Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323153392
label
Asian/Pacific American Salute to the President Fountain Valley, CA 6/16/91 [OA 8324] [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323153392
contentType
document
title
Asian/Pacific American Salute to the President Fountain Valley, CA 6/16/91 [OA 8324] [1]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13760-009
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323153392
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
adb6650b23a2d347
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13760
Folder ID Number:
13760-009
Folder Title:
Asian/Pacific American Salute to the President Fountain Valley, CA 6/16/91 [OA 8324] [1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
21
4
6
Weekly Compilation of
Presidential
Documents
Monday, May 13, 1991
Volume 27-Number 19
Pages 557-596
111 RESEARCH
Pres Documents
3
Administration of George Bush, 1991 / May 6
were sent to Senato
up this proposal in your Committee. Let us
Proclamation 6288-Asian/Pacific
nd Jake Garn, chair
now work together to craft the broad bank-
American Heritage Month, 1991 and
mber of the Senate
ing reform legislation that this country
1992
Urban Affairs Com-
needs.
May 6, 1991
Sincerely,
George Bush
By the President of the United States
of America
Note: Identical letters were sent to Repre-
A Proclamation
sentatives Henry B. Gonzalez and Chalmers
al Leaders on
P. Wylie, chairman and ranking member of
With characteristic clarity and force, Walt
the House Banking, Finance and Urban Af-
Whitman wrote: "The United States them-
islation
fairs Committee; and Frank Annunzio,
selves are essentially the greatest poem
chairman of the Financial Institutions Su-
Here is not merely a nation but a
pervision, Regulation, and Insurance Sub-
teeming nation of nations." Those immortal
ear Representative:)
committee.
words eloquently describe America's ethnic
n Banking, Finance
diversity-a diversity we celebrate with
S forward with legis-
pride during Asian/Pacific American Herit-
ig reform, let me re-
age Month.
ort for the Adminis-
Message to the Congress Transmitting
The Asian/Pacific American heritage is
dernize the Nation's
laud your Commit-
an Extension of the Iceland-United
marked by its richness and depth. The
world marvels at the wealth of ancient art
to use this compre-
States Fishing Agreement
foundation for Com-
and philosophy, the fine craftsmanship, and
May 6, 1991
the colorful literature and folklore that have
e end of June. My
eady to work closely
To the Congress of the United States:
sprung from Asia and the Pacific islands.
of this process.
In accordance with the Magnuson Fishery
Whether they trace their roots to places
Conservation and Management Act of 1976
like Cambodia, Vietnam, Korea, the Philip-
as come to addres
ems of our banking
(Public Law 94-265; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.),
pines, and the Marshall Islands or cherish
comprehensive leg-
I transmit herewith the Agreement be-
their identities as natives of Hawaii and
1 economic growth
tween the Government of the United States
Guam, all Asian and Pacific Americans can
of America and the Government of the Re-
take pride in this celebration of their herit-
more competitive
etter able to lend to
public of Iceland Amending and Extending
age.
es and bad. Without
the Agreement of September 21, 1984,
By preserving the time-honored customs
the economy is ex-
Concerning Fisheries off the Coasts of the
and traditions of their ancestral homelands,
il of future credit
United States, as amended and extended.
Americans of Asian and Pacific descent
the Administration
The agreement, which was effected by ex-
have greatly enriched our Nation's culture.
I-based reforms.
change of notes at Washington on February
They have also made many outstanding
Committee to reject
11 and April 5, 1991, copies of which are
contributions to American history. Indeed,
approach was the
attached, extends the 1984 agreement for
this country's westward expansion and eco-
ould merely recapi-
an additional 2 years and 6 months, from
nomic development were greatly influ-
ce Fund and make
July 1, 1991, to December 31, 1993. The
enced by thousands of Chinese and other
aw would be short-
exchange of notes together with the 1984
Asians who immigrated during the 19th
: fundamental prob-
agreement constitute a governing interna-
century. Today recent immigrants from
lustry, not just fund
tional fishery agreement within the require-
South Asia are giving our Nation new ap-
ils to adopt a broad-
ments of section 201(c) of the Act. The ex-
preciation for that region of the world.
e lines I have sug-
change of notes also amends the 1984
Over the years-and often in the face of
face another recapi-
agreement to incorporate the latest changes
great obstacles-Asian and Pacific Ameri-
ce fund. This addi-
in U.S. law and policy into the agreement.
cans have worked hard to reap the rewards
ank Insurance Fund
I urge that the Congress give favorable
of freedom and opportunity. Many have ar-
and taxpayers that
consideration to this agreement at an early
rived in the United States after long and
ire.
date.
arduous journeys, escaping tyranny and op-
st step toward com-
pression with little more than the clothes
George Bush
lying a broad-based
on their backs. Yet, believing in America's
ongress. You have
The White House,
promise of liberty and justice for all and
y agreeing to take
May 6, 1991.
imbued with a strong sense of self-disci-
571
May 6 / Administration of George Bush, 1991
pline, sacrifice, courage, and honor, they
and of the Independence of the United
have steadily advanced, earning the respect
States of America the two hundred and fif
and admiration of their fellow citizens.
teenth.
Today we give special and long-overdue
recognition to the nisei who fought for our
George Bush
country in Europe during World War II.
During one of America's darker hours, they
[Filed with the Office of the Federal Regis-
affirmed the patriotism and loyalty of Japa-
ter, 4:27 p.m., May 6, 1991]
nese Americans and, in so doing, taught us
an important lesson about tolerance and jus-
tice.
Time and again throughout our Nation's
Statement by Press Secretary Fitzwater
history, Asian and Pacific Americans have
on the President's Health
proved their devotion to the ideals of free-
dom and democratic government. Those
May 6, 1991
ideals animate and guide our policies
toward Asia and the Pacific today. The eco-
President Bush has carried out his normal
nomic dynamism of the Pacific Rim is a
schedule for the day, indicating several
crucial source of growth for the global econ-
times that he felt well and is glad to be
omy, and the United States will continue
back at work. The President is cheerful and
working to promote economic cooperation
absorbed by conversations with visitors to
and the expansion of free markets through-
the Oval Office, often indicating that he
out the region. The United States also re-
feels in the best of health. The President's
mains committed to the security of our
heartbeat remains in normal sinus rhythm,
allies and to the advancement of human
which means that there is no irregularity.
rights throughout Asia and the Pacific.
The White House medical staff continues
The political and economic ties that exist
to monitor the President's heartbeat on
between the United States and countries in
regular basis. A heart monitor has been set
Asia and the Pacific are fortified by strong
up near the President's study just off the
bonds of kinship and culture. All Americans
Oval Office. A White House nurse checks
are enriched by those ties, and thus we
the President's heartbeat with the monitor
proudly unite in observing Asian/Pacific
between meetings and at other times when
American Heritage Month.
the President is not otherwise occupied.
The Congress, by House Joint Resolution
During the course of the day, the Presi-
173, has designated May 1991 and May
dent's heartbeat has shown no evidence of
1992 as "Asian/Pacific American Heritage
returning to fibrillation. Monitoring in the
Month" and has authorized and requested
days ahead will be done by telemetric EKG
the President to issue a proclamation in ob-,
equipment.
servance of these occasions.
The intravenous line was removed from
Now, Therefore, I, George Bush, Presi-
the President's arm late this afternoon. The
dent of the United States of America, do
bandage remains only to close the point of
hereby proclaim the months of May 1991
insertion. The President remains on digoxin
and May 1992 as Asian/Pacific American
and procainamide.
Heritage Month. I call upon the people of
the United States to observe these occasions
According to the President's Physician,
with appropriate programs, ceremonies,
Dr. Burton Lee, "The President's medical
and activities.
day in the White House has been unevent-
ful. He has performed the functions of
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set
office while maintaining good humor and
my hand this 6th day of May, in the year of
good health. No problems of -any kind have
our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety-one,
arisen since he left the hospital."
572
TRANSFER SHEET
GEORGE BUSH LIBRARY
COLLECTION Bush Pres. Records
ACC. NO:
93-01
Office of Speechwriting
Speech File-Backup
The following material was withdrawn from this segment of the
collection and transferred to the
AUDIOVISUAL COLLECTION
BOOK COLLECTION
X
MUSEUM COLLECTION
OTHER (SPECIFY:
)
DESCRIPTION:
Campaign Button : Vietnamese Americans for
Bush 1988
SERIES
BOX NO.
Speech File - Backup
FILE FOLDER TITLE:
Asian/Pacific American Salute to the President
Fountain Valley 1 CA 6/16/91 [OA 8324] [1]
TRANSFERRED BY:
DATE OF TRANSFER:
GMF
6/13/96
DATE RECEIVED
6/13/96
METHAMESE AMERICANS
GEORGE
-
BUSH
FOR PRESIDENT
/
88
State of California
# to NN # * the
State of
California
Department of
Chinese American Association of Southern California
Medical Board of California
Consumer
Medical Quality Review Committee
Affairs
21171 Western Avenue, Suite 120
Torrance, CA 90501-1724
CA
# &
(213) 320-8919
c
Kim Wang
President
6860 Verde Ridge Road
Elizabeth Szu, (PM)
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90274
Member, District 11
P.O. Box 7000-54
(213) 325-1755 (W)
(213) 544-1001
MQRC
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
(213) 377-8622 (H)
Week Ending Friday, May 12, 1989
Remarks on Signing the Asian/Pacific
nity socially, culturally, economically, spir-
American Heritage Week Proclamation
itually.
May 8 / Administration of George Bush, 1989
May 8, 1989
Ladies and gentlemen, as we proclaim
this Asian/Pacific American Heritage Week
Welcome to the Rose Garden, ladies and
let me observe that you have earned this
another gets the shade." For decades, Asian
one, marked by significant achieve ments in
gentlemen and fellow Americans. You
recognition. You've done it through excel-
Americans have planted the trees of pros-
the arts, science, education, and busines:
know, an Asian proverb says "intelligence
lence, with the value of your lives. Those
perity, opportunity, and human dignity.
Today, Asian and Pacific Americans con-
consists in recognizing opportunity.' Well,
values are, of course, discipline and self-sac-
And in coming years, more than ever, 1
tinue to enrich our life as a Nation.
if that's true, it's clear that we are recogniz-
rifice, humility and compassion, an abiding
know that my children, America's children,
Through their efforts to preserve the tradi-
ing opportunity in putting the flag back
belief in work, a soaring love of freedom-
will thank you for the shade.
tions of their ancestral homelands, they
where it belongs. [Laughter] No, intelli-
values which brought you parents, you
And finally, before I sign this proclama-
greatly enhance the beauty and color of
gence consists in recognizing opportunity,
grandparents, and some of you, right here
tion declaring this week as Asia/Pacific
American culture. Their faith, determina-
tion, and hard work and their devotion to
and it's clear that you may be one of the
to America-values which are now uplifting
American Heritage Week, it gives me great
most intelligent groups that we've wel-
America.
pleasure to announce two nominations that
family life inspire men and women through-
comed to the White House, for you've rec-
I think, for example, of pioneers like
I will submit to the Senate 101 confirmation
out the United States.
ognized opportunity and seized it. And I
Gerald Tsai, Jr.; or Jenlane Gee, the Califor-
to positions within my administration. I'll be
The celebration of Asian Pacific Ameri-
am just delighted to be with you.
nia Teacher of the Year; or Henry Tang and
sending the name of Julia Chang Bloch to
can Heritage Week provides a welcome op-
I'd like to welcome a very special visitor,
I.M. Pei; of our own Sichan Siv, who fled
the Senate to be the next-|applause|-
portunity to acknowledge the many contri-
President Hammer DeRoburt of Nauru out
the killing fields of Cambodia and a daring
United States Ambassador-please-|laugh-
butions that Asian and Pacific Americans
in the Pacific-a friend of the United States.
escape-now at work right here in the
ter and applause)-the next United States
have made to American society and to ex-
Welcome, sir. And I think it's appropriate
White House. Let me mention my trusted
Ambassador to Nepal. And the name of Kyo
press our appreciation for them.
he's here, head of an island-state in the Pa-
adviser, Lehmann Li, who's been at my side
Jhin to be Chief Counsel-Kyo-Chiel
Now, Therefore, I, George Bush, Presi-
for a long time. You talk about a bright
Counsel for Advocacy in the SBA [Small
dent of the United States of America, by
cific-most appropriate that you join us
individual, he's a walking encyclopedia.
here today, sir. Thank you.
Business Administration]. And I salute, also.
virtue of the authority vested in me by the
My friends, they-you-are building a
We gather in a special week: Asian/Pacif-
Katherine Chang Dress, sworn in today as
Constitution and laws of the United States,
better America and creating new jobs.
an Assistant Secretary of the Interior. We
do hereby proclaim the week beginning
ic American Heritage Week. And yesterday
You're enhancing our medical schools, the
are so lucky. And we welcome these quali-
May 7, 1989. as Asian/ Pacific American
marked the 146th anniversary of the day
law, our small and large businesses. In short,
fied, capable individuals to our team.
Heritage Week. I call upon the people of
the first Japanese immigrated to America;
honoring your heritage by the lives you
the United States to observe this week with
and Wednesday celebrates the 120th birth-
God bless all of you. Thank you for
lead, and for that I congratulate you. And in
coming here to Washington on this beauti-
appropriate ceremonies and activities.
day of an event that Chinese-Americans
a personal sense, I want to thank you, too,
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set
made possible, the driving of the golden
ful day. And now, let's sign this proclama-
for as Chief of the United States Liaison
tion. Thank you very much.
my hand this eighth day of May, in the year
spike to complete the first transcontinental
Office in China, I came with Barbara to
of our Lord nineteen hundred and eighty-
railroad. And we meet, too, as special
love that heritage and, in countless ways,
nine, and of the Independence of the
friends. And in particular, I want to thank
Note: The President spoke at 10:15 a.m. in
with countless friends, to see and share
United States of America the two hundred
the Rose Garden at the White House. In his
three people: Jeanie Jew, who created the
what lies at its center: the family. Ten
and thirteenth.
idea for this week and is the granddaughter
remarks, he referred to Gerald Tsai, Jr.,
weeks ago on a trip back to Asia and to the
member of the board of directors of Primer-
George Bush
of a Chinese pioneer who helped build that
Pacific Rim, Barbara and I visited the non-
railroad; Frank Horton, the chief sponsor of
ica; Henry Tang, vice president of Solomon
denominational church that we'd attended
Brothers; I.M. Pei, architect; and Sichan Siv,
[Filed with the Office of the Federal Regis-
the Heritage Week legislation; and Ruby
in Beijing. And it's different now, it's
bigger. But the values, the heritage, are the
Deputy Assistant to the President for Public
ter, 4:36 p.m., May 8, 1989]
Moy, chairman of the Congressional Asia/
Liaison.
Pacific American Heritage Week Caucus.
same. And the memories are even better.
Perhaps most of all, we assemble here for a
And I'll never forget when our own daugh-
special reason: to salute the millions of refu-
ter was baptized right there in China.
gees and immigrants from Asia and the Pa-
Yes, the Asian/Pacific community has a
cific who braved the unknown and ven-
special place in my heart, and so does an
tured to our shores, and to salute a commu-
old Chinese proverb which I've often cited.
nity which has enriched America's commu-
It goes: "One generation plants the trees,
675
May 7 Administration of George Bush. 1990
Administration of George Bush, 1990 / May 7
Remarks on Signing the Asian/Pacific
Spark Matsunaga. Spark's brilliant career
late Ellison Onizuka. And we are richer be.
And that's why we support the emerging
American Heritage Month
was the culmination of a history that began
cause of Asian Pacific American leaders,
Asian and Pacific democracies. And that's
Proclamation
146 years ago with the arrival of Nisei, the
many of them with us here today.
why we advocate peaceful change, why we
May 7, 1990
first Japanese Americans to land on these
Count among them Elaine Chao, number
will remain in solidarity with the aspirations
shores. And now, people from Asia and the
two in this enormous Department of Trans-
of the peoples of these many lands. And
First, let me just express a warm White
Pacific, from dozens of lands across a broad
portation of ours; Wendy Gramm, Chair-
that is why America must stand for more
House welcome to Prime Minister Namaliu
swath of the world that spans from the
man of the Federal Commission on Com-
than mere material success. America must
from Papua New Guinea. I just wanted to
Middle East to the Philippines, have found
modity Future Trading; Cindy Daub, Com-
remain the beacon of liberty, a light of
walk out with him, show him a little hospi-
this new homeland called America. They
missioner of the Copyright Royalty Tribu-
hope for the troubled, the oppressed, the
tality. I look forward, sir, to visiting with
represent the whole range of religions—
nal; Kyo Jhin, who will be named shortly to
downtrodden. The people of this land know
you this afternoon.
Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist. They're
a senior position at the Department of Vet-
that it is not enough to let a man purchase
To Senators Inouye and Phil Gramm, wel-
Arab. Iranian, Indian, Korean, Thai descent.
eran Affairs: my own-I say my own-our
what he wants. He must be allowed to say
come. To Representative Pat Saiki, my old
But they will tell you that they are Ameri-
own Sichan Siv, on the White House staff,
what he believes. He must be allowed to go
friend, welcome back to the White House.
cans first.
who fled the killing fields and is now doing
where he wants. He must be allowed to
And [Representatives] Norm Mineta; Ben
an outstanding job for the White House in
Look at the scope of America's demo-
choose his government. Economic freedom
Blaz; of course, Bill Broomfield; and Eni
every way; and Julia Chang Bloch, U.S. Am-
Faleomavaega-|laughter|-Eni, tough on
graphic change. Cambodian, Laotian, Viet-
alone will not provide sufficient room for
bassador to Nepal, our first Asian-American
namese neighborhoods flourish just across
the restlessness of the human spirit.
your name, but I got close, didn't I? Okay.
Ambassador.
the Potomac River. The minaret of a
Let us, as we celebrate the contributions
And all the Members of Congress who are
As shown by public-spirited leaders like
with us here today, and a special welcome
mosque rises over the skyline of a Dallas
of Asian Pacific Americans to our precious
Spark Matsunaga and those here today,
to Frank Horton. My heavens, Frank, be-
suburb. The student body of a school in
Asian Pacific Americans are beginning to
freedoms, remember the restless millions
cause of your diligence in working with so
southern California is made up almost en-
excel in the field of politics, just as they
who remain behind. In looking for inspira-
many of your colleagues in the Congress in
tirely of Hmong children. Pacific islanders
have excelled in every other field. While
tion they need look no further than the
the support of Jeanie Jew and Ruby Moy,
have enriched the culture and heritage of
politics is often a second-, third-, or fourth.
success of their grandchildren, their chil-
we established Asian/Pacific American Her-
Orange County. Filipinos have called Amer-
generation profession, the time is coming
dren, their brothers, sisters, and cousins
itage Week.
ica home since the first son of the Philip-
when more and more Asian and Pacific
who found freedom in America. And so, it
Now, I'm proud to take one more step
pines arrived on these shores in 1763. All of
Americans will seek office to lead our cities,
is in your honor that I sign this measure
and proclaim this May to be the first Asian/
these are subtle signs that Asian and Pacific
our States, and our nation. As America looks
proclaiming this to be Asian/Pacific Ameri-
Pacific American Heritage Month First, let
Americans are our fastest-growing minority
toward the Pacific in the century ahead, we
can Heritage Month.
me acknowledge with respect the gentle-
population. They're changing America, and
will need your insights and your leadership
Thank you all May God bless you. And
man in the Senate who was Frank's cospon-
they are changing America for the better.
as never before.
may God bless the United States of Amer-
sor-someone who has left us-a great man,
Some Asian and Pacific Americans come
You know that the future of Europe has
ica.
a great friend who wrote both haiku and
from families that have lived in America for
been very much on my mind of late-I
lasting legislation with that same graceful
more than a century. And others have liter-
think, on the mind of all Americans. But
fluency. And I, of course, am talking about
ally just arrived, by boat or jumbo jet. But
America's destiny is also tied to the Pacific
our beloved friend, the late Senator Spark
all can rely on strong communities, net-
Rim. And I've lived in Asia, and I know that
Matsunaga of Hawaii. I think this ought to
works of family and friends, often with the
the fate of Asia and the Pacific is no less
Note: The President spoke at 11:36 a m in
be his day.
support of a church, synagogue, mosque or
important to America than the future of
the Rose Garden at the White House In his
We also have with us a number of Asian
temple. So, whatever their background, all
Europe. We are encouraged by the changes
remarks, he referred to the following indi-
and Pacific American leaders from many
enjoy strong communities-a great sense of
in Eastern Europe and by the rise of de-
viduals. Jeanie Jew, lecturer and consultant
walks of life: Virginia Cha, I.M. Pei, Dr.
community, too. These 7 million Americans
mocracy to our south right here in our own
on Asian Pacific American issues; Ruby
Taylor Wang, Nancy Kwan, Dr. Samuel
show us an example of how strong families
hemisphere Make no mistake about that
Moy. chairperson of the Congressional
Lee, Dr. T.D. Lee. And with us, also, some
can instill an abiding respect for the law,
But we will not neglect Asia and the Pacif-
Asian/Pacific Staff Caucus: Virginia Cha,
distinguished Ambassadors. I also especially
tenacity in the endeavor of life and work,
ic My administration is committed to pro-
Miss Maryland 1989, I.M. Pet, architect;
want to single out Governor Peter Cole-
and most of all, excellence in education.
moting open trade and fighting protection-
Taylor Wang. payload specialist for the
man, of American Samoa, and Lieutenant
ism $0 that the economic ties between the
May 1985 "Skylab I" mission, Nancy Kuan,
Consider this: The last U.S. Census
Governor Benjamin Manglona, of the
United States and Asia can continue to
actress; Samuel Lee, Olympic gold medalist,
Northern Mariana Islands, and every
showed that 75 percent of Asian Americans
grow. Like Asian and Pacific Americans in
T.D. Lee, 1957 Nobel Prize winner for phys-
age 25 and over had at least a high school
member of their very distinguished delega-
the United States, these nations are a testa-
ics; Yuan T. Lee. 1986 Nobel Prize winner
degree-well above the national average of
tions. Thank you all for being with us.
ment to the power of self-initiative With
for chemistry, An Wang, founder of Wang
66 percent. This nation is incomparably
You've come so far, and your presence is
time, we will create a true community of
Laboratories, Inc.: Michael Chang, profes-
richer because of great scientists like Nobel
most welcome and deeply appreciated.
Prize winner Dr. Yuan Lee and the late An
nations surrounding the Pacific Rim, bound
sional tennis player: and Ellison S. Oni-
As I said, we're here in large measure
Wang We are richer because of the talent
together by commerce, a shared commit
zuka, crewmember of the space shuttle
because of the vision of Frank Horton and
ment to democracy, and an abiding friend.
"Challenger" who was killed in the explo-
of Michael Chang and the courage of the
ship.
sion of January 28, 1986.
730
731
Administration of George Bush, 1989 / May 8
make to furthering openness, transparency
tion and activities in Europe.
and predictability about military organiza-
uay
Remarks on Signing the Asian/Pacific American Heritage Week
Proclamation
May 8, 1989
ittee
the
Welcome to the Rose Garden, ladies and
nity socially, culturally, economically, spir-
ador
gentlemen and fellow Americans. You
itually.
V at
know, an Asian proverb says: "Intelligence
Ladies and gentlemen, as we proclaim
consists in recognizing opportunity." Well,
this Asian/Pacific American Heritage Week
918,
if that's true, it's clear that we are recogniz-
let me observe that you have earned this
\.B.
ing opportunity in putting the flag back
recognition. You've done it through excel-
I.D.
where it belongs. [Laughter] No, intelli-
lence, with the value of your lives. Those
He
gence consists in recognizing opportunity,
values are, of course, discipline and self-sac-
)45,
and it's clear that you may be one of the
rifice, humility and compassion, an abiding
om
most intelligent groups that we've wel-
belief in work, a soaring love of freedom-
the
comed to the White House, for you've rec-
values which brought your parents, your
ognized opportunity and seized it. And I
grandparents, and some of you right here to
am just delighted to be with you.
America-values which are now uplifting
I'd like to welcome a very special visitor,
America.
President Hammer DeRoburt of Nauru out
I think, for example, of pioneers like
as
in the Pacific-a friend of the United States.
Gerald Tsai, Jr.; or Jenlane Gee, the Califor-
Welcome, sir. And I think it's appropriate
nia Teacher of the Year; or Henry Tang and
he's here, head of an island state in the
I.M. Pei; of our own Sichan Siv, who fled
Pacific-most appropriate that you join us
the killing fields of Cambodia and a daring
here today, sir. Thank you.
escape-now at work right here in the
its
We gather in a special week: Asian/Pacif-
White House. Let me mention my trusted
on.
ic American Heritage Week. And yesterday
adviser, Lehmann Li, who's been at my side
in
marked the 146th anniversary of the day
for a long time. You talk about a bright
on-
the first Japanese immigrated to America;
individual-he's a walking encyclopedia.
IC-
and Wednesday celebrates the 120th birth-
My friends, they-you-are building a
ed
day of an event that Chinese-Americans
better America and creating new jobs.
id
made possible, the driving of the golden
You're enhancing our medical schools, the
n-
spike to complete the first transcontinental
law, our small and large businesses-in
al
railroad. And we meet, too, as special
short, honoring your heritage by the lives
i-
friends. And in particular, I want to thank
you lead; and for that I congratulate you.
in
three people: Jeanie Jew, who created the
And in a personal sense, I want to thank
to
idea for this week and is the granddaughter
you, too, for as Chief of the United States
d.
of a Chinese pioneer who helped build that
Liaison Office in China, I came with Bar-
ly
railroad; Frank Horton, the chief sponsor of
bara to love that heritage and, in countless
the Heritage Week legislation; and Ruby
ways, with countless friends, to see and
st
Moy, chairman of the Congressional Asia/
share what lies at its center: the family. Ten
to
Pacific American Heritage Week Caucus.
weeks ago on a trip back to Asia and to the
Perhaps most of all, we assemble here for a
Pacific Rim, Barbara and I visited the non-
special reason-to salute the millions of ref-
denominational church that we'd attended
e
ugees and immigrants from Asia and the
in Beijing. And it's different now-it's
Pacific who braved the unknown and ven-
bigger; but the values, the heritage, are the
SS,
tured to our shores, and to salute a commu-
same, and the memories are even better.
in
nity which has enriched America's commu-
And I'll never forget when our own daugh-
523
May 8 / Administration of George Bush, 1989
ter was baptized right there in China.
Ambassador to Nepal, and the name of Kyo
Yes, the Asian/Pacific community has a
Jhin to be Chief Counsel-Kyo-Chief
special place in my heart, and so does an
Counsel for Advocacy in the SBA [Small
old Chinese proverb which I've often cited.
Business Administration]. And I salute, also,
It goes: "One generation plants the trees,
Katherine Chang Dress, sworn in today as
another gets the shade." For decades, Asian
an Assistant Secretary of the Interior. We
Americans have planted the trees of pros-
are so lucky. And we welcome these quali-
perity, opportunity, and human dignity.
fied, capable individuals to our team.
And in coming years, more than ever, I
God bless all of you. Thank you for
know that my children, America's children,
coming here to Washington on this beauti-
will thank you for the shade.
ful day. And now, let's sign this proclama-
tion. Thank you very much.
And finally, before I sign. this proclama-
tion declaring this week as Asia/Pacific
Note: The President spoke at 10:15 a.m. in
American Heritage Week, it gives me great
the Rose Garden at the White House. In his
pleasure to announce two nominations that
remarks, he referred to Gerald Tsai, Jr.,
I will submit to the Senate for confirmation
member of the board of directors of Primer-
to positions within my administration. I'll be
ica; Henry Tang, vice president of Solomon
sending the name of Julia Chang Bloch to
Brothers; I.M. Pei, architect; and Sichan Siv,
the Senate to be the next-[applause]-
Deputy Assistant to the President for Public
United States Ambassador-please-|laugh-
Liaison. The proclamation is listed in Ap-
ter and applause]-the next United States
pendix E at the end of this volume.
