U.S. Policy on China

A recent editorial (“Unlock China Espionage Data,” Jan. 6) urged the Clinton administration to declassify the top secret report of the Select Committee on U.S. National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns with the People’s Republic of China, which I chair. A comprehensive look at the apparent security breakdowns is necessary, The Times wrote, to provide “a clearer picture of how China got its hands on such important technology.”

Now comes columnist Tom Plate, however, claiming such concerns are nothing but a “new Red scare” (Commentary, March 2). In fact, the select committee’s report is a sober, detailed look at some disturbing facts. Its entire 1,400 pages and all of its 38 recommendations were unanimously agreed upon by the committee’s Republican and Democratic members.

Since the report remains classified in its entirety, your readers may take preemptive criticisms with a grain of salt. In the meantime, the approach The Times encouraged in an even more recent editorial (Feb. 24) is one with which I wholeheartedly agree: “Strengthening economic and other ties with China has been a fairly consistent goal for more than two decades. But that policy must be subordinate to U.S. security interests.”

REP. CHRISTOPHER COX

R-Newport Beach

*

I read that Secretary of State Madeleine Albright criticized China for its dismal human rights record. In the same sentence she assures the Chinese leaders that there will be no consequences (March 2). China is a Communist dictatorship that has its markets tightly closed to anything that isn’t essential technology useful to enable it to build its military or economic might. It is also running a $58-billion trade surplus with the U.S.

At the same time we are threatening punitive sanctions and a trade war with our European allies over questionable banana trade practices (March 3). These are democracies that follow international trade rules. What’s wrong with this picture?

MICHAEL DRESSEL

Los Angeles