#00-03

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm delighted to have an opportunity to appear before this Committee on behalf of the more than 13 million members of the AFL-CIO and our affiliate unions.

It now seems likely that Congress will be asked to grant permanent normal trading relations to the Peoples Republic of China.

You should not.

An affirmative vote would reward the Chinese government at a time when there has been no improvement in their abysmal human rights record and would significantly reduce our ability to insist upon improvement in the future. It would also dramatically weaken our ability to insist that China live up to trade agreements that it has already made, and that it routinely violates.

The record is clear.

China routinely tramples human rights and religious liberty. It is a massive user of prison labor, and, according to the Logai Research Foundation, operates over a thousand forced labor camps, many of which produce commercial goods.

The Chinese government refuses to allow workers to join free and independent trade unions and imprisons those who try exercise this fundamental right to freedom of assembly and to organize.

Tens of thousands of Chinese citizens have been detained for daring to express their religious views. For instance, Amnesty International reports that over 200 Roman Catholics were arrested when they tried to celebrate Mass in 1997.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, I could go on and on with examples of the Chinese government's outrageous repression of basic rights.

The question that will be before this Committee and the Senate is, in effect: will the United States make it easier for the Chinese government to go on and on repressing its citizens and violating every norm of international conduct? We believe that a grant of permanent normal trading relations will have exactly that effect. It will signal to the Chinese government that the international community will continue to turn a blind eye and welcome China to a seat to the table.

Not only that will send the wrong message to China, but China will use its seat at the table to obstruct our efforts, and those of others, to insist that those who wish to gain benefits from the world trading system must meet international standards with respect to labor rights and environmental standards. President Clinton was correct when he told the World Trade Organization that labor and environmental standards ought to be incorporated in the rules governing the trading system. China's unchecked accession to the WTO will work against those goals directly and indirectly. First, it will, perversely, give the world's biggest law breaker a voice in writing the rules. Second, it will signal to others that we don't mean what we say and that they can continue to repress their citizens and violate international standards without any fear that they will be called to account.

On these grounds alone Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, you should refuse to grant China a blank check by voting no on permanent normal trade relations. But the story does not end here.

China also routinely violates existing trade agreements and high-ranking Chinese officials have made it clear that they have no intention of living up to the deal negotiated with the United States in Bejing last fall.

Since 1992 the United States and China have entered into three bilateral trade agreements and a memorandum of understanding on prison labor. They have failed to live up to their obligations in all four cases. The annual USTR report on foreign trade barriers lays out China's failure to comply in numbing detail. Mr. Chairman, I'm sure you are familiar with USTR's report so I will not recite their findings here, but simply observe that the violations are blatant, widespread, and continuing.

And if past behavior were not bad enough to raise questions about Chinese intentions with respect to the latest agreement we need only to turn to the words of the Chinese leaders themselves.

• •In a November 1999 fact sheet discussing the U.S. China accession agreement, the USTR reports, "China agrees to award (insurance) licenses solely on the basis of prudential criteria, with no economic needs test or quantitative limits." Just a few days later Ma Yongwei, chairman of the China Insurance Regulatory Commission told the Financial Times that "Bejing reserved the right to block licenses for foreign insurance companies if their approval seems to threaten stability of economic policy."
• •The USTR also reports that with respect to meat experts, "China has also agreed to the elimination of SPS barriers that are not based on scientific evidence." But Chinese trade official Long Yongtu told the South China Morning Post, "Diplomatic negotiations involve finding new expression. If you find a new expression this means you have achieved a diplomatic result. In terms of meat imports we have not actually made any material concessions."

Mr. Chairman, I could go on and quote Chinese officials saying they have no intention to honor commitments with respect to telecommunications, wheat, and petroleum, but time is short. The record is clear. China has not lived up to past commitments, has no intention of living up to its latest commitments, and if we grant permanent NTR we will have given up our ability to protect our interest by using bilateral tools to respond when violations.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee let me sum up.

China routinely violates the rights of its people and agreed to norms of international behavior. The United States is seeking to strengthen the ability of the international community to insist that standards are adhered to, but the Chinese government has made it clear that if it joins the World Trade Organizations they will oppose those efforts. And finally, Mr. Chairman, China has failed to live up to past commitments and Chinese leaders have clearly communicated that practice will continue. Contrary to what Ambassador Barshefsky and Secretary Daley told this Committee earlier granting permanent trading normal relations will effectively pardon China's past violations and give them a blank check for the future.

Thank you for your attention and I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.