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.
“URGING THE EUROPEAN UNION TO MAINTAIN ITS ARMS EMBARGO ON THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H299-H303 on Feb. 2, 2005.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
URGING THE EUROPEAN UNION TO MAINTAIN ITS ARMS EMBARGO ON THE PEOPLE'S
REPUBLIC OF CHINA
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 57) urging the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the People's Republic of China.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Res. 57
Whereas the United States and the European Union (EU) have maintained arms embargoes on the People's Republic of China since 1989, following the decision of the Chinese Government on June 4, 1989, to order an unprovoked, brutal, and indiscriminate assault on thousands of peaceful and unarmed demonstrators and onlookers in and around Tiananmen Square by units of the People's Liberation Army, which resulted in an untold number of deaths and several thousand injuries;
Whereas the People's Republic of China has yet to acknowledge and make amends for the 1989 massacre at Tiananmen Square and an estimated 2,000 Chinese citizens remain in prison as a result of their participation in those peaceful demonstrations according to the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2004;
Whereas the National Security Strategy of the United States approved by President George W. Bush on September 17, 2002, concludes that the People's Republic of China remains strongly committed to national one-party rule by the Communist Party and is not truly accountable to the needs and aspirations of its citizens, while preventing the Chinese people to think, assemble, and worship freely;
Whereas for several years the People's Republic of China has also been engaged in an extensive military buildup in its air, naval, land, and outer space systems, including the deployment of approximately 500 short range ballistic missiles near the Taiwan Strait according to the Department of Defense's Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of China for Fiscal Year 2004;
Whereas the military buildup by the People's Republic of China and the strategic doctrines and policies that underpin such a buildup remain shrouded in secrecy and imply challenges for strategic deterrence between the United States and China, United States Armed Forces deployed in the Asia and Pacific region, United States commitments and interests related to the defense of numerous friends and allies in the region, particularly Taiwan and Japan, and regional stability more broadly;
Whereas the European Union and the People's Republic of China released a joint statement on December 8, 2004, following their seventh summit meeting at The Hague in which the two sides recognized each other as ``major strategic partners in the area of disarmament and non-proliferation'' and the EU confirmed its ``political will to continue to work towards lifting the EU arms embargo against China'';
Whereas the European Union and the People's Republic of China also released a joint declaration on non-proliferation and arms control on December 8, 2004, at The Hague in which the EU stated its support for China's entry into the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR);
Whereas on December 20, 2004, the Government of the United States determined that seven entities of the People's Republic of China, including several entities that play major roles in China's military-industrial complex, should be subject to sanctions under section 3 of the Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000, which provides for penalties on entities for the transfer to Iran of certain controlled equipment and technology, reflecting a time span of more than a decade in which the United States Government has made repeated determinations regarding Chinese firms engaged in illicit transactions involving strategic technology;
Whereas on December 17, 2004, the Council of the European Union ``reaffirmed the political will to continue to work towards lifting the arms embargo'' on the People's Republic of China and invited the next Presidency of the EU ``to finalize the well-advanced work in order to allow for a decision'';
Whereas the largest member states of the European Union--France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom--have steadily increased their arms sales to the People's Republic of China, such that from 2002 to 2003 the value of reported arms sales to China doubled to approximately $540,000,000, according to the most recent annual report, dated November 11, 2004, of the EU on its Code of Conduct on Arms Exports;
Whereas in order to assist member states of the European Union to close the gap in defense capabilities with the United States and to enhance the interoperability of the armed forces of such member states and United States Armed Forces, the United States has provided a framework in its laws, particularly under the Arms Export Control Act and chapters 138 and 139 of title 10, United States Code, in which the United States has pursued a policy of expanded transatlantic armament and defense industry cooperation involving increasingly sophisticated levels of sensitive United States military technology, which becomes subject to increased risks of diversion to the People's Republic of China due to armaments cooperation between the EU and China;
Whereas despite the chronically low defense spending of member states of the European Union, EU member states have decided to develop, with the participation of the People's Republic of China, a new global radio navigational satellite system, known as Galileo, at a cost of more than
$3,000,000,000, which will have military applications, even though such system purports to serve civil applications already served by the United States Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) System; and
