U.S. Dept. of State - IIP: The United States and China

Transcript: Agriculture Secretary Delegation Briefing
("Constructive and friendly" discussions on agriculture)

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Daniel Glickman, U.S. Ambassador to China Joseph Prueher, and members of a congressional delegation held a press briefing in Beijing April 26 on issues surrounding the upcoming vote in Congress on permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status for China.

In response to questions from the press, Glickman and members of the congressional delegation -- which includes Representatives Norm Dicks from Washington State, Greg Walden from Oregon, Gregory Meeks from New York, Rub¡¦ Hinojosa from Texas, and Governor Edward Schafer from North Dakota -- elaborated on their recent meeting with Chinese Vice-Minister Wen Jiabao.

The American officials said that because Wen Jiabao is in charge of agricultural issues, the two sides discussed agriculture in general as well as the specifics of how to raise capital for small agricultural producers, how to further the economic interests of Chinese farmers, and the future of biotechnology in China.

The Chinese minister "emphasized the importance of the Agricultural Agreement that was signed [between the United States and China], as well as some of China's purchases under those agreements," Glickman said.

"And he indicated that this agreement shows that China will in fact honor its agreements that they would reach with the United States," Glickman added.

In response to a reporter's question concerning the effect Chinese threats against Taiwan could have on the PNTR vote in Congress, Congressman Dicks replied that belligerent statements from Beijing "certainly [are] an issue and there is concern about it in the Congress." He pointed out, however, that the leadership of Taiwan supports China's accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO).

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Daniel Glickman

Press Conference in Beijing, China

April 26, 2000

SECRETARY GLICKMAN: Thank you. Well, let me first of all say some of you were with us yesterday evening when we came in. But let me just give you a little bit of an idea about today. We had a very good lunch with the American Chamber of Commerce members. Some of you were there. And then we had an excellent meeting with some of the future leaders of China, hosted by Motorola. Representatives of Motorola, Lucent, Hewlett Packard and Intel talking about the job training that's going on by some of these companies here, working conditions in some of these companies and we had a lot of time for dialogue. And I thought that was fascinating.

Let me just mention, we did meet with Wen Jiabao the Vice-Minister. It was a good discussion for all members who had the opportunity to ask questions. The climate was constructive and friendly. I tried to emphasize the importance of the PNTR vote and the PNTR issues, as well as emphasizing the fact that the vote is very, very close. I didn't want to leave the impression that this was necessarily a done deal. There is still a lot of work to be done in the next four weeks to get this to pass, because as you know, not every member of this congressional delegation, even in this group, is for it. There are a couple of undecided members and I wanted to emphasize to him that particular fact.

He explained, by the way, he was very positive. I don't want to characterize everything that he said, but a couple of things struck me. One is that he said China needs the world and the world needs China, in talking about the nature of Chinese accession to the WTO and why this is important for both China and the rest of the world. And he also talked about the great change that has taken place in China in the past 20 years. He emphasized that change as well as the fact that the relationship between the United States and China is still developing in a forward manner. So it is not static. I think that was also an important recognition.

I happen to believe, as does the President, that the WTO is a great way to help move that change constructively and positively. That is my own opinion. In the area of agriculture, we talked about a lot of agricultural issues and he emphasized the importance of the Agricultural Agreement that was signed between the U.S.-China, as well as some of China's purchases under those agreements. And he indicated that this agreement shows that China will in fact honor its agreements that they would reach with the United States.

So I thought it was a good and constructive meeting. Of course, we have a lot of things left to do on this trip. I think I will stop now and allow anybody to ask any questions of anybody here.

Q: Just because Vice Premier Wen Jiabao does hold the portfolio for agriculture, I was very curious if you could go into any detail about, did he discuss what he thought would be the impact of WTO accession on China's domestic agricultural sector? Could you go into any more detail than what you just said? And also, I know that on the aborted trip to the Great Wall this morning that Vice Agricultural Minister Wang Baorui was there. Same question; I was wondering did he have any insights that he shared about what the impact would be on China's agricultural sector?

SECRETARY GLICKMAN: The Vice Premier himself talked in more general terms. But he reaffirmed China's importance of the agricultural agreement, the purchases that China had made of citrus, wheat, and meats, and how that shows that China will in fact honor its agreements generally. That was reinforced. But we did not go into any specific detail on the effect on Chinese agriculture. We were sorry because of traffic that we were unable to get to the Great Wall. We said half facetiously if we couldn't get to the Wall maybe they could bring the Wall to us. But that didn't go over very well. That obviously wasn't going to do.

But anyway there were some discussions on the bus. I wasn't privy to all the discussions. There were some discussion of other issues.

GOVERNOR SCHAFER: I think we talked quite a bit about agricultural in general. And we had discussions about how to raise capital for small agricultural producers. We had quite an extensive discussion on how to uplift the peasant farmers, if you will, out in the countryside, to further their economic interests.

One of which is agricultural equipment. Being North Dakota is a manufacture of agricultural equipment the importation of agricultural equipment and those kind of things -- the mechanization of production is an issue. Those are the kind of things we talked about that would be make life better for farmers out in rural areas.

GLICKMAN: Mr. Galvin is head of our Foreign Agricultural Service. Can you think of anything else that was discussed on the bus?

GALVIN: We did have some additional discussions about biotechnology and the outlook for biotechnology in China. And we asked the Vice-Minister, for example, if the view of the Government toward biotechnology is positive or cautious or what. He indicated it was positive.

GLICKMAN: The visit at Motorola where we heard from all the companies, but particularly about their contributions to the education of their workers, was a particularly significant thing, and one that I am sure is well enough known throughout the United States.

Q: I have a couple of questions. One is we have four members of the House of Representatives here out of 300 some odd, yes, 435. So the question is to any member of the delegation who wishes to answer, why has it been so difficult to get members of the House to actually come to China, when this is from what everyone is saying, an extremely important vote that will really influence China policy and U.S.-China relations for some time to come? Why is it that so few members of the House have been willing to come? I am wondering if some of you could explain that to us? The other question is directed I think to Representative Meeks and Representative Hinojosa since you were the two undecided members on this visit. I am wondering if you could characterize whether you are satisfied with the program. You both spoke at noon today about your desire to understand the impact of this agreement on ordinary farmers, ordinary workers. Not just the business people, but the ordinary folk.

Are you satisfied with the amount of access that you are getting to ordinary workers, ordinary farmers, ordinary Chinese people? Are you going to be having any unscripted, unplanned meetings with any citizen of this country? Or do you feel that your meetings are pretty much pre-selected, pre-chosen?

CONGRESSMAN DICKS: I will take on the first question and let the other members. This is a two-week recession. This is a national election year. Every single member of the House of Representatives is running for reelection. A lot of people want to be with their families during this period, or home campaigning and working in their districts which is certainly understandable.

I'm just pleased as one member of Congress that two of the undecided voters, two of the undecided Members, were willing to take a week of their vacation and come here. I personally think and, yes, you're right, this is a highly crucial vote and I hope that Members will take every opportunity be briefed. And one thing about it is that the four us will go back and talk to a lot of our Members about what we have learned here and our impression of the significance of this vote.

CONGRESSMAN MEEKS: Thus far I have found the meetings that we have had to be very informative. I have also found that the Embassy has been very helpful. I will be breaking away at some point tomorrow. I have not had the opportunity to break away today, but I will be breaking away at some point tomorrow to talk to some of the everyday citizens of this nation. So I have not had that opportunity yet just simply because it is our first day, and I did want to speak to some of the government officials. I did want to speak with some of the business representatives. But tomorrow, I will get the opportunity, and I have been assured, and I have worked out plans, so that I can break away from the group to talk to some of the everyday people.

