Transcript: Baucus Says PNTR Has Support of Three-Fourths of Senate
(China WTO accession, PNTR national imperatives for U.S.)A long-time supporter of granting China Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status says the bill to grant PNTR to that country "has the strong support of at least three-fourths of the Senate."
H.R. 4444, Senator Max Baucus (Democrat of Montana) said in a July 24 speech to the Senate, "is deeply in our national interest."
The Montana Democrat said the bill should have been passed "months ago."
"We have had to struggle to find time to consider it in this chamber," Baucus said, and "we are now approaching the eleventh hour of this session of Congress with a week left this month and a few weeks in September."
According to Baucus, there is a struggle between "the forces of reform and the forces of reaction" in China. While no one can predict how it will end, he continued, "it is certainly in the vital interest of the United States to do everything we can to support those who favor reform over totalitarianism."
The United States "must work to incorporate China into the international community. We need to engage China with the goal of promoting responsible behavior internally and externally," he said.
China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO), Baucus said, "will help anchor and sustain" economic reform efforts and "empower economic reformers."
The free trade advocate acknowledged that China would not become "a market-driven economy overnight," but added, "it is in our interest that they move in this direction. And the WTO will help the process."
China is not America's enemy; at the same time, "China is not our friend," he said.
The issue for the United States "is how to engage China, and this means engagement with no illusions," Baucus said.
The question the United States has to answer, he said, is "How do we steer China's energies into productive, peaceful and stable relationships within the region and globally?"
Incorporating China into the WTO and granting China PNTR are national imperatives for the United States, Baucus said.
Following is a transcript of Baucus' speech from the July 24 Congressional Record:
(begin transcript)
PERMANENT NORMAL TRADING RELATIONS WITH CHINA
(Senate - July 24, 2000)Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I would like to speak a few words on a matter that will be coming before this body, I hope, later this week; that is, beginning the process of the United States agreeing to extend permanent normal trading relations status with China.
I would like to step back for a few moments and reflect a bit on its significance and on its implications. The irony is that we are even talking about this today because I think the bill to grant China PNTR has the strong support of at least three-fourths of the Senate. It is deeply in our national interest. I wish it had been passed some time ago. Actually, we should have passed it months ago. Instead, we have had to struggle to find time to consider it in this chamber. We are now approaching the eleventh hour of this session of Congress with a week left this month and a few weeks in September.
I personally believe this issue should have been handled differently. We should have brought it up much earlier. But later is better than never. I am glad we are finally approaching the denouement.
For over two millennia, China was ruled by a series of imperial dynasties. The last Emperor was overthrown in 1912. Warlords, dictators, and the Japanese military then took over parts of the country at various times.
In 1949, the Chinese Communists took control of the entire Chinese mainland. Chiang Kai-shek and his supporters were forced to flee to Taiwan. Then followed three decades of absolute, totalitarian, Communist rule by Mao Zedong.
To oversimplify, in 1979, Deng Xiaoping signaled the beginning of the end of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideology as the underlying construct of the Chinese economy, polity, and society.
Another critical turning point was Deng's so-called `Southern Journey' in 1992. He visited Shenzhen, other parts of Guangdong Province, and Shanghai. On that journey, he advocated more economic openness, faster growth, and more rapid progress toward a market-based economy.
For the next two decades, we witnessed both progress and retreat in China's economic and political developments. Dramatic opening to foreign products and foreign investment. Yet a continuing government effort to maintain control over telecommunications.
The massacre of students at Tiananmen Square in 1989. Yet relatively unfettered access today by many Chinese to the Internet. Repeated violations of contract sanctity. Yet the development of domestic stock markets and Chinese companies placing issues on foreign stock exchanges.
The battle in China between the forces of reform and the forces of reaction continues. No one can predict how it will end, or when. But it is certainly in the vital interest of the United States to do everything we can to support those who favor reform over totalitarianism. Those who favor private enterprise over state-owned enterprises.
That means we must work to incorporate China into the international community. We need to engage China with the goal of promoting responsible behavior internally and externally. Encouraging them to play by international rules. Integrating the Chinese economy into the market-driven, middle-class, participatory economies of the West.
