Why does the Clinton Administration insist on financing the military buildup of China when that huge country could eventually pose a threat to the United States comparable to the Soviet threat that hung over us for so many years of the Cold War? Why does the Clinton-Gore Administration toast the tyrants who sent tanks into Tiananmen Square and host Red Chinese arms dealers at White House coffees, but meet only on the sly with the Dalai Lama of Tibet?
Why do the advocates of “free trade” and “global economy” continue to insult our intelligence with the fiction that friendly commercial relations will cause China to respect democracy and human rights? That doesn’t pass the straight-face test: it hasn’t worked in the past ten years, and the evidence is overwhelming that China now looks on the United States, not just as an economic competitor, but as the enemy.
China is using the cash windfall of its $40 billion a year trade advantage to build an awesome military arsenal. The Chinese shopping list includes several aircraft carriers, modern missile-equipped warships, nuclear attack submarines, fighter aircraft, and land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles with multiple warheads.
Those are expensive toys, and the Chinese are incapable of buying such luxuries without the U.S. cash that flows from the pockets of Americans. What if they are not mere toys but parts of a master plan, not only to dominate the Pacific, but to threaten the United States?
China’s expansionist aspirations are no secret; General Chi of the People’s Liberation Army has crudely commented about China’s ability to deliver a nuclear warhead on Los Angeles. Now that China has pocketed Hong Kong, China can turn its avaricious eyes on Taiwan, Singapore, Indonesia, Guam, and even threaten the sailors of the U.S. Seventh Fleet.
A classified Air Force report released in May states that China is about to deploy a new mobile strategic missile with multiple warheads. Concluding that China’s effort to build an advanced ICBM capability is “steadily increasing,” the report states that this missile “will be a significant threat not only to U.S. forces deployed in the Pacific theater, but to portions of the continental United States and to many of our allies.”
China is determined not only to become a nuclear superpower but also a world-class industrial player. Three spectacular deals, which pretend to be merely commercial, will vastly expand China’s military and industrial espionage and subversive capabilities.
The China Ocean Shipping Company (Cosco), a 600-ship global shipping company controlled by the People’s Liberation Army, has acquired a 20-year lease on the U.S. Naval Shipyard in Long Beach. U.S. taxpayers recently spent a reported $500 million to modernize this all-ship, deep-water port which is located at the epicenter of our defense research and defense production in southern California.
This is the same Cosco that was caught red-handed in Oakland, California, last year smuggling 2,000 illegal AK-47s into the United States to sell at a big profit to Los Angeles street gangs.
Clinton personally lobbied for the Cosco deal at a White House meeting in September 1995. Congress should investigate to find out whether U.S. national security was compromised in exchange for contributions to Clinton’s reelection campaign, and whether the cozy relationship Chinese agents had with the Clinton Administration gave them access to trade secrets that allowed them to influence U.S. government trade policy.
A Cosco subsidiary has made an agreement to lease the ports of Colon and Cristobal at both ends of the Panama Canal (the strategic American property which Jimmy Carter gave away). And another Cosco subsidiary has made a deal for a shipyard in Mobile, Alabama.
This latter deal was facilitated by a $138 million, 25-year, U.S.- taxpayer-subsidized loan guarantee. It was arranged under a 40-year-old Transportation Department program that was intended to help the American shipping industry.
Corporate welfare has thus taken on a new meaning under the Asian policies developed by Bill Clinton, Al Gore and former Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown. It now appears that “competing in the global economy” means U.S. taxpayers must subsidize foreign businesses, too.
When are we going to put a stop to the bleeding of U.S. taxpayers by the foreign-giveaway lobby that dishonestly hides behind such slogans as “free trade”? Trade with China isn’t “free” when U.S taxpayers are subsidizing it through long-term, low-interest World Bank loans, International Monetary Fund bridge loans, Asia Development Bank credits, Export-Import Bank financing, and Overseas Private Investment Corporation guarantees.
We should reject Most Favored Nation (MFN) status and World Trade Organization membership for China, not only for national security reasons, but also because of its persecution of Christians and massive theft of our intellectual property. We should impose a tariff on imported Chinese products equal to the tariff China now levies on U.S. goods going into China (instead of tolerating the 35% to 2% disparity). We should prohibit all Chinese bases on American soil.
The coming vote on MFN trading status for China will be a good test to demonstrate which Members of Congress will stand up for American national security and jobs, as well as the persecuted people of China and Tibet.