Nomination of Julia Chang Bloch To Be United States Ambassador
to Nepal
May 8, 1989
The President today announced his inten-
mittee on Nutrition and Human Needs,
tion to nominate Julia Chang Bloch to be
1976-1977. Ms. Bloch served as a staff
Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipoten-
member for the minority staff of the Senate
tiary of the United States of America to the
Select Committee on Nutrition and Human
Kingdom of Nepal. She would succeed
Needs, 1971-1976. She served in various ca-
Milton Frank.
pacities with the Peace Corps, including
Since 1981 Ms. Bloch has served in sever-
evaluation officer, 1968-1970; training offi-
al capacities for the Agency for Internation-
cer for the East Asia and Pacific Region,
al Development, including Assistant Admin-
1967-1968; and a volunteer in Sabah, Ma-
istrator for the Asia and Near East Bureau,
laysia, 1964-1966. Ms. Bloch was awarded
since 1987; Assistant Administrator for the
the Woman of the Year Award from the
Food for Peace and Voluntary Assistance
Organization of Chinese American Women,
Bureau, 1981-1987; and Special Assistant to
1987; the Leader for Peace Award from the
the Administrator, 1981. Prior to this she
Peace Corps, 1987; and the Humanitarian
was a fellow at the Institute of Politics of
Service Award from the Agency for Inter-
the Kennedy School of Government at Har-
national Development, 1987.
vard University, 1980-1981. She has also
Ms. Bloch graduated from the University
served as Deputy Director of the Office of
of California (B.A., 1964) and Harvard Uni-
African Affairs for the International Com-
versity (M.A., 1967). She was born March 2,
munication Agency, 1977-1980; and chief
1942, in Chefoo, China. She is married and
minority counsel for the Senate Select Com-
resides in Washington, DC.
524
Oct. 13 / Administration of George Bush, 1989
Continuation of Richard P. Kusserow as Inspector General of the
Department of Health and Human Services
October 13, 1989
The President today announced that
ficiency, 1985 to present.
Richard P. Kusserow will continue to serve
Mr. Kusserow graduated from the Univer.
as Inspector General of the Department of
sity of California at Los Angeles (B.A., 1963)
Health and Human Services.
and received his master's degree from Call-
to
Since 1981 Mr. Kusserow has served as
the
fornia State University at Los Angeles. He
Inspector General at the Department of
Y
was born December 9, 1940, in San Jose,
Health and Human Services. Prior to this
CA. Mr. Kusserow served as a captain in
cy
he served as a special agent with the Feder-
that
the U.S. Marine Corps, 1965-1968. He is
al Bureau of Investigation. In addition, Mr.
back
married, has one child, and resides in Be-
Kusserow served as the Vice Chairman of
And
thesda, MD.
the President's Council on Integrity and Ef-
Eur
day
free
cour
Remarks at a White House Briefing for Members of the Asian-
goin
pea
American Voters Coalition
prel
October 13, 1989
that
ure.
table
Nice to see you. Well, I hope you haven't
Tu, our treasurer, and Nancy Kwan and all
We
been sitting waiting. I'm afraid I'm running
the rest of you here for the first time, a
forts
a little bit late. Welcome to the White
sincere welcome.
outc
House. I first want to salute our three Mem-
Almost a year ago, the Asian-American
prog
bers of Congress over here: Duncan Hunter
community supported the direction the Re-
and
and Dana Rohrabacher and Ben Blaz. Have
publican Party wanted to take the Nation.
An
you guys been introduced yet? Stand up,
And both the Vice President and I appreci-
we'v
and let them-[applause]. They have been
ate that continued support. And now I'm
trade
great leaders in their determination to
meeting here today to simply reiterate my
pros]
broaden our whole political base and reach
commitment to you.
out to men and women of sound values and
For example, I know of your interest in
good ideas. And so, they are here as a team
education. Let me tell you that we are
of interested individuals who are working
hard with me in the area that I want to talk
moving forward. Two weeks ago-I'm sure
Ren
to you all about.
some of you saw it-we convened the first
Awa
ever education summit with the Nation's
But welcome to the White House. I'm
Governors to find ways to improve our edu-
Oct
delighted to see my three friends and ex-
perts behind me, both of Paul and-I was
cation system through increased choice,
going to say Paul and Roger Porter-active-
flexibility, accountability, higher standards.
We
ly involved. And this character over here,
The goal: educational excellence.
salute
he and I worked the whole China equa-
That was only the first step, though. It
here
tion-Dick Solomon-for many years. So,
was a successful conference. And we did it
the S
you have our best here today to help you
with the Governors because they're, after
erson
with some of the facts. I want to say to Vi
all, on the cutting edge. And one thing they
Hall
De La Pena, the outgoing chairperson, and
made clear to me that I know you'll be
our f
to Frank Vinh, the incoming, and then to
interested in: Don't send us a lot of mandat-
ton-
the secretary, Gloria Caoile-if I got the
ed programs. Let us have the flexibility to
Actin
pronunciation correct-|laughter}-and Rex
use the resources where our families and
come
Tu-close enough?-laughter]-and Rex
our experts think is best So, they made that
It's
1342
Administration of George Bush, 1989 / Oct. 16
message clear.
among the most industrious and hard-work-
Immigration and refugee issues-they
ing members of our society. And all that
continue to be important. And let me ex-
you have asked of us and your families-
press my support for our policy of no forced
freedom. And in exchange, you have been
repatriation of refugees to a country like
the shining examples of what all Americans
Vietnam. We're not going to retreat from
can achieve. And there are so many success
our position taken at the Geneva confer-
stories and so much potential for the future.
ence. And people who seek freedom ought
I know that sacrifice and hard work and
to be given a chance. So, let's not deny
discipline are second nature to all of you.
them that.
And so, many of you have translated your
You all know that freedom and democra-
success in education and business into politi-
cy are on the march. I should say, you more
cal activism, and that's good. Keep it up.
than most, given the history, given the
We welcome it. The Asian-American Voters
backgrounds, given the family involvement.
Coalition is a major vehicle for you to do
And we've seen it actually in Eastern
just exactly that.
Europe now, in Asia. And I hope that one
And so, I really popped in not to inter-
day soon the people of Cambodia will be
rupt the experts but to tell you how much I
free from the tragedy that has engulfed that
appreciate your support and how much I
country for far too long. And so, we're
personally look forward to working together
going to continue in this one to seek a
with you as we continue to make America
peaceful, diplomatically negotiated, com-
great.
prehensive settlement of the conflict. And
Bless you all, and thank you very, very
that recent Paris conference was not a fail-
much for coming over here today to the
ure. Anytime you get opposite sides to the
White House. Thank you.
table, constructive dialog will come about.
We need to continue to support those ef-
Note: The President spoke at 2:21 p.m. in
forts. I can't say I wasn't disappointed at the
Room 450 of the Old Executive Office
outcome. I'd like to have seen more
Building. In his remarks, he referred to
progress. But we ought not to say failure
Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of Defense
and then throw up our hands and give up.
for Policy; Roger Porter, Assistant to the
America is moving forward, and as we do,
President for Economic and Domestic
we've got to continue to strive for free
Policy; Richard Solomon, Assistant Secre-
trade-free and fair trade. It's the fuel of
tary of State for East Asian and Pacific
prosperity worldwide. Asian-Americans are
Affairs; and actress Nancy Kwan.
Remarks at a Ceremony for the Presentation of the End Hunger
Awards and the Signing of the World Food Day Proclamation
October 16, 1989
Welcome to everybody, and I do want to
Dr. Kurien, the 1989 recipient of the World
salute the Members of Congress who are
Food Prize. And he's the father of India's
here from the House Select Committee-
White Revolution, that has brought hygien-
the Select Committee on Hunger: Bill Em-
ic milk to the homes of 170 million people.
erson, one of today's award winners; Tony
And tomorrow evening, Dr. Kurien will be
Hall and Ben Gilman; and then, of course,
honored at the Smithsonian for his lifelong
our friend Senator Lugar of Indiana. Clay-
dedication to the poor and hungry of India.
ton-welcome, Secretary, and Mark, our
I want to congratulate this great humanitar-
Acting Administrator of AID. Let me wel-
ian whose work has changed the lives and
come all of you to the White House.
the livelihoods of so many millions of
It's a very special privilege to welcome
people.
1343
May 7 / Administration of George Bush, 1990
Remarks on Signing the Asian/Pacific
Spark Matsunaga. Spark's brilliant career
American Heritage Month
was the culmination of a history that began
Proclamation
146 years ago with the arrival of Nisei, the
May 7, 1990
first Japanese Americans to land on these
shores. And now, people from Asia and the
First, let me just express a warm White
Pacific, from dozens of lands across a broad
House welcome to Prime Minister Namaliu
swath of the world that spans from the
from Papua New Guinea. I just wanted to
Middle East to the Philippines, have found
walk out with him, show him a little hospi-
this new homeland called America. They
tality. I look forward, sir, to visiting with
represent the whole range of religions—
you this afternoon.
Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist. They're
To Senators Inouye and Phil Gramm, wel-
Arab, Iranian, Indian, Korean, Thai descent.
come. To Representative Pat Saiki, my old
But they will tell you that they are Ameri-
friend, welcome back to the White House.
cans first.
And [Representatives] Norm Mineta; Ben
Look at the scope of America's demo-
Blaz; of course, Bill Broomfield; and Eni
graphic change. Cambodian, Laotian, Viet-
Faleomavaega-[laughter)-Eni, tough on
namese neighborhoods flourish just across
your name, but I got close, didn't I? Okay.
the Potomac River. The minaret of a
And all the Members of Congress who are
mosque rises over the skyline of a Dallas
with us here today, and a special welcome
suburb. The student body of a school in
to Frank Horton. My heavens, Frank, be-
southern California is made up almost en-
cause of your diligence in working with so
tirely of Hmong children. Pacific islanders
many of your colleagues in the Congress in
have enriched the culture and heritage of
the support of Jeanie Jew and Ruby Moy,
Orange County. Filipinos have called Amer-
we established Asian/Pacific American Her-
ica home since the first son of the Philip-
itage Week.
pines arrived on these shores in 1763. All of
Now, I'm proud to take one more step
these are subtle signs that Asian and Pacific
and proclaim this May to be the first Asian/
Americans are our fastest-growing minority
Pacific American Heritage Month. First, let
population. They're changing America, and
me acknowledge with respect the gentle-
they are changing America for the better.
man in the Senate who was Frank's cospon-
sor-someone who has left us-a great man,
Some Asian and Pacific Americans come
a great friend who wrote both haiku and
from families that have lived in America for
lasting legislation with that same graceful
more than a century. And others have liter-
fluency. And I, of course, am talking about
ally just arrived, by boat or jumbo jet. But
our beloved friend, the late Senator Spark
all can rely on strong communities, net-
Matsunaga of Hawaii. I think this ought to
works of family and friends, often with the
be his day.
support of a church, synagogue, mosque or
We also have with us a number of Asian
temple. So, whatever their background, all
and Pacific American leaders from many
enjoy strong communities-a great sense of
walks of life: Virginia Cha, I.M. Pei, Dr.
community, too. These 7 million Americans
Taylor Wang, Nancy Kwan, Dr. Samuel
show us an example of how strong families
Lee, Dr. T.D. Lee. And with us, also, some
can instill an abiding respect for the law,
distinguished Ambassadors. I also especially
tenacity in the endeavor of life and work,
want to single out Governor Peter Cole-
and most of all, excellence in education.
man, of American Samoa, and Lieutenant
Consider this: The last U.S. Census
Governor Benjamin Manglona, of the
showed that 75 percent of Asian Americans
Northern Mariana Islands, and every
age 25 and over had at least a high school
member of their very distinguished delega-
degree-well above the national average of
tions. Thank you all for being with us.
66 percent. This nation is incomparably
You've come so far, and your presence is
richer because of great scientists like Nobel
most welcome and deeply appreciated.
Prize winner Dr. Yuan Lee and the late An
As I said, we're here in large measure
Wang. We are richer because of the talent
because of the vision of Frank Horton and
of Michael Chang and the courage of the
730
Administration of George Bush, 1990 / May 7
late Ellison Onizuka. And we are richer be-
And that's why we support the emerging
cause of Asian Pacific American leaders,
Asian and Pacific democracies. And that's
many of them with us here today.
why we advocate peaceful change, why we
Count among them Elaine Chao, number
will remain in solidarity with the aspirations
two in this enormous Department of Trans-
of the peoples of these many lands. And
portation of ours; Wendy Gramm, Chair-
that is why America must stand for more
man of the Federal Commission on Com-
than mere material success. America must
modity Future Trading; Cindy Daub, Com-
remain the beacon of liberty, a light of
missioner of the Copyright Royalty Tribu-
hope for the troubled, the oppressed, the
nal; Kyo Jhin, who will be named shortly to
downtrodden. The people of this land know
a senior position at the Department of Vet-
that it is not enough to let a man purchase
eran Affairs; my own-I say my own-our
what he wants. He must be allowed to say
own Sichan Siv, on the White House staff,
what he believes. He must be allowed to go
who fled the killing fields and is now doing
where he wants. He must be allowed to
an outstanding job for the White House in
choose his government. Economic freedom
every way; and Julia Chang Bloch, U.S. Am-
alone will not provide sufficient room for
bassador to Nepal, our first Asian-American
the restlessness of the human spirit.
Ambassador.
As shown by public-spirited leaders like
Let us, as we celebrate the contributions
Spark Matsunaga and those here today,
of Asian Pacific Americans to our precious
Asian Pacific Americans are beginning to
freedoms, remember the restless millions
excel in the field of politics, just as they
who remain behind. In looking for inspira-
have excelled in every other field. While
tion they need look no further than the
politics is often a second-, third-, or fourth-
success of their grandchildren, their chil-
generation profession, the time is coming
dren, their brothers, sisters, and cousins
when more and more Asian and Pacific
who found freedom in America. And so, it
Americans will seek office to lead our cities,
is in your honor that I sign this measure
our States, and our nation. As America looks
proclaiming this to be Asian/Pacific Ameri-
toward the Pacific in the century ahead, we
can Heritage Month.
will need your insights and your leadership
Thank you all. May God bless you. And
as never before.
may God bless the United States of Amer-
You know that the future of Europe has
ica.
been very much on my mind of late-I
think, on the mind of all Americans. But
America's destiny is also tied to the Pacific
Rim. And I've lived in Asia, and I know that
the fate of Asia and the Pacific is no less
Note: The President spoke at 11:36 a.m. in
important to America than the future of
the Rose Garden at the White House. In his
Europe. We are encouraged by the changes
remarks, he referred to the following indi-
in Eastern Europe and by the rise of de-
viduals: Jeanie Jew, lecturer and consultant
mocracy to our south right here in our own
on Asian Pacific American issues; Ruby
hemisphere. Make no mistake about that.
Moy, chairperson of the Congressional
But we will not neglect Asia and the Pacif-
Asian/Pacific Staff Caucus; Virginia Cha,
ic. My administration is committed to pro-
Miss Maryland 1989; I.M. Pei, architect;
moting open trade and fighting protection-
Taylor Wang, payload specialist for the
ism so that the economic ties between the
May 1985 "Skylab I" mission; Nancy Kwan,
United States and Asia can continue to
actress; Samuel Lee, Olympic gold medalist;
grow. Like Asian and Pacific Americans in
T.D. Lee, 1957 Nobel Prize winner for phys-
the United States, these nations are a testa-
ics; Yuan T. Lee, 1986 Nobel Prize winner
ment to the power of self-initiative. With
for chemistry; An Wang, founder of Wang
time, we will create a true community of
Laboratories, Inc.; Michael Chang, profes-
nations surrounding the Pacific Rim, bound
sional tennis player; and Ellison S. Oni-
together by commerce, a shared commit-
zuka, crewmember of the space shuttle
ment to democracy, and an abiding friend-
"Challenger" who was killed in the explo-
ship.
sion of January 28, 1986.
731
(Smith/Wallace)
May 3, 1989
Draft One
ASIAN
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: ASIAN HERITAGE WEEK
ROSE GARDEN
MONDAY, MAY 8, 1989
Ladies and gentlemen, my fellow Americans.
You know, an Oriental proverb says, "The two words,
'peace' and 'tranquility,' are worth a thousand pieces of gold."
Well, my pleasure in welcoming you to the White House would be
worth a thousand times that total.
O We meet as special friends, in a special week, and for a
very special reason: To salute the millions of immigrants from
Asia and the Pacific who braved the unknown and ventured to our
shores. And whose community has enriched America's community --
socially, culturally, economically, spiritually.
O Someone once told me of a restaurant in China where three
American tourists walked in wearing the most outlandish safari
clothes, complete with Panama hats, backpacks, videocameras, a
brace of walkmans and a few Chinese phrases picked up from a
stateside friend who happens to own a wok.
2
O
The friends stood around looking for a waiter, and
finally one asked in a loud voice: "How do we attract
attention?"
o My friends, as we proclaim this Asian/Pacific Heritage
Week, let me observe that you haven't had to rely on outrageous
attire to "attract attention." You've done it quietly, through
excellence, with the values of your lives.
o Those values are, of course, discipline and self-
sacrifice. Humility and compassion. An abiding belief in work.
A soaring love of freedom. Values which brought your parents,
your grandparents, and some of you to America. Values which are
now enriching America.
o I think, for example, of pioneers like Gerald Tsai, Jr.
of American Can. Or countless teachers who uplift our kids. Or
Henry Tang and I.M. Pei. Or Sichan Siv of our White House staff.
o In 1976, Sichan escaped from Cambodia, spent three months
in a refugee camp in Thailand, and finally made his way to the
United States. Since then, to quote his words, "I have
experienced the real values of freedom, peace, prosperity,
independence, and democracy. The correct spelling of these words
is A-M-E-R-I-C-A."
3
My friends, he -- you -- came to find a better life. And
you're finding it. You came to build a better America. And
you're building it. Creating new jobs. Enhancing our medical
schools, the law, our small and large businesses. In short,
honoring your heritage by the lives you lead.
o For that, I congratulate you. And, in a personal sense,
I want to thank you, too. For as Ambassador to China, I came,
with Barbara, to love that heritage. And in a different
different ways -- with a thousand different friends -- to see,
and share, what lies at its center: the family.
O
Ten weeks ago, on a trip to the Pacific Rim, Bar and I
visited the non-denominational church we'd attended in Bejing.
It's different now, bigger. But the values -- the heritage --
are the same. And the memories are even better. Like when our
daughter Dora was baptized -- the first person to be publicly
baptized in China in over 40 years.
Yes, the Asian/Pacific community has a special place in
my heart. And so does an old Chinese proverb which I have often
cited. It goes, "One generation plants the trees; another gets
the shade. "
o
For decades, Asian-Americans have planted the trees of
prosperity, opportunity, and human dignity. And in coming years,
4
more than ever, I know that my children -- America's children --
will thank you for the shade.
O
God bless you, thank you for coming here, and God bless
the United States of America.
# # # #
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 15
18TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
The Associated Press
The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. These
materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The
Associated Press.
March 9, 1979, AM cycle
LENGTH: 180 words
DATELINE: NEW HAVEN, Conn.
KEYWORD:
Yale-China
BODY:
The People's Republic of China has agreed to pay more than $500,000 to the
Yale-China Association for property it seized in 1949, an association official
says. The payment covers a hospital, medical school, nursing school, college
and high school that were valued at $1.4 million when they were nationalized,
said Mildred Thomas, business manager. The association, formally named the
Yale in China Association, in 1910 located the facilities in Changsha of the
south-central Chinese province of Hunan. Since the takeover, Communist
government. has expanded the facilities, Mrs. Thomas said Thursday.
The payment is part of an$80.5 million claim settlement for a number of U.S.
properties siezed by the Communists. It is expected in six payments during the
next five years.
The association has not yet decided what to do with the funds, Mrs. Thomas
said.
It relocated its Asian operations in Hong Kong afte the Communist takeover
but hopes to re-establish a working relationship with the People's Republic, she
said.
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
5
8TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1984 Reuters Ltd.
April 10, 1984, Tuesday, BC cycle
SECTION: International News
LENGTH: 989 words
BYLINE: By Roger Crabb
DATELINE: PEKING
KEYWORD: Reagan-China
BODY:
President Reagan's visit to Peking this month comes almost exactly 200 years
after the United States began its passionate, often stormy relationship with
China.
In the summer of 1784, the 360-ton privateer Empress of China became the
first vessel from the newly-independent United States to reach the mysterious
land then known as Cathay.
The ship, which left Boston on February 22, arrived in Canton to trade with a
cargo of furs, lead, tar, turpentine, silver dollars and medicinal ginseng root.
By the time Master John Green sailed back to New England in May 1785, he had
made a profit for his owners of about $30,000 on their $120,000 investment.
It was a promising start and by 1829 bilateral trade had risen to $4 million,
one quarter of it in opium.
There followed a seemingly endless stream of American missionaries,
philanthropists and benefactors over the past 150 years.
They included men and women prepared to brave hardship, isolation -- and,
more recently, political opprobrium at home for their commitment to the
Communist revolution.
Several still live in Peking, weighed down with honors by the People's
Republic. They include Lebanese-born U.S. doctor George Hatem, credited with
eradicating venereal disease from China after 1949 and now on a crusade to stamp
out leprosy.
The first U.S. missionary whose arrival was chronicled was one Elijah
Bridgman, who set up in Canton in 1830.
In 1834 another Protestant clergyman, Peter Parker, landed in south China.
After the fashion of the 17th century Jesuits, he was determined to use science
to win souls for God.
Whereas. Matteo Ricci and the other early Jesuits used their knowledge of
astronomy to impress the Manchu court, Parker aimed to gain his entree into
Chinese society by his medical skills and launch his evangelical mission later.
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
6
(c) 1984 Reuters Ltd., April 10, 1984
Faced with the abject suffering of Canton's teeming population, Parker was
forced to abandon Gospel-teaching altogether to devote his time to surgery. His
hospital won him such fame that Lin Tse-hsu, the emperor's commissioner charged
with smashing the opium trade, consulted him for a hernia.
But Parker, later pressed into service as aide to U.S. diplomats in a series
of frustrating trade wrangles, finally became so disillusioned with the Manchu
court that he left China calling publicly for U.S. seizure of Taiwan.
An American who came to China with quite different motives was Frederick
Townsend Ward, a young adventurer who arrived in 1859 just as the "Taiping"
rebels began their bid for power.
Mocked by Shanghai's foreign military establishment, Ward formed a motley
Chinese force to combat the rebels, and its success earned the imperial title of
"ever victorious army".
When Ward died in battle aged 30 in 1862, he was an imperial general, admiral
and high-grade mandarin.
Then came more scholars, the first of whom was Calvinist missionary William
Martin who decided he should concentrate on Westernizing the Chinese and
proselytize later. He spent over half a century teaching English, science and
international law, and rising to become president of Peking university.
Like other foreign residents, he was trapped in China when the Boxer
rebellion erupted in 1900. He survived but a young Yale University missionary
was beheaded by the fiercely xenophobic Boxers.
His fate inspired another U.S. venture -- the Yale-in-China project, which
aimed "to furnish a center of Christian education in the interior of the Chinese
empire." In 1906 Yale scholars set up a middle school and later a teaching
hospital in Changsha, capital of Hunan province.
In 1919, the school provided shelter and printing facilities for a young
radical called Mao Tsetung. Yet despite generous funds, devoted staff and
abundant goodwill, the project foundered in the 1920s as China moved inexorably
towards civil war.
Another idealistic American, civil engineer Oliver J. Todd, came in the 1920s
and embarked on a series of huge, mainly successful projects to divert the
flood-prone Yellow and Yangtse rivers away from cities, or where that was
impossible, to build reliable protective dykes.
Two men who worked tirelessly for China's anti-Japanese war effort yet who
both left the country disillusioned and with a sense of failure, were retired
air force Gen. Claire Lee Chennault and infantry Gen. Joseph Stilwell.
Chennault, fiercely loyal to Chiang Kaishek, formed a force of expatriate
aviators known popularly as the Flying Tigers to battle the Japanese invaders.
After Pearl Harbor he became Chinese air force chief of staff but serious
supply problems were to limit his success.
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
7
(c) 1984 Reuters Ltd., April 10, 1984
Stilwell, assigned by President Franklin Roosevelt to be Chiang's overall
chief of staff, spent years attempting to build an efficient Chinese army to
fight against Japan.
He eventually fell foul of Chiang's concern that the best troops must be held
in readiness for the inevitable showdown with the Communists.
After Mao tsetung's civil war victory in 1949, influential voices in
Washington argued for U.S. recognition of the new People's Republic.
But China's intervention in the Korean war, lending weight to the
anti-communist campaign of Se. Joseph McCarthy, ensured that relations between
Washington and Peking went into a prolonged freeze.
It was to last until Richard Nixon broke the ice with his Peking visit in
February 1972.
Full commercial ties were established that years but it took seven more years
until Presisent Jimmy Carter normalized diplomatic relations with the People's
Republic.
Ghosts from bygone eras still stalk the halls of state. Last year Sino-U.S.
exchanges were ruffled by a dispute over unpaid dues to U.S. holders of imperial
railroad bonds.
And the main obstacle still blocking full Sino-U.S. amity, Washington's
refusal to break completely with Nationalist-ruled Taiwan, dates back to a U.S.
commitment in the 1940s when Roosevelt saw Chiang Kaishek as the vital ally
against Japan.
J.)
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
8
12TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1980 The Christian Science Publishing Society;
The Christian Science Monitor
December 30, 1980, Tuesday, Midwestern Edition
SECTION: Travel; Travel Log; Pg. 15
LENGTH: 870 words
HEADLINE: CHINA by bike
BYLINE: By David Butwin, Special to The Christian Science Monitor
DATELINE: New York
BODY:
It was only a matter of time before someone introduced bicycle tours to the
People's Republic OC China. That someone is Fredric M. Kaplan, a young China
hand who says of the course he has laid out in canton, "If I can bike it, anyone
can. I'm 50 pounds overweight and not exactly an athlete."
The blond-bearded Mr. Kaplan need not apologize, however, for his knowledge
of China or his abilities as a travel promoter. He may yet be recognized as the
Commodore Perry of China travel. His latest enterprise, 16-day bicycle tours of
Canton province, is selling out fast for 1981, but he says his outfit, China
Passage (302 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10001), has a few dates still open and
will expand the schedule in 1982.
Biking through China should not be seen as a trendy new way to visit the
People's Republic of China. It happens to be much cheaper than the customary
tour, and that was Fred Kaplan's aim. "China travel opened up in 1977," he
said, "and within a short time everyone who could afford the $3,000 or $4,000 --
now it's up to $4,000 and $5,000 -- had gone. But there were still a lot of
people who wanted to see China and couldn't afford it, so I started thinking of
how we could cut the cost.
"The answer seemed to be bicycle tours. The main cost of China travel is
within the country -- domestic air fares and hotel rooms are very expensive.
This was costing people $100 a day. Biking would eliminate all that flying
around, and the old inns and hostels would be much cheaper than big city
hotels."
With high hopes Mr. Kaplan drew up a biking tour and shaved the cost to
$2,600. But he was turned down by the China International Travel Service, which
worried about all those unchaperoned young American men and women rambling
through the countryside together ("China is a very puritanical country"); the
safety of visiting bicyclists in a country where, as Mr. Kaplan noted, one saw
an accidetn occur on every other corner; and too much mixing of foreigners and
peasants in rural China.
"I was bitterly disappointed," Mr. Kaplan said, "but on a visit to China I
ran into an old friend from Hong Kong who told me to skirt the official travel
service and try the Youth Federation. So I biked out of town to see them, and
they were crazy about the idea. Meanwhile, the safety factor had been taken
care of in 1979 when China put in bike lanes with stone barriers --- the kind
0
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
9
(c) 1980 The Christian Science Publishing Society, December 30, 1980
Mayor Koch tried to introduce to New York -- in every major city."
Fred Kaplan studied Chinese languages in Hong Kong for three years in the
1960s as part of the Yale in China program and was a correspondent for Time
and the Far East Economic review. He first saw China in 1965 -- illegally.
"People in Hong Kong used to go over twice a year for the festivals, and I
just went along with them. My name was written in Chinese on my Hong kong
residence card, and the official at the border never looked at my face. I was
scared to death. I wandered around for a week and slept in a part two nights.
In those days bicycles were a luxury. most of the people were walking."
His main company, Eurasia Press, has produced a number of books on China,
including the top-selling guide book on the country, published with Lippincott &
Crowell. Mr. Kaplan and Elliot Winick, an American Youth Hostel executive, laid
out the bike route together and will lead some of the 1981 tours.
"We chose Canton province because it's in South China where the weather is
subtropical -- never too cold for biking though very hot in the summer," Mr.
