Text: Representative Adam Smith Support for China PNTR
(Smith: May China vote the most important I will make)Representative Adam Smith (Democrat of Washington) told House colleagues April 5 that he will support granting permanent Normal Trade Relations (NTR) status to China.
Smith said the May vote on whether to grant permanent NTR status to China would be the most important vote he would make. Speaker of the House Representative Dennis Hastert announced April 5 that he had agreed to schedule a vote on China NTR for the week of May 22.
"I consider this to be the most important vote that I will take as a Member of Congress and am strongly in support of it, not just for the economic advantages that it will bring to the U.S., but for the far more important reason of national security and global security, a peaceful world," Smith said in his House speech.
While acknowledging that his own congressional district would benefit from the opening of China's markets, Smith said the issue was more than just a matter of economic gain.
"We need to peacefully coexist with China. I, for one, do not want another Cold War," he said.
"I do not want a hostile relationship with China. We must engage with them to prevent that," Smith said.
The Washington Democrat conceded that opponents to granting permanent NTR status are right when they speak of China's shortcomings.
"On human rights, on labor rights, on protecting the environment, on their relationship with Taiwan, on basic democratic freedoms, China has a long way to go," Smith said.
"They have a horrible record across the board," he emphasized, "and I will rise with all of my colleagues and say that as often as possible and urge China to improve."
But, Smith added, "it is not as simple as saying, if China has done anything bad, therefore, we should not trade with them."
The question, he stressed, "is how are we going to pull them forward? What course of action is going to improve human rights, is going to improve labor rights, is going to improve how China treats Taiwan.
"I strongly urge our body to support PNTR for China, not just because of the economic advantages," Smith said, "but because it is important to the future of the world."
Representatives Joseph Knollenberg (Republican of Michigan) and Marion Berry (Democrat of Arkansas) also spoke April 5 in support of granting permanent NTR status to China.
Following is the text:
(begin text)
GRANTING PERMANENT NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS TO CHINA
(House of Representatives - April 05, 2000)
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gary Miller of California). Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in support of granting permanent normal trade relations to China, a vote that this House will face possibly as soon as next month.
I consider this to be the most important vote that I will take as a Member of Congress and am strongly in support of it, not just for the economic advantages that it will bring to the U.S., but for the far more important reason of national security and global security, a peaceful world. I think both of these issues are critically at stake in this vote that we will take.
What permanent normal trade relations for China means is that the U.S. has negotiated a trade agreement with China. In exchange for giving them permanent normal trade relations, we will get from them dramatic reductions in tariffs across the board on goods and services.
This is tied into China's entry in the WTO. But it is important to point out that, regardless of what this body does in permanent normal trade relations, China will probably enter the WTO. The rest of the world has as much to say about that as we do.
What we can decide in this House is whether or not we gain the benefits from the permanent normal trade relations treaty that was negotiated with China. In other words, will we begin the economic advantages of reduced tariffs on goods and service across the board to China.
There was a lot of concern about the trade deficit with China. What better way to reduce that than to have a trade agreement that lowers China's barriers to our goods but does nothing to change the barriers to their goods coming to our country. It helps level the playing field and would be a tremendous economic advantage for this country. In agriculture, in my own region, in aerospace and software, name it, we would have an advantage of gaining access to the Chinese market and, therefore, help improve our economy.
As I pointed out, this does not necessarily mean China will come into the WTO. The rest of the world will decide that issue. But the economics are only a tiny part of it.
What is far more important to me is the national security implications, the long-term implications that that has for this country and the rest of the world. We need to peacefully coexist with China. I, for one, do not want another Cold War.
I do not want a hostile relationship with China. We must engage with them to prevent that. I believe that we can. We have followed a policy of engagement and we must continue on that if we are to have a peaceful world. Another Cold War could lead to trade wars and can ultimately lead to military wars and World War III. I do not want that.
China is a country of 1.2 billion people. It is an emerging power. Whether we are engaged with them or not, they will be an emerging power. I want them to be one that we can peacefully coexist with, and trading with them is a critical first start to that effort.
Now, opponents of China typically start out their arguments by pointing out all of the bad things about China, and I will not disagree with any of those. On human rights, on labor rights, on protecting the environment, on their relationship with Taiwan, on basic Democratic freedoms, China has a long way to go. They have a horrible record across the board. And I will rise with all of my colleagues and say that as often as possible and urge China to improve.
But it is not as simple as saying, if China has done anything bad, therefore, we should not trade with them. The question is, how are we going to pull them forward? What course of action is going to improve human rights, is going to improve labor rights, is going to improve how China treats Taiwan? Isolation?
We tried isolation with Cuba for 40 years. Cuba is a tiny nation not 90 miles off of our coast, and our efforts at isolating them has not done one little bit to improve any of their record on democracy, human rights, or anything.
Do we really believe that we can isolate China and pull them forward, a nation of 1.2 billion people with its own power source? If we cut off China, we will be leaning towards a bipolar world that will do nothing to improve human rights.
That is why many human right organizations have said that engagement with China and entry of China into the WTO is critical to us having a better relationship with them and critical to improving human rights in China. We must show them what a capitalist democracy can do. If we do, their people will demand the basic freedoms that the rest of us enjoy. To the cut them off and to isolate them is to empower the hardliners in China who want to maintain the brutal dictatorship forever. We must engage with them and pull them forward.
Many also argue that because of China's attitude towards Taiwan we should not give them access to the WTO. Taiwan wants China in the WTO. They are the ones most affected by that. And they want it for a very logical reason. In essence, they would be trapped in a room with a bully with nobody around. They want as much company as possible. They want the bright light shined on China and their activities for their own protection.
We have many concerns in this area, but giving China PNTR status is going to do more to pull forward those concerns than anything else.
I strongly urge our body to support PNTR for China, not just because of the economic advantages, but because it is important to the future of the world.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State -- usinfo.state.gov)
Return to The United States and China.Return to IIP Home Page.