The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“UNITED STATES POLICY ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN CHINA” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the Senate section on pages S15583-S15584 on Oct. 24, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
UNITED STATES POLICY ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN CHINA
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, this week President Clinton will be meeting in New York with Chinese President Jiang Zemin. We can recall that about this time last year, in Indonesia, President Clinton also met with Jiang Zemin; going into that meeting the President declared:
``the United States, perhaps more than any other country in the world, consistently and regularly raises human rights issues.'' I expect that in the reports coming out of this latest meeting we will hear that President Clinton once again took issue with the Chinese leadership for the egregious abuse of human rights in China.
I only wish, Mr. President, that a result of these exchanges would be an improvement in China's human rights record. Unfortunately, there has been little change in Chinese behavior in this regard.
We can begin by reading the administration's own State Department Human Rights Report, which acknowledges that in 1994 ``widespread and well-documented'' human rights abuses continued unabated and that in many respects the situation ``has deteriorated.'' We can recall the highly publicized case of American human rights activist Harry Wu, imprisoned by the Chinese Government only months after the November 1994 Clinton-Jiang Zemin meeting. Wu, subsequently expelled by the Chinese Government, has worked for years to document and expose horrific practices such as the harvest of body parts from executed prisoners for use in transplants.
If Wu--a citizen of the world's only remaining superpower and a country whose riches, technological expertise and markets are needed by the Chinese Government--could be treated with such impunity, how can it be for the Chinese human rights proponent who is laboring in relative anonymity? In the past year Human Rights Watch/Asia reports that several activists have disappeared, others sent into internal exile, and still others detained while their houses were ransacked for the simple crime of speaking out in favor of political openness. Furthermore, two prominent dissidents who were released just prior to the 1994 decision on MFN, Wei Jeisheing and Chen Zemin, are back in custody: at least, we assume Wei Jeisheing is in custody--he has been missing since April of this year.
Mr. President, I believe that the lack of progress on human rights is attributed to the fact that U.S. actions have been inconsistent with the spoken principle. Rather than seek to impose a cost on China for its abuse, rewards are bestowed on the leadership. I refer, of course, of the renewal in June of most-favored-nation [MFN] status for China. The President's announcement continued what I believe to be an ill-
considered abandonment of a policy linking MFN status--or other economic benefit--for China to an improvement of its human rights situation. The administration argued that U.S. business investment and overall improved economic ties would lead the Chinese in the right direction on human rights. In fact, the Chinese leadership appears to have taken the exact opposite lesson: that the United States puts corporate interests, market access, and profits before fundamental rights.
Mr. President, we have in MFN a weapon that the Chinese fear. Whenever it appears that its status is in question, they cancel high-
level official contacts. They threaten to limit the access of American corporations lusting after a potentially huge market. Why are the Chinese so visceral in their reaction? The $20 billion trade surplus China has with us, a surplus it uses to continue financing its economic development, might have something to do with it.
It is clear that the Chinese care deeply about this trade relationship and the benefits it brings to their economy. We have leverage, and we should use it to oppose egregious human rights abuses, such as slave labor, torture, and disappearances of Chinese citizens.
President Clinton did this effectively earlier this year when, in response to flagrant Chinese piracy violations against United States companies, President Clinton threatened to slap $1.1 billion worth of trade sanctions on China. Rather than face economic retaliation, the Chinese immediately promised to make statutory changes to address this problem. I am proud that the United States was willing to stand up for our software industry; it should do the same for human beings.
This is one of the reasons I introduced legislation in July to revoke MFN status from China because of its human rights record. We have had strong bipartisan support for linking MFN and human rights in the past. Taking that action will get Chinese attention in a concrete manner, in a way that words have not and cannot, and I renew my call to have such a resolution passed and supported by the administration.
Alternatively, I would welcome another strategy the administration could put forth for how human rights can be more effectively protected and promoted in China. Clearly, raising the issue has not been successful. This week's meeting is an opportunity to pursue this issue more aggressively, and I would urge the President to do so.
____________________