Kaplan said. "And it's flat. Just the other day we got approval to go to a
tropical island in the South China Sea, Hainan, which has the only real beaches
in China. fly there and try to rent bikes. In 1982 we will expand to
central and northern China."
The bicycle groups will number 16 or 17 and average 30 to 35 miles a day --
not the 150 miles that the Youth Federation suggested to Mr. Kaplan in early
planning stages. People of all ages have signed up.
"Some of our inns are 300 and 400 years old," he said. "There are Taoist
retreats from the 15th century and Buddhist retreats from the 18th century. The
average tourist has never stayed in these places; they've been used as political
retreats. South China is very lush, 50 we'll eat the best vegetables and rice,
and a lot of fish too. We'll eat at communes, which no foreign groups have ever
done."
Until Mr. Kaplan contracts with the Chinese to provide bicycles for his
groups, people will have to bring their own. Those three-, five-, and 10-speed
bikes will no doubt be conversation pieces in a country of one-speeds. "China
is a true biking culture," Fred Kaplan said. "Cars are not allowed -- there's
no such thing as a private car. You see nothing but one-speed bicycles, made in
China. It's become a prestige item.Everyone's goal is to get a bike."
He showed me a brochure advertising Chinese-made bicycles, headed by the
Phoenix and Forever models.
"Phoenix is the top of the line," Mr. Kaplan said. "The Forever is one grade
below, and there are about ten other levels. You are a very important person if
you have a Phoenix."
GRAPHIC: Picture, Road leading to the Ming tombs, near Peking, By Gordon N.
Converse, chief photographer
R
&
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 10
13TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
Copyright (c) 1980 The Christian Science Publishing Society;
The Christian Science Monitor
December 15, 1980, Monday, Midwestern Edition
SECTION: Education; Pg. 18
LENGTH: 1630 words
HEADLINE: Today, the bamboo curtain parts -- both ways
BYLINE: By Janet Ragatz, Special to The Christian Science Monitor
DATELINE: Wuhan, Hubei, China
HIGHLIGHT:
How China welcomes and uses its 'foreign experts'
BODY:
For the acadeic year 1980-81, The People's Republic of China has nearly
doubled the number of foreign teachers employed in its universities.
Last year, 134 "foreign experts" were scattered across the country; this
September new areas, such as Chengdu in remote Sichuan (Szechuan) Province,
acquired their first foreign teachers, while large groups, numbering up to 10 at
Nanking Teachers College, descended on other institutions.
This was a situation far different from 1978, during which one or two
foreigners, assigned to provincial cities, found themselves to be the only
native speakers of English in the entire region.
The deliverate importation of educational specialists to upgrade certain
fields, such as management and engineering, through shortterm seminars has been
widely reported. Long-term and widespread appointments of these foreign
teachers are a different matter. The designation "foreign expert" dates back to
the beginning of the People's Republic in 1949. Employed "friends" of the
postrevolution government and foreigners married to Chinese women were 50
labeled. They were, even then, accorded special salaries and privileges,
because their life styles and consequent needs were considered to be different
from those of their co-workers. This was not always the case, and not all of
them accepted the largess in its entirety.
Today the bulk of these specialists are in the language area. americans,
Britons, Canadians, Australians, and New Zealanders are found teaching English
under a variety of programs.
Some were hired by the Ministry of Education from direct application or in
answer to appeals for teachers. Others were placed by bodies such as the United
States-China Friendship Association, and still others by universities seeking to
establish exchange programs.
The result is a variety of contracts, backgrounds, training, screening,
selection procedures, and, for students, supervision. The Foreign Language
Institute and other educational centers in Peking have absorbed most of these
teachers. Provincial universities were supplied more recently.
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
11
(c) 1980 The Christian Science Publishing Society, December 15, 1980
The numbers of foreign students in China has expanded slowly; some share in
the teaching of English while working on their Chinese. This fall, Chengdu not
only received its first "foreign experts" but two undergraduates from the
University of Virginia. The arranagements were made by a faculty member who had
come from the province.
Similarly, an international relations major from the University of Denver is
teaching English in Peking, while eight recent Ohio State graduates are in Wuhan
for six months of teaching. The University of Pittsburgh has representatives in
Shanghai, and four Yale graduates are in Changsha (Hunan) and at the University
of Wuhan.
Carefully screened, selected, and trained, even in the teaching of English as
a second (i.e., foreign) language, the latter are also supervised and partly
financed by the Yale-in-China Association, a modified form of the pre- 1949
activities of Yale University on the mainland.
English is not the only language being upgraded with the help of native
speakers. German and Japanese "experts" are in evidence. Russian is taught,
but with no Soviet help apparent. Spanish is the only major language not
readily encountered.
The French government, long a committed sponsor of French-language and
cultural centers in the non-Western world, is establishing a center at the
University of Wuhan, in the heart of the country. The agreement was made with
then-Premier Hua Guofeng when he visited France. Twelve teachers, paid from
Paris, and a new language lab were arranged for. French then became the only
part of the Modern Language Department to merit and administrative structure of
its own. It not only became a splinter department, but may get its own
building.
"Foreign teachers," a designation preferred over "experts" by the
participants, are well treated in China. Qualified language instructors receive
from 600 to 700 yuan monthly (about $411 to $480), the base for Level 3 experts.
The top in the scale would be 1,300 yuan ($890). From $30 to 50 percent of the
salary can be repatriated depending upon marital status.
Level 2 salaries, ranging from 345 ($236) to 599 yuan ($410), are for the
less experienced. Even the modest 200 yuan ($137) a month paid to students,
recent graduates, and teaching wives of "experts" is phenomenal by Chinese
standards, particularly as lodging, essential local transportation, medical
care, and even some regional tours are provided as well.
"Experts," by government decree, are not charged tourist prices; even 50 they
always pay about double the Chinese cost for a bowl of rice or noodles. The
government regulation is enforced irregularly, because some restaurants and
hotels in provincial areas have not heard about it. As of July, these teachers
were to pay 9 yuan ($6.15) for a room and the same for board at a hotel. The
tourist price is about double this.
Chinese instructors, at the bottom of the faculty hierarchy, receive only 48
yuan ($39) a month, but their expenses are substantially lower. They live and
eat in teachers' dormitories. If married, their spouses usually bring in a
similar sum from their own employment. Although Chinese living conditions
remain austere, they are decidely better than before the Revolution for some
in
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 12
(c) 1980 The Christian Science Publishing Society, December 15, 1980
80 percent of the population, and they are improving.
The normal teaching load for foreigners is about 18 hours a week. This is
accomplished usually within five days, although the Chinese work six. Like
professors everywhere, both are busy on weekends grading papers.
As long as an "expert" fulfills his contract, his round-trip transportation
is provided. Visiting specialists, however, lecturing on short- term programs,
must usually pay their own or gain outside funding.
The lodging provided for "experts" is a major benefit. The Friendship Hotel
in Peking, a huge hostelry for 3,000 guests, includes buildings for longer-term
residents. These have two or three heated rooms with baths and cooking
facilities. Many universities are nearby.
This year saw the construction of guesthouses for foreigners at several major
provincial institutions. A Hong Kong visitor reports that the one at the
University of Wuhan is among the nicest. It is on university land overlooking
East Lake, a regional beauty spot, and has 20 steam-heated units, 12 with two
rooms, bath, and kitchenette for singles, and 8 with extra room for families or
couples. In a land where four or five individuals, spanning three generations,
frequently live in two rooms, sometimes with outside latrines and only bathhouse
facilities, the "ex
A central recreation area and a dining room, along with quarters for the
workers, complete the layout. Residents wishing to cook in whole or in part can
do so in their minuscule 3-by-3-foot kitchens. One- and two- burner propane
stoves and countertop-level refrigerators are provided in the living room. Food
and beverages can be bought at cost from the kitchen, which also permits use of
its oven for baking cakes or other goodies. Food served in the dining hall is
90 percent Chinese and costs $2.75 a day per person.
Before this guesthouse was completed, American teachers lived in faculty
housing with toilet facilities but without heat or hot water. Unlike their
Chinese colleagues, they were provided with a stove to take the edge off of the
freezing temperatures, but they bathed in the local bathhouse.
The comfort of their guests, rather than any attempt at isolation, appears to
motivate the ghettoizing of the "experts." Chinese of all levels seem genuinely
to expect that foreigners of all nationalities should live better than they do
themselves.
Food is the only necessity that visiting teachers pay for in China. Whereas
a professional-level Chinese family of four claims to eat well on 100 yuan ($69)
a month, a frugal Americal couple paid about twice that at a dining room for
foreigners. Another couple paid 240 yuan ($164) for Chinese food cooked for
them at a university, while a single person, eating two-thirds Western food
(which means more meat and is therefore more expensive), paid 180 yuan ($123) a
month. The prices cited for meals are not those of the hotels usually visited
by American tourists.
Many run their bills up further with the purchase of orange soda (7 cents at
cost, 15 cents in a foreign restaurant). Chinese rely upon soup for liquid,
with meals, or tea between meal. Cola is available only for foreigners. It is
sold solely at the Friendship Stores or at bars in tourist hotels and by
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 13
(c) 1980 The Christian Science Publishing Society, December 15, 1980
special currency cerificates obtained when tourists exchange money. A 12-ounce
can imported from San Francisco costs 69 cents.
Traveling is the major expense of the "experts." They pay Chinese prices on
trains and buses, but receive only a 30 percent reduction on air fares.
Exemption from customs duties on food and clothing packages, which run between
100 and 150 percent, is a further benefit. Without this, the mailing of
out-of-season clothing would be impossible.
Because the Chinese are generally of a slighter build than Westerners, this
ability to buy abroad is a blessing for long-term reisidents whose jeans are
wearing thin. Nothing thin has any appeal in most of China in the winter, as
classrooms, as well as most homes, have no heat. A Mongolian girl described the
students as "round balls in winter," a new expression for the multilayered look
to which even the "foreign experts" must subscribe.
GRAPHIC: Picture, 'I think Wellesley might be nice!', Photos by Gordon N.
Converse, chief photographer;
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 14
14TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format.
The Associated Press
The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. These
materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The
Associated Press.
April 4, 1979, Wednesday, PM cycle
SECTION: Domestic News
LENGTH: 40 words
DATELINE: NEW HAVEN, Conn.
KEYWORD:
Deaths
BODY:
The Rev. Sidney Lovett, Yale University's chaplain emeritus and former
executive director of the Yale-in-China Association, died Tuesday at Yale-New
Haven Hospital following an operation. He was 89.
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
2
(c) 1991 Financial Times, June 4, 1991
So said President George Bush a week ago in justifying the extension to China
for a further year of most favoured nation trading status (MFN), which provides
access to the lowest possible tariffs. Mr Bush's decision has provoked a furious
political row which, though not so far damaging his overall standing, has
brought him more criticism than any other foreign policy issue. Mr Bush may
overcome the substantial opposition in Congress. But the debate will underline
the doubts about his China policy in view of continued abuses of human rights by
the Beijing authorities following the Tiananmen Square massacre two years ago.
There is much at stake economically following the sharp growth in trade
between the two countries. Cancelling MFN would lead to a big jump in tariffs
- up, for example, from 6 to 35 per cent for footwear. It would also, Mr Bush
argues, 'deal a body blow to Hong Kong', as both the British government and
representatives from the colony have been arguing in Washington. This is because
Hong Kong handles much of the US-Chinese trade and Hong Kong businesses have
invested heavily in south China's thriving export industries.
Mr Bush believes he has a special understanding of China, its leaders and
their way of thinking following his time as head of the US mission in Beijing in
1974-75. He has argued that the moral dimension of US policy requires the US to
stay active in the world - 'trying to chart a moral course through a world of
lesser evils'.
(c) 1991 Financial Times, June 4, 1991
Mr Bush's China policy is the ultimate expression of his internationalism,
his belief in remaining engaged, retaining influence by maintaining contact,
almost no matter how repugnant the regime. The US, for example, sought to
improve relations with President Saddam Hussein right up to the August 2
invasion of Kuwait. Last winter, during the most brutal phase of the Soviet
crackdown in the Baltic republics, Mr Bush kept open contacts with Mr Gorbachev.
The heart of the argument is how best to influence the Beijing regime. Mr
payment
Bush claims that extending MFN and cultivating contacts offers the best chance
of changing Chinese behaviour, of stimulating economic, as well as political,
reform. Mr James Lilley, who has just ceased being the US Ambassador in Beijing,
claims that, following US urging, emigration from China rose by 84 per cent
between 1988 and 1990; prominent dissidents like Mr Fang Lizhi were released;
and the regime has accounted for many of the casualties of Tiananmen Square.
Mr Bush argues that terminating MFN, or imposing conditions making trade
impossible would dash hopes of further progress. It would punish south China
where the private sector is growing fastest.
The US also wants to retain Chinese acquiescence in, if not active support
for, its stance on other international issues. By using the United Nations
Security Council in the Gulf crisis, the US made itself dependent on China's
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
3
(c) 1991 Financial Times, June 4, 1991
willingness not to use its veto. Significantly, just after China abstained on
the key resolution authorising the use of force, Mr Bush offered an apparent
reward by receiving the Chinese foreign minister at the White House.
Moreover, the US is now the last western country to have kept in place the
sanctions imposed after Tiananmen Square. The European Community dropped its
sanctions last October and British, Japanese and French foreign ministers have
recently visited Beijing.
Mr Bush's critics accuse him of double standards, arguing that he is willing
to invoke morality against Iraq, but not against China. And MFN is still denied
to Cuba, Vietnam and the Soviet Union, though the latter may soon become a
beneficiary.
Senator George Mitchell, the Democratic majority leader, argues that Mr
Bush's policy has failed. 'To say we care about human rights, but then to ignore
the human rights violations is to say one thing and do another.' While the
president has made the same case for keeping open contacts for the past two
years, the human rights situation has not improved.
The granting of MFN has become the touchstone for this debate. MFN is usually
permanent, giving the recipients the lowest possible US tariff rates. Under
(c) 1991 Financial Times, June 4, 1991
the 1974 Trade Act, centrally planned/non-market economies can get the benefits
of this status only on a temporary basis, renewed every year or six months. The
president can extend temporary MFN status by either certifying to Congress that
the country is not in violation of human rights criteria or by waiving the
criteria on the grounds that MFN would 'substantially promote' free emigration.
Congress has 90 days from yesterday to vote for a resolution rescinding
China's MFN status. There is likely to be a majority against, but Mr Bush will
then exercise his veto. It will be hard for opponents to muster the two-thirds
vote necessary in both houses to override that veto, which has not happened 50
far in his near 2 1/2 -year presidency.
What could win a two-thirds vote is legislation which would impose conditions
- and Senator Mitchell believes he is 'very close' to such a level. The
legislation would demand release of political prisoners, a halt to restrictions
on peaceful assembly and tight controls on missile sales. The debate is likely
to focus on the stringency of conditions. If there is a risk of enough
defections, the administration may have to bargain to limit conditionality.
Even former US ambassador to Beijing Mr Winston Lord has argued that an
unconditional extension of MFN would re-inforce the Chinese regime's conviction
that domestic repression entails no real international costs and would
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
4
(c) 1991 Financial Times, June 4, 1991
accentuate the world's growing amnesia concerning Tiananmen Square. He has urged
conditions on, for example, emigration, human rights and freedom of information.
These should be concrete enough to provide yardsticks but flexible enough to
give the administration real leverage.
Chinese diplomats have insisted that they will not accept conditional MFN.
There is a good deal of public posturing here. While the Beijing regime will not
want to be seen to bow to US pressure, it also seems unlikely to expel from the
country the 1,200 US companies with investments worth Dollars 4.2bn as of last
September. The US is the largest foreign investor in China. Four months ago,
China National Offshore Oil and Amoco Oil signed a deal for the development of
the largest oil field in the South China Sea. McDonnell Douglas is already
involved in a joint aircraft venture.
Chinese officials say any withdrawal of MFN would be reciprocated. US exports
to China were Dollars 5bn last year, notably wheat, aircraft, fertilisers and
computer and electrical products.
The debate is complicated by the numerous trade-related complaints which the
US has against China because of its protectionist practices. These have boosted
its trade surplus with the US to Dollars 10.4bn last year.
(c) 1991 Financial Times, June 4, 1991
Beijing is accused of using prison labour to produce low-priced exports and
of imposing an elaborate import licensing system and more stringent quality
standards on foreign than domestic goods.
The Bush administration has already begun to address these problems. China
was one of three nations, along with India and Thailand, recently cited under
the 1988 Trade Act for its failure to protect intellectual property rights. This
has triggered negotiations, leading up to possible retaliatory sanctions.
Moreover, Mr Bush balanced his request for an extension of MFN by announcing
a simultaneous ban on sales to China of high-speed computer workstations,
missile related technologies and new satellite parts as punishment for Beijing's
sale of missiles to Pakistan and its transfer of other weapons technology to
Middle Eastern countries.
Mr Bush also argues that the US has raised human rights issues and he
recently infuriated the Beijing authorities by meeting the Dalai Lama, the
exiled Tibetan leader. To his critics this firmness has been undercut by his
conciliatory gestures. His problem is that there is little specific evidence he
can cite of changes for the better in the Chinese authorites' behaviour. Mr Bush
is fighting against the grain of American idealism.
LEXIS' NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
5
(c) 1991 The Christian Science Publishing Society, June 3, 1991
worth of tariff exemptions, officials and industry leaders say.
If Washington rescinds China's MFN treatment, Hong Kong would see its trade
in Chinese goods to the US fall 44 percent and its total trade shrink 7 percent,
according to the territory's government. The Hong Kong Chamber of Commerce
estimates that Hong Kong handles 70 percent of the goods shipped from China to
the US.
In addition, 43,000 workers in Hong Kong would lose their jobs, and the
growth of the free port's economy would be halved, the chamber says.
The loss of MFN for China 'would be a very severe blow to Hong Kong,'
says Ian Christie, director of the chamber.
President Bush agreed that revocation of MFN 'would deal a body blow to
Hong Kong, the bastion of freedom and free trade in the Far East.' He announced
last week he intends to formally ask Congress to extend the preferential
treatment.
Nevertheless, several US legislators have threatened to revoke China's
trading privilege because of its persistent disregard for human rights.
(c) 1991 The Christian Science Publishing Society, June 3, 1991
The MFN issue has forced Hong Kong to choose between sustaining its current
prosperity or making sacrifices in trade and industry in a risky attempt to
safeguard basic freedoms in the future.
Hong Kong residents have reason to want to see Washington goad China into
halting its human rights abuses: They will come under the rule of the mainland
government in 1997. But the immediate bread-and-butter matters of industry,
jobs, and trade have prompted leaders in the territory to join the mainland's
call for a continuation of the status quo.
Revocation of MFN, which provides the lowest tariff treatment available,
would effectively close the US market to billions of dollars of China-made
products.
For instance, tariffs on some textiles - China's most lucrative category of
exports to the US - would jump tenfold, from 6 percent to 60 percent. Duties
China would have to pay would increase about five times, according to government
statistics.
The denial of special trading rights for China would hurt Hong Kong's
industrial leaders as well as its merchants. Since China began opening to
foreign investment in the late 1970s, Hong Kong manufacturers have invested
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 6
(c) 1991 The Christian Science Publishing Society, June 3, 1991
billions of dollars in export industries throughout southeastern China.
The executives have also bound the livelihood of millions of workers across
the border to stable Sino-US trade. By undercutting that enriching commerce, the
US would betray the mainlanders who are at the vanguard of reform, say Hong Kong
officials and executives.
''If Americans want to delay the development of human rights in China, the
best way to do it would be to revoke MFN or put forward conditions to it,'' says
Mr. Christie.
LEVEL 1 - - 9 OF 61 STORIES
Copyright (c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation;
Federal News Service
MAY 29, 1991, WEDNESDAY
SECTION: IN THE NEWS
LENGTH: 31130 words
HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE,
THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE,
AND THE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY AND TRADE SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: MFN STATUS FOR CHINA
CHAIRED BY: STEPHEN J. SOLARZ (D-NY)
WITNESSES:
WINSTON LORD, FORMER US AMBASSADOR TO CHINA
RICHARD HOLBROOKE, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE
FOR EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS
EDWARD FRIEDMAN, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN
FANG LIZHI, CHINESE DISSIDENT
ZHAO HAIQING, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF CHINESE STUDENTS
LEXIS'NEXIS LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
7
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
2172 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
KEYWORD:
HF C ASIAN SBCMTE-05/29/91 LORD ET AL
BODY:
REP. SOLARZ: The Subcommittees will come to order. And the witnesses will
please take their places at the witness table.
Today, the Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Organizations,
Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs, and the Subcommittee on International
Economic Trade and Policy meet to consider the issue of Most Favored Nation
trade status for China. The issue of MFN in China involves a particularly
complex set of questions. How can the United States best promote our interests
in human rights and democratization in China, as well as a range of other
strategic and political interests? Where specifically does MFN fit into this
calculus? Do we have a better chance of promoting our multiple interests by
revoking MFN, by renewing it, or by imposing some sort of conditionality?
President Bush has signalled his preference for a renewal of MFN without
conditions for the stated purpose of keeping the United States engaged in China.
Subject to question is whether his approach places sufficient pressure on
China's leaders to make human rights reforms.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Those who advocate outright revocation must, it seems to me, demonstrate that
the damage which ending MFN would cause to American consumers, American
exporters, the people of Hong Kong, the more reform-minded parts of China, and
our security interests will be outweighed by rapid and significant political
progress in China. Those who advocate competing packages of conditions must
demonstrate that their proposed objectives are meaningful in the progress they
would facilitate, yet not 50 tough that they are tantamount to delayed
revocation. That hinges on the probability that China's leaders will meet the
suggested conditions.
Obviously, any option that facilitates a new consensus on China policy between
the White House and the Congress would be welcome. We will have a greater
impact on the decisions of the Chinese Politburo if there is unity up and down
Pennsylvania Avenue.
Whatever legislative action the Congress takes will originate in the House Ways
and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee, but my fellow chairmen and
I thought there was a useful role for this committee to play in informing the
public debate on MFN issues. A later hearing of these subcommittees will hear
from members of Congress and a representative of the administration.
To help us today in unraveling the knotty problems before us are a number of
extraordinarily distinguished witnesses. We have Winston Lord, who was present
at the creation of US-China relations and served as the American ambassador to
China from 1985 to 1989. We have also Richard Holbrooke, the Assistant
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
8
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Secretary of State for East Asia at the time of normalization of US-China
relations, who is now working at Shearson Lehman in New York. We also have
Edward Friedman, professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin,
one of my long-time advisors on China, who previously worked on the staff of the
Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs before returning to academic life in
the Midwest. We have Fang Lizhi, a leading Chinese advocate for democracy and a
former guest of the US embassy in Beijing. And we have Zhao Haiqing speaking on
behalf of the International Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars.
After we hear from the five witnesses whom I've just introduced, we will hear
from a second panel of witnesses, which will include Holly Burkhalter,
representing Asia Watch, which has done a commendable job in documenting the
repression that has occurred in China over the last two years; Jerome Shestack,
representing the International League for Human Rights; and John Kamm, a
long-time businessman in China. And then, in the third panel, we will hear from
Roger Sullivan, the President of the US-China Business Council; William
Overholt, speaking on behalf of the American Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong;
and Rudolph Oswald, the Director of Economic Research of the AFofL-CIO.
So, we should, throughout the course of today's hearing, get the benefit of the
views of some distinguished American diplomats, some notable Chinese dissidents,
some human rights specialists, and some representatives of the American and Hong
Kong business communities.
Before asking the witnesses to begin, I know my fellow co-chairman and some of
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
our distinguished ranking minority members would like an opportunity to say a
few words. Before I call on Chairman Gejdenson to give his opening remarks, let
me say that we're particularly to have Congresswoman Pelosi join the committees
for today's hearing. She has, as many of you know, been one of the leaders in
the effort to impose conditions on the renewal of MFN for China and she has been
a tireless and effective advocate on behalf of the cause of human rights and
democracy in that country. And I am sure that the legislation she is drafting
will figure significantly, not only in today's hearing but in the subsequent
congressional debates on this issue, and we're very pleased to have her with us.
After the members of the committee offer their wisdom, Nancy, if you want to add
anything of your own, we'd be happy to hear from you.
Mr. Gejdenson.
REP. GEJDENSON: Thank you.
For the past five or six years, as the Soviet Union has gone through some of the
most remarkable changes that I think very few of us if any had foreseen, the
administration refused to give the Soviet Union Most Favored Nation status.
Even when the Soviets got to a point where they allowed the immigration of
Soviet Jews in numbers that put the United States in a position that we had to
restrict the number we would take, and a number 50 large that it's taxing the
Israelis' ability to provide housing for them, we still haven't provided MFN for
the Soviets.
And it seems that the new world order provides a different standard of human
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
9
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
behavior for Arabs, for Asians and for Europeans. I find that unacceptable.
What we learned from our dealings with Saddam Hussein was that we couldn't buy
friendship by economic or military assistance. In reality, we paid the price
for it. The US is clearly justified in denying Most Favored Nation treatment
for China, because of the government's restrictive emigration policy. The
citizens who languish in prisons for participating in the 1989 democratic
movement are not free to speak, work or assemble, much less emigrate. Despite
the legal provisions which link MFN to freedom of emigration, President Bush in
an Orwellian twist of logic indicated his intention to renew MFN for China
without conditions. He said that we could advance our cherished ideals only by
extending our hand, showing our best side, and sticking patiently to our values.
Let's take a look at the American ideals that have been furthered by the
administration's policy of extending our hands and sticking patiently to our
values since Tiananmen Square's massacre of two years ago. The Chinese
government disregards human rights, persecutes political dissidents, holds
secret trials, and tortures prisoners; extracts payment in labor from students
who wish to study in the United States; cooperates with Algeria to build nuclear
weapons facility, exports missiles to Pakistan and Syria; uses forced labor to
produce goods destined for US markets; and ignores intellectual property rights.
The Chinese governments acts without fear of recrimination, having watched the
administration ignore the most outrageous of acts.
I cannot concur with the President, who stated that his policy towards China
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
paid off in spade since China did not veto the United Nations Security Council
resolution against Iraq. I'm not sure that the Chinese government's vote in the
UN also provided little (sic/may mean any) comfort to the citizens of China who
seek political, economic reforms and recognition of basic human rights. For the
past two years, Congress has not blocked the administration's recommendation to
extend MFN as a way of promoting economic and political reform. How many
extensions will it take before the conciliatory policy of the United States
towards the Chinese regime pays off? I, for one, am not willing to wait and
see. I am pleased to join with my cochairman here in today's hearing. But, for
the life of me, I can't understand why the United States has one standard for
human rights and decency in Europe and in the Soviet Union and another in China.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the very distinguished
chairman of the Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Organizations,
Mr. Yatron.
REP. YATRON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are holding this hearing today to
assess the prospects for extending Most Favored Nation status for China and more
generally to evaluate US-China relations. I want to commend my cochairs,
Congressman Solarz and Congressman Gejdensen for their outstanding leadership
and cooperation on this issue. And given the events of the past year such as
the continuing human rights violations in China, the sale of ballistic missile
technology to Pakistan, China's assistance in building a nuclear reactor in
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 10
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Algeria, the skyrocketing US trade deficit with China, and China's export of
prisoner-made goods to the United States, China appears to no longer warrant
MFN.
President Bush has decided to extend China's Most Favored Nation trade status
for another year. The human rights situation in China has not improved. If
anything, the situation has gotten demonstrably worse. Labor camps continue to
grow, Chinese citizens continue to languish in prisons without charge or trial,
and security police continue to occupy press offices. The President has stated
that conditions in China are better than they were in 1975. However, he should
have also mentioned that they are worse than they were in 1978 when, for a short
time, Chinese citizens could hang wall posters, read unofficial journals, and
call for free speech.
To harken back to the end of the cultural revolution, one of the worst periods
in China's recent history, is to set the law's possible point of reference by
which to measure human rights gains in China. Realistically, what is taking
place in China has been going on for decades. Forced labor is nothing new.
China sold billions of dollars worth of nuclear and missile technology around
the world during the 1980s, and China never respected intellectual property
rights or basic human rights. Our relations with China are at the lowest point
since normalization. Whether or not to extend MFN to China for another year
will be one of the most important foreign policy debates this year.
I look forward to hearing from our distinguished witnesses. I thank you, Mr.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you, Mr. Yatron. The Chair now recognizes the very
distinguished and able gentlemen from Iowa, the ranking minority member of the
Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs, Mr. Leach.
