask my colleagues 
to render their strong support for this resolution.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Democratic 
leader who has long been our leader on policy with respect to China.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, my colleague from California, and also for his distinguished 
service and for bringing this to the floor today. I am pleased to join 
our Republican colleagues. It is one area where we can work together to 
make the world freer, people freer, the world safer, and, hopefully, 
trade fairer one of these days.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution urging the 
European Union to maintain its arms embargo in the People's Republic of 
China. I commend the Committee on International Relations chairman, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and our ranking member, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for bringing this resolution to 
the floor. They are tremendous leaders on behalf of human rights in 
China and, indeed, all over the world.
  Almost 16 years ago, the Chinese regime shocked the world as it 
unleashed its army on its own defenseless people and crushed the 
peaceful pro-democracy movement in Tiananmen Square. We know that the 
human rights situation in China has not significantly improved since 
the arms embargo was imposed.
  At the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre, it was seared into our 
conscience. One of the most enduring images of the 20th century was a 
picture of a lone man standing before a long line of military tanks. We 
remember how millions of ordinary students, workers, and citizens 
marched in peace; how they raised the goddess of democracy, an image of 
our own Statue of Liberty; and how they quoted our own Founding 
Fathers.
  The United States and the European Union imposed complementary arms 
embargoes as a direct response to the Tiananmen Square massacre. 
Civilized governments were outraged at the brutality of the Chinese 
regime and took a course of action to ensure our weapons would not be 
used to harm innocent people in China, Tibet, East Turkistan, Inner 
Mongolia, and Taiwan.
  For a billion Chinese and Tibetans, freedom remains a dream deferred. 
Journalists, activists, academics, workers, and religious believers are 
still persecuted and tortured. Beijing is still harassing and arresting 
dissidents and families of the Tiananmen victims.
  The most recent State Department ``Country Report on Human Rights'' 
states that the Chinese Government's ``Human rights record remains 
poor, and the government continued to commit numerous and serious 
abuses. There was backsliding on key human rights issues.''
  The recent passing of Zhao Ziyang, the former Secretary General of 
China, reminds the world of the courage of the heroes of Tiananmen. 
Zhao dared to resist the Chinese Communist Party's decision to crush 
the pro-democracy movement. And I remind my colleagues that at the time 
he was the chairman of the Chinese Communist Party. He very 
courageously, just weeks before the massacre, made a very crucial 
appeal to the students to leave Tiananmen Square to prevent bloodshed.
  With tears in his eyes and bullhorn in his hands, he apologized to 
them for having come too late. His courage in opposing military force 
resulted in his dismissal from the government, his name erased from 
Chinese history books, and almost 16 years under house arrest, until 
his recent death. The Chinese Government has tried to erase the history 
of Tiananmen and Zhao's legacy, but the world will remember.
  For all their power, the regime is afraid of Zhao. They were afraid 
of him in life; they are afraid of him in death. But the more they try 
to suppress his message and his courage, the stronger they make him.
  Today, we are once again calling on Beijing to release thousands of 
Tiananmen activists held to this day and all the prisoners of 
conscience, whose only crime was to demand their basic human rights.
  I commend the Bush administration for reiterating its support of the 
U.S. arms embargo. The European Union has showed leadership in fighting 
for human rights all over the world. Now is not the time for them to 
abandon those principles.
  I just would like to make this point, because I mentioned trade in 
the beginning. Since the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre, for 
many years we have had debate on the floor as to whether we could use 
economic leverage to improve the human rights situation in China; that 
we could use economic leverage to improve the performance of the 
Chinese regime in regard to fairness and in trade with our country and 
to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by the regime 
to unsafeguarded countries.
  That idea was rejected by the Congress, and I may say in a bipartisan 
way: President Bush, President Clinton, President Bush all shared the 
same view. But it was wrong, and it is still wrong.
  The fact is that we did not use the leverage, and everyone said 
economic reform is going to lead to political reform; this trade is 
going to enable the Chinese people to be freer. The fact is that has 
not worked. And the trade deficit, which we thought was giving us 
leverage in 1989 of $2 billion, $2 billion, this enormous amount of 
money we thought was going to give us leverage for human rights, 
improve trade relations, as well as stopping the proliferation of 
weapons of mass destruction, well, the trade deficit today, thanks to 
this policy, is now $2 billion a week, not a year, a week. Over $2 
billion a week.
