Mr. HUTCHINSON. Madam President, I rise today, on the eve of Chinese President Jiang Zemin's official state visit to the United States. I rise today because I believe that, while it is important to continue relations with a country that contains one-fourth of the world's population, it is also important for us to remember that this one-fourth of the world's population--these 1.2 billion people--suffer today under an oppressive regime committed to a violent suppression of dissent, a regime which steadfastly refuses to recognize inalienable human rights, a regime which uses imprisonment, torture, and execution as tools to forge a society that is void of individual liberty.
It is a regime that has a government program to market human organs and body parts, using the execution of prisoners as a profit method for the Government of China; a regime that systematically jams Radio Free Asia. While coming to the United States and professing their belief in liberty, they systematically jam the expression of freedom that this country subsidizes, underscoring its importance by broadcasting throughout Asia.
Yet, with all of these facts, all of this evidence, the United States rolls out the red carpet for President Jiang Zemin of China, the same leader who was named General Secretary of the Communist Party 3 weeks after the protests were quelled with violence and bloodshed in Tiananmen Square. This is the same leader who is the hand-chosen successor to Deng Xiaoping, the so-called Butcher of Beijing. He is the same Communist leader who, in a 1990 interview, only a few weeks after the Tiananmen Square massacre, in an interview with Barbara Walters described the Tiananmen killings as, and I am quoting President Jiang Zemin, `much ado about nothing.' This is the Communist leader who, in an interview published in the Washington Post just last Sunday, continued to defend the Tiananmen Square massacre and suggested the violent crackdown on peaceful demonstrators was the price of allowing economic reform in China. Madam President, this is the Communist leader who is traveling throughout the country like a king.
Nothing underscores the differences we have with President Zemin more than his recent comments on the subject of human rights. Earlier this month, as he prepared to come to the United States, President Zemin said, `Both democracy and human rights are relative concepts and not absolute and general.' That bears repeating. President Jiang Zemin said about democracy and human rights, they are not absolutes, they are not something that is essential, something that is God given, something that is basic to being human beings. But, he says, they are relative concepts.
As citizens of the United States, the great foundation on which our country was built is the undeniable and unchanging principle that all mankind is created equal, and that we are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable rights. Those rights attend to us as human beings, whether we live in China or whether we live in the United States. Nothing is more central to our understanding of the role of government. President Zemin and the Chinese leadership flagrantly reject this and over 1 billion Chinese know oppression and fear and violence as part and parcel of their daily lives. I would say to President Zemin that human rights are not the possession of governments, to be dispensed at the will or the discretion of those who wield power. Human rights is not, as he has insisted, a relative concept. It is a transcending value that crosses cultures, societies, and forms of government. Liberty is not the province of America, and to my colleagues and to this administration I would say that our defense of freedom must not stop at our own shores.
The values which we cherish as Americans we must defend for people everywhere. We always have. The Great Wall that separates our governments today is the great wall of human rights violations. I hope the President and the leadership of Congress in their meetings with President Zemin this week will, frankly and forcefully, communicate the deep sense of anger and the deep sense of outrage that is stirred in this country by the ongoing human rights abuses in China.
It is time for straight talk with the Chinese leadership. It is time for an American foreign policy guided by a commitment to the cause of freedom. I urge the President to remember the words that he spoke in December 1991 as he campaigned for the office which he now occupies. Candidate Clinton in 1991 said, in reference to the Bush administration:
The administration continues to coddle China, despite its continuing crackdown on democratic reforms, its brutal subjugation of Tibet, its irresponsible export of nuclear and missile technology, and its abusive trade practices.
He accused the Bush administration of coddling China because of these circumstances within China--brutal subjugation of Tibet, irresponsible export of nuclear missile technology, and crackdown on Democratic reforms. He said, because of that, the Bush administration is doing too little. They are coddling China. I ask the President, what has changed? The only thing that has changed is the condition of the Chinese people and the oppression under which they live every day. Conditions are worse by every measure and by every standard. Things have gotten worse in China. Yet the administration has totally changed its position. The position of the President has changed. The condition of the Chinese people has changed also, but only for the worse.
I believe that China's flagrant disregard for human rights should be enough. But, since our policies toward China have not changed, the human rights abuses continue to take a back seat to a foreign policy that seems to be driven by profit projections. The administration now, instead of sanctioning China, wants to sign an all-encompassing new nuclear pact with China; in effect, to reward them.
The logic in all of this new policy, called constructive engagement, is that if we will engage China and we will trade with China and we will see economic expansion in China--and their economy is growing in double digits every year--that human rights conditions will improve, that the rights of the Chinese people will
be enhanced. Such has not been the case. And if such a policy were one that we consistently enforced around the world, it would result in the lifting of sanctions on Cuba, the lifting of sanctions on North Korea, because if we believe that increased trade is going to bring the downfall of totalitarianism, it ought to work not only in China but North Korea and Cuba, too. But we hear no mention we ought to change our trade policies toward North Korea or Cuba; all the time saying if we just continue to trade with China, things will get better there. Now, in the midst of all of this, the administration admits to signing an all-encompassing nuclear pact with China. Lets look at the facts, because I think they speak for themselves.
In December 1992, the Government of the People's Republic of China violated the Arms Export Control Act and the Export Administration Act of 1979 with the transfer by the Ministry of Aerospace Industry of approximately 24 M-11 missiles to Pakistan.
