From: rg@rg.b24a.ingr.com (Robert Greene)
Subject: Re: Clinton and Values
Reply-To: rg@rg.b24a.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corporation
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:51:28 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.165302.5506@m5.harvard.edu, (Dave Borden) writes:
|> In article <8032@news.duke.edu> eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK) writes:
|> 
|> >I am not a foreign policy expert by any means, but I don't know how you
|> >can encourage (e.g.) China to effect democratic reforms by refusing to
|> >trade with them or speak to them diplomatically. (Mind you, I do have
|> >some problems with our current relationship with China, but I don't see
|> >better alternatives.)
|> 
|> The view held by at least some China experts (Roger Sullivan among them;
|> you can check out his article in the Spring 1992 issue of "Foreign Policy",
|> is that we should place tariffs on exports from their government-owned
|> industries, while allowing complete free trade with respect to their
|> private sector, thus encouraging the free market while putting pressure on
|> the government.  Sullivan also thinks we should discontinue all prestigious
|> high-level contacts; but of course we should continue to do our business
|> as needed - just not in any high-profile way.  These policies are aimed at

    I must admit, this is the first I've heard of this idea.

|> making things uncomfortable for the autocrats in Beijing, without breaking
|> off relations.  They've repeatedly broken important arms-control agreements
|> which they've made with us; this demonstrates the insufficiency of the
|> current approach.  Bush has done all he could to reassure Beijing that
|> everything is really all right, despite the moral indignation expressed

    Please note that I don't concur with these sentiments.  I feel as though
    Bush did what he could, considering the particulars of the situation.

|> in Congress and by the public.  Sullivan feels that this approach has made
|> them think they can do anything they want, without risking Most-Favored-
|> Nation status.  The approach described above is a way to increase the
|> pressure for democratic reforms and compliance with arms-control agreements
|> without harming the free enterprise that is so beneficial to the Chinese
|> society.  If they want their state-owned enterprises to benefit through
|> relations with our economy (their state-owned enterprises are all operating
|> at substantial losses, currently), then they will have to enact political
|> reforms.
|> 
|> I personally think that tariffs on the state-owned industries should maybe
|> be accompanied by threats of tariffs even on the private enterprise to be
|> levied sometime in the future.  The government has decided that it needs
|> free enterprise, that in order to keep power they need to keep the economy
|> growing and the standard of living rising.  They've even publicly endorsed
|> free enterprise and some private ownership, though couched in their own
|> Marxist-Maoist language.  If we take steps to demonstrate our moral
|> indignation
|> in a credible way, a way which indicates that real action could be
|> forthcoming,
|> they will be scared, and might just start to cooperate, in a slow, cautious
|> way.  I'm not a foreign policy expert either, so take the preceding paragraph
|> more seriously than this one.  (I hope this paragraph is taken a little
|> seriously, though.)  I was glad to see Clinton taking positions on China
|> which
|> are identical to those taken by China policy experts like Sullivan.
|> 
|>    - Dave Borden
|>      borden@m5.harvard.edu

    I have a few questions.  What would you do when the Chinese government
    immediately cancels (makes illegal) all import of American made
    products in retaliation?  For example, the billions worth of new
    Boeing aircraft.  Do you think that the EC will stand firmly behind
    the US and not allow Airbus to fill those cancelled orders?  Will
    un-employed workers in the US then become the main priority?  Would
    a quick reversal of these new tariffs then make the US look silly?

    Please don't take my questions as rhetoric, I truly am interested in
    a reasonable conversation, because I also felt pretty low about not
    being able to do anything concrete (as opposed to harsh statements
    issued by the president) after the T-square incident.

-------------
Robert Greene

(205) 730-8276
rg@rg.b24a.ingr.com
!uunet!ingr.com!b24a!rg!rg
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc