97-52 F Radio Free Asia CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE LIBRARY OF CONGRESSNUMBER: 97-52 FDATE: October 24, 1997TITLE: Radio Free AsiaAUTHOR: Susan B. EpsteinDIVISION: Foreign Affairs National Defense DivisionTEXT:Summary In response to some Asian countries' human rightsviolations and to promote democracy in countries such asChina and North Korea, the Administration and the 103rdCongress agreed that the United States should increasebroadcasting to this part of the world. The InternationalBroadcasting Act of 1994, title III of the ForeignRelations Authorizations Act of 1994/95 (P.L. 103-236),created the Broadcasting Board of Governors under the U.S.Information Agency (USIA) and authorized the Board to makegrants available to conduct surrogate broadcasting services(See Endnote 1.) (referred to as Radio Free Asia or RFA)to the People's Republic of China, Burma, Cambodia, Laos,North Korea, Tibet, and Vietnam. Throughout 1997, lawmakers who oppose Beijing have beenseeking ways of promoting democracy and human rights inChina other than through denying most-favored nation (MFN)trade benefits. One suggestion is to dramatically increasefunds to expand Radio Free Asia and Voice of America (VOA)broadcasting into China. Within the context of the foreignrelations authorization legislation, the Senate would raiseRFAžs funding from its FY1997 level of $9.3 million to aceiling of $20 million for FY1998 and FY1999; the Housewould authorize a higher ceiling of $30 million for thetwo years. Similarly, both House and Senate have passedappropriations that would set RFAžs FY1998 budget at thesame levels as the authorizing committees: $20 million inthe Senate and $30 million in the House. A separate bill(H.R. 2232) has been introduced that also would increasethe budget of RFA substantially and require the Presidentwithin 90 days to submit a plan to Congress on how toachieve continuous broadcasting into China via Radio FreeAsia and the VOA.BACKGROUND The idea of U.S. surrogate broadcasting in Asia datesback to the Korean War and was again raised during theVietnam War. Interest in creating a broadcast service toAsia re-emerged after the Chinese government's 1989crackdown on the pro-democracy movement in Tiananmen Square. In December 1991, The President's Task Force onInternational Broadcasting recommended increasing U.S.surrogate broadcasting activities into the People's Republicof China, as did The Commission on Broadcasting to thePeople's Republic of China in September 1992. A third U.S.government committee, The U.S. Advisory Commission on PublicDiplomacy, recommended in August 1992 enhancing VOAbroadcasting to China. In early 1993, the Administration sought in its FY1994budget request $30 million for the creation of a surrogateservice which was referred to as Radio Free Asia. On June15, 1993, the President announced his proposal for a majorconsolidation of U.S. nonmilitary, internationalbroadcasting, including the creation of a new "AsianDemocracy Radio." Throughout that year the 103rd Congress debated whether,and how, to broadcast into Asia. Proponents of surrogatebroadcasting into Asia argued that: 1) it would promotedemocracy, especially in China where political repressionand government control of news is strong, 2) freer and moreopen countries would enhance U.S. bilateral relations inAsia, and 3) the United States has an obligation to promotefreedom around the world, not just in Europe. Opponentsclaimed that China is a much more open society with manysources of information, unlike Europe and the Soviet Unionin the 1950s when Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL)was established. Expanding Voice of America (VOA)broadcasts rather than creating a surrogate service would beless expensive and less confrontational, they contended,reducing the possible reaction by Asian governments ofdigging in their heels and moving even further away fromdemocratic principles. After numerous hearings and debates, Congress authorizedthe idea of a Radio Free Asia surrogate broadcasting entityin the United States International Broadcasting Act of 1994-- title III of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act,Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995 (H.R. 2333, signed into law onApril 30, 1994, as P.L. 103-236). The law stipulated thatno grant could be made to RFA unless, 1) a detailed plan onthe formation of RFA is sent to Congress within ninety daysafter the confirmation of the Broadcasting Board ofGovernors (BBG); and 2) the plan certifies that RFA can beestablished and operate with grants of no more than $22million in any fiscal year, with one-time capital costs ofno more than $8 million. Radio Free Asia would assume allobligations, not the U.S. government, and grants would endafter September 30, 1999, unless the Presidentžs FY1999budget submission to Congress recommends a one yearextension as authorized in sec. 309(g) of P.L. 103-236. Eighteen months later, the BBG sent the required RFAplan to Congress (November 15, 1995) after some in Congressexpressed concern that the Administration was stonewallingon the issue. RFA's plan asserted that it would be possibleto establish a surrogate broadcasting service into Asiancountries within the budget set forth by Congress and thatit would be broadcasting "as soon as possible". The planstated that full time staff for FY1995 and FY1996 would notexceed 45 in Washington, D.C. and 110 independentcontractors. The BBG also set out several recommendations: that funding for an Asia surrogate service continue underthe BBG; that the new