[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2816-2818]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 SENATE RESOLUTION 59--URGING THE EUROPEAN UNION TO MAINTAIN ITS ARMS 
            EXPORT EMBARGO ON THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

  Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Biden, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Kyl, Mr. 
Chambliss, Mr. Ensign, and Mr. Shelby) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

                               S. Res. 59

       Whereas, on June 4, 1989, the Communist Government of the 
     People's Republic of China ordered the People's Liberation 
     Army to carry out an unprovoked, brutal assault on thousands 
     of peaceful and unarmed demonstrators in Tiananmen Square, 
     resulting in hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries;
       Whereas, on June 5, 1989, President George H. W. Bush 
     condemned these actions of the Government of the People's 
     Republic of China, and the United States took several 
     concrete steps to respond to the military assault, including 
     suspending all exports of items on the United States 
     Munitions List to the People's Republic of China;

[[Page 2817]]

       Whereas, on June 27, 1989, the European Union (then called 
     the European Community) imposed an arms embargo on the 
     People's Republic of China in response to the Government of 
     China's brutal repression of protestors calling for 
     democratic and political reform;
       Whereas the European Council, in adopting that embargo, 
     ``strongly condemn[ed] the brutal repression taking place in 
     China'' and ``solemnly request[ed] the Chinese authorities. . 
     . to put an end to the repressive actions against those who 
     legitimately claim their democratic rights'';
       Whereas the poor human rights conditions that precipitated 
     the decisions of the United States and the European Union to 
     impose and maintain their respective embargoes have not 
     improved;
       Whereas the Department of State 2003 Country Reports on 
     Human Rights Practices states that, during 2003, ``The 
     [Chinese] Government's human rights record remained poor, and 
     the Government continued to commit numerous and serious 
     abuses,'' and, furthermore, that ``there was backsliding on 
     key human rights issues during the year'';
       Whereas, according to the same Department of State report, 
     credible sources estimated that as many as 2,000 persons 
     remained in prison in the People's Republic of China at the 
     end of 2003 for their activities during the June 1989 
     Tiananmen demonstrations;
       Whereas the Government of the People's Republic of China 
     continues to maintain that its crackdown on democracy 
     activists in Tiananmen Square was warranted and remains 
     unapologetic for its brutal actions, as demonstrated by that 
     Government's handling of the recent death of former Premier 
     and Communist Party General Secretary, Zhao Ziyang, who had 
     been under house arrest for 15 years because of his objection 
     to the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown;
       Whereas, since December 2003, the European Parliament, the 
     legislative arm of the European Union, has rejected in four 
     separate resolutions the lifting of the European Union arms 
     embargo on the People's Republic of China because of 
     continuing human rights concerns in China;
       Whereas the January 13, 2005, resolution of the European 
     Parliament called on the European Union to maintain its arms 
     embargo on the People's Republic of China until the European 
     Union ``has adopted a legally binding Code of Conduct on Arms 
     Exports and the People's Republic of China has taken concrete 
     steps towards improving the human rights situation in that 
     country. . . [including] by fully respecting the rights of 
     minorities'';
       Whereas a number of European Union member states have 
     individually expressed concern about lifting the European 
     Union arms embargo on the People's Republic of China, and 
     several have passed resolutions of opposition in their 
     national parliaments;
       Whereas the European Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports, 
     as a non-binding set of principles, is insufficient to 
     control European arms exports to the People's Republic of 
     China;
       Whereas public statements by some major defense firms in 
     Europe and other indicators suggest that such firms intend to 
     increase military sales to the People's Republic of China if 
     the European Union lifts its arms embargo on that country;
       Whereas the Department of Defense fiscal year 2004 Annual 
     Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of 
     China found that ``[e]fforts underway to lift the European 
     Union (EU) embargo on China will provide additional 
     opportunities to acquire specific technologies from Western 
     suppliers'';
       Whereas the same Department of Defense report noted that 
     the military modernization and build-up of the People's 
     Republic of China is aimed at increasing the options of the 
     Government of the People's Republic of China to intimidate or 
     attack democratic Taiwan, as well as preventing or disrupting 
     third-party intervention, namely by the United States, in a 
     cross-strait military crisis;
       Whereas the June 2004, report to Congress of the 
     congressionally-mandated, bipartisan United States-China 
     Economic and Security Review Commission concluded that 
     ``there has been a dramatic change in the military balance 
     between China and Taiwan,'' and that ``[i]n the past few 
     years, China has increasingly developed a quantitative and 
     qualitative advantage over Taiwan'';
       Whereas the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.), 
     which codified in 1979 the basis for continued relations 
     between the United States and Taiwan, affirmed that the 
     decision of the United States to establish diplomatic 