REP. LEACH: Well, I apologize for lengthening this dialogue a bit, but let me
just make a couple of observations. I appreciate the Chairman's opening
comments setting the framework for this, but I think all of us have to
understand that it's basically a yes-no decision that has to be made and that
conditions can be developed. But conditions, in effect, become hortatory, and
they can reflect a sense of the American people, but it's still yes-no on
whether to have MFN or not.
When I listened this last several days to some of the Democratic leadership,
particularly on the other side, I was struck with the observation of "there they
go again," and let me explain what I mean. Last winter it was Iraq, last week
it was Mexico, today it's China. It would appear increasingly that the
Democratic Party's only answer to a thorny foreign policy issue is
protectionism. And let me elaborate for a second.
Self-righteously denying MFN treatment for China may provide solace to the
liberal soul, but it neither advances the democratic movement on the mainland
nor serves US national interests. The President, in his Yale address, I think
hit the circumstance very profoundly when he indicated that the ship of state
must be guided with a moral beacon to the shoals of lesser evils.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 11
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
MFN, as everybody understands, is a misnomer. It's Most Favored Nation
treatment, it's normal trade treatment. It applies to the vast panoply of
nations. Revoking MFN would represent a regression from the normalization
process that we commenced under President Nixon, and a very profound regression
TECHNICAL at that.
Let me also say that I think both America's political parties -- the left,
right, and center -- concur on goals. The question is one of technique. Most
of us believe that opening up trade with China is more responsible than any
single thing to opening up the democratic process in China. If that is the
case, it's hard to understand how closing down trade with China, how seeking in
effect a protectionist aproach, will do anything except bolster the government
in power against the democratic movements that we want to advance.
GROWN
inally, let me just suggest that internally, economics can sometimes be more
important than politics because they can drive politics, as they seem to have
done in China. Externally, however, politics can be of seminal significance in
that this Congress has to understand very carefully that the Chinese were very
supportive, at least non-obstructionist on the Iraq-Kuwait circumstance, and
that in a world in which the Security Council plays a very massive role we have
to at least recognize that the Chinese government assisted the United States
government in a very important national security interest of our land, and that
progress
we shouldn't be apologetic about making that point.
In addition, the Chinese externally in the last year have moved towards
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
normalizing relations with a number of countries such as Singapore and Indonesia
that they haven't had normal relations with, also Saudi Arabia. They've worked
towards a diplomatic solution in the Spratly Islands dispute, and that there are
certain acts of the Chinese government externally that are consonant with the
American position. And in this I would also include the Cambodian issue, which
I think would be set back dramatically if the Congress were to do something
precipitously unfavorable in MFN.
And so all I would suggest to the subcommittee before we go down the path of
acting in a prideful kind of way on issues that there is good consensus in this
country, that we look at the ramifications of those actions and not do something
counterproductive.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you, Mr. Leach. Mr. Gilman, you had indicated an interest in
REP. GILMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I'd like to commend all of the
chairmen of our subcommittees, the Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs
that you head, and the Subcommittee on Human Rights, the Subcommittee on
International Economic Policy, for bringing us all together and holding this
hearing at a very appropriate time.
As our nation grapples with defining the new world order of critical importance
will be the tone of our relationship with the last giant communist dictatorship,
the People's Republic of China. These hearings should play an important role
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS`NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 12
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
in charting this historic course. And there is a longstanding premise that in
order to bring about positive economic and political change in the PRC, we must
continue to grant it MFN and simply wait for the old men who rule from Beijing
to fade away. If we deny MFN to the PRC, it's argued, China will happily
withdraw into its cocoon, and we will hurt progressive elements in the ruling
elite in addition to losing all of our influence with that nation.
The truth, however, is that we've already isolated China from the ethical and
moral standards we expect from civilized nations. Years of moral and ethical
isolation has emboldened China's communist leaders. According to Amnesty
International, pro-democracy forces in the PRC have been hunted down, rounded
up, and even executed. Asia Watch calls China's rule over Tibet "merciless
repression." And Freedom House informs us that Tibet is the number one worst
area in the world in regards to political freedom. The authorization of MFN
since 1979 has apparently not put a stop to any of these violations.
According to the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post,
Business Week, the Far Eastern Economic Review, and other authoritative sources,
the Beijing administration has recentralized banking, credit, production
planning, material allocation, foreign trade and other important elements in the
economy. There are approximately 3 million private and semi-private Chinese
enterprises that have been shut down, and in the majority of the cases, only
state-run enterprises are going to benefit from MFN. And all of this has
happened since reauthorization of MFN after the Tiananmen Square massacre.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Our nation has denied MFN to the Eastern bloc, to South Africa, and to
Nicaragua, and it's helped a country that exports products made by political
prisoners and which even exports prisoners to Africa to work on roads for
Chinese government contracts --- denies all form of democratic expression. And
any nation which unveils a 230-foot tall monument in downtown Llasa to
commemorate its rule over Tibet, leaves certainly a number of serious questions
in all of our minds with regard to China's views on human rights. The
pre-industrialized China of the 1960s no longer exists, and it's not going to
withdraw into any cocoon. The problem with the PRC is not with the old
Communists in Beijing, for there are plenty of young leaders willing to take
their places. The problem with China is the harsh Communist system itself, and
the world's industrialized nations continuing to do business with the People's
Republic of China, despite these violations.
Mr. Chairman, we certainly look forward to the diversity of views of our expert
witnesses. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: It would appear that it's not just Democrats who are skeptical
about renewing MFN. I notice that two of the other ranking minority members of
the subcommittees conducting these hearings have arrived, and let me recognize
them at this point. First, the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Roth, who is the
ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on Economic Trade and Policy.
REP. TOBY ROTH (R-WI): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Chairman, I want to
commend you and Chairman Gejdenson and Yatron for having these hearings. I
LEXIS' NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 13
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
think it's most appropriate, and of course, most timely.
Mr. Chairman, none of us condones the policies of the Chinese leadership. No
doubt, our witnesses will discuss those policies and the repression in great
detail. The events of 1989 were and are a great tragedy. We all want China to
Mareitz
return to the path of modernization, of freedom and democracy, and that's why I
feel that reason, not emotion, must be the hallmark of our policy.
The key question is what course can the United States pursue that will be
effective in reinforcing the people of China who want their country to move
foreward? To be effective, we must be realistic. The United States will never
determine China's policy, only the Chinese people can do that. It is a peculiar
concept of Americans that we continue to believe that we alone can remake the
world in our image, like some latter day political missionaries. We must
recognize that China is not a monolith economically or politically.
In southern China, there is a market economy that's flourishing, and the forces
of change are all over. The cause of this transformation has increased trade,
I
GROWTH
believe, and we should apply this lesson. The best way to strengthen the forces
of change and freedom in China is to provide them the economic lifeblood of
trade. And as trade produces changes in China, in their economy, change I
believe will come to China's political leadership, or that leadership will not
survive. Other nations in Europe and in Asia understand this reality. Denying
MFN will not isolate China. It will isolate the United States. And I think our
]!!!
President understands that, and I believe that that's the foundation of his
Moral
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
policy.
So let us be realistic and effective in our China policy. No one understands us
better, I believe, than President George Bush. The President is realistic. And
if Congress wants the US to stay effective, then I think we should endorse the
President's initiatives.
Thank you, Mr. President -- or Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: (Chuckles.)
REP. ROTH: That was a Freudian slip. (Laughter.)
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. (Laughter.)
The ranking minority member of the Subcommittee on Human Rights, my very good
friend from Nebraska, Mr. Bereuter.
REP. DOUG BEREUTER (R-NE): Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. This is a very
important controversial subject before us today. Since we have substantially
delayed the testimony of our witnesses, and I look forward to hearing from them
and having an opportunity to question them, I will forego any formal comments
and ask unanimous consent that I may submit my remarks for the record. And I
yield back.
REP. SOLARZ: Under the circumstances, an extraordinary demonstration of self
restraint, Mr. Bereuter.
The gentleman from California, Mr. Lantos, I think wanted to be heard. And we
will give all the members a chance to speak before we turn it over to the
witnesses.
LEXIS'NEXIS' LEXISNEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 14
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
REP. TOM LANTOS (D-CA): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just would like to add a few
footnotes to comments that have already been made by some of our colleagues.
I think it is self evident no one wants to isolate China. China is clearly one
of the most important countries in this world, with a unique history and
civilization. And nothing would please me and I'm sure all of my colleagues
more than the lack of a need for a hearing of this kind. So I think we need to
knock down this straw man, as to who wants to isolate China. No one wants to
isolate China. Our purpose is to facilitate the process whereby China becomes a
full, democratic participating member of the international community.
I think it's important, Mr. Chairman, to recognize that a year ago, we had a
similar debate. And had the legislation that we overwhelmingly passed become
law, we would now be compelled to revoke China's Most Favored Nation treatement,
because China palpably failed to meet the conditions that we set at the time.
Human rights conditions have deteriorated measurably. The persecution of the
people of Tibet has become worse. China's irresponsible sale of weapons of
destruction has increased. China continues and intensifies her jamming of Voice
of America broadcasts, thereby denying the people of China access to unbiased,
open, objective information. China continues to use prison labor as part of the
labor force for its export products. By any rational yardstick, China is not
entitled to Most Favored Nation treatment.
My friend from Iowa indicated that Most Favored Nation treatment is only normal
trade treatment. He's correct. China is not entitled to normal trade
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
treatment, because human rights conditions in China are abnormal and subnormal.
I also think it's important to realize that the administration and some of our
colleagues are calling for, quote-unquote, "effectiveness" in dealing with
China, arguing that imposing trade sanctions are not effective. I find this
argument the most obnoxious because it is used 50 selectively.
Every time this administration and some people in Congress choose to punish a
country, they use the argument that denying Most Favored Nation treatment is the
most effective formula. It was the most effective formula with respect to Tibet
and with respect to Nicaragua. It was the most effective formula with respect
to the Soviet Union. It was the most effective formula with respect to South
Africa. But to reach their pre-arrived conclusion -- namely, that China should
have a double standard -- we suddenly find that the Most Favored Nation
treatment denial is ineffective.
I would also like to mention, Mr. Chairman, that just as at the very end of the
Persian Gulf engagement, with its initial abandonment of the cause of the
Kurdish people, the administration abandoned its moral high ground which it
occupied during the war, we are now about to abandon that moral high ground
again.
I understand that for many people, human rights is just an inconvenience. It is
an issue that they would like to gloss over. It is an inconvenient item. Some
of us feel that human rights is the quintessential American contribution to
foreign policy, and I feel that unless this Congress succeeds in making a
LEXIS'NEXIS LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
15
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
meaningful step in the direction of imposing severe conditions on China, we will
have failed, and failed in a historic sense. My own preference would be to
terminate Most Favored Nation treatment. I realize under the circumstances
that's unrealistic. But I believe that conditions that WE set must be
meaningful and biting.
The Chinese Communist dictatorship must understand, as did the Stalinist
dictatorship in the Soviet Union, as did the Ceausescu regime and others, that
the United States simply will not stand for the blatant and brutal suppression
of the very people who share our values.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Lagomarsino.
REP. LAGOMARSINO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I want to join in commending you for holding this hearing. It
shows you do care.
Mr. Chairman, one thing you said in your opening statement, I think, needs to be
repeated, and that is that we will have a greater impact on the decisions of the
Chinese Politburo if there is unity up and down Pennslyvania Avenue. That is a
truism, and I think that is the question we have to ask ourselves. Human rights
is not just a minor thing, obviously, but we do have to consider what will bring
about an improvement in human rights in the best way in China.
I don't think there is any way that --- I know there is no way that I can
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
accept continuation of MFN without conditions. I guess what we're talking about
is what should the conditions be? You know, there was mention made earlier of
the Soviet Union in comparing MFN in China with that in the Soviet Union. It's
true, in some respects, the human rights situation in the Soviet Union is better
than in China. There is more freedom of press. There is more freedom of
assembly. Political parties are at least to some extent - they're free to
organize and to work.
On the other hand, there are things similar to what happened in Tiananmen Square
going on there, that have gone on there, in Armenia and Azerbaijan, in
Lithuania. The one difference is that we don't see that on television.
Gorbachev was not visiting those areas when that occurred in the Soviet Union.
So, I think WE have to keep that in mind. Now, lest anybody think that that
means I'm arguing for MFN for the Soviet Union and for China -- not SO. I don't
think either one are in a position to get that from us at this time, at least
without conditions.
One of the things that intrigues me about this debate that's been going on now
for at least two years is how many people suddenly realized what has been
happening in China for the last -- what -- 30 or 40 years, how much brutality
and suppression of human rights there has been. It didn't all start 2 years ago
in Tiananmen Square. That's when we discovered it perhaps because it was on --
as I said earlier, on living TV -- it couldn't be ignored anymore.
So, Mr. Chairman, I'm very interested in hearing what the witnesses will say
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
16
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
and hope that --- although it seems a very dim hope at this point -- but I would
hope that there would be some way that the Congress and the administration could
agree on appropriate conditions that will state what we all believe and what we
want to accomplish and that will have that effect on the Chinese leadership.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you very much. The Chair recognizes the distinguished
gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Torricelli.
REP. ROBERT TORRICELLI (D-NJ): Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, for
me, and I'll be interested in hearing the witnesses today, it is not a question
of whether or not there should be conditions placed on MFN, but indeed what
those conditions should be. This is, of course, the fight that nobody wanted.
In the wake of the massacre in Tiananmen Square, despite whatever differences of
approach or policy or partisan affiliation, we are reunited with a common hope.
From the President sending diplomats to Beijing to the Congress continuing MFN,
we all believe that somewhat reason would prevail. If there was a lapse of
judgment for a period of time in Beijing that would pass, and that while order
was being restored there would be fairness and there would be justice.
There is today no reason to believe that that policy yielded any success or that
continuing it will yield anything in the future. There has been an arrogant
rebuke to every decent effort by every nation to witness some easing in Beijing
and some fairness and simple justice. MFN may be the norm among nations.
Nothing however is normal about the situation in China. MFN is an entry price
for those nations who seek to have good relations, recognizing an established
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
norm of human decency among all countries of the world. It is an entry price
which China has chosen not to pay, and therefore, it does not deserve entry.
There was a time, Mr. Chairman, when the range of options before this country
and this Congress were very limited because of the real political realities of
the Cold War. In attacking Kuwait, Saddam Hussein miscalculated that the United
States would not militarily respond because of the realities of the world
situation. He failed to notice that things had changed. In failing to
recognize the understandable and justifiable outrage of the international
community over the human rights situation in China, the leadership in Beijing
has miscalculated itself. It is believed that because of the size of China, the
potential of its market, or its relationship with other nations in the world -
in particular, its position vis-a-vis the Soviet Union - we would not dare to
take a stand. The Chinese leadership has dangerously miscalculated and
jeopardized its own interests.
Perhaps there was a time when human rights needed to be compromised, when
America had to consider other interests before advancing the things WE hold most
dear. Those times have passed. It is time to take a stand.
We gave China the benefit of every doubt. We were reasonable and We were
understanding. We allowed time to pass and we withheld representing our own
interests. Nothing has passed. The carrot was returned to us. And now, we
simply need to represent those things which we wanted to represent all along and
to do those things which occur to us most naturally.
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 17
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: The Chair now recognizes my very good friend from the state of
Washington, Mr. Miller.
REP. JOHN MILLER (R-WA): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for convening
these hearings.
I think, as the witnesses can tell, members of this committee have strong
feelings on this issue going into these hearings, but that doesn't mean that
your testimony is not relevant. You know, for example, I come in with a strong
bias in favor of conditioning any extensions, but there are many nuances that
have to be addressed on this issue.
Let me give two issues that I think the witnesses should consider in their
testimony.
The first, alluded to by some of the previous speakers, is a comparison of where
China was a year ago with where China is today. Because to a certain extent,
we're evaluating the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of the policies we
followed the past year, including the unconditional extension of MFN. And 50, I
think that would be helpful.
Secondly, I think there's an issue here of whether we integrate or isolate our
policies in the economic, human rights, military, and diplomatic spheres. There
seems to be a notion around that you can separate these policies, treat them in
isolation -- this is isolationism of a different kind than the word is usually
applied to. I'm very skeptical of this isolationist approach to policy. But
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
if the witnesses feel that WE can separate out MFN from other trade policies or
diplomatic policies or human right policies, I would like to hear why. And if
they feel these policies should be integrated, I'd like to hear why, and how we
go about integrating them.
Mr. Chairman, these are difficult issues with many nuances, and I think that
you, Mr. Chairman, are probably better prepared or as well prepared as anyone in
the Congress to conduct the in-depth hearings that these issues require. Thank
you.
REP. SOLARZ: Well, I thank the gentleman very much for his very kind comment.
The Chair now recognizes my very good friend from Pennsylvania, Mr. Foglietta.
REP. THOMAS M. FOGLIETTA (D-PA): I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I commend you
for convening this very timely hearing on this very important matter.
Obviously, I think it's the objective of all persons on this committee, whether
on the right or the left, that we eliminate the human rights abuses in the
People's Republic. The question is before us as to whether or not denial of MFN
status is the proper means and most effective means to achieve this objective.
I am inclined to believe that at least conditions would lead us to the objective
we seek. However, I note with interest from the press reports that many
individuals and groups -- groups and individuals who oppose the policies of the
present government, especially those concerned with human rights abuses and who
are suffering from those policies, question this means to achieve the end that
we seek. So, therefore, I'm quite interested in hearing from the witnesses
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 18
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
before a determination is finally made. And I thank you for this opportunity.
REP. SOLARZ: All right. Thank you, Mr. Foglietta. The Chair now recognizes the
distinguished gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Smith.
REP. CHRIS SMITH: Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members, it seems to me that at this time
unconditional renewal for MFN is unwarranted. The case for renewal without any
conditions thus far has not been persuasive. Along with Congressman Frank Wolf,
I spent the better part of a week in Beijing and Shanghai in April and met with
a substantial number of leaders -- Chinese Communist leaders -- including
Premier Li Peng. I'm sorry to say that these encounters with the top leadership
of the PRC did absolutely nothing to mitigate my concerns over blatant human
rights violations in China. As a matter of fact, my concerns were deepened as a
result of those visits.
Mr. Chairman, the evidence suggests that the Chinese continue to harass,
incarcerate, and persecute the prodemocracy leaders. The tyranny against these
freedom-loving people is ongoing, and I would suggest it's totally unacceptable.
The Chinese leadership continues to suppress religious belief, especially in its
expression. And the hardliners have been especially severe in their crackdown
on Catholics, Protestants, and the Evangelical house church movement. We
presented Li Peng a list of some 77 bishops, priests, and other clergymen who've
been incarcerated, many of them of recent date, and hopefully, at some point
they will be released, but with no conditions attached to MFN I think that
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
becomes less, not more, likely.
The Chinese also continue to employ prison labor, and serious concerns have been
raised that perhaps some of these products are finding their way into US
markets. We visited Beijing Prison No. 1, and while there took note of the fact
that there were some 40 political prisoners there who were there as a result of
their participation in Tiananmen Square, and they were making jelly shoes and
other kinds of footware as well as socks. Right now there's an investigation
under way to determine whether or not those products indeed are finding their
way into US markets.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, the Chinese hardliners continue and indeed are
accelerating their assault on the family as they implement their Draconian "one
child per couple" policy with its very heavy reliance on forced abortion and
other forms of harassment, punishment, and penalties for those who would have
children. Mr. Chairman, as we all know, Chinese women in particular have been
the victims of this brutal systematic invasion of their personal privacy, and I
would suggest this is the most offensive invasion of women rights ever
experienced in the history of the world.
Mr. Chairman, you have assembled a most distinguished roster of witnesses. I
look forward to their testimony. Hopefully, it will shed some additional light
on what we should do as a Congress.
I yield back the balance.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you, very much. The Chair now recognizes one of the new
LEXIS' NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 19
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
members of our Committee. I'm particularly pleased to have with us today the
gentleman from Utah, Mr. Orton.
REP. ORTON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity of being here
this morning -- or this afternoon. I just arrived in from the District. What
seems like a decade ago just occurred two years ago, and I, as a private
citizen, watched on television with horror the events unfolding in Tienanmen
Square. Now, as a new member of Congress, one of my greatest concerns is trade.
That is why I selected this Subcommittee as one of my prime assignments in
Congress.
I am extremely concerned over the trade policies of the United States. In fact,
as I first came to Congress, the first foreign official that I met, as elected
-- after being elected to Congress, was the Foreign Minister of China during his
visit here last winter. Invited by the Human Rights Caucus, I appreciate that
opportunity. And we presented him with some very serious questions and
concerns. And I have to tell you that I personally was impressed with his
personal commitment to the resolution of those concerns. I have a fear that it
may have been rhetoric because since that time I have seen absolutely no action
-- none whatsoever -- taken in China to resolve the concerns that we presented.
Also, I have a general desire to support the President on issues of foreign
policy, but I have grave concerns over an unconditional designation of Most
Favored Nation status for China. My fear is the message we send. I look back
over the past two years and see great developments throughout the world,
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
particularly in East Europe and even in the Soviet Union. I think the question
we have to ask ourselves here is what message will be sent? Will there be a
message sent that entering into the world community requires certain human
action, or will the message be sent that suppression is acceptable?
So I am very interested in hearing what the witnesses have to say to us, will be
following this development very keenly, and hope to be involved throughout the
course of our hearings and deliberations.
I thank you, very much, for the opportunity.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you, very much, Mr. Orton.
Last, only because she's not actually a member of the Committee, but by no means
least because among all the members of the House no one has been more outspoken
on behalf of the cause of democracy and human rights in China -- the gentlewoman
from California, Ms. Pelosi, whose wisdom we eagerly await.
REP. PELOSI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your kind welcome and for holding this
hearing today. I thank you and Mr. Gejdenson and Mr. Yatron for calling this
important hearing.
I believe in your opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, you laid out a good framework
for how the debate should proceed, but I would add two things to that. Mr.
Washington -- Mr. Miller from Washington alluded to one of them. I would add
that we should measure in making a judgment about how we proceed on MFN on what
has worked in the last two years since the Tiananmen Square massacre. Has the
President's policy worked?
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 20
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
And secondly, we should, in making this decision about MFN to China, recognize
that in continuing trade on a normal basis with China we have to ignore certain
of our own laws. Among them are laws about prison labor, our own MFN law about
trading with -- MFN with a centralized economy, a communist system. Many say,
"Oh, we have MFN with a hundred other countries." MFN with a centralized economy
-- our own DOD authorization bill about the transfer of nuclear technology and
sanctions that are called for in that, our own laws about copyright,
intellectual property and the fact that the Chinese government -- the Chinese
are stealing those, and we have to ignore also not only those laws, but we have
to ignore the fact that people are wallowing in prison who spoke out for
democracy. Some were killed, some were imprisoned, we have no accounting of
them.
I know that our colleague, Mr. Leach, who I respect greatly, was concerned about
this being a partisan effort. And I'm pleased to refresh his memory that last
year my legislation passed 383 to 30, we had strong bipartisan support on this
issue, and that I voted for the fast track with the President, so that my
legislation is not a protectionist legislation, but in fact legislation that I
think can make a difference in China. As Chair of the congressional working
group on China, we developed the legislation in the working group with an eye to
what was realistic.
We believe and I believe that the Chinese government, while it may not approve
of capitalism -- does not like capitalism, loves money, needs hard currency,
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
and would perhaps think twice about giving up its share of the United States
market, the American market, rather than freeing the students detained for
demonstrating peacefully in Tiananmen Square.
So Mr. Roth, it is not a question of basing a decision on emotionalism. It's a
question of basing a decision on principle and our own laws.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to participate in the
hearing.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you. Now that the preliminaries are over, we can move to the
main event. I think each of our witnesses has been asked to limit their formal
presentation to five to ten minutes if you can, which will give us the maximum
opportunity for questioning, keeping in mind that we do have two other panels of
witnesses to appear before us. But I am speaking not just for myself but I'm
sure the other members of the committee, very much looking forward to what you
have to say.
This is clearly going to be one of the most important foreign policy issues
confronted by the Congress this year. And each of you in your ways, through
your own backgrounds and experiences, have a unique contribution to make to the
understanding of the Congress and derivatively of the country of this issue.
This is not a hearing simply to go through the motions. This is a hearing
designed to facilitate, if at all possible, not only a better understanding but
perhaps even a consensus about how we can most effectively approach this
question. So this is, I think, if not a rare opportunity a good opportunity
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
21
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
for all of you to contribute to our understanding and in the process to
influence the decisionmaking process in the Congress on this issue.
Why don't we go left to right or right to left, as the case may be? We'll start
with Ambassador Lord, then hear from Mr. Holbrooke, Mr. Friedman, Fang Lizhi,
and Zhao Haiging -- (hesitates over pronunciation) -- I think I got it right.
Okay.
Win, please proceed.
AMB. LORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've submitted my full remarks to the
committee.
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I'm pleased to reappear before you to
discuss China and America. Let me express at the outset my delight over the
President's nomination of Stapleton Roy to be our next ambassador in Beijing.
By virtue of his experience and expertise, intelligence and integrity, he is the
best person for this crucial assignment.
First, a brief note on our general policy toward China. It is an important
country and will be increasingly so in coming decades. My statement spells out
why, Mr. Chairman. Thus, no serious analyst seeks to "isolate China,"
quote-unquote. Indeed, since the Tiananmen Square massacre, it has isolated
itself from the historical tides of freedom which have swept the world. Those
who accuse critics of the Beijing regime of seeking to isolate China are using
this straw man to defend a special exemption on humanitarian issues. They echo
the Chinese government's rationale that the need for "stability,"
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
quote-unquote, justifies the murder of innocents, harsh repression, and the
flouting of basic human rights.
Our policy options are not confined to isolation of China on the one hand or a
double standard for China on the other hand. We can both conduct necessary
business and honor our ideals. Above all, the United States in word and deed
should align itself with the people and future leaders of China. This not only
projects our values but also promotes our interests. I believe our policy
should lend sharp condemnation of continuing repression and links with
progressive forces. And again, my statement elaborates on what I think our
overall policy should be.
Now, in weighing American policy, how do we judge the recent Chinese record?
And Mr. Miller and Mrs. Pelosi and others asked about this. In China, the
overall human rights situation continues to worsen. There have been some modest
moves the past year to influence world opinion, thus demonstrating that Beijing
does care about its standing. But these are essentially cosmetic and the
penchant of Westerners to inflate their significance earns secret derision from
the Chinese leaders.
Formal martial law in China and Tibet has been replaced by equally tight
controls that serve the same ends. The juducial system is a cruel farce. While
some prisoners have been released, there has never been an accounting of them,
let alone the thousands that are still detained, have been reclassified as
criminals, or have simply disappeared. Some students and intellectuals have
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 22
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
been sentenced for a few years. Others have received extremely long jail terms.
Their fates have no logic, let alone justice. And we never hear about countless
others, including workers who have been treated the most brutually because they
command little international attention.
Meanwhile, the general policies of the big lie, purges, intimidation,
surveillance, indoctrination and attacks on Western values continue. What
prevents the Chinese scene from being grimmer, however, is the conduct of the
Chinese people and indeed many party and provincial officials. Unlike previous
campaigns, hard-line edicts are being ignored or diluted and the people do not
inform on one another. They protect each other, deride the government, and lie
in wait for better days.
On foreign policy, the Chinese record is mixed. And again, my statement
elaborates where they've been positive and where they've been negative, in my
view. But throughout, Beijing has been pursuing its interests, not granting us
favors.
This, then, is the context for the current issue of MFN trade status. Mr.
Chairman, reasonable people can disagree on this important topic. One can favor
promoting human rights in China and still urge renewal. One can consider
Chinese relations important and still urge removal. I oppose the two extreme
options of revocation and unconditional extension.
Revocation of MFN would have the following negative effects. It would hurt many
of the people in China in economic fields who support reforms and opening.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
They would be weakened as China heads towards a succession struggle. It would
deal serious economic and psychological blows to Hong Kong as it heads toward
1997. It would damage American economic interests, including consumers,
importers, exporters and investors in China and Hong Kong. In many areas, the
Japanese, Europeans and others would move in. It will remove a key instrument of
leverage with China. In this case, if you use it, you lose it. Now, there are
some counterpoints to each of these arguments, and they're noted in my
statement.