Economic reforms never have an easy time. And the forces in China that want to maintain the status quo are strong.
But, economic reform, moving to a market economy, transparency, direct foreign investment, listing of companies on overseas markets. Progress in all these areas is of vital importance to the United States as they relate to stability in China, accountability, and the development of a middle class. China's entry into the WTO will help anchor and sustain these economic reform efforts and empower economic reformers. China will not become a market-driven economy overnight. But it is in our interest that they move in this direction. And the WTO will help the process.
Around the world, we have seen that economic growth leads to the development of a large and strong middle class. Eventually, the middle class makes demands on political leaders for greater participation, accountability, and openness. It takes time. For example, eighty years ago, the Kuomintang, the KMT, was created by the same Soviet advisors who created the Chinese Communist Party. Fifty years ago, the KMT massacred Taiwanese citizens. Twenty years ago, the KMT still ruled Taiwan under martial law. Yet Taiwan just held its second truly democratic election.
There are many other examples. Look at Korea. A quarter of a century ago, the Korean government tried to murder the dissident Kim Dae Jung. Now, President Kim Dae Jung has begun to transform Korea's economic structure. He has traveled to Pyongyang in one of the most remarkable initiatives in modern world history. He is worried about being turned out of office in the next democratic election; such is the way of democracy.
The Philippines in 1986, Thailand in 1990, Indonesia in 1999. They all showed us the power of the development of a middle class. There is nothing fundamentally unique about China that makes a similar type of change impossible, or even improbable, over time.
Once China joins the WTO, China will be accountable for its behavior to the outside world, for perhaps the first time in history. The dispute settlement system at the WTO is far from perfect. Many members are working to open up dispute settlements and make it more available to the outside world. I have been among its most vociferous critics. But WTO dispute settlement will allow other countries to examine Chinese domestic economic practices.
It will force China to explain actions that other members believe violate global rules for the first time in world history. When a violation is found, it will put pressure on China to change and comply with the internationally accepted rules of the WTO. Not a perfect organization, but certainly better than none. This type of external scrutiny of China is virtually unprecedented. It has implications that may go far beyond trade, as China learns about the need to respect the rule of law among nations.
Let me turn to Taiwan for a moment. Taiwan will accede to the WTO very shortly after China does. What will happen when both enjoy full membership?
They will participate together, along with all other WTO members, in meetings ranging from detailed technical sessions to Ministerial level gatherings. There will be countless opportunities for interaction at many levels. Under the WTO's most-favored-nation rule, they will have to provide each other the same benefits that they grant to all other members. That is a very important principle. Taiwan's current policy limiting direct transportation, communication, and investment with the mainland will not stand up to WTO scrutiny. Each will be able to use the WTO dispute settlement mechanism against the other. They will have to meet directly and deal with economic differences in a peaceful way.
Presumably, either could take reservations, such as a national security exception, against the other in certain areas. That is a decision still to be made. But, no matter what, membership in the WTO and WTO-induced liberalization will increase and deepen ties between Taiwan and the PRC in trade, investment, technology, transportation, information, communications, and travel. And that has to contribute to the maintenance of peace across the Taiwan Strait.
China is emerging from one hundred and fifty years of national torpor. How we in America, and how the leadership in China, manage this relationship will set the stage for regional and global politics, security, and economics for decades to come.
We must make a profound choice. Do we bring China into the orbit of the global trading community with its rule of law? Or do we choose to isolate and contain China, creating a 21st century version of the cold war in Asia?
It is a truism in international relations that rising powers have proven to be the most dangerous. Germany at the end of the 1800s and the Soviet Union in the 1940s. But this is not 1900 or 1945. As the world has become smaller for us because of revolutions in information, transportation, and production, so for China has the world come closer.
China is not our enemy. China is not our friend. The issue for us is how to engage China, and this means engagement with no illusions. Engagement with a purpose. How do we steer China's energies into productive, peaceful and stable relationships within the region and globally? For just as we isolate China at our peril, we engage them to our advantage.
Incorporation of China into the WTO, and that includes granting them PNTR, is a national imperative for the United States.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
Return to The United States and China.Return to IIP Home Page.