Whereas the United States has numerous national interests in the Asia and Pacific region, including the security of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and other key areas, and United States Armed Forces which are deployed throughout the region could be jeopardized by the People's Republic of China because it is increasingly well-armed and may seek to settle long-standing territorial and political disputes in the region by the threat or use of military force: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) reaffirms the United States arms embargo on the People's Republic of China and related findings and statements of policy set forth in title IX of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991
(Public Law 101-246);
(2) finds that policies by the United States and other countries which promote the development of democracy in the People's Republic of China, and not the development of Chinese military capabilities, will help assure a stable, peaceful, and prosperous Asia and Pacific region;
(3) deplores the recent increase in arms sales by member states of the European Union (EU) to the People's Republic of China and the European Council's decision to finalize work toward lifting its arms embargo on China, actions that place European security policy in direct conflict with United States security interests and with the security interests of United States friends and allies in the Asia and Pacific region;
(4) declares that such a development in European security policy is inherently inconsistent with the concept of mutual security interests that lies at the heart of United States laws for transatlantic defense cooperation at both the governmental and industrial levels and would necessitate limitations and constraints in these relationships that would be unwelcome on both sides of the Atlantic;
(5) requests the President in his forthcoming meetings with European leaders to urge that they reconsider this unwise course of action and, instead, work expeditiously to close any gaps in the European Union's arms embargo on the People's Republic of China, in the national export control systems of EU member states, and in the EU's Code of Conduct on Arms Exports in order to prevent any future sale of arms or related technology to China; and
(6) requests the President to inform Congress of the outcome of his discussions with European leaders on this subject and to keep Congress fully and currently informed of all developments in this regard.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly).
General Leave
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 57, the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution that was introduced yesterday by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), expressing the strong concern of the House that the EU may lift its arms embargo directed at China.
In his recent inaugural address, President Bush reaffirmed America's commitment to democracy and freedom throughout the world. Yet, by selling advanced weapons systems to the People's Republic of China, the EU is directly undermining the security of one of Asia's most vibrant democracies, our close ally, Taiwan.
Over the last decade, Taiwan has moved strongly in the direction of becoming a full-fledged democracy, with free elections, a free press and respect for the rule of law. If the arms embargo is lifted, the EU would be further tilting the military equation against the people of Taiwan at the very time they are embracing human rights and democratic values.
Furthermore, if our soldiers were ever called upon to defend Taiwan, they could potentially be facing weapons systems manufactured by our own European allies. This would be an intolerable development.
Finally, the lifting of the arms embargo would also have other negative consequences. In the past, China has demonstrated its willingness to sell weapons to nations that cannot be trusted with advanced military gear. This includes countries such as Iran that support international terrorist groups and countries such as Sudan, Burma and Zimbabwe that are among the world's worst violators of human rights. The last thing these countries need is additional weapons.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important measure. I also urge Secretary of State Rice and President Bush to raise this issue during their upcoming visit to Europe.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to commend my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly), for his strong and powerful statement. I particularly want to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on International Relations, my good friend, for leading us on this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I just returned from a very substantive mission to North Korea, China and Taiwan, where I met with many of the key leaders of those countries. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's security interests in the Asia-Pacific region, including the national and economic security of our friends and allies in the Asia-Pacific area, were paramount on my agenda.
While the Asia-Pacific region remains calm at the moment compared to other parts of the world, this calm can be deceiving. The United States has tens of thousands of troops deployed in Asia, and their security is directly threatened by the shortsighted and greed-driven initiative emanating from Europe. This initiative, Mr. Speaker, is the European Union's current effort to lift its ban on arms sales to the People's Republic of China.
I, therefore, commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of our full committee, for introducing this important resolution and for moving it forward so expeditiously.
Mr. Speaker, it is frightening to contemplate that American Armed Forces may one day be deployed in the Taiwan Strait to defend the island nation for a possible invasion by mainland China, and if key leaders in Paris, Berlin and Brussels have their way, our soldiers may very well be facing the latest in high-tech weaponry manufactured by our allies in Europe.