On the other hand, unconditional extension of MFN would also have serious
negative results. It would reinforce the Chinese regime's conviction that
domestic repression entails no real international costs. It would accentuate
the pattern of administration actions and the world's growing amnesia concerning
Tiananmen Square.
In recent months, Beijing has been loudly proclaiming that it is business as
usual with nations around the globe. It would dismay many moderates in and out
of China who long for a more open and humane society. They would be robbed of
the argument that China must loosen up if it wishes international cooperation.
It would ignore the legislative context of emigration and human rights. It
would forego our leverage with the Chinese on this issue. In this case, if you
don't use it, you lose it.
Accordingly, I favor conditional renewal of MFN. I believe this represents the
brightest chance of minimizing the drawbacks of the two more extreme options.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
23
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
More positively, it is best suited to promote our various interests,
geopolitical, economic and humanitarian. If properly managed, this approach
would neither deal a savage blow to our relations with China nor condone its
egregious abuses. It would arm the administration to encourage human rights
rather than forfeiting the most powerful instrument available.
If conditional renewal of MFN for China is the best course, a fundamental issue
remains: what kinds of conditions? I believe they should be essentially
humanitarian with reasonable prospects for progress. As already suggested, we
face many serious problems with Beijing, including human rights, Tibet, trade
practices and weapons proliferation. We cannot expect to solve them all through
a single instrument like MFN legislation, plus to link future renewal of MFN to
resolution of all significant issues is tantamount to an immediate cut-off.
Ambitious, wide-ranging conditions, moreover, are unlikely to produce human
conds
be
rights advances. Beijing will dig in against what it considers an impossible
agenda.
There is also the legislative context. While there are strong arguments for
roaevoca
invoking emigration and human rights because of the language or the history of
the Jackson-Vanik bill, it is a risky precedent to add on other topics. To be
sure, we must vigorously address these problems, but we should use other
vehicles, and my statement elaborates on those other vehicles.
Finally, there's a question of tactics. I defer, of course, to members of
Congress on this, but it would seem to be much more difficult to override a
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
presidential veto of extensive conditions compared to modest ones. If,
conversely, the administration judged that it did not have the votes to sustain
a veto of moderate conditions, it might join with the Congress to present a
united front toward Beijing.
Thus, I support MFN renewal with humanitarian conditions. Under this approach,
if the President wished to recommend renewal once again a year from now, he
would be required to report to the Congress that China had made significant
progress on certain issues. I'm not prepared to present a precise,
comprehensive list of these conditions. Let me suggest a few criteria, however.
I think they should be confined to areas that are logically connected to the
legislation at hand: for example, emigration, human rights and freedom of
information. They should be concrete enough to provide meaningful yardsticks,
but the formulation should be flexible enough to give the administration real
leverage with Beijing. For example, while freeing all political prisoners is
certainly a desirable goal, wording like "freeing political prisoners" is more
likely to engender results. Similarly on some other questions, the formulation
"significant progress" is preferable to requiring complete solutions.
The Chinese will, of course, object to any conditions whatsoever, but faced with
relatively moderate ones, they might make significant moves. Naturally, they
would claim they were acting unilaterally and not because of outside pressure.
For example, the regime has alleged that it has not provided a list of all
citizens who were killed or wounded at Tiananmen and, I believe, those
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
24
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
detained, accused, sentenced or released, because the families would be
embarrassed. This is a transparent and cruel ploy. But that makes it easy for
China to change its position by saying that the families have consented.
Another important and reasonable condition is that Beijing stop all jamming of
the Voice of America. I cannot overemphasize from my personal experience the
impact of these broadcasts in getting the truth to the Chinese people. We
should in any event increase funding for VOA to surmount the Chinese
government's obstruction. Beijing cares passionately about MFN status because of
the enormous economic stakes and the general question of face. It might well
take some actions in order to preserve it. Last year and this the Chinese have
made some cosmetic gestures to influence our domestic debate. These have been
cynical tokens, but they demonstrate that even the Chinese leaders are not
impervious to pressure. With moderate conditions the administration in turn
will have greater leverage with China and in its desire to preserve the
bilateral relationship should be expected to use it.
In sum, while far-ranging conditions might appear more satisfying, moderate ones
are much more likely to produce genuine improvements in the lives of Chinese
citizens. And that, after all, is what Americans desire and what this debate
concerns.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I strongly prefer that the executive branch set
forth conditions rather than the Congress having to do SO. For two years the
administration in effect has been telling the Chinese that it wishes to have
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
good relations, but that Beijing must help in order to ward off congressional
pressures. Even this pallid approach has been undercut by other actions, such
as sending high level emissaries to Beijing, secretly and otherwise; vetoing a
series of congressional actions; selectively relaxing sanctions; receiving the
Chinese Foreign Minister in the Oval Office after Beijing abstained on the most
crucial resolution on the Persian Gulf and employed anti-American rhethoric; and
generally applying one standard on human rights for China and another for other
countries.
Recently the administration has taken some commendable steps; more systematic
airing of humanitarian issues, tougher application of trade and technology
levers, the President's meeting with the Dalai Lama. Whatever the tactical
motivations, such steps suggest a willingness to be somewhat firmer toward
Beijing. Perhaps even the President is disappointed over the meager, indeed
insulting Chinese response to his policy.
How much more credible our posture would be if the President and Congress could
join together on the MFN issue. How much more effective our policy would be if
the Chinese could no longer count on the President to shield them. This will
require the administration to invoke its own conditions, or at least endorse
congressional ones. It will also require Congress to agree to moderate
conditions rather than comprehensive ones. In my view, this policy holds the
best hope, both for improving human rights in China and for preserving
foundations for that time when changes in Beijing's regime will allow
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
25
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Sino-American relations to flourish once again. That time is not far away.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Well let me thank you once again, Mr. Lord, for an extraordinarily
thoughtful statement. Coming from a Yale graduate it's particularly gratifying
to know that those who got their education in New Haven think there is a role
for human rights in our foreign policy toward China.
Having just finished his collaboration with Clark Clifford (sp) on one of the
most interesting, important and impressive political memoirs in recent years,
we're delighted that Dick Holbrooke now has some time to devote himself once
again to American foreign policy toward Asia. And relieved of those weighty
responsibilities, we're glad that he could now be with us. So let me recognize
the former Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific, Dick
Holbrooke.
MR. HOLBROOKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again it's a pleasure to appear
before your subcommittee and the associated subcommittees which are here today.
I speak on this issue that you've addressed today with very mixed feelings. I
do not have a prepared statement, but I really couldn't add much to what my
friend Winston Lord has said and to what Professor Friedman is about to say.
So let me add a few personal observations speaking not ex officio but as the
last Democratic Assistant Secretary of State and as the Assistant Secretary of
State who was in charge of policy towards China at the time when President
Carter made the difficult decision to extend MFN to China. And I speak with
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
great respect and admiration, particularly for my friends on the Democratic side
of the aisle today with whom I'm not in full agreement. I listened very
carefully to Congressman Lantos' statement, to Congresswoman Pelosi's statement,
and to other statements made here today, and I believe that is fair to say and I
would like to stress at the outset that I share what I understand your
objectives to be. However, I am somewhat troubled by some of the tactics that
have been proposed.
Let me address the problem, Mr. Chairman, from a slightly different point of
view than Winston Lord just took. It was stated earlier that China should not
be singled out as a unique case, as a special country deserving of a double
standard. I am not suggesting we do that. But I am suggesting that American
national interests require us to treat countries on the basis of the actual
facts as they exist. The central fact to me about China today is that it is led
by a group of people who are defying the actuarial tables and have long outlived
their normal span. These men who run China, average age 85, cannot last more
than a relatively short period of time, evidence to the contrary
notwithstanding. And we must act, and above all, the Congress should act taking
into account that whatever action it decides to take should be specifically
geared to affect the power struggle which has long since begun and which will
accelerate as the transition takes place.
If we accept the fact that everyone in this room has roughly the same objective
-- and by the way in reference to Congressman Leach's comments about
LEXIS'NEXIS LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 26
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
protectionism, I would join Congressman Pelosi in saying that is not a relevant
factor. Here we are talking about much larger issues, and I hope protectionism
is not an issue. But if we share the same objective here, the question is what
is the best strategy?
I support in general terms the administration's position, although I am deeply
disappointed at some of the things they have said and some of the things that
they have done in the last two years. I share with Ambassador Lord a feeling
that secret trips to China sent the wrong signal to the leadership. I also
think that the President's speech at Yale presented the United States government
in the position of public relations advocate for another government. That is
their business. Let them present their own case for themselves. Those of us
who advocate continuation of MFN, as I do, are not doing it in defense of the
Chinese, but for one specific reason. And that is that it is my view, based on
over 50 trips to China and government and business relations with Chinese, that
denial of MFN would hurt most the reformers and the moderates who we wish to see
succeed in the succession struggle to come. If I believed otherwise, I would
join with the people I respect very much on the Democratic side of the aisle and
some of their Republican colleagues here today.
But I am convinced that the people who would be hurt most by a process which led
to the denial of MFN would be the very people we most want to help.
The question was raised earlier about whether MFN itself is the best lever to
encourage the best outcome of the succession struggle. Let me say first of
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
all that whatever we do, our influence is limited, as we all know. But beyond
that, it was never understood by me and I don't think it's in the legislation
that led to the Jackson-Vanik amendment or definitions of MFN, that MFN was to
be the sole tool or the primary tool to affect internal change. If it was so,
then MFN could have legitimately been denied, not only to countries like the
ones that Congressman Lantos mentioned earlier, but also to right-wing regimes
which received MFN for years.
The most important thing to me about encouraging trade relations between the
United States and a country in the situation China finds itself in today is that
MFN increases trade; trade increases international communication; international
communication is a strong liberalizing force not only for economic reform but
for democracy. And I believe that that would be very much affected by the
denial of MFN. Today's Washington Post contains a quote in the article on MFN
which I think is very revealing. In the article by Lena Sun on page A21, she
writes, "A Chinese intellectual, when told of Bush's decision by foreign
reporters, said, 'Let's have a drink to MFN. If it were taken away, we would
not be able to meet and talk. I believe that is a legitimate point and must be
considered.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring your attention and that of the Committee to
B discussion of US-Chinese economic relations issued within the last week by
Nicolas Lardy (sp), one of the outstanding scholars on the Chinese economy in
the United States and, I believe, a former student of Professor Friedman. I
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 27
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
would hope that the entire report could be made available in your reports, but I
would like to quote a few brief sentences from it as being particularly
relevant. Mr. Lardy writes:
"I believe that two years later, it appears that there was much less
retrogression in economic reform after the Tiananmen tragedy than was perceived
at the time. The evidence presently available reveals that China's economic
reform program not only continues to be far more successful than that of the
Soviet Union, but in many ways, continues to lead even the reform efforts of the
formerly socialist states of Eastern Europe. In particular, China remains the
only reforming socialist or formerly socialist economy to become a more
significant participant in the world economy."
Mr. Lardy's (sp) conclusions may strike some as overly optimistic, but I think
he needs to be heard, given his stature in the field. And once again, to
repeat, it is my strong view that economic reform, which would be adversely
affected by denial of MFN, would also lead to political reform.
And so far, Mr. Chairman, I've avoided your central question of conditionality.
Congressman Leach said at the outset that in the end, we have to move one way or
the other, and in that, I would agree with him, and I would favor its
continuation. However, I wish to make a point which differs slightly from the
concept of the united front to China. The Congress and the executive branch
have different roles in foreign policy. We've gone far beyond the day when
people can lament the alleged micromanagement of Congress in foreign policy.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
You have an independent voice. It seems to me both logical and desirable for
Congress to continue to raise the banner of human rights the way you have done
in the past. The legislation will have to proceed. You will have to
compromise. The administration's present position is unconditional extension of
MFN. A range of options before you today include what amounts to automatic
cutoff within six months, which is how I interpret some of the proposals, to
mild conditions which include also the option of presidential waiver. Somewhere
in that range, the administration and your body will in its infinite wisdom
compromise.
I have no doubt that some degree of conditionality will be attached to this
issue before it is resolved. And I would not personally object to that. I'm
not in a position today to define the details. And quite frankly, Mr. Chairman
--- and I hope you won't think this an evasion but quite frankly, I don't
think the details matter as much as it will appear to those of us arguing over
them. The issue here -- and I wish to stress it again -- is to keep
communications with the reformers, the entrepreneurs, the moderates alive, to
prevent jobs from being lost in China, which would hurt innocent Chinese
enormously, and to weaken the elements of reform.
I commend you for your efforts. I'll be happy to respond to specific questions.
There are many aspects of the situation in China today that trouble me as deeply
as they trouble everyone else on your panel who has spoken out, but I believe
that given the unique nature of the Chinese leadership today, which is
LEXIS'NEXIS' LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 28
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
indisputably the oldest leadership ever to run a major country in the world, the
best course at this time is to extend MFN either without conditions or with some
degree of conditionality which does not involve automatic cutoff, and to hope
that in that way, we strengthen the forces which all of us in this room would
hope to strengthen.
Thank you.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you very much, Mr. Holbrooke. There's probably no more
thoughtful analyst of the sometimes subterranean movement for democracy in China
than Edward Friedman, who has written with great insight and knowledge on this
question. And so we are particularly pleased to have the benefit of his
analysis and advice this afternoon.
Ed?
MR. FRIEDMAN: You are overly kind, Mr. Chairman. It's an honor to testify here
today, because the Congress of the United States has made a major contribution
to the rise of human rights on the global/political agenda, a change that saves
lives and gives hope to victims of repressive tyranny.
My testimony today is on behalf of a one-year extension of MFN with three
conditions. None constitute interference in Chinese domestic affairs. Congress
should merely ask that China, one, act as a friendly nation; two, in accord with
its international commitments; and three, with progress on human rights. The
first condition is that China stop interfering in America, that it end the
jamming of Voice of America and terminate harassment of people on America's
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
sovereign soil, including citizens of China. Second, China as a supporter of
international human rights should prove its acts are as good as its word in this
as in all realms where China's rulers seek to benefit from open participation in
the world community and world market.
The students at my University of Wisconsin suffer because Chinese officials
block travel. China's leading intellectual historian Li Zhiho (ph) has been
invited to Wisconsin to teach, but China's officials did not respond to his
request for a passport, and Professor Li was not even active in the Tiananmen
movement. He did petition the rulers to release political prisoners.
Apparently, Chinese who seek action in keeping with China's human rights
promises are punished. The burden therefore is on the government of China to
reestablish its bona fides. The government of China should provide access for
representatives of internationally recognized human rights bodies to prisoners,
trials and places of detention involving supposedly political crimes. It should
act to end uncertainties on whether political prisoner Wei Jingsheng is
receiving medical treatment, or on the fate of Wang Weilin, who peacefully one
day in June 1989 stopped a tank column in Beijing.
In addition to ending interference with American rights and demonstrating that
the word of the government of China is its bond on international human rights,
the President should ascertain and the Congress should agree that China is again
making progress on human rights. Yet it would not be helpful to write any
specific element of human rights into US law. A foreign legislature should
LEXIS NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 29
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
not legislate for China. These three conditions reflect common US concerns.
MFN is only granted to dictatorships with non-market economies on a specific
finding of an American interest by the President. This long agreed upon
practice should be applied even-handedly. It's wrong to reward China and punish
the Soviet Union if the human rights record of Moscow is consistently and
conspicuously far superior to that of Beijing.
To be sure, the human rights situation in China today is better than in 1979
when China was first granted MFN. It is better than it ever was in the Mao era.
Still, the crucial issue at each finding is the trend line. That is, is
significant progress continuing? Right now it is repression in China that is
intensifying. There are even increasing reports of midnight knocks at doors
with residents dragged away by the police. To give MFN unconditionally would
reward those who crush human rights. It's an invitation to more repression and
a spurning of popular democratic forces that reflects a stubborn refusal to
learn the lessons of sticking too long with unpopular tyrants, from Batista,
Somoza, the Shah, Marcos, and Chin Do Won (ph).
The abuse of human rights in China is increasing. Even when political prisoners
are released, they can still be exiled out of Beijing or Shanghai to a place
where they lack friends of family and where no one will hire them and where
anyone who contacts them will immediately be investigated by the secret police.
They will live as if in solitary confinement. In China life outside of prison
can be made to resemble life inside of prison. This is how the regime has
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
treated the recently released democratic activists. And I must warn the
Committee that far worse violations may be in the offing. Press reports from
China tell of the beginning of a sterilization campaign in far western provinces
of peasants who are found to be wanting in intelligence. A quarter million such
sterilizations are planned for next year. If this means massive forced
sterilization, it really is going to be a shock to the international community.
Because the human rights situation in China is 50 bad, the Congress should seek
to make sure that its voice is clear and its policy effective. The Congress
should urge the President and his Secretary of Treasury to put promoting human
rights on the agenda of the G-5 and G-7 meetings. America should coordinate its
human rights policies with the other industrialized democracies.
Japan put the matter on a G-7 meeting in Texas. In practically promoting human
rights in Asia, Washington should not dictate. A genuine cooperation between
Tokyo and Washington is needed. Global policy coordination on human rights
should be made part of the Bush administration's program for a new world order,
a more humane world order.
But does China care about human rights? Beijing declares that China will never
bow to foreign pressure, that China can do without MFN, that it is America that
will be hurt by withdrawing MFN or putting conditions on MFN. These Chinese
official utterances are actually steps in a negotiating process. China's
bargaining ploy is not its actual policy. China's concern with human rights is
a highest level matter. Numerous government institutions have been invited to
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
30
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
do research on the topic. One goal is to show that market-oriented democracies
are massive violators of human rights. Another is to claim that Leninist
dictatorships with command economies do better at preventing starvation, meeting
basic human needs, and precluding economic polarization. In addition, Chinese
values will be held up as more humane than so-called Western values.
Actually, the Chinese have long embraced the idea of ethical values in ways as
universal to all humanity. Almost 2,500 years ago in Chapter 12 of the
quote
Analects, the great ethical philosopher Confucius wrote -- or it was written,
"The master said, do not do unto others what you would not have others do unto
you. And all men are brothers."
Despite Chinese propaganda about America as an inhuman country, Chinese people
know that China's system is corrupt and unjust and requires fundamental reforms.
Despite Chinese governments claims to the contrary, Mao's China, rather than
preventing famine, actually created the most massive deadly famine in all
history, and also made for an extrordinary polarizing gap between the privileged
state and all other Chinese.
Consequently, Chinese experience guarantees that propaganda to discredit the
human rights policies of market-oriented democracies will not prevent the
Chinese people from judging the old Leninist socialist ways as immoral and
unacceptable. Outward tranquility in China hides inner turmoil. As the great
Chinese philosopher Zhuang Zi (ph) put it more than 2,000 years ago, they can
coerce the people's mouths but not their hearts.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Because of the regime's fragile support, Deng Ziaoping takes access to most
America's Most Favored Nation trading status very seriously. He is reported to
have instructed his highest-level colleagues to maintain access to the American
market, to make necessary concessions to retain MFN, but to be prepared for the
worst - that is, to seek alternatives in case of the loss of MFN. A
highest-level working group headed by Party Secretary Jiang Zemin has said to
have been established to act on Deng's instructions. Its findings are said to
be that almost 10 million jobs would be lost as well as over $10 billion a year
in foreign exchange.
To hide this deep concern, Chinese officials tell visitors that that increase in
unemployment is but a drop in the bucket and that little of the lost foreign
exchange actually ends up in Beijing. The reality, however, is that the loss of
MFN would hurt badly. Beyond the immediate economic loss, American global
prestige is such that US action on MFN could have a ripple effect. Others might
follow America's lead. Therefore, Deng Xiaoping considers compromises.
Conditionality on MFN, therefore, can work. It is Realpolitik.
The Chinese seek to replace the American market but there are no replacements.
Over the past few years, China's anti-reform leaders have tried to reverse one
good economic policy after another. Each time they shoot themselves in the
foot. So, economic reforms gradually resume. The alternative is economic
stagnation that threatens the fragile power of ruling groups. The same
consequence would follow from a search for non-existent alternatives to the
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
31
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
American market. The zigzag search for alternatives to policies that work
erodes the regime's support.
Consequently, for its own survival the Chinese government seeks open economic
expansion and access to the American market. China's economic growth is far
more dependent on trade expansion than are those of the economies of Japan or
America. China's people will suffer if the regime abandons MFN and tries to
survive by mobilizing patriotic sentiment against America for supposedly
interfering in China's internal affairs. Such a ploy risks creating an
uncontrollable situation in which even large sections of the military, already
blaming the Deng regime for its Gulf War policy and its scapegoating of the
military for the June Beijing massacre ordered by Deng, could turn against the
regime. A compromise on conditionality, therefore, is likely.
Aware of its fragile power base, the Deng regime has stepped up attempts to
reeducate officials and to remove disloyal ones, both civilian and military.
[According to ?] the official newspaper of the ruling party, it had to remove 24
of the 25 middle-level section managers in a search for loyal subordinates. The
rulers seem narrowly self-serving and incapable of the bold reforms that China
needs.
Many Chinese officials, therefore, have given up on Beijing. They put their
energies instead into facilitating the success not of the large money-losing,
outmoded, neo-Stalinist state enterprises, but into helping the new local small
and flexible enterprises attune to competitiveness in the world market. The
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
anti-reform group almost wishes MFN and openness were gone, so the economy
could be totally recentralized and their local and economically open adversary's
base of power could be undermined. That would be like killing the geese laying
the golden eggs, destroying the growth factors that maintain stability in the
society.
To stop the reform and reject conditioned MFN would alienate the Chinese
people. Yet the anti-reformers fear that continuing reform and MFN even with
conditions or without conditions strengthens their domestic adversaries. Hence,
the Deng-led coalition first halts and then restarts economic reforms. It is on
the horn of an insoluble dilemma. It seems both damned if it does and damned if
it doesn't.
Beijing is not all powerful. Its limited reach is revealed in the case of
China's exports of goods made by forced prison labor. This violation of
American law outrages American people. It crystalizes a view of the government
of China as one that gets ahead by oppressively exploiting its own people to the
detriment also of the American people. The Chinese government has to change its
reality so that its image in America changes, or many members of the Congress
simply will not risk voting for unconditional MFN for China.
And yet the issue of exporting goods made with inputs from Chinese prison labor
may be complex. My impression is that Beijing actually does not promote such
exports; that is, in fact opposes such exports; that it is truthful when it
makes this claim. But at the local level power holders try to act as if
LEXIS'NEXIS LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 32
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Beijing does not exist. This leaves the authorities in Taiwan to claim about
arms smuggling to Taiwan criminals from independent mainline military
entrepreneurs across the Taiwan straits. That corrupt and out-of-control local
security authority creates a problem for Hong Kong with car smuggling rings.
In like manner, the stories of forced prison labor that reach me tell of Chinese
speaking middle men arriving from off the Chinese mainland and then using
personal connections to make deals with prison security managers of the local
forced labor system out to enrich themselves. It's not a policy that the
central government supports or encourages. Indeed, it's an embarassment that
the center wishes to resolve.
One way to deal with this outrage is to enforce the penalties on importers of
such prison goods, to seek the cooperation of friendly governments in Asia whose
nationals are active in this illegal trade, and to share information with the
Beijing authorities who also wish to end these outrages that 50 infuriate the
American people. I think President Bush is absolutely right not to tie all
Chinese trade issues and abuses to MFN.
This local illegal economic activity reminds us of the complexity of the diverse
Chinese issues before the Congress and the wisdom needed in dealing with an odd
string of issues that misleadingly often seem like a single knotted ball.
There's no reason to think it in the interest of enhancing human rights to weigh
MFN down with impossible conditions that the Chinese government cannot meet.
The most reactionary forces in Beijing would like to tug the strings of raw
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Chinese patriotism, WOO military xenophobes, and act as defenders of Chinese
sovereignty against crude interference. They'd love to launch a "Hate American"
campaign.
The anti-reform rulers see the industrialized democracies engaged in a plot to
subvert their communist dictatorship. Too much openness and human rights seem
to them part of that subversive foreign agenda. Hence, being able to blame
America for loss of MFN will not be totally unwelcome to those dictators.
There's no point in doing them a favor and burdening MFN with onerous conditions
that legitimate a Chinese complaint of gross American interference in China's
sovereign affairs.
Hence, US policy on MFN must be balanced and nuanced, seeking both to support
human rights and to maintain an open economic policy. The US need only act on
the premises of 1979 when China was first granted MFN because it proved itself a
friendly nation, engaged in market-oriented reforms and dismantling Mao era
political inhumanities. Since then, the government of China has changed and has
abandoned these premises on which the US traditionally granted MFN status.
America, therefore, should ask only that China return to the original 1979
policy direction that won it MFN.
To facilitate this continuity, MFN should be tied only to conditions that any
Chinese government of goodwill to its people and to America can meet. China's
rule is claimed to be committed to friendship with America, to gradual
democratization, and to expanded international openness. A one-year MFN
LEXIS' NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 33
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
renewal contingent on China's merely ending interverence with VOA and refraining
from harassment of Chinese in America, on Beijing improving its bone fides on
its international human rights commitments, and on China's resuming reform in
the direction of human rights does not interfere in China's internal affairs but
challenges the Chinese government to return to norms that benefit the people of
China and advance friendly relations between our two countries.
The United States should not want to harm living standards in China. Therefore,
the United States should only ask the government of China to agree to minimal
conditions, merely the original conditions of the first granting of MFN.
America should act today as in the past to promote mutually beneficial
relations, including human rights.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you very much, Professor Friedman.
Of our next witness, it can truly be said that China's loss is America's gain.
I only hope that he one day has the opportunity, if he so chooses, to return to
the land of his birth under circumstances in which it will be possible for him
and his wife to live as free people in China.
We will now hear from Fang Lizhi, 50 please proceed, sir.
MR. FANG: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm grateful for the friendly invitation of
the United States Congress to come here to express some views on American
foreign policy.
I have noticed that the question of MFN trading status for China has aroused
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
much debate. Holders of different points of view all seem able to have
well-reasoned arguments and (impressive ?) evidence. In such a situation, it
would seem better, if we want to get at the heart of the debate, not to address
all the finer points but to turn to the question of the basic principle.
As I understand, the United States of America is a country that is dedicated to
the founding principle of human rights and the rule of law. The reason why
America is respected by many Chinese is that some of its actions accord with its
principles. It should follow that any foreign policy action by the American
authorities that employs a double standard or multiple standards violates the
founding principles that America portrays and may harm or even destroy the
respect that America enjoys in other countries.
I must say with regret that American authorities' handling of the MFN question
has indeed involved a double standard. If I am not mistaken, the American MFN
policy were (framed as ?) conditional. There were at least conditions such as
the free immigration and the ban on the import of products of forced labor.
These are human rights conditions and human rights standards. Unless a double
standard is used, it should be very clear that the MFN question for China, as
for all countries, should be judged according to human rights standards such as
this.
There should be no need for debate. The crux of the controversy is precisely
whether or not there needs to be another set of standards. I have noticed that
some politicians have used at least the following double standards. Standard
LEXIS' NEXIS LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 34
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
number one: China is already much better off than it was in 1975. This judgment
in itself is correct. The problem is that when it comes to the MFN for the
Soviet Union, the same standard is not invoked. Why does no one say the Soviet
Union today is much better off than the Soviet Union of the 1930s under the
Stalinist regime of terror?
Standard number two: Granting the MFN supports Chinese reformers. Setting aside
the complex question of whether MFN really does support the reformers, the
problem is this: why has such a question not been raised in all the years of
handling MFN for the Soviet Union? Why have Soviet Union reformers not received
this same kind of consideration?
Standard number three: If human rights conditions are attached to MFN, the
Chinese authorities will refuse to accept them; hence we must not add
conditions. If this is to be the basis for granting MFN, then the logic of MFN
will become this, that every country that does not meet human rights conditions
therefore are qualified to receive the MFN.
Condition number four: Chinese human rights standards are different from those
of other countries. To be frank, these standards are based on racial prejudice.
China and the United States are both members of the United Nations. The United
Nations declaration of human rights -- (inaudible). And besides, the human
rights do not vary with race and skin color. I am aware, of course, of some
politicians who use a double standard do so because they worry that if the MFN
question is handled poorly, China will return to a state of isolation.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
The words of the American President a few days ago that the MFN is a means to
bring the influence of the outside world to bear on China may reflect this kind
of concern. I should recognize this kind of worry is well-intentioned, and it
certainly is true that China needs more openness and more economical
developmentk. But what worries me is that worry and good intentions that lack a
principle to stand upon can sink into a kind of futile, wishful thinking.