  The point I want to make in relationship to the European Union, 
though, is the following: for a long time over that time the Chinese 
Government was very clever. They took advantage of the U.S. because we 
welcomed them with open arms. Just flood our markets with your 
products, maintain your barriers to our products going into China, and 
you have this. China has a huge trade surplus. And where did they spend 
that surplus? They spent it in Europe, and they spent it in other parts 
of the world using economic leverage for a political purpose: just 
exactly what they argued against when we wanted to do it

[[Page 1374]]

to improve human rights, to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass 
destruction, and to improve the trade situation.
  So it is no wonder the European Union does not have the kind of trade 
deficit with China that we have, because China buys from the European 
Union, or they did for at least long enough to get them with the 
program. And what the program is is a giant economic power using its 
economic power to suppress initiatives that make the world safer, that 
make people freer, and make trade fairer.
  So I applaud again the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida for her 
remarks and the leadership of the committee for their initiative in 
bringing this to the floor; and I would hope, I would hope that the 
Bush administration's statements will now be met with firmness in 
dealing with the EU that this is important to us. Because the trade 
embargo is there for a reason, and now that it is lifted, if it is 
lifted, the world will be a less safe place.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Rarely in human history have so many been armed by so few in a crass 
and cynical pursuit of profit at the expense of Asia's peace. The word 
should go forth that the French President is determined to sell weapons 
that will be aimed at Japan and Korea and Taiwan and the Philippines 
and the men and women of the United States military. These weapons will 
be built in France and pointed directly at the people who serve in the 
United States Navy.
  In lifting the arms embargo against China, Europe will be making an 
enormous mistake. Europe's short-term concern with the corporate bottom 
line will lead to greater conflict and increased peril for Americans 
serving in uniform. Since 1989, China has been almost cut off from 
European technology, and China's leaders have responded by a 
cooperative foreign policy designed to lift this embargo so they can 
arm to the teeth as the rising power of Asia to challenge the other 
powers, all democracies on her periphery.
  If you are pro-U.S. Navy, you should be against this. If you are pro-
Japanese, you should be against this. If you are pro-Indian, you should 
be against this. Because these European weapons will be directed at 
each of these democracies.

                              {time}  1130

  This is a very short-term decision for a very few profits, and it is 
Jacques Chirac that is doing this. That will create greater insecurity 
in Asia, lay the seeds for a conflict, and maybe the death of Americans 
caused by French weapons sold for short-term profits.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I just want to make a comment about my good friend's observations. He 
is absolutely correct. This greed-driven policy by a Europe which was 
twice liberated in the 20th century by the United States, a policy 
which, by the way, this past year, in 2004, resulted in over a half a 
billion dollars of military sales already to China, with again the 
French leading the way. The degree of cynicism, the degree of greed 
displayed by some European leaders turns one's stomach.
  I strongly urge all of my colleagues to vote for our resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, we have no additional requests for time, and we yield 
back the balance of our time.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
  Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to wholeheartedly support this common-sense 
resolution.
  The U.S. and European Union, as we have heard, established arms 
embargoes against the People's Republic of China following the June, 
1989, Tiananmen Square Massacre.
  The U.S embargo continues today in light of the widespread human 
rights abuses that continue under the Communist regime. But the 
European Union, in a move that can only be described as reckless, is 
moving to lift its ban on weapons sales.
  EU states are even today selling China so-called nonlethal 
technologies that enhance its offensive capabilities. Advanced radar 
systems sold to China, for example, allow its military to better target 
U.S. warships and aircraft.
  For this reason, I introduced in the defense authorization bill last 
year a provision to prohibit the Defense Department from buying weapons 
from foreign companies that sell weapons to the People's Republic of 
China. My measure, which passed the House, also would have made it U.S. 
policy to deny China defense technology that could threaten the U.S. or 
destabilize the Western Pacific region.
  Unfortunately, this provision was dropped in conference as a result 
of Senate objections. But we are here again today discussing this 
vitally important issue.
  I strongly encourage the EU to place international security and human 
rights ahead of any monetary benefits from selling weapons to China, 
and I urge passage of this resolution.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
  Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. The 
European Union imposed a ban on arms sales to the People's Republic of 
China following the Tiananmen Square Massacre back in 1989. In recent 
months it has become apparent that European nations, seeing an 
opportunity to profit from China's large-scale military modernization 
program, may well be prepared to lift that embargo in the near future, 
and I believe that would be a terrible mistake.
  In a November 30, 2004, letter to the President of the European 
Union, 25 Members of this body who opposed the lifting of the arms 
embargo stressed that such a decision would alter the current fragile 
military balance across the Taiwan Straits. It would rapidly tip the 
balance in the PRC's favor. In the last year alone, China has added 
more than 100 missiles to its arsenal, bringing to more than 600 the 
number pointed directly across the Taiwan Straits at Taiwan.
