The House Makes a Morals Call

The United States has never followed a single, consistent policy toward governments that abuse the rights of their citizens. There’s no mystery about the reason.

International politics--relations among countries--are very much like domestic politics. Ultimately both depend for their effective functioning on compromises, trade-offs, and a system of rewards, favors and punishments. A foreign regime may well pursue policies that most Americans regard as morally odious, but still be perceived in Washington as a government whose goodwill and cooperation are important, maybe even vital, to U.S. national interests. China is a prime example.

By any humane measure, China has a deplorable record when it comes to tolerating political dissent or protecting civil liberties. In time that must change, as the weary, unimaginative and increasingly self-centered old men who run the country give way to those who believe, along with the exiled dissident Fang Lizhi, that “without democratization in China there can be no modernization.” Meanwhile, though, China remains an unmistakable presence on the world stage. The United States and other governments must deal with this China, not approving its harsh domestic policies by any means, but not holding other important interests hostage to them, either.

The House has voted to withdraw most-favored-nation trading status from China to punish it for continued repression of political dissent. There is sincere indignation behind this action, which if implemented could cost China billions of dollars in lost trade. There is also clearly more than a little protectionist fervor at play here, aimed at making textile imports more expensive. The action is largely symbolic; the Senate probably won’t concur and President Bush will veto any restriction. Bush, who has not always been right in his China policy, is right on this issue.

Withdrawing most-favored-nation status would add to the economic hardships of a great many Chinese, and cut sharply into American exports to China as well. Is the House wrong to voice its outrage and concern over human rights abuses in China? Of course not. But in this instance trying to use the self-wounding weapon of higher tariffs to underscore a moral point is misconceived.