entity be created as a private U.S.corporation using existing transmitters, where possible;that the new service be named the Asia Pacific Network(APN); that the entity establish its headquarters inWashington, D.C. with an office in Asia; and that it beginoperation as soon as transmission site issues are resolvedand staff hired. Despite congressional objections to altering the RadioFree Asia name, as cited by law, the broadcasting servicewas incorporated on March 11, 1996, as the Asia PacificNetwork (Radio Free Asia), Inc. In the following months,Congress reasserted that Radio Free Asia is the authorizedname.CURRENT STATUS The first RFA broadcast took place on September 29,1996, broadcasting into China in Mandarin. The initialbroadcasts of one hour at 7:00 a.m. and one hour at 11:00p.m. included regional news and feature stories. TheChinese government reacted to the initial broadcasts withstrongly worded letters of opposition to top level U.S.government officials, as well as editorials in major Chinesenewspapers claiming that the CIA is behind the broadcastoperation. By September 30, 1997, one year after it began, RFA wasbroadcasting for a total of 17 hours in Asia and in alllanguages mandated by Congress. Of the current total, 5hours of broadcasting is in Mandarin with 2 hours ofbroadcasts in each of the other languages. The Chinesecontinue to voice strong opposition to RFA, claimingrecently that the U.S. is using the idea of freedom ofspeech to interfere in Asian countriesž internal affairs. Additionally, Chinese have asserted that the U.S. is usingbroadcasting to impose its values on people in Asia. China began jamming RFA Mandarin broadcasts in mostfrequencies on August 18, 1997. The government also beganjamming Tibetan broadcasts in early October, 1997. Earlier,Vietnam had begun jamming the Vietnamese broadcasts inFebruary, 1997; and North Korea also had begun jamming theKorean broadcasts in June, 1997. In all of these cases,jamming has been continual, but with varying degrees ofeffectiveness. RFA currently is broadcasting into China viamultiple transmission sites and on varying frequencies,keeping the probability of China government jamming at aminimum. The broadcast entity has been successful inaverting some, but not all, of the jamming. RFA is exploring numerous possibilities for long-termbroadcast transmission sites, including the Philippines. Although Thailand would have been one of the best locationsfor broadcast transmission into China, the Thai governmenthas avoided the issue, fearing that doing so would have adetrimental effect on its relationship with China. The U.S.government has asked the Philippines to be a possible sitefor U.S. broadcasting transmitters, a proposal to which thePhilippines has not agreed. Another possibility is tocontinue to use multiple transmitter sites (of which all butone are leased), which VOA has found to be effective ingetting its broadcasts through to China with minimaljamming. As these sites are being negotiated and otheržsare being explored, USIA is constructing a relay station atTinian (islands in the Pacific) which, in a couple of years,could also be a key location for RFA and VOA broadcasting. An underlying principle for Radio Free Asia hiring isthat it is to be a lean organization. Full time employeesinitially numbered 35, but a year after its firstbroadcasts, the staff totals, in both the field and inWashington, have grown to 122. The President of RFA isRichard Richter, formerly a producer and executive producerof news programs at ABC, CBS, and WETA. Dan Southerland,previously a Beijing bureau chief for The Washington Post,and a Hong Kong bureau chief for the Christian ScienceMonitor and Vietnam correspondent for United PressInternational, is Vice President of Programming andExecutive Editor. Each language service has a chief; the Mandarin service,because of its size, also has a deputy. Total personnel foreach service includes: Mandarin, 19; Tibetan, 9; Burmese,11; Vietnamese, 12; Korean, 9; Khmer, 6; and the Laosservice, 8. RFA will attempt, where feasible, to havecorrespondents or stringers in each of the countriesreceiving broadcasts. RFA stringers will also be located inmany other countries throughout Asia and Europe. RFAheadquarters are located in Washington, D.C. It has openeda bureau in Hong Kong and has additional smaller 1 or 2person offices in other Asian cities.FUNDING HISTORY The FY1995 Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations (P.L.103-317) provided $10 million in multi-year funds forstartup of RFA ($5 million of which was rescinded inFY1996). The FY1996 appropriations provided a $5 millionearmark from the international broadcasting account. ForFY1997, Congress earmarked $9.3 million for RFA within theOmnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997. Earlier inthe FY1997 appropriations debate, Members of the HouseAppropriations Committee had expressed concern that RFA hadnot been operating within a clear plan. The Committeerequested RFA to submit a plan prior to receiving grantsunder the FY1997 appropriations. Officials of the broadcastentity sent a plan to Congress in mid-September 1996 whichthe committee approved. For FY1998, the Administration hasrequested a total of $366.8 million for internationalbroadcasting which includes $9.3 million for Radio FreeAsia. Following is the radiožs funding history:FY1995 -- $5.0 millionFY1996 -- $5.0 millionFY1997 -- $9.3 millionFY1998 -- $9.3 million (request) ISSUES FOR CONGRESS Throughout 1997, some in Congress have been frustratedwith the Presidentžs China