It is worth noting that the Chinese Communist authorities have recently said
they will (not bend ?) if MFN is denied to them. This statement already assures
that there is no basis for the expectation that an unconditional granting of MFN
will help the well-intentioned people we have just mentioned to get a
well-intentioned response. Chinese history of the last 40 years or so has
demonstrated a connection of different - (inaudible) -- the inseparability of
the economy and politics. Each period of modest economic development has
coincided with the slightly more and lightly ---- (inaudible.) There is yet to be
a conqueror -- (inaudible) -- there is no precedent to show that when human
rights are most (seriously trampled ?), the economic life, the kind the people
can never -- (inaudible) -- general improvement.
Only three weeks ago, -- (inaudible) - telephone line to the home of the famous
Chinese writer, Mr. Rond Rowah (ph). Every few days, he is summoned to appear
before the police. He has recently appealed to his friend for help, complaining
that for people like us, even the right to survive is hard to come by.
It is clear that in times of high political pressure, to speak only of helping
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 35
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Chinese people economically, simply does not achieve the desired goal. There's
one major country in the world whose leader has proclaimed that they are the one
to help China economically. This country's trade with China has -- -- (inaudible)
-- that of the United States, but the prestige of the country's leaders within
Chinese public opinion really is not very high simply because they remain
unmoved by basic conditions of human rights, and want to aid China purely
economically. This kind of good intentions is either naive or hypocritical.
In sum, the question of what human rights conditions the United States should
attach to MFN is a question for domestic American politics, of which it is hard
for me to advance a specific opinion. But - (inaudible) - and especially as à
-- (inaudible) -- I do hope that American policy maker will base himself on
consistent principles and not on double-standard. This is the only way to gain
the true respect of the international community, and the only way to help
history more forward. Thank you.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you very much, Dr. Fang, for a very thoughtful statement.
We'll now hear last, but by no means, least, from Zhao Haiqing, who some of the
members will recall testified last year when our subcommittees had a similar set
of hearings.
Mr. Zhao?
MR. ZHAO: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I go on with my oral testimony --
REP. SOLARZ: If you could perhaps put the microphone a little bit closer and
speak up, everyone will be able to hear you.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
MR. ZHAO: I'd like to first meet the request to submit my written testimony into
the record.
REP. SOLARZ: Without objection, 50 ordered.
MR. ZHAO: Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, on behalf of the
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars, thank you for inviting
me to appear before you today so that I may share the views of the majority of
students and scholars studying and living in the United States.
My name is Haiqing Zhao, and I'm presently a post -- (inaudible) -- fellow in
the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Harvard University. I
also serve as chairman of the IFCSS, the national committee on Chinese student
affairs.
Now, given those two approaches, where you require significant progress in each
and every one of a half-dozen or more things that we've all mentioned -- you
know, the prisoners, the accounting, the access to the prisons, the access to
VOA, the release of the religious leaders, improvements in Tibet and the like -
or simply a generic improvement in human rights in general, letting the
President define that, which of the two approaches do you think are most likely
to get the Chinese to do the maximum of which they are capable of doing? And
this is my last question, and you are free at last. Your human rights will be
respected.
AMB. LORD: Essentially, the second approach, but I would have a slightly
different formulation. I think you can have a list of fairly specific
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 36
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
conditions or yardsticks, but you ought to be saying there ought to be
significant progress in these areas, but you should not say there has to be
major progress in every single area. You get my point. You can be specific
enough to have yardsticks, not just have a generic explanation which is too
vague, but have a formulation which allows you to use your --
REP. SOLARZ: You could say it is the objective of MFN in China to advance -- to
facilitate an improvement in these general areas, and before the President
determines whether MFN should be renewed, he would have to report to the
Congress that there has been an improvement in human rights in these areas. So
it wouldn't have to be each and every one, but it would have to be at least a
few.
AMB. LORD: That's correct.
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. Holbrooke, is that approach more suitable?
MR. HOLBROOKE: I would agree with Winston on this, but I would put far more
pressure than you have put up to now on the executive branch to use its leverage
with the Beijing government.
REP. SOLARZ: Well, if we elect a Democrat as president -- (laughter) -- then
maybe some of us will be in a position to do it.
MR. FRIEDMAN: I had three different categories, and each one gets a different
yardstick from me. Things like VOA I think of absolutes -- all. They must do
it. The things such as beginning to allow people to trials to see political
prisoners, I think of that as significant progress. And then I had a general
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
assessment one in terms of -- so I had all three because I thought different
ones --
REP. MILLER: Mr. Chairman?
REP. SOLARZ: Yes?
REP. MILLER: Just a clarification. I take it the way you lay out the two
alternatives, implicit in the more general one is there's more presidential
discretion there.
REP. SOLARZ: Right. And also implicit in the more general one is that there
doesn't have to be significant progress in each and every area. For example, if
you had significant progress in four out of the six, he could say significant
progress is being made, or if there was significant progress in three out of the
six and there wasn't backsliding in the other three. So he would be reporting
on a general trend in the human rights area. We would spell out the kinds of
specific things he should be looking at, but he would be making an overall
judgment.
The alternative to that, which is the alternative contained in the gentlewoman's
bill, as I understand it, is to lay out half a dozen or so specific areas and to
say there has to be significant progress in each of those areas. What I'm
trying to determine is which of these two generic approaches is preferred.
I gather, Mr. Friedman, you would favor the second one. In other words, you
would have to be --
MR. FRIEDMAN: I was pretty absolute on VOA.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 37
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
REP. SOLARZ: Yeah, except for VOA.
MR. FRIEDMAN: And I had a general like you did at the end for some overall human
rights findings.
REP. SOLARZ: Dr. Fang and Mr. Zhao, which of these two approaches do you prefer?
REP. MILLER: Mr. Chairman?
REP. SOLARZ: If they can just answer, and then I'll -
MR. ZHAO: First of all, I would like to clear one fact. My understanding of the
Pelosi bill is that the requirement of release of political prisoners has to be
met by the Chinese government, and the rest of the conditions must - six or
seven of them -- they don't have to meet every - each one of them, just
significant progress in general. That's my understanding. Maybe I'm wrong.
And that's why we endorse that kind of approach, because we think that Chinese
government can meet with that.
And I think -- I think that the -- see, one thing that we have to learn is the
Chinese government learned, and they became smart this year -
REP. SOLARZ: The gentlewoman will correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand
her bill, you're quite right in saying that there would have to be an accounting
of detainees and political prisoners would have to be released. But with
respect to the other criteria, there would have to be significant progress on
each and every one of them.
REP. PELOSI: Well, the discretion is with the President, and so if there were
some blatant violations in any one of those categories, that would be
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
something he'd have to weigh in making the recommendation.
REP. SOLARZ: But I think -
REP. PELOSI: But, of course we don't expect that in one year that each of those
-- that is, just to elevate them as issues of concern, but recognizing that
we're not going to achieve success ---
REP. SOLARZ: But as I understand your bill - and I recognize that this is not
necessarily a final product -
REP. PELOSI: Right.
REP. SOLARZ: But as it is written right now, in order to renew MFN, the
President would have to say that there was significant progress in each of those
areas, that if there was one area, for example, where there was clearly no
progress, that he would not under the terms of the legislation be able to renew
MFN.
REP. PELOSI: Well, Mr. Chairman, I think you would have to look at it in the
same way as you look at release the citizens who are imprisoned in connection
with the Tiananmen Square. It doesn't say all, but it doesn't mean three people
either. In other words, when you say significant progress in these areas it
means these are areas that members of Congress have concern about. Some of them
are not unrelated, in other words, ensuring access of international human rights
groups, ensuring freedom from torture --- those kind of go together. And 50 some
of the -- some of it is it's like saying I'm going in to clean the kitchen.
If you leave a filthy dirty floor, you haven't made significant progress in
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 38
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
cleaning your kitchen, even if everything else is perfectly clean. Forgive me
for using these housewife-type analogies -- (laughter) -- it's my roots -- REP.
SOLARZ: Better for you to use them than us to use them -- (chuckles).
REP. PELOSI: But I think that in the instructions as far as the bill is
concerned and report language and in who decides what -- your point is well
taken that it would have to be clear that it isn't expected to get a hundred
percent in order to have the renewal. The only category that we're absolutely
concerned about is that there be some real effort in terms of the release of
prisoners.
REP. CHRIS SMITH: I'd just like to raise the very real potential possibility
that there might be significant regression in certain areas. Say there was
advancement in three or four areas, and no progress -- but the opposite,
regression. What would the President's options be in that --
REP. SOLARZ: Well, I would -- we're not, of course, writing the legislation, but
let me say -- listening to the panel, my tentative preference would be to spell
out the kind of things we're looking at and then ask the President to make a
judgment about whether there was net progress overall, which would contemplate
the possibility of forward movement in some areas, the possibility of some
backsliding in others. But on balance, he would have to conclude that there had
been progress -- significant progress toward the achievement of human rights.
And I think such flexibility would be useful because one would not want to see a
situation where there was, say, really significant progress in six out of
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
seven areas, and then in the seventh there was maybe a little bit of
backsliding, but then have the President in a position where he had to say no
more MFN, because even though, yes, there has been great progress which we
applaud in six out of seven areas, in the seventh, I'm sorry, but they went
backwards and therefore I can't give them MFN.
REP. PELOSI: Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield.
REP. SOLARZ: Right.
REP. PELOSI: I think that you describe very well what the intention of the bill
was -- that is, that there be improvement and these are some of the kinds of
things specfically that we would like to see improvement in, to give some
guidance about what is important. And some of these items are here because they
have a strong base in the Congress among people who care very much about these
particular issues. It doesn't mean that legislation isn't the arena for
compromise, but it does mean that -- I think as you described very succinctly to
my lengthy explanation -- that we're talking about improvement in the human
rights situation in China, and these are some of the issues -- measures by which
we would measure that.
REP. GILMAN: Mr. Chairman?
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. Gilman.
REP. GILMAN: Now, Mr. Chairman, I can't quite understand how VOA is 50 absolute.
I understand the importance of VOA, and yet human rights is not that absolute,
or prison labor is not that absolute, or the number of detainees is not so
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 39
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
absolute. It seems to me that the recommendations being made on what's absolute
and what isn't seem to be far off base.
The importance of these other issues, I think, far outweigh, for example, a VOA
consideration. And it seems to me you're looking for the easiest one that they
can accommodate us on and that's going to be our criteria.
I would hope that we'll take another look at some of those recommendations, and
to also indicate that significant progress --- People's Republic of China has had
MFN since 1979. Where has been the progress? We've been shouting and objecting
to violations year after year. We talk about the support during the Iraq war
when the Post reported that an agency of the PRC sold Iraq seven tons of lithium
hydride (?). We talked about the nuclear supply to Algeria, we talked about the
missile technology to the Middle East and Pakistan. Where has been this -- any
progress with MFN? So I question whether substantial progress or whatever
terminology you want to put in is going to be of any use in dealing with this
subject.
Would you like to comment, panelists?
MR. HOLBROOKE: Let me explain why I think all of us have put VOA in a different
category, Mr. Gilman, and that is simply that it is an American - it's an
agency of the American government. We all believe that the interference, which
started since Tiananmen Square is unconscionable and unreasonable, and it is
very important that the United States' voice be heard throughout China ----
REP. GILMAN: Mr. Holbrooke, I'm not arguing the importance of the VOA, but
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
what I'm saying is you're making that absolute -- the others you just sort of
fluff off and say, well, substantial -
MR. HOLBROOKE: No --
REP. GILMAN: -- progress.
MR. HOLBROOKE: Nobody is fluffing them off, sir. We all share the same general
feeling of concern and abhorrence about events inside China in the last two
years. I believe --
REP. GILMAN: Then why not apply the same absolute standard to these other
issues?
MR. HOLBROOKE: As I think we've all said in different ways, an absolute standard
will be cutting off our nose to spite our face, that the long-run consequences
of denial of MFN will be much greater and will work against the objectives which
I think everyone on this panel shares.
AMB. LORD: I agree that these other objectives are equally important in human
terms, Mr. Congressman, but one argument for total on VOA - and it wasn't my
formulation, it was others, but I have no problem with it -- is it is
measurable. They either are jamming it or they aren't jamming it. These others
are a little bit tougher to be absolute in terms of judging just what they've
done. Don't underestimate the importance of VOA for human rights in getting the
truth to the Chinese people.
REP. SOLARZ: Let me say I think you have all made a very valuable contribution
to this debate. I think during the course of the hearing so far, we've
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
40
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
succeeded in narrowing some of the questions, certainly illuminating them,
perhaps we've even taken a step or two toward the emergence of a consensus
around here that could attract a broader base of support than some of the
polarized positions have taken.
We now have a vote in progress on the floor. I'm also concerned that if we kept
this particular panel any longer, this committee would be accused of violating
their human rights, and we might be the subject of actions by the Chinese
parliament, so we will stand in recess for about ten minutes, and then resume
with the next panel. And I do want to apologize to the -- those who have waited
patiently to testify, but this panel took longer than we anticipated, so we'll
return in about ten minutes. Our national organization represents more than
42,000 Chinese students and scholars in over 200 universities across the United
States. Our goals are to achieve respect for human rights, democratic freedoms,
and economic progress in China, and we believe the American people and their
elected officials and government share the same goals with us.
However, we were saddened and very, very disapointed by President Bush's
announcement of unconditional renewal of the Most Favored Nation status to
China. Why? The reason is not because of the simple fact of renewal, rather,
it is the fact that he did not attach any human rights conditions to the renewal
of MFN to China, and that sends a wrong message to both the Chinese government
and the Chinese people. To the Chinese government, that means that their brutal
reppression of human rights and democracy can go on unquestioned and
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
unchallenged. To the Chinese people, that means their effort of fighting and
daring their lives for freedom, democracy, and human rights are not fully
supported by the American people.
We agree with the President that China shuld not be isolated. In fact, we are
the last ones who want to see China isolated. If the President has argued that
it is for financial and economic reasons that the US government should grant MFN
to China, we may not agree - and we don't think the American people would agree
-- but at least we could understand that is the President's judgement on the
issue. But saying it is moral to renew MFN without attaching any human rights
conditions while so many young Chinese students died and many many more are in
prison today, and saying that position reflects the American position on this
issue makes us feel nothing but sad and abandoned.
I heard that the President wept when he read about the human rights abuses in
Kuwait. What about the humnan rights abuses and the people of China? Are the
Chinese people any less human than others around the world, or for whom America
had stood on principle? We believe it is immoral to renew MFN while ignoring
the gross human rights abuses in China, and we think the only credible approach
right now is to impose human rights conditions on the renewal of MFN. Those
conditions will require the Chinese government first to release political
prisoners; second, to improve the most fundamental human rights such as the
freedom of speech, assembly and association; third to stop harrassment and
intimidation of Chinese nationalists residing in this country.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
41
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Specifically, we support Representative Nancy Pelosi's legislation, HR. 2212,
that establishes key human rights conditions which should be satisified in order
for MFN status to be granted to China in June of 1992. And I have a letter here
signed by many Chinese intellectuals, and some of them are former advisors in
the Chinese government and Chinese student leaders here, endorsing the Nancy
Pelosi bill on conditional renewal. I request that you submit it to record.
Furthermore, it is our best judgement that the Chinese government will in the
end respond to human rights conditions outlined in the Pelosi legislation. In
fact this bill simply requires that the Chinese government returns to the paths
of economic and political reform that they were on in 1986 and 1987.
Imposing human rights conditions on the continuation of MFN status for China
does more than pressure the Chinese government to improve its human rights
record. It also provides an opportunity and reinforces the moderates' ability
to argue and challenge in the internal debate that brutal repression has
external costs. While it is the massacre in Tiananmen Square that exposed the
brutality of the current Chinese regime against its own people, it is the
continued violation of the most basic human rights in the last two years that
brings us before you today. The brutality of this regime has been demonstrated
over and over again, and the cases for condemnation since 1989 have only become
stronger. The list of human rights violations is so lengthy that I could spend
the entire time allocated for this hearing just reviewing them.
But of particular concern to us are the harsh sentences imposed upon leading
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
activists earlier this year. The persecution of these dissidents cannot go
unheeded. These are the same individuals we watched on our television sets and
cheered on. Wang Zhintao (ph) and Chin Zemin (ph) are the heroes of us who seek
democracy in our homeland, and both of them are sentenced -- were sentenced for
30 years in prison just two months ago and it's our obligation to bring these
prisoners before you today, so that they can be seen as living, breathing
individuals, whose only crime was to non-violently express their desire for
better conditions in their country.
China has a history of human rights abuses of which the massacre at Tiananmen is
the most recent. However, it was the results in Tiananmen in June 1989 that
made the American people aware of the magnitude of such abuses and which sparked
the momentum for calls that the US should do something about it. In the
post-Cold War era, the '90s should be the decade where human rights
considerations are at the forefront of the free world's dialogue with all Asian
nations.
In the past, the United States administration has relied upon Chinese assurances
on emigration when extending the Jackson-Vanik waiver in order to grant MFN
status to China. In light of China's institution of harsher emigration
standards since June 1989, those assurances have proved to be untrustworthy.
They have just instituted new criteria for people to export from China, the new
export and exit criteria. Such criteria focuses upon the political orientation
of the applicant in relation to Communist Party principles.
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
42
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
During last year's hearing on the MFN before the House Ways and Means Committee,
Deputy Secretary of State Eagleburger testified that "emigration from the
People's Republic of China in our judgment is relatively free," unquote. This
statement is based on the fact that the US emigration quota for China is filled
each year. This is indeed a unique and troublesome statement. What the State
Department is arguing is that in fact it doesn't matter that China does not have
free emigration policy, as long as they let enough people to fill the US quota.
For a country of 1.2 billion, that's not difficult to do.
Chinese documents obtained and released by Asia Watch detail a policy that uses
forced labor for the production of goods that are exported to Western countries,
including the United States. In some cases, it is jailed Tiananmen
demonstrators that are required to take part in this production. It is
incomprehensible for us that international business interests in some cases
knowingly participate in such degradation, in spite of US law prohibiting such
products from being imported.
While it is the position of our organization that China's MFN status should not
be revoked at this time, we would like to dispute the disastrous predictions by
US and Hong Kong business interests of the effect on Hong Kong of revocation.
It is exactly the fear of crisis of confidence caused by Tiananmen Square
massacre that will bring the disastrous result for the Hong Kong and other
international business. We believe that the business community, in focusing
their concerns on the crisis of confidence that will occur if revocation or
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
imposition of conditions is enacted, has set their sights on the wrong target.
The crisis of confidence was triggered by the Tiananmen massacre, and it's
reinforced by Beijing's continuing political repression and orthodox Marxist
policies.
To restore confidence in Hong Kong, one must look for ways to encourage a change
in Beijing's policies. Matters that do nothing to challenge the present
developments in China and would rather focus on maintaining business as usual in
the short term most assuredly will not restore confidence in Hong Kong.
Imposing human rights conditions on the continuation of China's MFN status is a
modest but important step, and it's not severe or drastic as business interests
try to argue. It is not revocation. It does not isolate China, but rather
engages China in an important dialogue, the result of which will be to bring
them closer to the community of nations.
The United States should play a leading role in championing the rights of
people, not just of sovereignty. Wang Juntao, the founder and the leader of the
movement, was sentenced and his wife was also sentenced early and released
later. In her letter, released to the West, she said, "Your interest in our
plight is a call for justice, a solid example that people will stand up for
international laws and human rights." When I was discharged from prison and
found that no one in China dared speak up for Wang Juntao and Chen Zeming I
decided to do it myself. It was like throwing a pebble into the water and
watching the ripples spread. I realized that I can do very little on my own.
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 43
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
I find myself alone facing an overwhelming Chinese government.
We should try our best to save those who are now suffering and now in prison.
To remain quiet is equal to silently endorsing those brutal policies. We ask
members of Congress to heed the words of Juntao's wife -- her name is Hu
Shaotien (ph) -- and support the Chinese people in their quest for human
liberty. America and its democratic system is a beacon of hope for millions of
Chinese citizens.
We are not here before you to seek punishment for those who committed sins
against their own people. Rather, we seek your assistance in pressuring the
Chinese government --- unresponsible (sic/may mean "unresponsive") to the pleas
of its own people --- to seek the release of those who are still suffering today
and to make progress in internationally recognized human rights in China.
Thank you.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you very much. And let me thank all of you for some very
thoughtful presentations.
Mr. Gejdenson?
REP. GEJDENSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me start with Mr. Holbrooke and
try in a broad, general way to ask a question of you. What message do we send
to the Soviet Union? If you're sitting inside the Politburo now and there's a
tug of war between the forces of reform and the forces that are saying, "Let's
go back to the good old days. Under Brezhnev, you know, at least the lines had
order to them." I mean, if I'm on that side of the debate wouldn't you be
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
saying -- I'd say to the reformers, "Look, look what's happening in China, that
the United States is going to go for what's expedient for the United States.
The Chinese students were crushed, they're getting MFN. You know, when they
want to help you, they help you and when they don't, they don't."
It's got nothing to do with what happens internally, that the Soviet Union has
given Soviet Jews the ability to emigrate, they've reformed, they're moving
towards reform, they're trying to resolve the differences among the Baltic
states and all their other -- and we're saying, "One more hoop each time. One
more hoop for the Soviet Union, and then MFN. The Soviet Union -- in China,
kill as many as you want.
Now, it seems to me that those kinds of actions, the actions before August 2nd
with Saddam Hussein, send a terrible message around the world, that if it's
important to the United States, kill as many as you want, do whatever you want,
we're not going to respond. Isn't that what your position argues for in a
sense?
MR. HOLBROOKE: Mr. Chairman, first of all, I don't think our policy towards the
Soviet Union ought to be made in Beijing, nor do I think our policy towards
China ought to be made in Moscow. In regard to MFN for the Soviet Union, I
cannot for the life of me understand why it's still denied to the Soviet Union.
We are talking here -- not in this committee but elsewhere -- about massive
economic assistance to the Soviet Union, money that could be used more
effectively in many other areas domestically and internationally.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 44
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
While denying the Soviet Union most-favored-nation, which as we all understand
really is by and large the normal tariff rate for most countries, and denying
them a chance on the margin to improve their own economy by allowing them to do
something which they now have merited under any interpretation of the law. So
although your question is well phrased, it doesn't represent my view, nor do I
wish to defend the administration's performance in regard to Iraq prior to
August 2nd of last year, which in my view, we took actions which encouraged
those things.
However, bad as the human rights situation is in China, I don't think it can be
compared to the situation that existed in Iraq in those days. And I want to
return to my central theme, at the risk of repeating myself. While I agree with
Professor Friedman and Voice of America, and I think that a lot of the points
here have been very clearly stated, I do not believe that the objective you have
stated, and which I share, will be furthered by denial of MFN to China.
REP. GEJDENSON: Aren't we then saying -- aren't we then saying that we have this
separate standard for Chinese, that in Western Europe where white people live --
and I know that's not your view, but, you know, in Western Europe, we have white
people; we want them to have democracy; and we go to pretty strong lengths to
make sure it gets democratic -- in Eastern Europe. Thank you. In China, well,
it's China; it's different. I mean, is there another explanation as to why our
standard is so much lower in China?
MR. HOLBROOKE: Well, I don't think we did enough to encourage democracy in
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Eastern Europe and other parts of the world in recent years --
REP. GEJDENSON: Well, if you don't think we did enough there -- let me interrupt
you because I'm out of time and want to ask one other question here before I
lose all my time. If we didn't do enough in Eastern Europe, then how do you put
on the scale of doing nothing in China, which is give them MFN; don't basically
complain too loudly; and hopefully, these guys will die.
MR. HOLBROOKE: Mr. Chairman, I'm not saying do nothing in China. I'm saying
that MFN is not the vehicle to achieve your objective, which I share.
REP. GEJDENSON: What are the vehicles? What are the vehicles?
MR. HOLBROOKE: Excuse me?
REP. GEJDENSON: What are the vehicles?
MR. HOLBROOKE: I think the administration has set itself up as the public
relations agent for the PRC, which is a huge mistake. I think we are trying to
give them credit where they deserve very little credit, in places like Cambodia
and the Gulf. We are not making enough of an effort on nuclear proliferation,
their assistance to the Algerians, their sales of weapons in the Mideast. These
are bilateral issues on which the administration has not taken sufficient --
REP. GEJDENSON: But the bottom line is they haven't done anything there. They
haven't done anything on human rights. This is our opportunity to make a
statement, and your position is we shouldn't do anything --
MR. HOLBROOKE: Mr. Chairman, it may feel good in this body to make a statement,
but it will not result in the objective you seek. If it did, I would support
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
45
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
you.
REP. GEJDENSON: All right. Thank you.
MR. HOLBROOKE: And I believe, with deference to Mr. Fang Lizhi, if I understood
his position correctly, he does not disagree. He's not arguing for a cutoff,
and I would defer to him as the leading expert on this issue.
REP. GEJDENSON: Let me ask him. Let me ask him two quick questions. One is, if
we leave things as we are, if the President says we have to go forward with MFN,
if we don't take any other actions, which we appear not to be taking, serious
actions about the Chinese situation, in my opinion, what happens when, as Mr.
Holbrooke waits for this octogenarian leadership to die off, are we suddenly
confronted with an open, liberal regime that follows them? I mean, is it only
these handful of 80-year-olds that stands between liberalization in China and
the present status?
And I guess -- and let me just add to that. Doesn't what we do now send a
signal for those below?
MR. FANG: I think the history since Tiananmen Square already shows the result.
Even should you renew MFN, unconditionally renew the MFN, then they do nothing
-- almost nothing -- in the last two years. Of course, on the surface, they did
something. But, in fact, you know, the circumstance, the situation in China now
is the same as two years ago. So, this is the result. So, this is -- if you
want to help Chinese to go ahead, both economically and politically, you should
have the conditional MFN.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
REP. GEJDENSON: Conditions on MFN? If they don't meet the conditions on human
rights, no MFN? Is that correct? Is that your position?
Mr. Holbrooke, are you still deferring to Dr. Fang? (Laughter.)
MR. FANG: You know, if there is no approach (with ?) condition, then why you
still support such a dictatorship is the question.
REP. GEJDENSON: Thank you.
MR. FANG: The same as the question for the Soviet Union.
REP. SOLARZ: The gentleman from Iowa, Mr. Leach.
REP. JIM LEACH (R-IA): I thank the gentleman.
Let me just clarify for a second -- I mean, a personal perspective. I agree
with Mr. Holbrooke very thoroughly that Congress and the Executive branch are a
little bit different, and therefore ought to have a little different emphasis.
And I think it's appropriate for Congress to make very clear certain human
rights kinds of views with an extension of MFN. But I -- and I would also say
that I think the tenor of Mr. Friedman, Mr. Holbrooke and Mr. Lord's statements
is exactly right and about the general framework of such conditions as well as
the possibility of an executive branch waiver.
And so my hope is that we can have a general kind of circumstance that isn't
pushed so far that it isn't actively - and I stress this partisan sense -- veto
seeking instead of a framework which is cooperative with the administration.
I would like just briefly 50 that we have this on the record, Mr. Friedman has
testified that basically the human rights condition in China is somewhat
LEXIS' NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 46
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
better than when MFN was first extended under President Carter. Would you agree
with that, Mr. Holbrooke and Mr. Lord?
MR. HOLBROOKE: MFN was extended in August of 1979. On the trend line from there
to today, it is correct, that it is better, although as Mr. Friedman has pointed
out, if you look at the trend line more closely, it has been worse in the last
two years.
REP. LEACH: Would you agree with that also, Mr. Lord?
AMB. LORD: Yes. It is better than '79 but worse, of course, than two years ago.
But I agree with Mr. Friedman's main point and that is it's the trend that
counts. And I suggested in my statement, while I think things have gotten worse
in the last even the last year, let alone the --
REP. LEACH: I concur on that completely. I don't think there's any
differentiation on that subject.
Do you -- I mean, we all know if we go back in our history, I mean, that several
things have stood out in the United States policy. One, we stood for the open
door, and that implied opening China to the West. In addition, for a number of
years very progressive elements in American society pressed for normalization of
what might be considered political relations. Now there seems to be some
movement in progressive circles to seek for the end of normalization in terms of
economic relations, which is what MFN is all about.
