From: haiying@cs.mcgill.ca (Haiying ZHANG)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: S1216 in Light of Bush's Veto on Conditional MFN
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:52:24 GMT
Organization: McGill University, Montreal, Canada




         As it  is  reported  through  various  channels,  the  latest
     attempt  by  the congress to attach human right conditions to the
     extension of most favoured nation trade status to China has  been
     shot  down  by the president with the reason given as the measure
     "would not lead to faster progress in advancing our goals."

         He claimed that the U.S. has  a  dialogue  with  China  "that
     gives  us  an  avenue  to  express  our views directly to China's
     leaders."

         Does this mean that on all these delicate matters  especially
     when  dealing  with  the last communist strong hold in the world,
     one on which our Mr. President happens to have a direct  personal
     experience  and  understanding,  one  nation  in which people/the
     leadership's  way  of  thinking  is  vastly  different  than  our
     democratic  mind, the US hence the free world would be better off
     to leave it to the hands of the administration, people with  whom
     Mr.  Bush  can  directly  control, people who allegedly just know
     better?

         He said "It is easy to be discouraged by the pace of progress
     in  this  area,"  But  it  would  be a serious mistake to let our
     frustration lead us to gamble with policies that would  undermine
     our  goals."  To  touch  base  with the American public, he added
     "China's retaliation for the loss of (most-favored nation)  would
     cost us this growing market and thousands of American jobs."

         By his definition, congress's insistency to impose  a  strict
     condition on  China in trade is an act of emotion, a move that is
     not rationalized. To allow this to happen would be equal  to  put
     our  hard  earned, never anticipated win over the communist world
     lead by the evil empire to gamble. It would jeopardize  his  well
     engineered  approach  to  bring  the  Chinese  leadership  to the
     embrace of freedom and  democracy  in  concert  with  his  global
     policy of new world order.

         While all this sound good and well, watching through the haze
     of  the  mass media, he seemed failed to address the changes that
     the congress brought into this new version of the battered  bill.
     He  did  not  tell  the American public whether he thinks to only
     revoke MFN for state-owned enterprises while leaving the  private
     sector  and joint ventures intacted is still too sever in context
     of the current Chinese economy, or it  is  virtually  unmanagable
     with  the  Chinese  government  in  absolute  power  to  make any
     arrangement they like to evade the US  restriction.  Rather  than
     creating  some  nuisance  for  both  US  and China, we should try
     something more workable and straight  forward.  He  did  not  say
     whether  in  his  opinion whether MFN is not the right vehicle to
     try to press the Chinese  government  to  release  the  political
     activists  detained in the aftermath of its brutal suppression of
     the Tiananmen movement. He failed to point out that  attempts  to
     pin  point  and ban prison labor products from importation to the
     US is barking on a wrong tree.

         Further more, until today, he did not bring his  master  plan
     to  public  light  as  of how to approach these issues in dealing
     with China that aroused  so  much  interest  and  attention  that
     congress  tried  again and again to try to use the United States'
     economic muscle to bring the seemingly irremediable  and  totally
     unpredictable  Chinese  hardliners  to reason. He did not set out
     how he is going to fit  China  with  its  manipulative  patriarch
     hiding  and  poking  behind  a  smoky  curtain into his new world
     order. Neither did he confess that he has long given up the idea.
     From  his  deep personal understanding of the Chinese leadership,
     he has given  them  another  century  to  come  around.  For  the
     relevant  time  being, you just have to cast the issue off. Leave
     China alone, let it develop  in  its  own  pace.  Just  like  the
     Chinese  leaders  always  fond  of  remind us that China with its
     unparalleled and ever continous long  history  possesses  such  a
     unfound  of  uniqueness  that all criteria and theories governing
     basic human right and path of development in a human society have
     to  be redrawn when it comes to applying it to this five thousand
     years old middle kingdom.

         Now the bill has been shot back into congress. We  shall  see
     whether  it  can  gather enough support to override the veto this
     time around.

         Almost everyone from China  who  reside  in  the  states  are
     watching  the  president's  move  very  closely  ever  since  the
     protection bill eventfully went pass  the  Senate.  Indeed,  some
     panic  was caused by some netters mistaken Bush's veto on MFN for
     his final execution of S1216. With his act yesterday,  he  seemed
     to  indicate that despite the lack of popularity in the polls, he
     has not made any fundamental changes in his approach to China. He
     still  chose  to  act in favour of the Chinese government. He did
     not approve the measures put  forward  by  others  in  trying  to
     protect  the  Chinese  national  in  this  country and to display
     America's strong stand for freedom and democracy. He may  not  go
     along  with  it  this  time  still.   He knows what it is like in
     China. He experienced the life when freedom was a lot  less  than
     it is now. He is prepared to stand up for his believes.

         On the other hand, politics is full of gives and takes. There
     is  seldom  any  direct  path to any approach. The election which
     would ruthlessly decide our honorable Mr.  President's  political
     fate  is  less  than  one month away. He has to be calculative on
     every move he makes. He may not be able to afford to be  seen  as
     pro  Chinese  government  all  the  time. He might well give some
     concessions on other issues such as this  protection  of  Chinese
     nationals  on  the  soil  of freedom. This will show the American
     public that on the one hand, he is not afraid to show his  strips
     to  the  aging  hardline leaderships in China. While on the other
     hand, he is a president for jobs. He would not put  any  American
     jobs  in jeopardy over some ideological issues especially in this
     trying economic hard times.

         The other thing that is worth noting is that he did not  veto
     the  conditional  MFN bill right after congress passed it. He did
     not just drag his feet to pocket veto it either.  He  gave  it  a
     week  time,  vetoed  it. Shoved it back to congress, and yet left
     enough time for congress to act to override  it.  This  could  be
     seen as he is a man of reason. He carefully weighted all sides of
     argument, acted with his morale conscious. He does not want to be
     seen  as  a  bully  pushing  his  own  wishes down to everybody's
     throat. He is willing to accept people's choice instilled by  its
     elected representatives on the Capital Hill.

         All in all, to  read  a  president's  mind  is  not  easy  if
     possible  at all. It does not matter whether he is democratically
     elected or just held in power by sheer brutality of the forces he
     controls. We can just hope that no matter what motivation he has,
     the final action will be beneficial to us, the ones who just  had
     a   first  taste  of  freedom  and democracy, who only have a very
     limited political clout, who are not even eligible to  vote,  and
     yet  who are struggling hard against all odds to start a new life
     on this continent.


                                     Haiying