POLITICS-US: Clinton Defends China Policy

By Jim Lobe Reprint | | Print |

Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Jun 11 1998 (IPS) - U.S. President Bill Clinton, speaking just two weeks before a state visit to China, Thursday defended his “comprehensive engagement” policy with Beijing which had been attacked by right-wing Republicans and other critics.

Clinton denied charges that he had subordinated U.S. principles, and even national security, to the commercial interests of big business. In a speech at the National Geographic Society he declared that a “stable, open, prosperous China that assumes its responsibilities for building a more peaceful world is clearly and profoundly in our interests.”

“Seeking to isolate China is clearly unworkable,” Clinton stressed. “Most important, choosing isolation over engagement would not make the world safer; it would make it more dangerous.”

He went on to argue that U.S. interests in Asian stability, the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other global problems from crime to the environment, required Washington to pursue a cooperative relationship with the world’s most populous nation.

Clinton, scheduled to start a weeklong visit to China June 24, will be the first U.S. president to visit the country since Beijing’s crackdown on “pro-democracy” forces and the “Tienanmen Massacre” of protesting students in June 1989.

The incident provoked outrage in the United States, forcing then-President George Bush, a staunch supporter of close ties to Beijing, to impose a number of economic and military sanctions which gradually were lifted during the past nine years.

Clinton assailed Bush during the 1992 presidential campaign for “coddling tyrants” and resisting stronger sanctions against Beijing, including the denying “most-favoured-nation” (MFN) trade benefits unless China improved its human-rights performance, as then urged by many of his fellow-Democrats.

Clinton adopted precisely that policy on taking office in 1993 but abruptly abandoned it one year later, adopting instead a policy of “comprehensive engagement” designed to coax China with incentives toward greater co-operation with Washington on a range of issues, including human rights.

Within months, the administration resumed high-level military ties and negotiated an accord by which China agreed to adhere to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). It also stepped up commercial ties with Beijing, even as it admitted that the human- rights situation remained as dismal as ever.

Many Democrats and human-rights activists were stunned by Clinton’s sudden reversal of policy, but, backed by intense lobbying by US-based multinational companies with interests in China, the president’s new direction was sustained in Congress where most Republicans lined up behind Clinton.

The 1994 Congressional elections, however, brought to Washington a large group of right-wing Republicans who, in many cases, owed their seats to the so-called Christian Right which had long considered the Communist government in Beijing anathema for its alleged policy of coercive abortions and persecution of Christians and other religious minorities.

Disappointed by Republican backing for Clinton’s engagement policies, leaders of the Christian Right, including James Dobson and Gary Bauer, have steadily increased pressure on the party’s leadership in Congress to reconsider its position, much to the displeasure of the Party’s corporate backers.

The result has been a series of high-profile hearings on religious persecution and abortion practices in China, as well as a major effort to investigate the administration’s role in approving the transfer of sensitive missile technology to China by US companies which contributed heavily to the Democratic Party.

In recent days, some prominent Republicans have called on Clinton to cancel his visit or, at the least, to boycott his official reception at the Great Hall of the People to demonstrate his condemnation of the 1989 repression and continued human rights abuses. The hall is located at Tienanmen Square.

Last week, the House of Representatives voted 305-116 to approve a resolution that urges him to boycott the ceremony. “We need to put pressure on communist China,” declared Rep. Dan Burton. “Are we supposed to look the other way just for the almighty dollar?”

These attacks clearly put Clinton on the defensive, and Thursday’s address marked his first major effort to answer the critics and lay out a comprehensive policy agenda, which he called “principled (and) pragmatic,” in advance of his trip.

“I’m going because I think it’s the right to do for our country,” he declared, adding that the Sino-US relationship “will, in large measure, help to determine whether the new century is one of security, peace, and prosperity for the American people.”

Washington needed China’s cooperation on a wide range of issues, Clinton argued. In coping with the ongoing financial crisis in Asia, for example, a devaluation by Beijing could set off a new round of devaluations in the region that would badly damage prospects for recovery, he said.

Similarly, Beijing has played a major role in convincing North Korea to freeze its nuclear programme and is certain to be a key player in easing tensions in South Asia after last month’s nuclear detonations by India and Pakistan and reduce proliferation of dangerous technology to other nations. China’s participation in the Kyoto Convention to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – of which Beijing will soon be the world’s biggest producer – is critical to “one of the central challenges we face” in the global environment.

As for trade, the erection of tariffs or other barriers would “only penalise our consumers, invite retaliation from China on 13 billion dolalrs in United States exports, and create a self- defeating cycle of protectionism that the world has seen before,” he warned.

On human rights, Clinton said, “we have a fundamental difference with China’s leadership.” But “by integrating China into the community of nations and the global economy, helping its leadership understand that greater freedom profoundly serves China’s interests and standing up for our principles, we can most effectively serve the cause of democracy and human rights within China.”

He rejected the House resolution on boycotting his official reception. “Protocol and honouring a nation’s traditional practices should not be confused with principle,” he said. “In the end, if the choice is between making a symbolic point (by boycotting the ceremony) and making a real difference, I choose to make the difference.”