CONGRESSMAN HINOJOSA: My response to your question if there was a plan laid out for us on the first day, and I've stayed with the plan that was devised by the Embassy? I think it's been informative for me also to listen to members of the American Chamber of Commerce here in Beijing and to have opportunities to be at a table and in a setting where I heard those who have widgets or services to sell in China and how they have seen that the market is huge.

Again, there are two sides to this, and you heard me say that there were some people who are in the rural areas that are going to be impacted positively and in some cases negatively, as we have experienced in the Texas border region after the implementation of NAFTA.

And I wanted to hear from them what they expect. And I wanted to ask them that if they were impacted negatively, what did they expect the Chinese government to do to help them in the transition as they produced other products, or possibly to find other ways of making a living? And that question was answered this afternoon by the Vice Premier. He said that the Chinese government is very serious about helping those who need their help. That access to capital, as the Governor mentioned, would be available. That they are going to see that the small businesses and business firms in this country are able to help themselves. And so all I can say is that in the next three days we are going to be here, I will do similar to my colleague from New York, and try to speak to the small and medium sized entrepreneurs. And I will also talk to those who are starting up businesses especially in the franchise business. Especially McDonalds, Kentucky Fried, and Pizza Hut, because I see that as an opportunity for some of the people in the United States to come and look at that as an area where they can also participate, as the doors open for commerce and trade. So again, I am not saying that there isn't a possibility; I simply want to be able to hear it from the Chinese citizenry.

CONGRESSMAN MEEKS: Can I just add that I thought that the meeting that was real significant was the young men and women we met at Motorola. I am interested tomorrow, when I do get a chance to break away, to talk to similar-aged individuals and ask what their outlook and view is in regards to China and American relationships. Whereas, I found that they were very positive and very hopeful with the group that we met with today.

GOVERNOR SCHAFER: Just to follow up on today, I did have a chance to be in a bus station, [and] one market all by myself with nobody else around. I found people friendly, kind. I had a great conversation with a group of cab drivers and not sure either one of use knew what we were saying. After that I also made an unscheduled stop with a member from the Embassy at another market, and had a chance to get around outside the schedule thing. I think that has been an opportunity that has been important here today as well.

AMBASSADOR PRUEHER: I would like to make one comment on that, related to access. I think for people from our country the United States to understand and to know a little more about this country, the best possible way is to come here and take a look for themselves. I am grateful to the delegations for coming to do this during this period. Also our Chinese, the Chinese leadership, understands how the U.S. system works and they know how important it is for Congressional delegations or Congressmen or individual Americans to come see China. And they really give a lot of access to people that come and spend time discussing issues.

They are also quite willing for people to go out a great deal on their own in the cities and just look around and free-form it, and we tried to do that with the Embassy schedules we set up. The discussions with officials are constructive and they like to talk with Congressmen, and they know that needs to be done. We don't always agree on the topics. Or we may agree on the subject, but not the outcome of the discussing those topics. But they are willing to do that too. And I think we need to move forward in that regard. And the more the better, for people coming to take a look at China so they can form a view from our country on what's going on here.

CONGRESSMAN ?: I would also make the point that I would wager most members of Congress have made up their minds. Either privately or publicly, on how they are going to vote on this issue, and that there are very few truly undecided members left out there. Most of us had commitments made for this two-week recess or district work period before this trip was even scheduled, before the invites went out. It's tough, eight days in a row, to do anything in this business.

Q: My question is for Congressmen Walden. Today at noon, Congressman, you made the remark that you, something along the lines of the terms negotiated last year that got us to this point for China's accession into the WTO, were very favorable to agricultural in America. We heard that echoed later from the feed grain industries, the pork industries, and the soybean industries about how great they think the deal is. What is the Chinese reaction when we talk about we negotiated this great deal, and now we are thinking that maybe we don't want to do it?