  The EU's imminent decision to lift the arms embargo would further 
isolate that island nation and endanger its sovereignty and the safety 
of its citizens.
  A lifting of the European arms embargo and further modernization of 
China's army would also create new dangers for the United States and 
its Asian allies. If we were ever to be called upon, and I hope this 
never happens, but if we were ever called upon to intervene in an Asian 
military crisis, the lives of our servicemen and women would be 
increasingly endangered.
  Mr. Speaker, our European neighbors need to think long and hard about 
the short- and long-term negative effects of the lifting of the arms 
embargo. Stability in Asia is all too important to dismiss for the sake 
of short-term profits for European arms dealers.
  I thank the chairman for bringing this important resolution to the 
floor in such a timely manner. I particularly thank the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Gallegly) for doing this, and I urge my colleagues to 
support the resolution.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I would like to close by thanking the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Lantos) and those on the other side of the aisle for their strong 
support for this important issue. I ask all of my colleagues to join in 
strong bipartisan support of this critical resolution, H. Res. 57.
  Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House 
Resolution 57.
  Mr. Speaker, while I support passage of this resolution, I am 
disappointed that events require us to debate it today. How any 
European leader could seriously contemplate the notion of arms sales to 
the regime in Beijing is, frankly, a mystery to me.
  Beijing's abysmal human rights record has scarcely improved since the 
massacre at Tiananmen Square that prompted the EU to institute the 
embargo in the first place. The

[[Page 1375]]

communist authorities in China continue to detain hundreds upon 
thousands of political prisoners. Torture remains widespread and 
systemic. Political freedom is nonexistent, as are the right to worship 
freely and the rule of law. The flow of information is rigidly 
controlled by government authorities and there is no independent media 
or judiciary.
  And the Chinese regime has shown no signs of changing course. They 
have backpedaled on promises of democratic reform in Hong Kong and 
routinely threaten the peaceful democratic nation of Taiwan with 
military force. And these threats have only become louder and more 
belligerent in the years since the imposition of the embargo. In fact, 
the Chinese have become so bellicose and bold in their threats to 
``crush'' Taiwan's self-determination that they no longer make any 
secret of their buildup--some 500 and counting--of missiles pointed 
directly at Taiwan.
  So we must ask why? Why would any freedom loving European nation 
entertain the idea of selling weapons to a regime like the one 
currently ruling on the Chinese mainland? How could any nation that 
calls itself a friend of the United States seriously consider selling 
weapons to a regime whose stated goal is to annex, by force, Taiwan--a 
democratic ally of the United States? Perhaps most importantly, why 
would any European country sell weapons to the People's Liberation Army 
knowing that someday U.S. servicemen could be drawn into a conflict in 
the Taiwan straits?
  Does the EU honestly believe it is in the best interests of the 
trans-Atlantic alliance to create a possible situation that could pit 
U.S. soldiers and sailors against Chinese soldiers wielding European 
weapons? Haven't enough U.S. soldiers been killed by European weapons 
in the last two World Wars? The European Union member nations should 
think very seriously about that last question before they decide to 
lift this embargo.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H. Res. 57, 
which urges the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the 
People's Republic of China. While I have been a supporter of increasing 
trade and diplomatic relations with China, I am not nearly as 
comfortable with the idea of lifting the arms embargo. I am also 
disturbed by reports that China has sold weapons to Iraq that bolstered 
the regime of Saddam Hussein and are now being used by insurgents who 
have gotten a hold of the regime's weapons stockpiles. China needs to 
take a giant step back in its weapons proliferation in order to become 
a valuable ally instead of the menacing figure it often portrays.
  Again, I want to reiterate that while I have many concerns about the 
Chinese government, I have long recognized that trade with China has 
value for Americans and the people of China, which is why I voted in 
favor of Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) with China. My record 
on trade measures since coming to Congress demonstrates my willingness 
to evaluate each vote on its own merits, as long as worker and 
environmental rights are protected. In addition, I have voted for most-
favored-nation status for China, while I have continued to raise my 
voice against the ``undemocratic'' ways of China. Unlike during the 
Cold War, we have unparalleled opportunities to bring the people of 
China and America much closer together. Trade is one way to accomplish 
this, however my desire to bring our two nations together is 
overshadowed today by my concerns about China's role in the world, 
especially in the form of weapons proliferation.