Mr. Speaker, based upon my recent meetings in China and Taiwan, I remain optimistic that tensions across the Taiwan Strait can be resolved peacefully and that the United States will not be drawn into Taiwan-related conflict.
Key policymakers in Beijing fully understand that military action against Taiwan would spark international isolation, possible military conflict with the United States and a certain boycott of the much-
prized 2008 Olympics in Beijing.
Taiwan's leaders, for their part, fully understand that the increasing economic ties between Taiwan and the mainland would be threatened by provocative steps.
President Chen and Vice President Lu in Taiwan fully understand that Taiwan must negotiate with the mainland from a position of strength, which requires immediate approval by Taiwan's legislature of a supplemental defense package.
Despite these factors working in favor of peace across the Taiwan Strait, it is possible that mainland hard-liners might push for military action against Taiwan after the 2008 Olympics or that conflict in the Strait may begin because of miscalculation by either side.
It is in this context that the European Union's current deliberations on lifting its arms embargo on China are so outrageous. With enormous loss of human life, the United States liberated the Nations of Europe during World War II, including France and Germany. For the new generation of European leaders to turn their backs on American national security interests and consider opening up the floodgates of weapons sales to the People's Republic of China shows that they have truly lost their moral compass.
Europe's leaders have argued that they will continue to restrict most arms sales to Beijing, even if the ban is lifted. Mr. Speaker, I simply do not believe this assertion. If there is money to be made in a troubled part of the world through arms sales, key European arms manufacturers are the first through the door to make that sale.
Mr. Speaker, the decision by the European Union is not final, and it is my strong hope that President Bush and our new Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice will make it a top priority to convince the European Union to reverse this dangerous course. Sadly, the key reason for the imposition of the arms embargo, China's horrendous human rights record, remains unchanged, more than 15 years after the massacre at Tiananmen Square.
{time} 1115
Europe's leaders must understand that there will be severe ramifications for the transatlantic relationship if they fail to do what is right and just, if they fail to respect internationally recognized human rights and the national security interests of their historic liberator and their most important ally, the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support our resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).
Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise as a proud cosponsor of House Resolution 57 and ask my colleagues to render their strong support to this resolution.
It is unconscionable that the European Union has decided to lift its arms embargo against the People's Republic of China, a regime that is a gross human rights violator and a country of proliferation concern, given its assistance to terrorist states like Iran.
The arms embargo was implemented in response to the Chinese regime turning its tanks against peaceful demonstrators in Tiananmen Square on that fateful day of June 4, 1989. The PRC has yet to acknowledge or even make amends for this massacre. The PRC harasses, intimidates, imprisons, and tortures religious worshipers, human rights dissidents, and any who seek to exercise their fundamental freedoms and who oppose the repressive apparatus of the regime in Beijing.
For the EU to remove the ban and for its largest members to steadily increase their arms sales to the PRC is an affront to all of China's victims, particularly to the victims of Tiananmen Square. It also undermines global efforts to hold other human rights violators accountable for their deplorable practices. How can the EU's so-called human rights dialogue with Iran or its discussions with Syria, for example, have any credibility when the EU has given a pass to the PRC for this massacre?
It is critical we also look at the implications for U.S. policy priorities on other issues. As the resolution before us articulates, the United States has significant security interests in the Asia and Pacific regions, including the security of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, and other critical areas. The EU decision could alter this delicate strategic balance in this region.
An even more daunting implication is how the EU's removal of the arms embargo on China could undermine counterproliferation efforts. Chinese entities have been sanctioned under U.S. law for transferring missile technologies to Iran. Concurrently, Iran has paraded its long-range Shahab-3 missiles that could reach and threaten U.S. allies in the Middle East and American forces stationed in the region.
Yet the EU decides to facilitate China's military buildup by lifting its arms embargo on the PRC. Within this context, is the EU complicit in the threat posed by Iranian missiles targeting U.S. interests with Chinese technology? For that matter, how will the EU respond to Iran missile threats when they reach European capitals, thanks to Chinese technology? How can the EU be taken seriously in its efforts to halt Iran's pursuit of a nuclear capability?
