From: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Subject:      IFCSS HQ NR-4046:  Bill is on the way
Reply-To: IFCSS HQ <ifcss@WAM.UMD.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 22:52:10 GMT
Comments: To: ccnl@utarlvm1.uta.edu, china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

**************************************************************
IFCSS Headquarters News Release No. 4046    September 30, 1992
             TALKING POINTS: LATEST VERSION
**************************************************************
Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS)
   733 15th Street, N.W., Suite 440, Washington, D.C.20005
         Tel. (202)347-0017  Fax: (202)347-0018
                Email: ifcss@wam.umd.edu


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
     This afternoon, the Chinese Protection Bill was signed
by all four major sponsors and was enrolled. It is now on
the way to the White House.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


     The following are the "Talking Points" prepared by our
legal advisers in Arent/Fox. It incorporated newest information.


-------------------------------------------------------------

             QUESTIONS & ANSWERS CONCERNING S.1216

Why do the Chinese Students trapped here after Tiananmen need
this legislation?

      We cannot make plans for the future for ourselves and our
      families if we do not know what will happen to us after
      1993.  Our fate after 1993 is in a state of limbo.  In
      addition, we are afraid to work openly for democracy in
      China so long as United States immigration law may force
      us to leave while the brutal repression continues in
      China.

         For many of us, there is no assurance that we can stay
          in lawful status after the President's Order expires.

         Accounts of dissidents who returned and were caught
          continue.  Punishment is severe.

         We are not all famous enough to expect worldwide
          pressure to come to our aid.

         The political prisoners from Tiananmen are still in
jail.

Wouldn't legislation anger Beijing?

     Perhaps, but it gives them a strong incentive to begin
      proving to the world that they are ceasing their human
      rights abuses.  As long as Congress delays definitive
      action, the hardliners can keep their options open,
      continuing their brutal torture of political prisoners and
      their blanket repression of dissent.

     The hardliners believe they have until 1994 to begin
      reacting to calls for freedom for the Tiananmen victims.
      If Congress delays action, it will reinforce Beijing's
      belief that "business as usual" can continue for at least
      another year.

     Besides, under this legislation China herself has control
      over what happens.  If China changes its policies and
      actions sufficiently by next summer and its safe for the
      students to return, then the President simply can so
      certify.  Then no chinese student would be able to utilize
      this bill.  The bill is just an insurance policy, in case
      China does not change.

Isn't the President's Executive Order sufficient?

      The Executive Order took care of short term safety
      concerns.  This legislation complements the Executive
      Order by answering the question of what happens when the
      Executive Order expires at the end of next year, December
      1993, if matters in China have not improved.  Under S.
      1216 the protection will become permanent unless Beijing
      can convince the President that all Chinese nationals may
      return home in safety.

Is it Safe to Return?

Champions of China may blithely suggest that it already is safe
to return to China.  The Bush Administration apparently is
gathering data now in China, designed to show that some students
who have returned have not been persecuted.

      It is outrageous to suggest that Chinese students will be
      welcomed with open arms:

         Some of the persons who have returned to Beijing have
          been supporters and indeed agents of the Beijing
          government.  Of course, these persons have not
          suffered any retribution.

         There have been several accounts of students who
          returned were caught and have suffered severe
          punishment.  Most recently, Shen Tong, a Boston
          University student active in the pro-democracy
          movement, was the object of Beijing's retribution.
          Previously two dissidents went back to China from the
          U.S. after promises of a safe return.  They were badly
          mistreated and beaten.

         In addition, a very recent letter smuggled out of a
          Chinese prison labor camp and published by the
          Washington Post gave a glimpse of the grizzly torture
          and mistreatment of incarcerated pro-democracy
          activists.

Ask yourself Senator, if your child was a Chinese student who had
stood up for democracy and freedom in this country would you want
him sent back to China, when Beijing has that kind of a track
record?

***************************************************************
         IFCSS Headquarters Office    Signature
***************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china