CONGRESSMAN WALDEN: Well, that is a really good point. We obviously don't emphasize that side of the discussion. But when you look at the tariff reductions, and especially when you look at the sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards they have agreed to adhere to. To me, that is extraordinarily important, as I mentioned at lunch regarding northwest white wheat. For first time in 26 years. Although it is a small shipment, it is a shipment and that's important. And that is, I think that they are watching this very closely, and understand the concern, as the Secretary and I think the Ambassador mentioned understand [that] we have a President who can't dictate Congress to take an action. Although he is working very hard to get us to do that. But we have separation of powers and they hopefully understand that. I think it would be an extraordinary setback in our overall Sino-American relations for us to fail to past PNTR. It's far more than just an agricultural economic issue. It is a multi-dimensional relationship that's at stake here.

CONGRESSMAN DICKS: They clearly think that this is an important vote and very important to the relationship between the two countries.

Q: Last night, during your arrival conference you mentioned that in addition to agricultural and PNTR issues, you would bring up other issues such as human rights and Taiwan. Specifically with regards to the Taiwan issue, has the Taiwan issue come up in any of your conversations with government officials today?

SECRETARY GLICKMAN: The human rights issue was discussed briefly today. The Taiwan issue, I don't believe was brought with them as of yet. We are having a meeting with Taiwan ... Wang Dao-Han in Shanghai. So the issue will arise. But the human rights issue was raised.

Q: On the Taiwan issue again, I wonder if some of you maybe could make your positions clear: Does the Taiwan issue -- the threat of war in the Taiwan Straits -- have any affect on how Congress is thinking about PNTR? And what do you hope to hear in Shanghai that would help to alleviate those kind of concerns?

CONGRESSMAN DICKS: In the Congress this is discussed, the relationship with Taiwan, and I said last night I hope that we can stay with the one China policy, and that any effort to resolve the Taiwan issue has to be done peacefully. That's the position of the United States.

It's interesting the leadership of Taiwan supports China being in the WTO. So I think that's important to note, and I think that some of our colleagues were unaware of that who wanted to use that as their reason for their position. But it certainly is an issue and there is concern about it in the Congress. The Foreign Relations Committee had a Taiwan Relations Act that was overwhelmingly passed by Congress, reiterating our position that the United States wants this issue resolved peacefully, and not with force.

AMBASSADOR PRUEHER: I'd like to add on that I think the threat of war may not be the right characterization of what's going on right now. I think it is a bit of an over-statement. There has been a -- the Mainland has not renounced the use of force, and has described some conditions under which they might use force.

So we are in a period now post-election in Taiwan. It is a period that is very sensitive. It is a period where there is uncertainty on what a new government in Taiwan might do. The people of China and the government of China have said they would wait and see, look and listen -- listen to the words and watch the actions, and that's where we are right now. And it is a sensitive period. It is a period where there needs to be some creative ideas to reduce the tension. But I like to -- in my own view, and I think the view of anybody else looking at this carefully -- the threat of war is a bit of an overstatement on this issue right now.

Q: I have a question for Governor Schafer, last night you said that there were 44 governors in support of PNTR. I mean last night 44; today 47. I assumed three more signed on. Why is there such a big gap between the strong support among the governors, about a fifty-fifty split maybe, and between the House members?

GOVERNOR SCHAFER: We did, by the way -- to clarify the numbers -- we did have an agenda to the original letter, which three more Governors signed. So we do have 47 Governors now signed up out of a total of 54 in the National Governors Association -- that includes the territories like Guam and Samoa.

I think the difference between the legislative branch and the executive branch is one of delivery. The legislative branch is obviously the one that sets the policy gives it the direction, passes the law and puts forth the rules and regulations. Governors have to deliver. Governors are responsible for our businesses in the states. We are responsible for creating an atmosphere for economic growth. Trade is a big issue in economic growth.

Our states rely on shipping our goods and services beyond our borders, if we are going to lift the economic conditions of the people in our states. And I think Governors are more pragmatic; they understand the need, and are more willing and not more willing, and by necessity have to weigh into these issues on a deeper level because we have to deliver them.

So I think Governors recognize the need for trade they understand the economics and importance of it. We look towards our legislative branches to give us direction. But as we have to administer and deliver I think we get involved at a deeper level. And that's why governors are signing on to support.

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)