policy. Expanding U.S.international broadcasting to China has surfaced as one ofseveral ideas to promote democracy and human rights inChina, but would not entail direct harm to U.S. interests,such as would occur in the case of denying MFN trade status. In the Commerce, Justice, State Department and relatedagencies for FY1998 appropriations, the House would provide$30 million, while the Senate would provide $20 million. Congressional action on the foreign relations authorizationbills this year involves raising the authorizing ceiling forRFA. The House version includes $30 million for each yearFY1998 and FY1999; the Senate version includes $20 millionfor the same years.. Among similar bills introduced in recent months is thežRadio Free Asia Act of 1997" (H.R. 2232), introduced byCongressman Royce on July 23, 1997. The House InternationalRelations Committee marked up this bill on September 29, andthe Committee reported it out on October 6, 1997. H.R. 2232 would authorize increased funding for U.S.broadcasting into China from the FY1997 level of $9.3million to $30 million for FY1998 (of which $8 million wouldbe for a one time capital cost) and $22 million for FY1999. Included in both fiscal year levels is $700,000 forincreasing the number of Cantonese language personnel. Inaddition, VOA broadcasting into China and North Korea wouldbe expanded by $10 million in FY1998 and $7 million inFY1999. Furthermore, the measure would provide $10 millionfor radio construction in FY1998 and $3 million in FY1999which, reportedly, would be used for completion of theTinian transmitter site, as well as perhaps locating apermanent transmitter site elsewhere. (Currently, RFAtransmitter sites are all leased.) The legislation alsowould require that within 90 days of enactment of the Actthe President report to Congress on a plan to achievecontinuous RFA and VOA broadcasting into China in the majordialects and languages. RFA officials support the measure, saying they have beenoperating on a shoestring since Radio Free Asiažs inception. They believe that the added funds in the coming fiscal yearswill allow them to fully function as Congress had intendedin the International Broadcasting Act of 1994. Increasedradio construction funds would benefit both RFA and VOAactivities. The Clinton Administration endorses the idea ofexpanding RFAžs budget and capabilities. Both theAdministration and many in Congress believe that expandingbroadcasting into China is a better way to promote democracyand human rights than denying China MFN trade benefits. Some concerns regarding expanding RFA budget exist. Lawmakers concerned with balancing the budget view this asan unnecessary expenditure that could weaken the drivetoward balancing the budget. Furthermore, because thefunding level being debated in Congress is three times theFY1997 funding level, some fear that such a dramaticincrease in just one year to an organization that is justone year old could lead to an inefficient use of taxpayerdollars by RFA. Others have cited the fact that numeroussimilar information sources already are reaching China,including CNN; they say that increasing RFA three-foldlikely would not result in a proportionate increase indemocracy promotion in China. Moreover, organizations thatpromote U.S.-China trade assert that this action will causefurther deterioration of U.S.-China relations that coulddampen the future growth of U.S. exports. Congress continues to monitor other past concernsregarding Radio Free Asia. For example, in mid-1996, theHouse Appropriations Committee expressed concern in itsCommerce, Justice, State and Related Agencies Appropriationsfor FY1997 report (H.Rept. 104-676) that RFA was notfollowing a clear blueprint. The Committee requested thatRFA send Congress, prior to the beginning of FY1997, adetailed statement of how, when, and at what cost RFA wasgoing to operate. In response, the BBG forwarded a memofrom Radio Free Asia to Capitol Hill in September 1996. Itprovided a detailed financial schedule to the year FY2001,a programming timetable, and personnel hiring intentions,but did not specify the amount of funds currently remainingto be obligated. Another matter of ongoing interest in Congress isoverlap, duplication and coordination of VOA and RFA. According to Allen Heil, Deputy Director of Voice ofAmerica, RFA and VOA are closely coordinating and monitoringtheir activities in Asia and believe that they will continueto maintain complementary activities there, includingachieving around the clock broadcasting in certainlanguages. Jamming of U.S. broadcasts into Asia is a concern ofboth administrators and Members of Congress. China government jamming of U.S. international broadcasting--bothVOA and RFA--reportedly has been very effective, especiallyin the cities, according to Voice of America and Radio FreeAsia officials. They believe that increased funding willassist U.S. broadcasters in circumventing the jammingproblem. Broadcast officials admit, however, that Chinažsjamming activity may increase proportionately to theincrease in U.S. broadcasting activity there. ENDNOTES(1) U.S. surrogate broadcasting provides independent,uncensored, and accurate news and information of events inthe targeted country (often a closed society), as well ascultural programs of that country. Surrogate broadcastingincludes Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Inc and CubaBroadcasting. In contrast, general broadcasting, carriedout by Voice of America, presents a reliable source ofinternational news, American policies and culture tolisteners overseas. END OF FILE
