[Page: S4943]
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Madam President, today the State Department authorization bill has been sent to the President for his signature. I rise to speak about a particular provision of that bill, section 531, because it is an important statement on United States policy toward Taiwan.
Back in July of last year, I added an amendment to the State Department bill that reaffirmed the primacy of the Taiwan Relations Act, as the law of the land, over the 1982 Joint United States-China Communique--the Shanghai Communique--a statement of policy. This amendment passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by a 20- to-0 vote.
I would remind this body that the Taiwan Relations Act was passed back in 1979 by a greater than two-thirds vote of each House. It is the cornerstone of our relationship with Taiwan. The Shanghai Communique, on the other hand, was the result of Executive communications that were never ratified by this body.
Last week, the House and Senate conferees accepted a substitute of my original amendment in the form of a statement of Congress that retained the intent of the original language to reaffirm the primacy of the Taiwan Relations Act [TRA] over statements of policy. I believe this amendment is also significant because it reasserts Congress' role, together with that of the President, in determining the extent of defensive arms sales to Taiwan.
To understand the intent of the congressional statement, I think it is important to look at the relevant language of the TRA and the Shanghai Communique:
Section 3(a) of the TRA says:
The United States will make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.
Section 3(b) says:
The President and the Congress shall determine the nature and quantity of such defense articles and defense services based solely upon their judgments of the needs of Taiwan * * *
In the Shanghai Communique, on the other hand, the administration pledged:
To reduce gradually its sales of arms to Taiwan, leading over a period of time to a final resolution.
The language adopted by the conferees simply reasserts the primacy of domestic law over nontreaty understandings, and gives notice to the administration that Congress has not been consulted properly over the continuing refinement of United States arms sales policy toward Taiwan.
This congressional statement reflects my concern and the concern of many of my colleagues over China's military modernization, its increased military spending, and its territorial claims. The increased threat from China is real. China is the only declared nuclear power increasing its defense budget and military capabilities--an estimated 22 percent increase over last year. China also reaffirmed its right to use force against Taiwan in its white paper on the Taiwan question last summer.
Section 531 of the State authorization bill calls on the President to assess changes in PRC capabilities and intentions on a regular basis in considering whether it is appropriate to adjust arm sales to Taiwan. The language of the amendment makes clear that the United States Congress is committed to providing Taiwan the defensive means necessary to ensure its safety.
My intent in pushing for this amendment was to point out the inconsistency between telling the Taiwanese that we will provide for
their defensive needs, but then arbitrarily limiting what we would sell them. I am referring here to the so-called `defense bucket.' As a result of the Shanghai Communique, the `bucket' of defensive articles and defensive services to Taiwan has been declining--from about $820 million in 1982 to approximately $580 million in 1993.
The TRA is explicit that the nature and quantity of defensive arms transferred to Taiwan would be based solely upon the judgment of the President and the Congress of the needs of Taiwan. Thus, whether we are talking about sales of United States manufacturing equipment on third-country ships in the Taiwanese Navy or ballistic missile systems, the decision must be based on Taiwan's needs, and not on arbitrary principles.
I am pleased that Secretary of State Warren Christopher sent me a private letter, as part of our discussion of this amendment, which reaffirms the administration's commitment to the provisions of the TRA, including acknowledging the TRA's legal precedence over the Shanghai Communique.
But, Madam President, more changes are needed in United States policy toward Taiwan. This country must treat Taiwanese with the respect she deserves as the world's 14th largest economy and the United States' 6th largest trading partner. Taiwan also holds the world's largest foreign reserves. Taiwan is a dependable friend to the United States and a good International citizen.
Many United States policies are simply out of date, out of line with the practice of our major European allies, and out of touch with current realities in East Asia--including the fact that Taiwan and the PRC are themselves exchanging citizens and trading, and that Taiwan has invested over $10 billion in the PRC.
I would like to share with you a few examples of policies that should be changed.
First, the administration should change the policy prohibiting high-level contacts with Taiwanese officials. The current lack of high-level exchanges is unnecessary and particularly hypocritical by the Clinton administration. For example, last week it is reported that President Clinton dropped in on a meeting in the White House between Vice President Al Gore and Tibet's exiled leader, the Dalai Lama. This week, Hong Kong's Chief Secretary, Mrs. Anson Chan, paid official visits to the State Department and the National Security Council. In addition, Yasser Arafat visited the White House earlier this year. None of these individuals have official U.S. diplomatic status, but in each case the White House made a policy decision to have contact because of an important goal that it would help advance. The same rationale should apply to Taiwan.
Such a change in policy to allow high-level visits has historical precedence. President Bush sent USTR Carla Hills to visit Taiwan. I encourage the administration to send Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown or USTR Mickey Kantor to Taiwan this summer. The administration should also allow Taiwan's economic minister to visit his counterparts in the United States.
The second change that the administration should allow is a change in the name of Taiwan's representative office here. Currently, the Taiwanese who conduct nondiplomatic activities here are forced to live with an acronym more appropriate for a basketball league: CCNAA, the Coordinating Council of North American Affairs. Who could make the connection to Taiwan if it you were not told directly. This is silly, especially for a country that has substantial economic and trading ties with the United States. Let the Taiwanese change the name to something that at least identifies its place in the world, such as the Taipei Representative Office in Washington.
A third practice that must change is the issuance of visas. Currently, when an American gets a visa for Taiwan it bears a Hong Kong stamp. This is another example of a policy that bears no relationship to any rational policy. More importantly, this is a policy that absolutely must be changed because of events. What will we do in 1997 when Hong Kong reverts to China's control?
Finally, the administration should take steps to support Taiwanese membership in multilateral institutions, such as the GATT, APEC, and the United Nations.
Senator Hank Brown and I included a `sense of the Congress' in the State Department bill, section 508, urging the President to send Cabinet-level appointees to Taiwan and to take other steps to show clear United States support for Taiwan both in our bilateral relationship and in multilateral organizations such as the GATT and the United Nations.
Madam President, I have been told that the administration is conducting an interagency review of its Taiwan policy. I have been told that this interagency review has been going on since at least last July. I hope that the administration will listen to these recommendations as they finalize their review. I know that many of my colleagues would support these changes, and I ask my colleagues to communicate their views directly to the administration.
Before concluding, I would like to thank my colleagues on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in particular Senators Pell and Helms, for their steadfast support of my amendment at conference.
I would also like to thank National Security Adviser Tony Lake, Ambassador Winston Lord, Congressman Hamilton, and their staffs for working with me and my staff in reaching an agreement in conference on the language of the substitute amendment.
[Page: S4944]
END
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