     relations with the People's Republic of China was based on 
     the expectation that the future of Taiwan would be determined 
     by peaceful means;
       Whereas the balance of power in the Taiwan Straits and, 
     specifically, the military capabilities of the People's 
     Republic of China, directly affect peace and security in the 
     East Asia and Pacific region;
       Whereas the Foreign Minister of Japan, Nobutaka Machimura, 
     recently stated that Japan is opposed to the European Union 
     lifting its embargo against the People's Republic of China 
     and that ``[i]t is extremely worrying as this issue concerns 
     peace and security environments not only in Japan but also in 
     East Asia as a whole'';
       Whereas the United States has numerous security interests 
     in the East Asia and Pacific region, including the security 
     of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, and other key areas, and the 
     United States Armed Forces, which are deployed throughout the 
     region, would be adversely affected by any Chinese military 
     aggression;
       Whereas the lifting of the European Union arms embargo on 
     the People's Republic of China would increase the risk that 
     United States troops could face military equipment and 
     technology of Western, even United States, origin in a cross-
     strait military conflict;
       Whereas this risk would necessitate a reevaluation by the 
     United States Government of procedures for licensing arms and 
     dual-use exports to member states of the European Union in 
     order to attempt to prevent the retransfer of United States 
     exports from such countries to the People's Republic of 
     China;
       Whereas the report of the United States-China Economic and 
     Security Review Commission on the Symposia on Transatlantic 
     Perspectives on Economic and Security Relations with China, 
     held in Brussels, Belgium and Prague, Czech Republic from 
     November 29, 2004, through December 3, 2004, recommended that 
     the United States Government continue to press the European 
     Union to maintain the arms embargo on the People's Republic 
     of China and strengthen its arms export control system, as 
     well as place limitations on United States public and private 
     sector defense cooperation with foreign firms that sell 
     sensitive military technology to China;
       Whereas the lax export control practices of the People's 
     Republic of China and the continuing proliferation of 
     technology related to weapons of mass destruction and 
     ballistic missiles by state-sponsored entities in China 
     remain a serious concern of the United States Government;
       Whereas the most recent Central Intelligence Agency 
     Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of 
     Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and 
     Advanced Conventional Munitions, 1 July Through 31 December 
     2003, found that ``Chinese entities continued to work with 
     Pakistan and Iran on ballistic missile-related projects 
     during the second half of 2003,'' and that ``[d]uring 2003, 
     China remained a primary supplier of advanced conventional 
     weapons to Pakistan, Sudan, and Iran'';
       Whereas, as recently as December 20, 2004, the United 
     States Government determined that seven entities of the 
     People's Republic of China, including several state-owned 
     companies involved in China's military-industrial complex, 
     should be subject to sanctions under the Iran 
     Nonproliferation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-178; 50 U.S.C. 
     1701 note) for sales to Iran of prohibited equipment or 
     technology; and
       Whereas the assistance provided by these entities to Iran 
     works directly counter to the efforts of the United States 
     and several European countries to curb illicit weapons 
     activities in Iran: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the Senate--
       (1) strongly supports the United States embargo on the 
     People's Republic of China;
       (2) strongly urges the European Union to continue its ban 
     on all arms exports to the People's Republic of China;
       (3) requests that the President raise United States 
     objections to the potential lifting of the European Union 
     arms embargo against the People's Republic of China in 
     upcoming meetings with European officials;
       (4) encourages the United States Government to make clear 
     in discussions with Governments in Europe that a lifting of 
     the European Union embargo on arms sales to the People's 
     Republic of China would potentially adversely affect 
     transatlantic defense cooperation, including future transfers 
     of United States military technology, services, and equipment 
     to European Union countries;
       (5) urges the European Union--
       (A) to close any loopholes in its arms embargo on the 
     People's Republic of China and in its Code of Conduct on Arms 
     Exports;
       (B) to make its Code of Conduct on Arms Exports legally 
     binding and enforceable;
       (C) to more carefully regulate and monitor the end-use of 
     exports of sensitive dual-use technology; and
       (D) to increase transparency in its arms and dual-use 
     export control regimes;
       (6) deplores the ongoing human rights abuses in the 
     People's Republic of China; and
       (7) urges the United States Government and the European 
     Union to cooperatively develop a common strategy to seek--
       (A) improvement in the human rights conditions in the 
     People's Republic of China;
       (B) an end to the military build-up of the People's 
     Republic of China aimed at Taiwan;
       (C) improvement in the export control practices of the 
     People's Republic of China; and
       (D) an end to the ongoing proliferation by state-sponsored 
     entities in China of technology related to weapons of mass 
     destruction and ballistic missiles.

  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to submit a resolution on the 
European Union's expressed intent to lift its arms embargo against 
China.