  China's weapons exports remain the most serious proliferation threat 
in the world. Since 1980, China has supplied billions of dollars worth 
of nuclear weapon, chemical weapon and missile technology to South 
Asia, South Africa, South America and the Middle East. It has done so 
despite U.S. protests, and despite repeated promises to stop. The 
exports are still going on, and while they do, they make it impossible 
for the United States and its allies to halt the spread of weapons of 
mass destruction. I am especially shocked by the role of China in 
supplying Iraq with weapons, including chemical weapons that were used 
against the Kurdish people by the Saddam Hussein regime. Now many of 
those same weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents who are 
targeting our military personnel. China must cease and desist 
immediately from interfering in Iraq and bring itself into the 
international circle of non-proliferation efforts.
  I urge the European Union not to lift its Arms Embargo against China, 
because doing so at this time will send the wrong signal. Relations 
between the United States and China are a long term effort, one which 
cannot be handled with a singular approach. I stand for trade and 
diplomatic relations with China because this increases our person to 
person contacts that can only serve to create friendly relationships. 
However, lifting the Arms Embargo at this time will give the signal 
that proliferation of these weapons is acceptable, and it is not. 
Lifting the Arms Embargo will also signal that a bad human rights 
record is acceptable, and likewise it is not. Lifting the Arms Embargo 
against China will also signal to other nations who seek to gain access 
to weapons of mass destruction that proliferation of these weapons is 
acceptable, and to this point the whole world must stand up and say 
that it is not. I will continue to support increased relations with 
China because it is a key nation in the world, but I will forever 
refuse to turn a blind eye to weapons proliferation that threatens the 
security of all nations.
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 57, 
expressing the Sense of the U.S. House of Representatives that the 
European Union should not lift its embargo on the sale of arms to 
China.
  After the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre the European Union imposed a 
ban on arm sales to China. I support this embargo, as I believe it 
helps ensure peace in the region and deters China from the use of arms 
against Taiwan. In the world we live in we should strive to ensure 
peace, liberty and democracy. I feel strongly that the European Union's 
lifting of the arms embargo would be detrimental to the fragile peace 
that we are striving to maintain, and I am proud to join my colleagues 
in support of the embargo.
  Ms. BORDALLO. I would like to thank Chairman Hyde, Ranking Member 
Lantos, Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, and Congressman McCotter for 
initiating this resolution urging the European Union to maintain its 
arms embargo on the People's Republic of China. I rise today to give my 
strong support to this resolution. The arms embargo we are discussing 
today was placed on the People's Republic of China in response to the 
massacre at the Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989. That singular event 
succinctly demonstrated the oppression of those who suffer under a 
closed society like the PRC. They suffered on that fateful day at the 
hands of a brutal suppression. I urge our European friends to uphold 
their principled stand against arms sales as they opposed arming 
Eastern Germany and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. At that time 
it was the safety of Europe that hung in the balance. Now it is the 
peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region that is at stake.
  The gathering of students and peaceful protesters at Tiananmen Square 
that summer represented a value we in this country hold dear: the right 
to freely assemble. If you believe in that freedom, then don't lift the 
embargo. Let us remember the graphic image of the lone protester 
stopping a line of People's Liberation Army tanks on a Beijing highway. 
How will the governments of Europe explain that the next time this 
occurs the People's Liberation Army could be using French or German 
tanks to quell a protest for democracy?
  One member of the PRC government recognized the plight of the Chinese 
people on that fateful day and had the courage to admit that the brutal 
suppression was a shameful tragedy. General Secretary Zhao Ziyang was 
then stripped of power and placed under house arrest until his recent 
passing. It is forbidden to discuss his heroism in China, but here on 
the floor of Congress we can be candid because we enjoy the right to 
free speech that the people of China do not. In his memory, I urge the 
good nations of Europe to recognize that the work begun by the 
protesters at Tiananmen is not done.
  I admit that I have personal interest in keeping the arms embargo in 
place. The People's Republic of China has had a history of aggressive 
military acquisition. These forces may someday threaten our allies in 
the Asia-Pacific region. It was only recently that a Chinese submarine 
was detected circling our island. I urge the leaders of Europe to look 
beyond their own self-interest and consider the cause of freedom in 
making their decision concerning the arms embargo.
  To this end, I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of House Resolution 
57, to urge the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the 
People's Republic of China.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, there is a very troubling development taking 
shape in the security policy of the European Union concerning arms 
sales to China. Briefly stated, the major European countries have 
already resumed arms sales to China and now propose to terminate 
altogether the long-standing embargo on arms sales that they imposed in 
1989 following the Tiananmen Square massacre.
  This is all part of a new ``strategic partnership'' which the 
European Union proclaimed at its summit meeting with China last 
December. Also reflected in the communique for that

[[Page 1376]]

meeting is European support for China's membership in the Missile 
Technology Control Regime. The contrast with the policy of the United 
States Government could not be greater. Just a few days later, the 
Department of State once again imposed sanctions on several most 
prominent entities in China's military industrial complex for illicit 
sales to Iran.