This is a matter of utmost urgency. The EU's decision to lift the arms embargo on the PRC can have grave repercussions. It could trigger a domino effect that could undermine our efforts to address and curtail threats across multiple sectors. It will only serve to emboldened oppressors and proliferators. We must stand together against such threats.
As the resolution underscores, this development in European security policy is inherently inconsistent within the concept of mutual security interests. Let us, through the overwhelming adoption of the resolution of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), strongly urge European leaders to reconsider this unwise course of action. I ask my colleagues to render their strong support for this resolution.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Democratic leader who has long been our leader on policy with respect to China.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, my colleague from California, and also for his distinguished service and for bringing this to the floor today. I am pleased to join our Republican colleagues. It is one area where we can work together to make the world freer, people freer, the world safer, and, hopefully, trade fairer one of these days.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution urging the European Union to maintain its arms embargo in the People's Republic of China. I commend the Committee on International Relations chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and our ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for bringing this resolution to the floor. They are tremendous leaders on behalf of human rights in China and, indeed, all over the world.
Almost 16 years ago, the Chinese regime shocked the world as it unleashed its army on its own defenseless people and crushed the peaceful pro-democracy movement in Tiananmen Square. We know that the human rights situation in China has not significantly improved since the arms embargo was imposed.
At the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre, it was seared into our conscience. One of the most enduring images of the 20th century was a picture of a lone man standing before a long line of military tanks. We remember how millions of ordinary students, workers, and citizens marched in peace; how they raised the goddess of democracy, an image of our own Statue of Liberty; and how they quoted our own Founding Fathers.
The United States and the European Union imposed complementary arms embargoes as a direct response to the Tiananmen Square massacre. Civilized governments were outraged at the brutality of the Chinese regime and took a course of action to ensure our weapons would not be used to harm innocent people in China, Tibet, East Turkistan, Inner Mongolia, and Taiwan.
For a billion Chinese and Tibetans, freedom remains a dream deferred. Journalists, activists, academics, workers, and religious believers are still persecuted and tortured. Beijing is still harassing and arresting dissidents and families of the Tiananmen victims.
The most recent State Department ``Country Report on Human Rights'' states that the Chinese Government's ``Human rights record remains poor, and the government continued to commit numerous and serious abuses. There was backsliding on key human rights issues.''
The recent passing of Zhao Ziyang, the former Secretary General of China, reminds the world of the courage of the heroes of Tiananmen. Zhao dared to resist the Chinese Communist Party's decision to crush the pro-democracy movement. And I remind my colleagues that at the time he was the chairman of the Chinese Communist Party. He very courageously, just weeks before the massacre, made a very crucial appeal to the students to leave Tiananmen Square to prevent bloodshed.
With tears in his eyes and bullhorn in his hands, he apologized to them for having come too late. His courage in opposing military force resulted in his dismissal from the government, his name erased from Chinese history books, and almost 16 years under house arrest, until his recent death. The Chinese Government has tried to erase the history of Tiananmen and Zhao's legacy, but the world will remember.
For all their power, the regime is afraid of Zhao. They were afraid of him in life; they are afraid of him in death. But the more they try to suppress his message and his courage, the stronger they make him.
Today, we are once again calling on Beijing to release thousands of Tiananmen activists held to this day and all the prisoners of conscience, whose only crime was to demand their basic human rights.
I commend the Bush administration for reiterating its support of the U.S. arms embargo. The European Union has showed leadership in fighting for human rights all over the world. Now is not the time for them to abandon those principles.
I just would like to make this point, because I mentioned trade in the beginning. Since the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre, for many years we have had debate on the floor as to whether we could use economic leverage to improve the human rights situation in China; that we could use economic leverage to improve the performance of the Chinese regime in regard to fairness and in trade with our country and to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by the regime to unsafeguarded countries.
That idea was rejected by the Congress, and I may say in a bipartisan way: President Bush, President Clinton, President Bush all shared the same view. But it was wrong, and it is still wrong.
The fact is that we did not use the leverage, and everyone said economic reform is going to lead to political reform; this trade is going to enable the Chinese people to be freer. The fact is that has not worked. And the trade deficit, which we thought was giving us leverage in 1989 of $2 billion, $2 billion, this enormous amount of money we thought was going to give us leverage for human rights, improve trade relations, as well as stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, well, the trade deficit today, thanks to this policy, is now $2 billion a week, not a year, a week. Over $2 billion a week.