Now, in a structural way, is that inconsistent with the open door? Is it
consistent with seeking normalization of political relations, to seek an end
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
to what might be described as normal trade relations or normal economic
relations? Does that strike you as a reasonable kind of description of the
circumstance?
AMB. LORD: Well, I testified, as you know, to say that we should have
humanitarian conditions, so I would hope we could renew it again because China
has made progress on human rights. But I do think we have to keep in mind both
political and economic progress. I think we've seen around the world,
particularly the last couple years, that they must go together.
REP. LEACH: I appreciate that. Would you more address the question, if you
could, Mr. Holbrooke? I mean --
MR. HOLBROOKE: The -- without referring to the open door, which I interpreted
more as an imperialism disguised in the rhetoric of the turn of the century, our
objective, it seems to me, remains the same, Mr. Leach, that we seek to develop
relations with the People's Republic across a broad spectrum.
REP. LEACH: Fair enough. Well, I - maybe I asked a question that wasn't easy
to respond to. I didn't mean to be convoluted.
But let me just say in this sense, it looks like if we look at history in just
two or three or four decades, no longer than that, that most Western efforts to
open China up have received kind of a liberalizing response. Most Western
efforts to isolate China seem to have affected a kind of xenophobic harsher kind
of response. Is that a fair conclusion from the last 3 or 4 decades?
MR. FRIEDMAN: I think the view you just stated -- that when America has put
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
47
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
pressure, China has been more xenophobic; when America has been more open, China
has been more giving -- is a view shared by many specialists in the field. I
believe it's totally wrong. Most -- I say in advance I don't want to make --
REP. LEACH: Sure.
MR. FRIEDMAN: -- but most people, I think, in the field would agree with you.
Let me explain why I don't, if I may. I actually think Chinese policy is made
inside of China first and foremost for domestic Chinese reasons. And the Mao
policy of closing off to the world and trying to build an autarchic kind of war
communism came out of this entire experience of life and history and so on, and
was only at the margin, at most, influenced by the United States. And we all
know that the marginal propensity is all we have.
REP. LEACH: I appreciate that. Let me ask just one final question, Mr. Fang.
And let me say both about you and Mr. Zhao that one of the interesting aspects
of President Bush's policy is that, I mean, there's no person residing in the
United States who is more indebted in a way to Mr. Bush's diplomacy than you,
Mr. Fang. And yet -- and also, in terms of Mr. Zhao and the Chinese student
movement, the President has made it very clear that they will be protected as
long as you're on these shores. And yet, I must say that one of the great
hallmarks of the American system, that it's wonderful that two people that in a
sense owe something to the President have come here and criticized his policy.
And that is welcome, it's the American way, and you should be free to do that.
Now, having said that, Mr. Fang, in a August 1990 article in the Far Eastern
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Economic Review, you said, "The most important thing now is not to isolate
China. Instead, we should be strengthening all kinds of external links ---
economic, cultural, scientific, educational." Do you still agree with that kind
of statement?
MR. FANG: Sure.
REP. LEACH: And as I read your own statement today, which is a little bit
elliptic, one could argue you're really stressing that we should cut MFN for
China or that we should give it to the Soviet Union. And I don't know which way
you want to read it, but I mean, it was a double standard kind of statement.
All I can say is, I certainly support extending MFN at this time to the Soviet
Union. I think it's the wise course of action to do. Let us presume we do
extend it to the Soviet Union, does that imply in your mind that we shouldn't be
cutting it off for China, or that we should cut it off for China?
MR. FANG: Of course, I agree. We should keep open the China. But, I -- you
know, if you're looking back for the history, your policy to the Soviet Union
already led the Soviet Union to change, and change both politically and
economically. Even, they already passed the law of free emigration. So, this
means your success. Why you choose a different policy to China? You know, you
(ought to assure ?) that success before you choose another one. And just to
mention the last two years, I know President Bush want to help the Chinese
people - I know that. But, you know, the response from China authorities is
not so good -- already showed that. So, this means, sure, your policy is not
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
48
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
50 successful like your policy to the Soviet Union. So, this means not - we
need both open. You know, openness means it's politically and economically.
REP. LEACH: Sure enough. I appreciate that. Thank you. My time has expired.
Let me just say very briefly in conclusion. Basically speaking, I favor
extending Most Favored Nation treatment so that we can help the people against
the government, not defend the government against the people. And I think that
is a general kind of judgmental perspective, perhaps with a kind of
conditionality, as elaborated by Ambassador Lord and Mr. Holbrooke and Mr.
Friedman. But, I think it should be clear that there is sheer consensus in this
country of disappointment -- and I'm sure I speak for the executive branch as
well -- about some of the policies that eventuated in the last few years in
China. Thank you.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you. Mr. Weiss.
REP. TED WEISS (D-NY): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First, let me
apologize for coming in late, but I've had a chance I think to review most of
the testimony. I wonder, Mr. Fang and Mr. Zhao especially, I know that you
aware of the fact that there continues to be in Congress a very deep concern
about the status of political prisoners, prisoners of conscience. Mr. Miller
and I, in conjunction with Asia Watch, have an "Adopt a Prisoner" program, and
there are 70 members of the House of Representatives who have joined as
participants in that effort. Can you tell us something about what is going on,
what the current situation appears to be in China? Do you see a movement
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
toward liberalization toward improvement of treatment of prisoners or their
families or the press? What's happening in China currently?
MR. ZHAO: Since the Tiananmen massacre, our observation is that the hardliners
in the Chinese government, they fear the fact that they are responsible for the
massacre, and the only thing they care is to hold on power. And as a
consequence, what they did was they try to crush anything that they feared that
might cause trouble, and particularly that was targeted on the students and
particularly some of the student activists. As I mentioned in the testimony,
some of the leaders are sentenced recently to up to 13 or 15 years in prison.
And now I think one of the arguments some people in the panel has argued is that
the Chinese government won't respond to the foreign pressure and they have a
history of limited response to the foreign pressure. And I don't quite agree
with that, because look at what happened last year. Yes, Chinese may have a
history of not responding to foreign pressure 30 years ago, 20 years ago, but
recently, especially after the open door policy -- for example, last year, it
was exactly the debate in the Congress in the US on MFN that caused the Chinese
government to release several hundred political prisoners and eventually they
released Dr. Fang Lizhi in order to gain the international image that their
improvement of human rights and to gain the MFN.
In that sense, we think -- and that's our judgment -- if the measure is well
thought and reasonable, the Chinese government will comply to the human rights
conditions.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS`NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 49
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
REP. WEISS: Mr. Fang?
MR. FANG: I share his opinion. You know, I just want to tell you some of the
reasons [for] the current situation in China, just as we mentioned many times
about isolation. You know, these things are done, not by outside, by the
authorities themselves. For instance, you know, before the Tiananmen massacre
for us as a scientist, we can submit all paper to outside [to be] published.
Now, if we want to submit any scientific article to publish outside, we should
have the two ---- need twice permission. You know, once from the university,
second from province authorities. So they want to cut off all the connections.
So this, they do it themselves. So, this means to (result ?) a change the
political restraints, you just have economically, I think that you can't get
such results.
REP. WEISS: I'm going to ask a question that my colleague Mr. Foglietta wanted
to ask, but he had leave for another meeting. He says that there have been
interviews in China with even dissidents who have said, "No, don't cut off Most
Favored Nation treatment because that would tend to work against us, the people,
rather than the leadership." How widespread is that feeling and how much credit
should one give to that?
MR. ZHAO: First of all, I think there is a misunderstanding even in the press
that in China not many people know about MFN. If you ask ordinary, not many
people even know what MFN is. And second - and I think that's particularly
important, is they don't distinguish there's a conditionality involved. They
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
always think, "Well, it's either cutoff or it's renewal." In that sense, they
prefer to keep the contact. And that's also exactly our judgment to have
conditions imposed on the renewal of MFN. If you ask ordinary Chinese people,
if they knew they have all the conditions like what we discussed today, they
knew all the facts, I'm sure they will choose the conditions -- impose the human
rights conditions on the renewal of MFN. And that's what the majority of
people, the Chinese people living in this country, prefer.
REP. WEISS: Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you, Mr. Weiss. Mr. Miller?
REP. MILLER: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I want to take up where my colleague from New
York Mr. Weiss left off on human rights, he and I co-chair a Chinese prisoner of
conscience program in the Congress where members of Congress have tried to adopt
individuals imprisoned. And I want to go back to this -- while looking at the
human rights situation, I want to go back to this trend question. I heard
general agreement that the human rights situation was better today than in '79,
but worse than two years ago. Well let me add to that then. What about one year
ago? Does anybody on the panel believe that the human rights situation in China
is better today than when MFN was unconditionally extended a year ago? Anybody?
Yes, Ambassador Lord?
AMB. LORD: I don't believe it. But I wanted to make the argument why it's
gotten worse, if you'd like --
REP. MILLER: Okay.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 50
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
AMB. LORD: -- because I think it has gotten worse in the past year. Now I used
in my own testimony "overall situation." There have been some token moves, as I
said, but the overall trend, in my view, has been worse.
First of all, it's been another year in jail for thousands of Chinese. Many
still have not even been brought to trial or haven't even been charged yet.
Others have disappeared. And this is after two years of detention. And the
workers in particular are getting no attention at all from the world community.
You've had a series in the past year of farcical trials, secret trials,
ridiculous sentences. You've had the families of these dissidents badly
treated. And themselves -- even those who get out, as was pointed out in other
testimony --- I think Mr. Friedman -- they're really in prison even though
outside prison.
Another example, Mr. Zhao mentioned the fate of the two intellectuals who got 13
years. The lawyers who defended those intellectuals and actually tried to mount
a somewhat credible defense, unlike usually what you're allowed to do in China,
have lost their ability to practice law now because they chose to defend these
people. Just to cite that one example. Tibet appears to be even more
controlled. Other signals are mixed, but the essential trends that I sketched
in my statement have continued for another year. I would say the attacks on
Western values have become more shrill. And there's certainly been more
restrictions on trade, to take an economic issue. And the --
REP. MILLER: More restrictions on trade?
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
AMB. LORD: Absolutely. I mean, our imports went down -- I mean our exports to
China last year went down 17 percent. It's the only major market in the world
--
REP. MILLER: Because of specific actions taken by the Chinese government?
AMB. LORD: Absolutely, yes. While their exports went up to us. So I'm just
listing a series of pieces of evidence that, despite some token moves, the
overall situation has gotten worse and the big lie continues with justifications
even in recent weeks for Tiananmen Square and what's been happening since.
REP. MILLER: Does anybody on the panel - does anybody on the panel -- can
anybody on the panel cite an area, whether it's trade and economics, human
rights, military, diplomatic, can anybody cite an area where from our
perspective the situation has significantly improved in the last year since the
unconditional extension of MFN?
Yes, Mr. Friedman?
MR. FRIEDMAN: The situation has improved in two ways. First of all, in those
regions of the country most tied into the world market the economic boon is
mind-blowingly fast. The Province of Guangdong grows at a faster rate than any
part of the world as far as we can tell, and it is transforming life in
extraordinary ways.
Secondly, one of the consequences of the democracy movement of 1989 was that
people discovered essentially that all their workers, fellow workers and
neighbors agreed with them, that they all knew the regime was useless. The
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 51
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
result of that, there is an extraordinary growth now of informal human contacts,
of people helping each other, of meeting at homes, of all sorts of family
lineage, religious, commercial -- that is, there is another life which is
growing in China which in many ways is -- it's not because of government policy.
Beijing deserves no credit for it. Nonetheless, those things really are
occurring.
REP. MILLER: Let me -- if I have time to ask one more question. Mr. Holbrooke,
when Mr. Gejdenson asked you about vehicles there was one vehicle you didn't
mention, and nobody has commented on this.
We've all looked at what the US -- how the US government can influence the
Chinese government, but nobody has commented on how the US government can
influence the US business community. And this House of Representatives, a year
ago, by an overwhelming vote -- it was something like 410 to 6 -- adopted a
proposal that I made that US businesses be asked by the US government --- that
is, US businesses in China -- be asked by the US government to observe certain
principles of conduct, such as not buying goods from slave labor camps, such as
not allowing political harassment on the premises. These principles were
certainly not original with me. They were originally created by Reverend
Sullivan, and this Congress applied them to South Africa, and then a Soviet
Jewish emigre, Slepak, altered them for the Soviet Union. But nonetheless, this
House adopted a variation for China. It was only adopted by this House. The
administration did not, in my view unfortunately, did not support it and 50 it
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
never became law.
I'd be interested in any comments that members of the panel have in terms of
either this specific approach or what US businesses in China today could do to
improve the long-term political and human rights situation. And maybe I should
start at that end of the table this time, because this end of the table jumps in
faster when we ask questions. Do either of you gentlemen want to comment?
MR. ZHAO: Yeah. I'm not a business expert, but I think mainly from the view of
human rights and the general political situation in China, we definitely support
-- as you know, we supported your bill last year for the business conduct in
China. And we think it's important -- we don't think it's right -- or it's
right to cut off business contacts with China at this time. But at the same
time, we think it's important for the business community to recognize the basic
human rights. I mean, it's up to the job of the Congress or the business
community to clarify what exactly the contacts are, but I think in principle
they ought -- for example, the forced labor issue, that the business should not
encourage or [be] involved in any kind of factory products that use forced labor
to export.
REP. JOHN MILLER: Anybody else want to comment on that issue?
MR. HOLBROOKE: I would commend you for the resolution you put in last year. I
think that any American businessmen working in China should adhere to those. As
far as the export of the products of forced labor, I must confess, like
Professor Friedman, I don't see it as a pattern of the government but as
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 52
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
something which probably occurs in isolated areas, and it must be resisted. And
I would consider it a rather clear-cut issue that goes far beyond the more
nuanced issues that we've been talking about earlier. And I think it's -- I
commend you for keeping it in the forefront of our attention as an additional
but somewhat separate issue.
American businessmen around the world face the same problems as they do in
China. Other countries play games and accept standards which Americans should
not. This is a standard problem. You're very familar with it. It happens in
China, where the Japanese tend always to out-compete us and always ignore all
these factors, while we're somewhat torn on the horns of this dilemma. But I
think it's vital that we, as businessmen, and I speak here as someone who works
in China on business things, pay particular attention to these issues.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you very much, Mr. Miller.
Mr. Smith.
REP. CHRIS SMITH (R-NJ): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
My first question I'd to address to Mr. Fang Lizhi. The essential theme of your
testimony is your regret over the double standard in analyzing renewal of MFN,
and I know in previous occasions you have raised this double standard in the
larger context as to how it applies to human rights. And I think you argue very
persuasively that consistent principles, not double standards, ought to be the
norm applied by our government and perhaps any other government.
In like manner, I regret that there appears to be a double standard on the
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
part of some as to which human rights are focused upon and which are ignored,
and in some cases which human rights are actually whitewashed. I speak here of
the issue of China's coercive population control program and its heavy reliance
on forced abortion and forced sterilization, which this House, the House of
Representatives, on two separate occasions condemned as crimes against humanity,
remembering that forced abortion against Polish women were so cited during the
Nuremberg war trials.
I am very -- I regret to point out that there are some, like the United Nations
Population Fund and its director, Dr. Zadik, who has gone on national
television, the CBS "Night Watch" program for one, and on other occasions as
well, and said that the program is purely voluntary. In my meetings with Li
Peng and Peng Peyiung, the head of the state family planning program in China,
in Beijing, we heard the same kind of line, both me and -- Congressman Frank
Wolf and I.
Dr. Ehrde (ph), and it's a book I would recommend to all members interested in
Chinese human rights, recently published a book called "Slaughter of the
Innocents: Coercive Birth Control in China," in which he states very succinctly,
"The Chinese program remains highly coercive not because of local deviations
from central policies but as a direct inevitable and intentional consequence of
those policies," closed quote.
Dr. Fang, I would appreciate your comments on this issue as it relates to not
only MFN issue but also the general issue of human rights and those that have
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
53
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
not been emphasized as they ought to.
MR. FANG: I'm not expert of this area, but in my view, you know, because China
has a population problem and the people also know we have such a problem, we
should solve that. So then I think that (partly ?) some people is really --
they do abortion and the like. But, you know, even in China newspaper they
mention some of the forced abortion, yeah, in the China news. So there are just
some. They mention even in some of the official newspaper.
REP. JOHN MILLER: Yeah. Mr. Zhao -- or would anyone else like to address that
issue?
MR. ZHAO: You know, I agree with Dr. Fang that it's that even the Chinese
government publicly sometimes in the newspaper you can see there are forced
abortion quite widespread. But at the same time there are some people who are
voluntarily going onto abortion. Yes.
REP. JOHN MILLER: I'd like you to address a second question, and that deals with
the issue of religious freedom. In some of the provinces there have been new
regulations promulgated that are even more severe than current regulations, and
we understand that a new draft law on religion is being contemplated in Beijing.
I was wondering if any of you have -- speaking of the trend line which was
discussed at length earlier -- what direction is China going with regards to
religious crackdowns? Are they looking at what has happened in Eastern Europe
and perhaps saying when religious freedom occurs also the winds of further
democratization are not far behind? Is that something that is a correct
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
analysis? And Ambassador Lord, you might want to speak to that.
AMB. LORD: I'm frankly not familiar with what they're contemplating any new
legislation on religious freedom. It is one area where they got somewhat
better conditions, certainly since the '60s, over the '70s and '80s. It has
regressed, along with other aspects of China the past two years. But I think as
in 50 many other cases in China -- and Mr. Friedman's made this point - there's
a great variation by province, by locality, depending on how enlightened and how
humane the local officials are and whether they can ignore hardline edict. So
you may get some Beijing regulations coming out on this issue like on many
others, but they will be tempered in various regions. You really have to take
it almost province by province.
But, to get to your larger question, although they don't have the nationalities
problem of the Soviet Union, the Chinese nevertheless are concerned about such
areas as the Muslim, Western provinces, and Tibet. And it's there, of course,
that the restrictions on religion are particularly tight. The hardliners are
looking very carefully at what's happening in the Soviet Union and in Eastern
Europe, and one reason why it's important that those experiments toward the
greater freedom economically and politically succeed is not only for the peoples
in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, but the impact it will have on the
internal debate within China.
REP. JOHN MILLER: Yes. Mr. Friedman.
MR. FRIEDMAN: I recently visited a Taoist monastary in China, and I asked them
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 54
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
the kind of questions -- the young monks that I met there -- that you just asked
me. And at that particular place I think -- and what I could 522 with my eyes
--- you were seeing young monks where previously you didn't have them. They were
getting more contributions than they knew what to do with, which I -- that is
certainly a change from a pervious period of time.
What it reflected is there really has been a tremendous religious renaissance
all over China. In a situation in which the government is essentially
illigitimate and economic outlets for many people are still constrained, one of
the private realms in which many human beings - I almost want to say a
majority, but no statistics exist, but I'd be willing to bet that -- have put
their energies has been religion.
And here's where we get to your point. We really do know that the most
reactionary members of the old guard in Beijing have been scared by this. We do
know that they have commented upon that in many villages in rural China the
local religious temples and sects are now more legitimate, and the party can't
do anything without their approval. And so the evidence we have suggests that
what you say does reflect a highest level concern of the most reactionary old
guard members, very frightened of the spread of popular religion all over China.
REP. CHRISTOPHER SMITH: May I ask one final question, Mr. Chairman? Chinese
officials state that there are approximately 1.1 million inmates in labor reform
facilities, and over 100,000 in labor reeducation camps, and I wonder if you can
tell us, anyone on the panel, if you consider those figures to be accurate,
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
and what your view is on the Business Week article of April 22nd, which
chronicled the "ugly secret", as they called it, with regards to convict labor
making its way into the United States?
Anyone on the panel who would like to speak to that issue?
MR. FANG: It is difficult to say how the total number of the political
prisoners. I just want to say if we can find a ratio. I got a letter from my
former friend who still remains in China. He tell me, among all (common friends
?) that 30 percent have been arrested after Tiananmen massacre.
REP. SMITH: Mr. Friedman?
MR. FRIEDMAN: Well, I'll do part of the question for you. Even before China
opened up, prison labor goods were sold in China. In fact, one of the most
famous brands in China, Shin-chung (ph), "new life", was a prison force labor
product, that the disorder that Mao had created in the economy was such actually
that prison labor was a higher quality good than many goods you could get, and
it was a brand actually in high demand in many parts of China.
So before opening up, we know as a fact that prison labor was pervasively sold
in the Chinese economy. Then everything, Win Lord just said, gets added on to
that. Everybody is under local pressure to enrich themselves or gain foreign
exchange. Unless the central government has a way of cracking down on it, there
are surely lots of people acting based on something which had been in the system
for a long, long time, and these outrages occur in, I think, larger numbers than
WE are yet aware of.
LEXIS NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 55
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
REP. SMITH: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you, Mr. Smith.
The gentleman from New York, Mr. Gilman.
REP. GILMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be brief. I'd like to ask Dr. Lizhi
and Mr. Zhao, they have indicated that there ought to be some conditionality.
What conditions would you like to see imposed on any MFN? Do you have any
specific recommendations?
MR. ZHAO: As I briefly mentioned in the testimony, the key conditions we're
seeking, and we think that will be beneficial for the future of China, is the
human rights conditions, and in particular, the release of those political
prisoners arrested around and before and after Tiananmen massacre.
Now there has been some argument of what type of conditions, meaning how to
address those conditions. I think what we are really pushing for, and we think
that's the best for the current situation, is that for the release of political
prisoners that has to put the Chinse government on notice, instead of any
executive branch or the President. In other words, the Chinese government would
have to do it in order to gain further MFN.
The other conditions I think we generally support that are outlined in the
policy bill for the other human rights conditions.
REP. GILMAN: Dr. Lizhi, did you want to comment on that?
MR. FANG: (Off mike.)
REP. GILMAN: No comment? Any of the other panelists like to comment on any
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
conditional provisions that we should put in in MFN?
MR. HOLBROOKE: Mr. Gilman, I would just like to go back to one point,
particularly since I omitted it from my opening statement. That's the Voice of
America. I think a valid distinction can be made between that and the other
issues. There is no excuse for the interference that's going on with it, and I
think at an absolute minimum, the administration should have made a far greater
effort than it has up to now to deal with that issue. And I would just like to
single that out for particular attention in response to your question.
REP. GILMAN: Ambassador Lord, do you have any comments?
AMB. LORD: I would basically reiterate the statements in my opening remarks,
namely, I think the conditions should be logically connected to the legislation.
Namely, there should be be emigration, human rights, freedom of information,
including -- emphatically -- the Voice of America which I mentioned in my
opening statement. So I would incude freeing our prisoners, accounting for
prisoners, observation of trials, emigration, treatment of Chinese in this
country and elsewhere, but with a general formulation of significant progress
toward and a package that I think could produce real improvement in China as
opposed to more ambitious packages which are desireable in terms of their goals
but which I don't think will produce the results that we all seek.
And then finally, there's the tactical question that several have addressed that
maybe we can get unity between the executive and congressional branches on this
issue. And you're only going to do that with moderate conditions coming out
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 56
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
of the Hill and the White House agreeing to conditions on MFN renewal.
REP. GILMAN: Let me ask the entire panel again. Should any conditionality be
specific or general in nature that we place into the -
AMB. LORD: Well I think you have to -- again it's a middle option. You've got
to be specific enough so it's a meaningful yardstick. I agree with almost
everything Mr. Freidman said in his opening statement, both in terms of analysis
and prescription. I'm not quite sure where he comes out on conditions, but I
felt that the three general ones were so broad they wouldn't give you a
yardstick, so I would be more concrete thatn that.
But I as I said in my statement I would have the formulation sufficiently broad
so that you have some way of using it as leverage and you are not boxed into
very tight language. I know that's a straddling position, but I think it's one
between the two extremes. So you can say, for example, an accounting of all
prisoners; those released, still detained, those reclassified. That's certainly
legitimate. I would be very specific on the Voice of America. Yes, stop
jamming Voice of America. They didn't use to do it up until two years ago. So
we can be specific in certain areas.
REP. GILMAN: Mr. Friedman, did you want to respond?
MR. FRIEDMAN: Since I'm the only one who spelled out the specific three
conditions and the ambassador would like them more specific, let me tell you why
I left them in the vague way I did and why I think they actually have punch even
in the vague way they are.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
The first one was that China again treat the United States as a friendly nation,
that is, stop jamming the Voice and stop harrassing Chinese in the United
States. That might seem like an easy thing for them to do, but actually, within
the leadership America's no longer considered a friendly nation, whatever their
external propaganda says. They see us, the United States, as a great enemy
trying to subvert their dictatorship, and it will be quite a political struggle
to get them to do this. And 50 leaving it at that vague way is quite sufficient
to begin to get what you want to have on the first one.
On the second one, that China should keep its word on international commitments,
that is, that it open up to having representatives of international human rights
bodies, and the Red Cross visit political prisoners and stay at political
trials, given the Chinese feeling about sovereignty and no foreign interference,
even with groups which go in and maintain essentially --- and don't report openly
about everything they're saying, that, too, will touch a tremendous number of
sensitive issues and be struggled out within the regime. Just to raise that
issue gets into very tough struggles within China. If you can get them to agree
with that, I think you will be experienced as having made great human rights
progress and will be appreciated by the forces that you're trying to support.
And the third one, some generality of improvement in the human rights situation,
which I urge that we not spell out particulars of, although I say in my written
testimony it's perfectly okay for you to say "things like" without particularly
tying yourself to any one of them. Why? The regime feels fantastically
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
57
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
isolated and fragile and it's very worried that if you give them an inch they'll
take the ruler. They're very scared of making any human rights concessions
because it would lead to a view inside of China that people might not learn the
lesson, they'll act again, we can't really crack down and 50 anything which gets
them to be willing to open up will be experienced in China as a rather
significant move in direction and have large consequences.
Therefore, I don't see any need to spell any of these things out in any larger
kind of way. We would get what we wanted with these three conditions in the
vague way that I put them, and I thought they were quite sufficient. I think
many in the Chinrse leadership will think they are going too far.
REP. GILMAN: Mr. Chairman, just one other question. Assume that we place some
conditions in MFN, and then we find that these conditions have not been met, and
then we have to withdraw MFN. Is that going to be more traumatic than not
granting MFN reauthorization in the first place?
MR. FANG: In my view -- (inaudible) -- China became open in the early of 1970s,
not in the late 1970s. So at that time, no MFN. Why China became open, that
should not depend -- not mainly depend on the -- (inaudible) - the MFN. That
depends on internal change. So this means China has politically changed, so
even, you know, the first person who shake hands with the American president is
Mao. What this means is I don't think if - even if they revoke the MFN, China
become back to the -- before the 1970s. I don't think so, because it certainly
already changed. So it means it still -- I understand, you should consider
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
the -- both the human rights conditions and the economic aid.
MR. ZHAO: I share with Dr. Fang in that the ---- whether China would change not
only depends on whether you have MFN just because when they changed they didn't
have MFN at all. Now the key thing is how ---- right now I think our purpose is
how -- what's the best way to promote this change, to make China progress? And
that's why we proposed the conditions that - like Ambassador Lord said, it has
to be specific enough so that it has enough power and enough pressure and yet it
has to be somewhat general so that they can actually meet with them. And that's
why we really support Pelosi's approach, which will lay out some conditions that
they -- specifically, like the release of political prisoners and the
improvement in freedom of speech, assembly, and association. That includes stop
jamming MFN (sic/may mean VOA).
REP. GILMAN: But going back to my initial question, isn't it going to be more
traumatic if we grant MFN with conditions and then have to cut it off later on
than not reauthorizing it at the present time.
MR. ZHAO: I know, but first that's our judgment, with well-measured conditions.
First, they should meet it and then WE think eventually the Chinese government
will comply. That's our judgment.
REP. GILMAN: So you don't think it will be that traumatic if we have to --
MR. ZHAO: We don't believe that's the case.
REP. GILMAN: Yes. Ambassador Lord.
AMB. LORD: Just very briefly, I think it would be more traumatic to cut it off
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 58
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
now certainly than to cut it off a year from now, because you're giving them a
year to try to make this kind of progress 50 we won't have to cut it off.
That's what we all hope will happen. So it's much better to string it out for
another year and try to use it as leverage. If you cut it off now, you've lost
your leverage. Let's try to use it, but with the kind of conditions that can be
realized.
REP. GILMAN: But haven't we been doing that all along?