  Recent public comments by European authorities seek to downplay the 
significance of their new policy. They maintain that their arms sales 
to China will not result in quantitative or qualitative increases. But, 
this provides little assurance since the major EU member states have 
already doubled their arms sales in the one year period between 2002 
and 2003 to $500 million. Indeed, there are no rose-colored glasses 
available that can soften the impact of this dangerous course of 
action.
  The development of democracy in China would be the first casualty. 
Like the United States, the European Union imposed an arms embargo on 
China in 1989 following the Tiananmen Square massacre. While China's 
economic policies since then have provided the Chinese people with 
greater choices about consumer goods, the Communist Party remains 
firmly in power and permits few choices about what can be said publicly 
in exercise of personal liberty. A termination of the EU arms embargo 
would provide the Chinese leadership with an impressive propaganda coup 
and demoralize the pro-democracy movement.
  Even more disturbing, European security policy in this area appears 
to be on a collision course with our country's extensive security 
interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Our security posture has been the 
decisive factor in ensuring regional stability and prosperity since the 
end of World War II. Our military planners and commanders are already 
confronting a sustained Chinese military buildup, which includes 
China's deployment of some 500 short range ballistic missiles across 
the Taiwan Strait and intercontinental missiles that can reach American 
shores.
  The statement we make in this Resolution is twofold: First, that 
European policy should support the development of democracy in China, 
not a military buildup, by maintaining the embargo and terminating 
current sales. Second, that European armament cooperation with China is 
fundamentally inconsistent not only with our security interests in 
Asia, but also with transatlantic armament cooperation, which we will 
be duty bound to examine in a new context given the increased risks of 
diversion of sensitive U.S. military technology that naturally arise 
from EU-Chinese arms cooperation.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, the Status Quo in the Taiwan 
Straits is under threat. This has far less to do with unilateral steps 
being taken by Taiwan and much more to do with People's Republic of 
China's (PRC) decision to apparently leave its ``Good Neighbor'' policy 
by the wayside, and embark on a new campaign to promote its economic 
and military ambitions across the Straits and throughout the region.
  For several months now, based on speeches by Jiang Zemin, it appears 
that China is in the process of drafting a so-called Anti-Secession Law 
which obligates the People's Liberation Army to use military force to 
annex Taiwan if Beijing believes Taiwanese rhetoric or actions are 
moving the Island towards independence.
  The prospect of a lifting of the European Union's arms embargo 
against China, together with the drafting of this Anti-Secession Law, 
and the publication of a PRC white paper last year entitled, ``China's 
National Defense in 2004,'' calling Taiwan's independence advocates the 
``biggest immediate threat to China's sovereignty and territorial 
integrity,'' are alarming items in and of themselves, but taken as a 
whole they represent a disturbing trend in China's thinking about the 
situation in the Taiwan Straits.
  Officials at the State Department and our friends in Taiwan are 
extremely uneasy to say the least over these signals of a change in 
China's posture towards Taiwan--and with good reason. Saber rattling by 
the PRC is nothing new, but this Anti-Secession Law represents a 
dangerous new dimension.
  If enacted, this Anti-Secession Law will create the legal grounds for 
Beijing to punish anyone speaking or acting against reunification of 
Taiwan and China. Moreover, the law will permit, in fact it will 
compel, Chinese leaders to use force against Taiwan if China considers 
Taiwanese leaders are engaging in so-called separatist activities.
  The Law clearly undermines efforts to enhance the goodwill that has 
grown-up across the Straits in recent years spawned by deep socio-
cultural ties, and the increasing economic interdependence between 
Taiwan and the Mainland. If this Anti-Secession Law is enacted, the 
response from the Taiwanese will be predictable; military tension will 
rise accordingly in the Taiwan Strait and regional peace and stability 
will be affected. This cannot be in the best interests of any country, 
especially those in the region.
  Mr. Speaker, since 9/11 there has been a heightened recognition of 
the benefits of cooperation with Beijing on security issues in the 
region; ranging from eliminating the North Korean nuclear threat, to 
stabilizing the Taiwan Strait, and countering global terrorism. A 
security crisis over Taiwan is something we all must work to avert. 
But, China's proposed Anti-Secession Law is a bad law with serious 
consequences for future relations between China and Taiwan, as well as 
regional stability. I hope the Chinese Government will reconsider their 
actions and return to the ``Good Neighbor'' policy that has worked so 
effectively for so long.
  Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) that the House 
suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 57.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________