The point I want to make in relationship to the European Union, though, is the following: for a long time over that time the Chinese Government was very clever. They took advantage of the U.S. because we welcomed them with open arms. Just flood our markets with your products, maintain your barriers to our products going into China, and you have this. China has a huge trade surplus. And where did they spend that surplus? They spent it in Europe, and they spent it in other parts of the world using economic leverage for a political purpose: just exactly what they argued against when we wanted to do it to improve human rights, to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and to improve the trade situation.
So it is no wonder the European Union does not have the kind of trade deficit with China that we have, because China buys from the European Union, or they did for at least long enough to get them with the program. And what the program is is a giant economic power using its economic power to suppress initiatives that make the world safer, that make people freer, and make trade fairer.
So I applaud again the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida for her remarks and the leadership of the committee for their initiative in bringing this to the floor; and I would hope, I would hope that the Bush administration's statements will now be met with firmness in dealing with the EU that this is important to us. Because the trade embargo is there for a reason, and now that it is lifted, if it is lifted, the world will be a less safe place.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).
Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
Rarely in human history have so many been armed by so few in a crass and cynical pursuit of profit at the expense of Asia's peace. The word should go forth that the French President is determined to sell weapons that will be aimed at Japan and Korea and Taiwan and the Philippines and the men and women of the United States military. These weapons will be built in France and pointed directly at the people who serve in the United States Navy.
In lifting the arms embargo against China, Europe will be making an enormous mistake. Europe's short-term concern with the corporate bottom line will lead to greater conflict and increased peril for Americans serving in uniform. Since 1989, China has been almost cut off from European technology, and China's leaders have responded by a cooperative foreign policy designed to lift this embargo so they can arm to the teeth as the rising power of Asia to challenge the other powers, all democracies on her periphery.
If you are pro-U.S. Navy, you should be against this. If you are pro-
Japanese, you should be against this. If you are pro-Indian, you should be against this. Because these European weapons will be directed at each of these democracies.
{time} 1130
This is a very short-term decision for a very few profits, and it is Jacques Chirac that is doing this. That will create greater insecurity in Asia, lay the seeds for a conflict, and maybe the death of Americans caused by French weapons sold for short-term profits.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I just want to make a comment about my good friend's observations. He is absolutely correct. This greed-driven policy by a Europe which was twice liberated in the 20th century by the United States, a policy which, by the way, this past year, in 2004, resulted in over a half a billion dollars of military sales already to China, with again the French leading the way. The degree of cynicism, the degree of greed displayed by some European leaders turns one's stomach.
I strongly urge all of my colleagues to vote for our resolution.
Mr. Speaker, we have no additional requests for time, and we yield back the balance of our time.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler).
(Mr. HOSTETTLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HOSTETTLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to wholeheartedly support this common-sense resolution.
The U.S. and European Union, as we have heard, established arms embargoes against the People's Republic of China following the June, 1989, Tiananmen Square Massacre.
The U.S embargo continues today in light of the widespread human rights abuses that continue under the Communist regime. But the European Union, in a move that can only be described as reckless, is moving to lift its ban on weapons sales.
EU states are even today selling China so-called nonlethal technologies that enhance its offensive capabilities. Advanced radar systems sold to China, for example, allow its military to better target U.S. warships and aircraft.
For this reason, I introduced in the defense authorization bill last year a provision to prohibit the Defense Department from buying weapons from foreign companies that sell weapons to the People's Republic of China. My measure, which passed the House, also would have made it U.S. policy to deny China defense technology that could threaten the U.S. or destabilize the Western Pacific region.
Unfortunately, this provision was dropped in conference as a result of Senate objections. But we are here again today discussing this vitally important issue.
I strongly encourage the EU to place international security and human rights ahead of any monetary benefits from selling weapons to China, and I urge passage of this resolution.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. The European Union imposed a ban on arms sales to the People's Republic of China following the Tiananmen Square Massacre back in 1989. In recent months it has become apparent that European nations, seeing an opportunity to profit from China's large-scale military modernization program, may well be prepared to lift that embargo in the near future, and I believe that would be a terrible mistake.
