We must remember that one of every five human beings on this earth lives in China. They proceed from the fragile hope that unilaterally imposed trade sanctions would cause China to change both its domestic and foreign policies. The administration proceeds from the realistic conviction that revoking China's trade status would derail prospects for U.S.-China cooperation on issues important to America's strategic interests, ranging from dismantling North Korea's nuclear program to encouraging dialogue between Beijing and Taipei to controlling nuclear proliferation to safeguarding the global environment to cracking down on international terror, drugs and crime. These losses would weaken Hong Kong just when it most needs to assert its strength and autonomy. Moreover, China would surely retaliate against U.S. exports, endangering more than 170,000 high-paying American jobs.
Critics say that disrupting commerce with China is essential to uphold U.S. principles.
I believe strongly that our strategic dialogue can both protect American interests and uphold our principles, provided we are honest about our differences on human rights and other issues and provided we use a mix of targeted incentives and sanctions to narrow these differences. In contrast, the elimination of China's normal trade status, rather than advancing human rights and the rule of law, would actually harm those in society most dedicated to their promotion. Whatever the outcome of the debate, China will be a rising force in Asian and world affairs. History teaches us the wisdom of encouraging emerging powers to become part of international arrangements for settling disputes, facilitating shared economic growth and establishing standards of international behavior. Domestically, we should not let the differences voiced in the current debate obscure agreement on long-term goals.