From: kxd5425@usl.edu (Du Kaisheng)
Subject: Re: Political Prostitutes or Democractic Activitists  ?
Organization: University of Southwestern Louisiana
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 18:48:45 GMT

In article <102663@bu.edu> lix@thames.bu.edu (Xiaowen Li) writes:
>In article <1992Nov20.031407.21695@marlin.jcu.edu.au> phsj@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Su Jianfeng) writes:
>
>IFCSS GaoGans recently showed some real concerns about the possibility
>that CMFN yields losing MFN. Thus in advocating CMFN, they showed more
>prudence than before, for example, they haven't joined Toycotters to pressure
>for CMFN bill yet (as far as I know). I applaud their concerns and their
>responsibility. However, what they told the State Department today was
>too vague:
>
>>The IFCSS officers pointed out that it has been the official stand of
>>the organization to attach well-measured human rights conditions to
>>China's MFN status.
>
>What is definition of "well-measured"? Without clear definition, these
>words can be easily interpreted as unconditional support to CMFN. I hope
>these vague words really mean that "HR conditions which will NOT result
>in finally revoking MFN". If so, I think IFCSS should speak it out very
>clearly.
>
>I suggest a compromise between concerned UCMFN and CMFN'ers:
>
>1) Push China to release more 6-4 related prisoners; IFCSS should send
>a few GaoGans to China for this purpose, not for propoganda only.
>
>2) GaoGan JH Li told us, there will be a CMFN bill, no matter we CSS
>take what stands. I doubt this, but let us accept this as a compromise:
>No Chinese should push for a CMFN bill this year without knowing what
>will be the final version. And we all stop debating.
>
>3) If nonetheless, a CMFN bill is proposed, we all support IFCSS to
>lobby for making the conditions "well measured" as defined above.
>
>-- 
>The SOS China Education Fund is a non-political, non-profit and independent
>organization to raise money promoting the education in rural China. All donations
>are tax-deductable. Make checks or money orders payable to: "SOS China Education
>Fund"; c/o Jie KANG, 2610 E. 5th Pl, Apt. 1, Tulsa, OK74104, USA.

I am an UCMFN supporter.  From my point of view this kind of thing is simply
political game.  The president of U.S will always take the interest in the 
first place.  They may want to do something in the name of human right.
They listed a lot of conditions in the name of caring about the human right
of chinese people.  Why? Did you watch what has happened three more years ago
in TAM?  How do you know your decision will be for the benifit of chinese
people? Because  there are some heroes escaped from China who can stand for
the chinese.  THen the action is justified.  So I think that it is very
important not to lobby for the CMFN in the name of ALL chinese students in 
America.  In this case at least they will loss a strong excuse for doning
that.  

The trade between China and America is crutial to the economy of China but
not to US. We simply can't afford to loss it.  One fourth of the foreign
trade is with US.  I do not have a figure to show how many people are now
employed or partially supported by the trade.  But it is definitely a huge
nunber.  It is inhuman to let those people loss their jobs in the name of 
human right.

Human right is important.  BUt what is the use of a poor democratic country.
Do the homeless people have any right in this great democratic country? They
are simply too humilated to do anything. They even do not have any self-respect
because of their poverty. Also people in a rich country will definitely enjoy more
democracy.  There are countless people who died for a rich and strong China,
including  
those dead in 1989.  Today's economy reform is the second chance ( first is
from 1949 but Mao blew it) in more than a hundred years to realise the dream.
Do not block it, even out of good intention.

Du