In a November 30, 2004, letter to the President of the European Union, 25 Members of this body who opposed the lifting of the arms embargo stressed that such a decision would alter the current fragile military balance across the Taiwan Straits. It would rapidly tip the balance in the PRC's favor. In the last year alone, China has added more than 100 missiles to its arsenal, bringing to more than 600 the number pointed directly across the Taiwan Straits at Taiwan.
The EU's imminent decision to lift the arms embargo would further isolate that island nation and endanger its sovereignty and the safety of its citizens.
A lifting of the European arms embargo and further modernization of China's army would also create new dangers for the United States and its Asian allies. If we were ever to be called upon, and I hope this never happens, but if we were ever called upon to intervene in an Asian military crisis, the lives of our servicemen and women would be increasingly endangered.
Mr. Speaker, our European neighbors need to think long and hard about the short- and long-term negative effects of the lifting of the arms embargo. Stability in Asia is all too important to dismiss for the sake of short-term profits for European arms dealers.
I thank the chairman for bringing this important resolution to the floor in such a timely manner. I particularly thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) for doing this, and I urge my colleagues to support the resolution.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I would like to close by thanking the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and those on the other side of the aisle for their strong support for this important issue. I ask all of my colleagues to join in strong bipartisan support of this critical resolution, H. Res. 57.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 57.
Mr. Speaker, while I support passage of this resolution, I am disappointed that events require us to debate it today. How any European leader could seriously contemplate the notion of arms sales to the regime in Beijing is, frankly, a mystery to me.
Beijing's abysmal human rights record has scarcely improved since the massacre at Tiananmen Square that prompted the EU to institute the embargo in the first place. The communist authorities in China continue to detain hundreds upon thousands of political prisoners. Torture remains widespread and systemic. Political freedom is nonexistent, as are the right to worship freely and the rule of law. The flow of information is rigidly controlled by government authorities and there is no independent media or judiciary.
And the Chinese regime has shown no signs of changing course. They have backpedaled on promises of democratic reform in Hong Kong and routinely threaten the peaceful democratic nation of Taiwan with military force. And these threats have only become louder and more belligerent in the years since the imposition of the embargo. In fact, the Chinese have become so bellicose and bold in their threats to
``crush'' Taiwan's self-determination that they no longer make any secret of their buildup--some 500 and counting--of missiles pointed directly at Taiwan.
So we must ask why? Why would any freedom loving European nation entertain the idea of selling weapons to a regime like the one currently ruling on the Chinese mainland? How could any nation that calls itself a friend of the United States seriously consider selling weapons to a regime whose stated goal is to annex, by force, Taiwan--a democratic ally of the United States? Perhaps most importantly, why would any European country sell weapons to the People's Liberation Army knowing that someday U.S. servicemen could be drawn into a conflict in the Taiwan straits?
Does the EU honestly believe it is in the best interests of the trans-Atlantic alliance to create a possible situation that could pit U.S. soldiers and sailors against Chinese soldiers wielding European weapons? Haven't enough U.S. soldiers been killed by European weapons in the last two World Wars? The European Union member nations should think very seriously about that last question before they decide to lift this embargo.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H. Res. 57, which urges the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the People's Republic of China. While I have been a supporter of increasing trade and diplomatic relations with China, I am not nearly as comfortable with the idea of lifting the arms embargo. I am also disturbed by reports that China has sold weapons to Iraq that bolstered the regime of Saddam Hussein and are now being used by insurgents who have gotten a hold of the regime's weapons stockpiles. China needs to take a giant step back in its weapons proliferation in order to become a valuable ally instead of the menacing figure it often portrays.
Again, I want to reiterate that while I have many concerns about the Chinese government, I have long recognized that trade with China has value for Americans and the people of China, which is why I voted in favor of Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) with China. My record on trade measures since coming to Congress demonstrates my willingness to evaluate each vote on its own merits, as long as worker and environmental rights are protected. In addition, I have voted for most-
favored-nation status for China, while I have continued to raise my voice against the ``undemocratic'' ways of China. Unlike during the Cold War, we have unparalleled opportunities to bring the people of China and America much closer together. Trade is one way to accomplish this, however my desire to bring our two nations together is overshadowed today by my concerns about China's role in the world, especially in the form of weapons proliferation.