AMB. LORD: Well, we tried that. Last year I testified before the same group,
and I was for unconditional extension of MFN, although I also suggested some
unilateral steps we might take to indicate our support for democracy and human
rights so the extension of MFN would not be misconstrued.
REP. GILMAN: So you've changed your position, then.
AMB. LORD: I have evolved my own position to conditional precisely for the
reason you're suggesting. We have not seen improvement. We've seen the
situation get worse.
REP. SOLARZ: The gentleman's time --
REP. GILMAN: I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: -- has expired. But you'll have an opportunity to come back and
ask more.
REP. GILMAN: Thank you.
REP. SOLARZ: Let me now recognize the gentlewoman from California.
REP. PELOSI: Thnk you very much, Mr. Speaker. I really - oh, gosh, first
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
President, now Speaker - (laughter) -- what a day!
REP. SOLARZ: I'm not sure
REP. PELOSI: You like the trend in the other direction.
REP. SOLARZ: -- if I've been promoted or demoted.
REP. PELOSI: You want the trend to go the other way, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I
understand. Thank you.
REP. SOLARZ: Give the gentlewoman an extra minute. (Laughter.)
REP. PELOSI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
What an opportunity today to hear from experts in this field, and particularly
honored to be in the presence of Dr. Fang Lizhi and -- a man of great courage
and a tremendous resource to us as we make these decisions. I think we've made
a lot of progress since last year here, because as Ambassador Lord mentioned,
last year it was yes or no; this year we're saying, "Which conditions?" and that
I think is a step forward.
I'm going to try to very briefly run through a few conditions and 522 if they're
acceptable to the panel. I'll excuse Mr. Holbrooke from answering, since he
doesn't support conditional renewal, but certainly you're welcome to chime in.
I hear you say no conditions, but Voice of America, they definitely shouldn't be
jamming Voice of America. I hear you say that things are getting better in
China economically. We've got to let that continue, but anyway, these people
are going to die in a few years, and so at some point we have to make -- know
why we are where we are and make a decision. Are things okay? Or are they
LEXIS' NEXIS LEXIS' NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 59
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
going to die, so it doesn't matter if they're okay or not?
In that perspective in terms of what condition I would like to -- I think I hear
general agreement, correct me if that is not the case - that one condition
might be an accounting for citizens detained or accused or sentenced as a result
of the Tiananmen Square non-violent demonstrations, the Tiananmen Square
massacre. Would that be a condition, accounting for the prisoners?
MR. FRIEDMAN: I didn't even go that far.
REP. PELOSI: Okay. Release of citizens who are imprisoned in connection with
these events.
MR. FRIEDMAN: No, I asked only that WE have access -- that some international
bodies have access to them --
REP. PELOSI: That's another condition, Mr. Friedman - that's another condition
down the road.
MR. FRIEDMAN: Right.
MR. HOLBROOKE: May I just clarify something because - I think, before we get
into the list. The issue here is not simply conditionality or no
conditionality. It is the degree of specificity -
REP. PELOSI: That's what we're asking --- that's what I'm asking --
MR. HOLBROOKE: And what I'm unclear on - and the reason I express concerns
about the specifics of your bill while applauding your objectives and your
motives ---- was that as I interpret your bill and the current situation in China,
your bill is automatically - automatically will result in termination of MFN
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
in six months. That is my concern.
REP. PELOSI: No, that's Senator Mitchell's bill. Senator Mitchell's bill calls
for automatic termination in six months unless certain conditions are met, and
they are relating to human rights, prison labor, proliferation of nuclear
weapons, intellectual property -- it's a more far-ranging bill.
While I support Senator Mitchell's bill, I believe that we do have other laws
which address those particular issues with every country in the world, including
China, even though China has almost a perfect record of violating every one of
them in our relationship. But in terms of just some human rights concerns, I
just wondered -- getting the expert opinion that is available there -- and I'll
be very quick about them --- my bill is very human rights oriented, and it calls
for accounting for citizens detained, accused or sentenced as a result of peace
-- non-violent demonstrations in Tiananmen Square, and release of citizens who
are imprisoned in connection with these events. Those are the conditions that
Mr. -- I call him Haiqing -- but Haiqing has put forth as an absolute that the
students were interested in and then made significant progress.
Now, is this -- would this be going to far -- ending religious persecution in
China in Tibet make significant progress in ending religious persecution in
China and Tibet?
MR. FRIEDMAN: I'm forced to agree with Mr. Holbrooke. While they are all --
it's not my preference -- (laughter) -- it's -- I think at that level of
LEXIS' NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 60
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
specificity, one is creating a conflict which guarantees that the Chinese will
not accept, and if that is the goal, then why don't you say that is the goal?
If you put that many specific conditions on, you do create the situation that
Congressman Leach suggested.
If you are looking for some kind of other way to try to indeed, once again,
reach something which they can compromise on and which will also serve our
purposes, I indeed believe -- not that one shouldn't push for all those things,
not that the President's human rights advisors, et cetera, shouldn't be bringing
them up all the time, not that we shouldn't be embarrassing them for -- it is an
extraordinarily repressive regime and so on -- but if you really want to try to
maintain the two things, you have to seek at the present moment a little less,
and with a little more vagueness. And --
REP. PELOSI: Thank you. Removing restrictions on freedom of the press and on
broadcast of Voice of America in China and Tibet. Any objection to that? Voice
of America?
Terminating acts of harassment against Chinese citizens living in the United
States. (Pause.) Ensuring access of international human rights monitoring
groups to prisoners' trials and places of detention in China and Tibet.
(Pause.) Ensuring freedom from torture. (Pause.) I really am genuinely asking
your advice. And terminating restrictions on peaceful assembly in China and
Tibet. This is one that is Senator -- Congressman Porter's contribution to the
bill -- Congressman Porter, Republican.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
The bill also requires China to adhere to the joint declaration on Hong Kong
signed by China and the United Kingdom. Is that too specific in your view?
MR. FRIEDMAN: No, I think the latter group --- not because they aren't worthy,
not because they aren't correct, not because what China has done in Tibet isn't
absolutely horrendous beyond anybody's ability to --
REP. PELOSI: Imagine.
MR. FRIEDMAN: -- accept, but if we just take the Tibet thing just for a moment
in terms of dealing with China -- there is no consciousness in China, even among
democratic activists, that would be supportive of understanding what you were
getting at in terms of the regime's ability, therefore, to WOO popular patriotic
sentiment against it -- you lose, they win -- that's not in our interest.
REP. PELOSI: I appreciate your comments.
Mr. Lord?
AMB. LORD: I was reluctant in my opening statement, and I remain reluctant, to
go over every specific condition in the wording, but let me again give my basic
philosophy. I think, to the extent that one can make real progress, this should
be our criterion. I believe, without getting into every last detail, that
Congressman Pease' bill of last year -- I'm not sure whether he's got one this
year -- is somewhat more doable and would be somewhat closer to my specific
view. Certainly yours is in the ballpark because you use significant progress
as opposed to a complete solution --
REP. PELOSI: Right.
LEXIS'NEXIS LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 61
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
AMB. LORD: -- on most of these conditions. And therefore, as long as you've got
"significant progress," I think that's a useful formulation although I don't
think we can expect the end of religious persecution and full freedom of
assembly in the next year. So, there are some particular ones that are more
difficult than others.
REP. PELOSI: No, no, it wouldn't -
AMB. LORD: I greatly prefer the Pease/Pelosi approach to Senator Mitchell's
approach, which I said in my opening statement is tantamount to a cutoff because
it's much too ambitious, and we ought to use other instruments for these other
problems that we have and we ought to use significant progress as opposed to
complete achievement.
One last comment. I wouldn't put Hong Kong in this particular bill, but I think
it's very important that we elevate Hong Kong on our agenda. It's a point that
I have in my opening statement I didn't read. We have got to make clear that
this is a concern of the United States, and that the political and economic
freedom of Hong Kong is of genuine interest. So, we should be taking this up
with the Chinese. I would not take it up via this particular legislation,
however.
REP. PELOSI: I appreciate that. Thank you very much, Ambassador. Thank you
very much. I appreciate the comments of our witnesses.
And thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Thank you very much, Ms. Pelosi.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Let me try to take the panel, if I might, through a series of questions, some of
which in one form or another have already been covered, but in an effort to kind
of systematically ask you to examine the critical questions we're going to have
to face and 522 if there is some kind of consensus here.
First of all -- and I'll ask you to go left to right and answer as briefly but
persuasively as possible. Would you agree that the promotion of human rights in
China is a legitimate objective of American foreign policy?
AMB. LORD: Yes.
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. Holbrooke?
MR. HOLBROOKE: Yes.
MR. FRIEDMAN: Certainly.
REP. SOLARZ: Okay. So, there is clear agreement on that.
Now, with respect to the extent to which MFN gives us some ability to promote
that objective, would you agree that it is the threat to withhold MFN, rather
than the removal of MFN, which provides us with our essential leverage in the
effort to promote the cause of human rights?
AMB. LORD: Absolutely. As I said in my statement, if you use it, you lose it.
But if you don't use it as a threat, you also lose it for leverage. So, I
agree.
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. Holbrooke?
MR. HOLBROOKE: Yes, Mr. Chairman.
REP. SOLARZ: Okay. Mr. Friedman?
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 62
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
MR. FRIEDMAN: I have to say it works both ways, Mr. Chairman. I think, if we
use it, it's also something they don't want to have happen because the regime's
ability to muster support depends so much now on meeting material needs of the
people, and the loss of it would hurt very, very badly.
REP. SOLARZ: But is it your view that --
MR. FRIEDMAN: Therefore, it could start, if it were gone, a process of
disintegration and struggle within the regime.
REP. SOLARZ: Well, as between those two alternatives, which do you think would
presumptively give us the greatest capacity to promote the cause of human
rights, the threat to withhold it or the actual withdrawal of it?
MR. FRIEDMAN: The threat. We should always take the moral high ground if we
want to --
REP. SOLARZ: Okay. Dr. Fang?
MR. FANG: I think should insist on the human rights principle.
REP. SOLARZ: Yes. And Mr. Zhao?
MR. ZHAO: Yes. Well, I agree with Dr. Fang's previous comments on that, too.
That is, yes, the threat is the most powerful, but it has to be real. And
particularly this year.
REP. SOLARZ: Yes. Now, let us assume that we establish some kind of conditions
with respect to MFN. Conceptually, there are one of two ways of approaching
this. We could remove MFN forthwith and then restore it if the various
conditions are met. Or we could retain MFN, but remove it if the various
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
conditions are not met. Which of these two approaches do you think, from a
conceptual point of view, would be the most productive to pursue?
AMB. LORD: Clearly the second, namely to extend it with the conditions and
remove it if these are not satisfactorily met.
REP. SOLARZ: Why?
AMB. LORD: Because if you cut it off now and say, "Well, you can earn your way
back," it'll be even tougher in terms of politics, in terms of face, for the
Chinese leaders to reverse course. But, if you have it conditioned, and say you
may lose it in a year, they can deny that they're responding to our pressures
and say they're taking unilateral actions and actually meet some of our
conditions.
REP. SOLARZ: Okay. Mr. Holbrooke.
MR. HOLBROOKE: Well, in the Socratic dialogue that you're conducting, I agree
with Winston Lord. But, I want to stress again, Chairman Socrates - I mean,
Solarz -- (laughter) - that --
REP. SOLARZ: You're not suggesting I take a cup of hemlock. (Laughter.) Some
might think that. I was never among them.
MR. HOLBROOKE: You've been called by Congresswoman Pelosi, the Speaker, the
President -- I thought we should just broaden out the mandate here. I want to
stress that I don't -
REP. SOLARZ: -- be suggesting I should be a platonic philosopher king?
(Laughter.)
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 63
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
MR. HOLBROOKE: At the risk of breaking your narrow rubric, I want to go back to
the reasons I at least took the position I did. It has nothing to do with your
question. The present leadership is unlikely to change whatever happens with
your bill. I regret to say that, but that's the truth. The objective here is
to strengthen the reform forces in the succession struggle which is going to
begin shortly. In that regard, the removal of MFN now, whether it's done as Mr.
Gilman suggested immediately, or in the automaticity which would follow Senator
Mitchell's bill would hurt those forces. It is --
REP. SOLARZ: But, is it your view then Mr. Holbrooke that even if we establish
some kind of loose conditionality in which we say that the renewal of MFN will
be a function of some progress on human rights, that even under those
circumstances it would be vain for us to hope for any improvement whatsoever
because the current leadership simply isn't going to yield at all?
MR. HOLBROOKE: See, this is the problem with the entire discussion we have had
today. We have all been dancing on the head of a pin as to what could affect
events in China, when the odds are, in my view, that whatever we do here won't
affect the situation in China while the present leadership remains. I wish it
was other. The reason I single out Voice of America, to which I would add
Congresswoman Pelosi's point about treatment of Chinese students in the US is
because those two issues uniquely affect us directly.
REP. SOLARZ: You've made an important point, and let me reiterate it and then
ask the others to comment, and if I interpreted your view correctly, because
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
it does in a way go to the heart of the issue. You're saying, as I understand
it, in effect, that regardless of whether we renew MFN or reject MFN or renew
MFN conditionally -- regardless of which of these three different approaches we
take, that it's not going to have any impact whatsoever on whether the Chinese
leaders release political prisoners, give us an accounting of those political
prisoners, permit access to their prisons and to their trials, permit greater
freedom of the press, or perhaps for that matter even permit the Mandarin
language broadcast of the VOA to go in without being jammed -- that the
decisions on these kind of issues are going to be made regardless of what we do
on MFN. Is that in effect your view?
MR. HOLBROOKE: With the arguable exception of VOA, which is our broadcast and
which I think is outrageous, I think the way you have stated it is probably
correct during the period of time allotted to the current leadership.
REP. SOLARZ: And is it not --
MR. HOLBROOKE: And -- one more point, Mr. Chairman. At the same time, denial of
MFN would hurt enormous numbers of people economically in China.
REP. SOLARZ: Right -- and in Hong Kong.
MR. HOLBROOKE: And in Hong Kong.
REP. SOLARZ: But, given what you said about the VOA, would you personally be
prepared to make a willingness by China to stop jamming the Mandarin language
broadcasts of the VOA an absolute condition for the renewal of MFN?
MR. HOLBROOKE: I would certainly make it a highest priority of the
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE
64
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
administration's policy. There is no evidence it is so far. And if the
administration did not make that a high enough priority and did not get results,
then I would like to return to the subject before you and think about it
positively.
REP. SOLARZ: Well, let me ask you -
MR. HOLBROOKE: And I want to stress -- the change in VOA I think is the most
symbolic aspect of the problem.
REP. SOLARZ: But I gather even there you're not prepared to say at this
particular point you -
MR. HOLBROOKE: Because I don't think the administration has made a real effort
--
REP. SOLARZ: -- you would be prepared to cut off MFN.
Let me ask the other witnesses to comment on Mr. Holbrooke's point. Do you
share his view that regardless of what we do, whether we condition MFN, reject
it or renew it, that it will have absolutely no impact whatsoever so long as the
current gerontocracy remains in power on these human rights questions?
Let me start with Mr. Lord, then move to Mr. Friedman, Dr. Fang and Mr. Zhao.
AMB. LORD: No, I don't agree with Mr. Holbrooke, who I have great respect for,
except for his tennis game. But I do think we can affect things at the margin.
We're not going to change the basic nature of this regime, and I think that's
what Mr. Holbrooke is essentially getting at. They're not going to do anything
which they feel jeopardizes their control politically over the Chinese people.
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
Having said that, I think because MFN is so important to them, that they will be
willing to make some concessions, such as in the Pease and Pelosi bills, if we
use conditional MFN renewal. So therefore, that is the heart of my position,
that we should avoid two extremes which won't produce progress and take this
middle route.
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. - Dr. Friedman?
MR. FRIEDMAN: Mister.
REP. SOLARZ: Mister.
MR. FRIEDMAN: In specific answer to your specific question, I'm happy to be able
to disagree with Mr. Holbrooke again. I think that how we handle it will have
an influence and in impact in Beijing. To just take it away and then add
conditions afterwards plays into the hands of the worst hardliners in being able
to make a successful claim that America is just trying to hurt us, impose things
on us and so on; that that's a disastrous way to go for any of the forces or
causes that we believe in.
The other way, I think, actually has a real impact. It will be something that
they will have to debate at the very highest level. We know that they already
have been debating it for at least five months. They are prepared to talk on
these kinds of issues, and the splits on these issues play into, as he says, the
succession crisis. It's always the succession crisis that's being struggled
over, and I think if they're forced to make concessions in this direction, you
are helping the long-term succession crisis direction. So I think it does
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 65
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
matter how you do this.
REP. SOLARZ: To the extent that what we do feeds in to the struggle for power
already under way in Beijing, to what extent would the conditional renewal of
MFN put those Chinese who may aspire to positions of preeminent leadership in
the country in a position where if they argue that they should make these
concessions or take these actions in order to qualify for MFN, to what extent
does it put them in a position where their adversaries can say they're not
worthy of national leadership because they've demonstrated that they don't have
the guts to stand up to the imperialists in the United States and they're not
looking out for the interests of China first and most of all?
MR. FRIEDMAN: Absolutely, they'll say all those things. But if they come to the
conclusion at this present point nonetheless to make the compromise, it makes it
easier to continue in that direction. It makes it clear that those people who
take the position you just said will be hurting the standard of living of the
people of China, and you can't go that way.
REP. SOLARZ: Dr. Fang, do you agree or disagree with Mr. Holbrooke's point that
regardless of what we do, it will have no impact on the actions of the current
leadership in Beijing with respect to these human rights issues so long as they
remain in power?
MR. FANG: It depends on which condition you put. You know, of course you want
to change the whole regime, and this currently is impossible, but if you want to
change some of the behavior, I think you can. For instance, my issue is the
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
evidence. Even they originally also don't want to release me and my wife. Now
they, finally they --- they did. So there's the evidence.
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. Zhao?
MR. ZHAO: I agree with Dr. Fang. We don't believe that the Chinese government
today won't respond to the pressure from the US.
REP. SOLARZ: You believe they will respond?
MR. ZHAO: We don't believe.
REP. SOLARZ: You don't believe they will.
MR. ZHAO: They will not respond. I'm sorry. We believe they will respond.
REP. SOLARZ: You're using a double negative. (Laughter.)
Do you believe they will respond or they won't respond?
MR. ZHAO: Yes, they will respond if it's reasonable and well-measured.
REP. SOLARZ: Okay. Now, if that is the case -- Ms. Pelosi tried to take you
through a list of conditionality --- here I'd like to make that effort also, but
in a slightly different context. It seems to me that if we are going to
establish conditions, one of the key questions we have to consider is the
standard for determining whether the condition has been met. And here there are
three conceptual possibilites.
We can insist on the total achievement of the objective. In other words, if
it's the release of political prisoners, we can say the criteria is the release
of all political prisoners, every last one of them, where the condition hasn't
been met. We can secondly, as an alternative, establish as the criteria
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 66
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
significant progress toward the achievement of the objective. So once again, if
you're talking about political prisoners, you would say that the condition is
achieved if a significant number of political prisoners, although not
necessarily all, are released. And the third conceptual possibility would be to
establish the release of political prisoners as one of the objectives of the
renewal of MFN, so that you would have a situation in which conceivably even if
no political prisoners were released, you could still renew MFN a year from now
if the President reported to the Congress that he believed that renewing MFN
would contribute to the achievement of that objective.
So one is a very, very tough standard. Another one is tough, but a little bit
more flexible. And the third is obviously extremely porous. It sets up an
objective but it doesn't require as a condition for saying that objective --
that we should renew MFN, that the objective has been met.
So, looking at it in those three ways, let me go through a list of things and
tell me -- assuming we were going to use that condition -- and I know, for
example, Mr. Friedman would prefer three vague and more generic criteria, where
you would put it in this scheme. First, the release of political prisoners
incarcerated as a result of or after Tiananmen Square. Would you require
release of all, significant progress toward the release of those who are
incarcerated, or simply have it as an objective? Mr. Lord.
MR. LORD: I'd be for significant progress, but I want to make clear again I
would prefer if the executive branch would set this out as saying, "Here's
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
what we're going to have to have before we recommend renewal a year from now,"
but I'd be for the significant progress formula.
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. Holbrooke?
MR. HOLBROOKE: I would agree with Winston.
REP. SOLARZ: But you would prefer, I gather, not to -- would you prefer not to
have that as an objective at all?
MR. HOLBROOKE: As an objective I agree with it. I think the issue always
remains the degree to which it's automatic, the degree to which you're giving
waivers, your other three criteria.
MR. FRIEDMAN: I totally agree with the Ambassador, and I want to stress one part
of what he said in terms of the executive branch. You know the executive branch
from July 1989, when the heads of state gathered at the 200th anniversary of the
French Revolution, should have at that point put it on the agenda for all the
leading democracies, and you wouldn't be in this position today if it had been
that kind of a high-level issue, coordinated among democracies from that point
on.
REP. SOLARZ: Okay. Dr. Fang?
MR. FANG: Yeah, I think the -- release prisoners is a priority condition.
REP. SOLARZ: But do you think we should insist on the release of all political
prisoners? Or would the release of many of the political prisoners or some of
them be sufficient?
MR. FANG: The difficulty - you can't -- you don't know how many there is
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 67
(c) 1991 Federal Information Systems Corporation, May 29, 1991
prisoner, how to -- you know, how -- they achieve --- they made such a condition
or not, so we only we only know some persons' rights have been persecuted.
We don't know the total.
MR. ZHAO: Yeah, I agree with Dr. Fang that there's no way to know how many is
all, 50 that we definitely think that's important, that they definitely release
-- and we know some people who are arrested.
REP. SOLARZ: Mr. Zhao, I want to pin you down on this. We may not know the
total number, but we have some idea. Would it be your view that this condition
should be met if everyone we know who is a political prisoner is released? Or
would you be satisfied if, of those we know who are political prisoners, many of
them have been released, but not necessarily all?
MR. ZHAO: Oh, I think everyone we know should be released.
REP. SOLARZ: And you're saying that unless they release every one we know to be
incarcerated, we should not renew MFN, even if they were prepared to release
most of those we know to be in prison?
MR. ZHAO: Well, that's -- it's a hard question, because first of all the -- I
think we have to judge not just by the prisoners alone, together with other
conditions, if they make significant progress, but in other areas as well.
(TEXT OMITTED)
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, May 29, 1991
million. As China's shop window since 1979, Hong Kong has grown deeply entwined
with its giant neighbor.
"Ending MFN status might be directed against Beijing," said Hong Kong's
governor, Sir David Wilson. "But it would be a body blow to Hong Kong just when
we need to keep up economic growth to get us through a time of crucial
political change."
Though President Bush says he will renew China's MFN status by the June 3
deadline, members of Congress are threatening to pass legislation to block it or
attach conditions that likely would be unacceptable to China, thus effectively
ending its MFN advantages.
Last year, $12 billion worth of goods from China were exported through Hong
Kong, accounting for 16.8 percent of the territory's economy.
If China loses MFN, up to 43,000 Hong Kong jobs could be lost while its
economy, forecast to grow 3.5 percent this year, would shrink by 1.3 percent to
1.8 percent, according to Sir Piers Jacobs, Hong Kong's financial secretary.
Virtually every sector of Hong Kong's economy would be hit.
LEXIS'NEXIS LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 68
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, May 29, 1991
But that's the tip of the iceberg. Hong Kong manufacturers have migrated en
masse to neighboring Guangdong province in Southern China. Its abundance of
cheap workers and land has helped Hong Kong companies maintain their global
competitiveness.
Hong Kong companies now employ 2 million workers across the border, where
"unemployment might rise dramatically" if MFN is revoked, analysts say.
MFN renewal is an annual process.
Since China's June 1989 crackdown on student-led protesters at Tiananmen
Square, the renewal has become increasingly controversial because U.S. trade
law links MFN status to a country's human rights record.
"Uncertainty over the extension of MFN every year is like having a thorn in
the heart," said Tommy Tam, director of National Electronic Holdings, which is
moving its Guangdong-based watch-making factory to Singapore or Indonesia
because of uncertainties caused by MFN.
"We need to be prepared for the long term in case China loses its trade
status," he said.
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, May 29, 1991
Other Hong Kong companies are considering similar moves, prompting worries
that investment in the territory and its role as a regional service center would
be damaged.
With confidence in Hong Kong shaken by fears over its post-1997 future under
Communist Chinese rule, loss of MFN would represent another psychological blow.
Yet, heretical as it is in this city where money is king, there are some who
want tough action against China.
"At first glance it seems fairly obvious that we have to get the Americans
to renew MFN," said Walter Sulke, a prominent local businessman and political
commentator. "But the present government in China is not good for business in
Hong Kong."
LEXIS' NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 69
LEVEL 1 - 11 OF 61 STORIES
Copyright (c) 1991 News World Communications Inc.;
The Washington Times
May 29, 1991, Wednesday, Final Edition
SECTION: Part A; NATION; Pg. A6
LENGTH: 665 words
HEADLINE: Opposition builds on Hill to president's China policy
BYLINE: Major Garrett; THE WASHINGTON TIMES
BODY:
Although President Bush appears inflexible in seeking unconditional renewal
of most-favored-nation trading status with China, political realities in
Congress may force him to retreat.
Sizable majorities in the House and Senate oppose renewing MFN without
requiring that China ease various forms of religious and political repression in
the aftermath of the bloody crackdown on pro-democracy dissidents at Tiananmen
Square in June 1989.
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, May 29, 1991
"There are many members willing and eager to condition MFN to China and many
who are willing to cut it off altogether," said Rep. Don Pease, Ohio Democrat,
who has introduced legislation to renew MFN while imposing moderate human rights
reforms.
"The president will have to make a judgment if he can make his hard-line
stance stick or not," he said.
MFN trading status grants the lowest possible tariffs on foreign goods.
Congress has renewed MFN for China every year since 1980. China's trade surplus
with the United States this year is expected to approach $11 billion, second
only to Japan's.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry yesterday applauded Mr. Bush's stand, which
the president announced Monday.
"This is a realistic and wise decision for which the Chinese government
would like to express its appreciation," the ministry said. "The Chinese
government had always believed that a proper settlement
will help to
promote the restoration and growth of China-U.S. relations."
LEXIS' NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 70
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, May 29, 1991
Congress has 90 days to reject Mr. Bush's request for MFN, which he is
expected to submit today or tomorrow.
If Congress rejects MFN for China, the president can veto its action. An
override would require two-thirds majorities in both chambers.
Since MFN was renewed last June, China's only act of political
liberalization was the lifting of martial law in Tibet.
In the eyes of many lawmakers that has not compensated for Beijing's
suppression of religious and political speech, its continued detention of
Tiananmen Square protesters, its missile-technology shipments to Pakistan, or
its help in building a nuclear reactor in Algeria.
"The conditions are worse now than they were last year," said a Republican
aide with the House Foreign Affairs Committee. "The White House is already in
sort of a bunker mentality."
Mr. Bush has argued that free trade with China encourages a freer exchange
of goods and services. That could later lead to a freer political system once
Beijing's aging rulers have left power.
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, May 29, 1991
"Our actions should be consistent with our goal of nurturing democracy and
market economics," Sen. Richard Lugar, Indiana Republican, said yesterday. "We
should improve relations with the growing number of economic reformers [in
China] rather than isolate them."
Opponents contend China must suffer for its ongoing human rights abuses.
They believe limiting or conditioning its access to U.S. markets is the best
way to coax Beijing toward reforms.
Mr. Pease's legislation would renew MFN but would require Mr. Bush to
certify that China had:
*
Accounted for all protesters arrested at Tiananmen Square.
*
Ended religious persecution in China and Tibet.
*
Released all religious prisoners.
*
Expanded freedom of the press and improved access to Voice of America
broadcasts.
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS'NEXIS
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc.
PAGE 71
(c) 1991 The Washington Times, May 29, 1991
* Ceased harassment of Chinese students in the United States.
"My intention is not to cut off MFN, but rather use leverage to improve
human rights conditions," Mr. Pease said.
Rep. Gerald B.H. Solomon, New York Republican, wants to cut off MFN. Rep.
Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat and Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell of
Maine have drafted bills placing several conditions on MFN that China likely
would reject.
"I do see some room for compromise, but not right away," said Mr. Pease,
whose bill could be a vehicle for compromise. "It may take 60 days. The issue
has to percolate for a while."
LEXIS'NEXIS'LEXIS NEXIS