[[Page 2818]]

  During the EU-China summit meeting last December, the European Union 
indicated that it is likely to lift the arms embargo it imposed against 
China after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Evidently, the 
``strategic partnership'' the EU seeks with China and base economic 
interests trump the human rights considerations that were the reason 
for instituting the embargo in the first place. How the EU proceeds on 
this issue will reveal a great deal about the role it seeks to play in 
the world.
  In helping the Chinese develop their military capabilities, the 
Europeans see two principal benefits. China's enhanced military prowess 
would serve as a more effective counterweight to American power, 
theoretically strengthening the EU's hand in international political 
and strategic decisions. Additionally, European defense industries 
stand to gain billions of euros in Chinese contracts which, for EU 
leaders, seems too good to resist.
  Sadly, the EU seems to be giving in to Chinese blackmail. Because 
China views the continued arms embargo as an international black eye 
and an embarrassing reminder of the Tiananmen crackdown, it has 
aggressively lobbied the Europeans to lift it, even saying that their 
trade relationship will be jeopardized if the embargo remains in place.
  It is important to remember the reason for imposing the embargo: 
China's brutal reaction to the democratic movement in 1989 that 
resulted in the death of hundreds of Chinese and the imprisonment of 
thousands more. So, when we consider the future of the embargo it seems 
self-evident to evaluate the current state of human rights in China 
today.
  Though the government's methods may be more refined than we saw in 
June 1989, the situation remains bleak. Chinese citizens who attempt to 
exercise basic rights are dealt with harshly. People are jailed for 
writing essays. Priests are beaten and abused. Churches are closed, 
their leaders detained. Birth planning policies are cruelly 
implemented. The Chinese people are still unable to speak freely, to 
meet without interference, or to worship in peace.
  Although respect for basic human rights is one of the values that 
define the Euro-Atlantic tradition, the EU seems ready to discard it at 
will. It is foolish for them to call on China to improve its human 
rights record and then talk of rewarding them by lifting the embargo. I 
cringe to think of the message that sends to the brave Chinese 
dissidents fighting for democracy.
  The EU claims that lifting the embargo will not change the status 
quo. Its argument is based on the EU's 'Code of Conduct' that lays out 
minimal standards (including respect for human rights and preservation 
of regional peace) for EU nations to consider before approving arms 
sales. There would be no explosion of military sales to China if the 
embargo is lifted, EU leaders say. But not only is the Code of Conduct 
ineffective, it is purely voluntary. And if its terms are violated, it 
is not legally enforceable.
  Even if the EU were to strengthen the code of conduct and improve its 
transparency, I am confident that EU members would ignore its 
provisions if they deem it economically advantageous. Otherwise, I 
doubt their defense industries would be as enthusiastic about access to 
the Chinese marketplace.
  There are serious consequences if the EU proceeds down this road. By 
giving China access to advanced military systems, including 
surveillance and communication equipment, the EU would be directly 
responsible for modernizing the Chinese military. On a regional basis, 
the delicate strategic balance in the Taiwan straits will be altered, 
and as one Pentagon official states, China will be able to kill 
Americans more effectively. China's recent threatening moves against 
Japan will be seen as more dangerous. And whether the EU admits it or 
not, China will have a greater capability to suppress internal dissent.
  This may not matter to Europe. But they should carefully consider the 
impact this move would have on the transatlantic relationship that they 
claim to value. I can guarantee that if the EU lifts its arms embargo 
against China, the Congress will reassess the close defense and 
intelligence cooperation that the United States has with Europe and 
work to reverse the liberalization of technology transfers to our 
European partners. To do otherwise would be irresponsible. If we share 
advanced technology with the EU which then allows China even limited 
access to it, our forces in the Pacific are more vulnerable to Chinese 
misadventure.
  Last November, British Foreign Minister Jack Straw told me that the 
United Kingdom did not want to jeopardize its close defense 
relationship with the U.S. over the arms embargo issue. Yet, apparently 
the British believe that this is an instance where it can play the role 
of a good European, rather than an American partner. I take heart that 
there are some EU members that still believe in the importance of 
taking a stand on human rights grounds. Unfortunately, I am not certain 
their views can prevail in Brussels.
  I am pleased that my distinguished colleague, Senator Biden, has 
joined me in submitting this resolution today, along with Senators 
Brownback, Kyl, Chambliss, and Ensign.
  President Bush will be traveling to Europe next week, where he will 
meet with senior European and EU leaders. This resolution states our 
strong support of the United States arms embargo on China and urges the 
European Union to maintain its embargo as well. It also urges the 
President to raise our objections to the EU lifting its embargo and to 
engage the Europeans during his meetings next week in a discussion on 
how doing so could adversely affect the transatlantic relationship. It 
encourages the EU to examine its current arms control policies, close 
any loopholes, and examine their trade with China in light of serious 
human rights concerns.
  I believe, and it is expressed in the resolution, that this situation 
presents us with an opportunity to work with the EU to strengthen the 
transatlantic relationship. By working together actively on a common 
strategy to improve human rights in China, end the Chinese military 
build-up against Taiwan, improve Chinese export control practices, and 
bring an end to the ongoing proliferation by state-sponsored entities 
in China of technology related to weapons of mass destruction and 
ballistic missiles, we are more likely to achieve our common goal.
  But I am concerned that the strident competitiveness of some senior 
European leaders and their obsession with hampering America's ability 
to operate in the world is impacting U.S. national security interests, 
rather than purely economic or commercial ones. Multipolarity is not a 
policy goal, it's a recipe for disaster. At what cost is the EU trying 
to counter American power? In order to play a greater role in the 
world, they are willing to risk one that is more dangerous.

                          ____________________