China's weapons exports remain the most serious proliferation threat in the world. Since 1980, China has supplied billions of dollars worth of nuclear weapon, chemical weapon and missile technology to South Asia, South Africa, South America and the Middle East. It has done so despite U.S. protests, and despite repeated promises to stop. The exports are still going on, and while they do, they make it impossible for the United States and its allies to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction. I am especially shocked by the role of China in supplying Iraq with weapons, including chemical weapons that were used against the Kurdish people by the Saddam Hussein regime. Now many of those same weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents who are targeting our military personnel. China must cease and desist immediately from interfering in Iraq and bring itself into the international circle of non-proliferation efforts.
I urge the European Union not to lift its Arms Embargo against China, because doing so at this time will send the wrong signal. Relations between the United States and China are a long term effort, one which cannot be handled with a singular approach. I stand for trade and diplomatic relations with China because this increases our person to person contacts that can only serve to create friendly relationships. However, lifting the Arms Embargo at this time will give the signal that proliferation of these weapons is acceptable, and it is not. Lifting the Arms Embargo will also signal that a bad human rights record is acceptable, and likewise it is not. Lifting the Arms Embargo against China will also signal to other nations who seek to gain access to weapons of mass destruction that proliferation of these weapons is acceptable, and to this point the whole world must stand up and say that it is not. I will continue to support increased relations with China because it is a key nation in the world, but I will forever refuse to turn a blind eye to weapons proliferation that threatens the security of all nations.
Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 57, expressing the Sense of the U.S. House of Representatives that the European Union should not lift its embargo on the sale of arms to China.
After the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre the European Union imposed a ban on arm sales to China. I support this embargo, as I believe it helps ensure peace in the region and deters China from the use of arms against Taiwan. In the world we live in we should strive to ensure peace, liberty and democracy. I feel strongly that the European Union's lifting of the arms embargo would be detrimental to the fragile peace that we are striving to maintain, and I am proud to join my colleagues in support of the embargo.
Ms. BORDALLO. I would like to thank Chairman Hyde, Ranking Member Lantos, Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, and Congressman McCotter for initiating this resolution urging the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the People's Republic of China. I rise today to give my strong support to this resolution. The arms embargo we are discussing today was placed on the People's Republic of China in response to the massacre at the Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989. That singular event succinctly demonstrated the oppression of those who suffer under a closed society like the PRC. They suffered on that fateful day at the hands of a brutal suppression. I urge our European friends to uphold their principled stand against arms sales as they opposed arming Eastern Germany and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. At that time it was the safety of Europe that hung in the balance. Now it is the peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region that is at stake.
The gathering of students and peaceful protesters at Tiananmen Square that summer represented a value we in this country hold dear: the right to freely assemble. If you believe in that freedom, then don't lift the embargo. Let us remember the graphic image of the lone protester stopping a line of People's Liberation Army tanks on a Beijing highway. How will the governments of Europe explain that the next time this occurs the People's Liberation Army could be using French or German tanks to quell a protest for democracy?
One member of the PRC government recognized the plight of the Chinese people on that fateful day and had the courage to admit that the brutal suppression was a shameful tragedy. General Secretary Zhao Ziyang was then stripped of power and placed under house arrest until his recent passing. It is forbidden to discuss his heroism in China, but here on the floor of Congress we can be candid because we enjoy the right to free speech that the people of China do not. In his memory, I urge the good nations of Europe to recognize that the work begun by the protesters at Tiananmen is not done.
I admit that I have personal interest in keeping the arms embargo in place. The People's Republic of China has had a history of aggressive military acquisition. These forces may someday threaten our allies in the Asia-Pacific region. It was only recently that a Chinese submarine was detected circling our island. I urge the leaders of Europe to look beyond their own self-interest and consider the cause of freedom in making their decision concerning the arms embargo.
To this end, I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of House Resolution 57, to urge the European Union to maintain its arms embargo on the People's Republic of China.
Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 57.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________