Let's look at the facts. From September 1994 to June 1996, the Government of the People's Republic of China again violated the Arms Export Control Act and the Export Administration Act of 1996, with the transfer by the Ministry of Aerospace Industry of as many as 30 M-11 ballistic missiles to Pakistan.
In August 1996, the Government of the Peoples Republic of China again violated the Arms Export Control Act, the Export Administration Act of 1979, and the Iran-Iraq Arms Nonproliferation Act of 1992, with the transfer by the China Precision Engineering Institute to Iran's defense industries of gyroscopes, accelerometers, and test equipment for the construction and test of ballistic missile guidance systems.
While looking at the facts, it was reported in August of this year that the United States Central Intelligence Agency discovered a shipment by the People's Republic of China to the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Center, a Syria Government agency that oversees missile development, of guidance equipment for M-11 ballistic missiles. This alleged system would be a violation of the Missile Technology Control Regime. This alleged shipment would have taken place after the limited sanctions imposed by the United States on China for shipments of M-11 missiles and components to Pakistan had been lifted following the assurances by China that it would comply with the Missile Technology Control Regime.
So we see these ongoing violations. After each of these violations, and there are many more, our administration either failed to take appropriate actions to deter future violations of such acts, took the least onerous action against the Government of the People's Republic of China that was possible under such acts, or rescinded previous actions, thereby diluting or eliminating the deterrent effect of sanctions under such acts with respect to China.
This inaction has forced three important results. First, this Congress renewed MFN to China. Second, we are now honoring the Communist leader in our country. Third, the public has been convinced that through such nearsighted ill-advised strategies like constructive engagement, China would change.
Yes, Madam President, China has changed--for the worse. And this Congress and this President, I believe, has done too little. If you will, we have stood idly by. We have said too little. We have done virtually nothing.
What is truly unprecedented is the administration's recent campaign to draw a bright and attractive picture of Communist China. I ask the President and I ask this Congress, and I have turned to this before and I will turn to it again, have you not read the 1996 United States State Department's China Country Report on Human Rights Practices? Because I have read it. The information in it is horrific. Once again, allow me to quote from this report:
China has continued to commit widespread and well-documented human rights abuses, in violation of internationally accepted norms stemming from the authorities' intolerance of dissent, fear of unrest, and the abuse of laws protecting basic freedoms. Abuses include torture and mistreatment of prisoners, forced confessions, and arbitrary and lengthy incommunicado detention. The government continued severe restrictions on freedom of speech, the press, assembly, religion, privacy and workers' rights.
That's from our own State Department 1996 country report on China.
In 1989 we watched with amazement as courageous Chinese students marched in Tiananmen Square. Today, they are all gone. They are all gone. During their struggle they defied the tanks, they looked to the United States for inspiration, they quoted our Declaration of Independence, they built replicas of our Statue of Liberty, and throughout it all United States policymakers have answered that economic engagement would stop China's abuses of human rights. As far as I can tell, not only are profit projections driving our foreign policy, not only is our current policy with China appeasement rather than engagement, not only does this Congress continue to turn a blind eye to the oppressed in the interests of trade opportunities, but, President Jiang Zemin's visit is a clear sign to the world, our enemies, and our friends that not only did the United States tacitly approve of everything that was going on, I think, from forced sterilization to the breaking of ballistic missile treaties, but even more important it's a clear message that we can and will tolerate anything and everything without repercussion and without a price.
I am reminded of President Ronald Reagan. I think few have served our country more nobly. And I am reminded of my good friend Senator John Ashcroft who has spoken so forcefully on the issue of China, especially even during this last month. In President Ronald Reagan's second inaugural address, he spoke of the danger of simple-minded appeasement. He spoke of accommodating countries at their lowest and least. This is what former President Reagan said:
History teaches us that wars begin when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap.
There have been no repercussions to the egregious human rights abuses ongoing in China. There have been no repercussions. There has been no price to pay for the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction that the Government of China has carried out. There have been no repercussions for the incomprehensible toleration by the Chinese Government of laogai camps, the slave labor camps that exist in which there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, incarcerated.
Madam President, President Jiang Zemin's visit proves that China believes that the price of aggression and the price of these abuses is cheap. It proves that we in this country accept this, and I can remember when we did not. It proves that, just as President Clinton stated last Friday that China is at a crossroads, well, Madam President, we in the United States are at a crossroads as well. President Jiang Zemin and his enjoyment of a state visit, a visit that has been elevated to the highest level, the red carpet treatment that he has been accorded, the 21-gun salute, I believe this is truly a slap in the face to every Chinese political dissident that languishes today in a Chinese prison. It is time that we as public policymakers, those concerned about the welfare of our fellow human beings wherever they may live in this world, who are the recipients by their creator, as we Americans are, of certain unchangeable, undeniable human rights, it is time that we, once again, not only spoke out, but move from debate and discussion and outrage to action.
During the course of this state visit, while I disagree with much that has been planned and the royal treatment that he is being given, it is an opportunity for us as Americans to show President Zemin what freedom really is. It is an opportunity for us, through our protests, through our debates, through our congressional oversight hearings that are going on, through every means possible, to raise these most serious issues to the attention of President Zemin and to show him not only what free expression really is, but to show him the true intensity of the feeling of the American people, if not our Government, the American people at what has been tolerated and what continues to go on in China today.
Madam President, I yield the floor.