Morton Kondracke
http://www.jewishworldreview.com --
IN SPITE of multiple misbehavior by China's Communist
government, Congress should approve permanent
normal trade relations for China - and chances are
improving that it will.
The Clinton administration is putting on a full-court press to have PNTR enacted by Memorial Day, and supporters are increasingly confident, despite earlier doubts, that the measure will pass the House.
White House aides expect some - but not serious - falloff from the 260-170 vote by which the House renewed one-year normal trade status to China in 1999 amid the flap over alleged Chinese nuclear espionage.
This year, the administration is seeking votes early enough - first in the Senate, then the House - that election-year pressures don't cause opposition to build.
A complication is insistence by GOP leaders that the White House guarantee 100 Democratic votes for the measure. President Clinton's aides are hoping that Republicans will settle for less and that business groups will pressure the GOP leadership to schedule an early vote.
In 1999, 150 Republicans joined 110 Democrats to maintain China's trade status, with 98 Democrats and 71 Republicans voting against. Clinton aides say opposition estimates that 30 Democrats have switched against China trade are "bogus."
To achieve what he clearly regards as a major item of his presidential legacy, Clinton is meeting regularly with Members in the "Yellow Oval," the family room above the Oval Office. He has Cabinet secretaries calling wavering Members and delivering speeches almost daily. The White House has set up a war room in the Old Executive Office Building to keep tabs on Members' concerns.
And Clinton has assigned Commerce Secretary William Daley, who masterminded the effort to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994, to direct the sales effort, along with White House Deputy Chief of Staff Steve Richetti, an experienced vote counter.
Clinton aides say that Vice President Al Gore, who previously allowed his stance on PNTR to be ambiguous, will lobby for the measure, bolstering Democrats who fear retaliation from labor unions if they support it.
House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.), who's close to labor, is expected to vote no, but is not lobbying against PNTR.
Instead, according to aides, Gephardt is telling Democrats to vote whichever way will help them win in November and recapture Democratic control of the House.
Gephardt is also said to be urging the unions not to punish Democrats who support PNTR. If they follow that advice in the larger interest of having a Democratic House, it will reduce pressure on Democrats to vote no.
The White House is pushing for an early vote not only to lighten election pressures but also to force Members to focus quickly on the merits of the issue, which favor PNTR.
The economic arguments for PNTR are a no-brainer: China will have to lower its present barriers to U.S. products, creating market opportunities for U.S. producers and jobs for American workers. U.S. markets are already open to Chinese products.
Passage of PNTR also will tighten the terms of China's entry into the World Trade Organization and allow the United States to appeal for enforcement if (or, almost certainly, when) China violates the terms of the U.S.-China trade pact negotiated in November 1999.
While the economic case for PNTR is clear, on the political and strategic level Clinton and pro-PNTR Republicans are making a gamble that free trade will push China toward democracy and international good citizenship.
There is a danger that China's rulers plan to gain the benefits of world commerce - money, technology and management know-how - and use them to dominate Asia militarily and to keep tight control on China's population.
Certainly, China's persistent cracking down on religious groups and political dissenters, missile buildup, use of prison labor, violation of trade agreements and recent threat to use force if Taiwan does not move faster toward reunification are bad signs.
On the other hand, it has happened elsewhere in Asia - in Taiwan, South Korea and the Philippines, for example - that intensive economic and political contact with the rest of the world helped to turn former dictatorships into democracies.
The prospect that China could follow that model surely would be preferable to a decision now to isolate China from U.S. influence - particularly when Europe won't follow suit and will expand its trade with China without exerting pressure for human rights and democracy.
The best arguments against PNTR - or for delaying it until next year - are that Congress shouldn't reward China just after it's threatened Taiwan and shouldn't give up its power to review Chinese behavior annually.
However, Taiwan itself supports PNTR. The United States should equip Taiwan with the weapons it needs to defend itself from missile attacks - especially Aegis missile destroyers and Patriot missiles - and create an alternate annual monitoring mechanism.
Voting down PNTR would amount to a decision by Congress that China is
a long-term strategic adversary. It may become that, but the United States
should do what it can to push in the opposite
JWR contributor Morton Kondracke is executive editor of Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill. Send your comments to him by clicking here.
03/16/00: Lieberman as veep would help Gore
03/14/00: Can Bush, McCain Unite to Beat Gore?
03/09/00: Can GOP Forge Unity After Nasty McCain-Bush Race?
03/07/00: What accounts for McCain's excesses?
03/02/00: 'Debate' Proved Gore Is This Year's Best Gut-Fighter
02/29/00: Surprises! The 2000 GOP race is full of it
02/25/00: Voters want centrist in White House
02/23/00: Gore would hit McCain's record
02/15/00: Will negativity hurt McCain in S.C.?
02/10/00: How hard should Bush hit McCain?
02/08/00: Bush must retool his entire campaign
01/27/00: Could Gore beat Bush as Truman beat Dewey?
01/20/00: Big New Surplus Estimates Could Alter 2000 Politics
12/21/99: Bush improves, everyone panders
12/16/99: Prospects improve for campaign reform
12/14/99: Riots raise free trade as 2000 issue
12/10/99: Gore won GOP 'debate' in N.H.
12/07/99: Election pits Bush cuts vs. Medicare boost
12/03/99: Can race be a constructive issue in 2000?
11/19/99: White House race may be best in decades
11/16/99: Where is Bush on health care fight?
11/11/99: Will TV stop profiteering from politics?
11/09/99: Is GOP isolationist, or just partisan?
11/04/99: Gore, Bradley Run Opposite Races On Style, Substance
11/01/99: GOP, Clinton could reach deal swiftly
10/27/99: Bush to fight 'culture wars' -- positively
10/21/99: Porter, Mack: heroes on medical research
10/19/99: Gore scores among party big shots, but polls go South
10/14/99: Bush critiques could help GOP Congress
10/12/99: Congress can save health care from ruin
10/07/99: Will gun-control cause the GOP to shoot itself in the foot?
10/05/99: Gore moves: Desperate but necessary
10/01/99: Fox, Armstrong make case for NIH
09/28/99: Dems' race brightens Bush's chances
09/23/99: East Timor deflates `Clinton Doctrine'
09/21/99: Buchanan v. Bush? Yeah right
09/17/99: Candidates turn attention to poverty
09/15/99: Bush's education problem
09/09/99: Budget makes 2000 an `issues' election
09/07/99:Airport rage increases, with good reason
09/02/99: U.S. future up for grabs in 2000
08/31/99: U.S. Capitol needs visitor's center -- soon
08/24/99: Will 2000 be the year of the foreign crisis?
08/19/99: Neither party has upper hand for '99
08/17/99: Ford gets freedom medal one month early
08/12/99: There's time to catch Bush, say Gore aides
08/10/99: Rudy, Hillary try much-needed makeovers
08/09/99: GOP must launch new probe of Chinagate
08/02/99: Pols blow fiscal smoke on budget surplus
08/02/99: One campaign reform should pass: disclosure
07/27/99: Gore leads Bush in policy proposals