GOP Inflates China Spy Furor for Partisan Gain

To gain a bit of perspective on the political dynamics underlying Washington’s overheated China spy furor, let’s consider for a moment the record of Rep. J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).

Hastert is the speaker of the House. But for years before that he was, among other things, the congressman from Caterpillar, the manufacturer of earth-moving equipment.

Caterpillar, headquartered in Hastert’s district, has been trying for many years to do business in China. Three years ago the Clinton administration, in a rare display of spine in dealing with China, blocked U.S. Export-Import Bank loans for the Three Gorges Dam, a huge Chinese project that could well turn out to be one of the world’s biggest environmental disasters.

Hastert’s response? He took the lead in unsuccessfully urging the administration to back down. The Ex-Im Bank, he said, should drop its “political” mission and stick to the job of helping American companies do business overseas.

That episode is all too typical of the sorry track record on China of the congressional Republicans, who have this month seized upon the catchy, well-reported but not altogether new story of spying at the Los Alamos National Laboratory as Exhibit A in their case that President Clinton is soft on China.

Why is the current spy case so convenient for the Republicans? Because it enables them to attack Clinton’s China policy without threatening their own core supporters in the corporate world.

Since the Republicans took control of Congress in the 1994 elections, they have not passed a single bit of legislation that would seriously impinge upon the ability of American companies to export their goods--including high-technology products--to China.

Let’s summarize the history of the last four years:

* The Republican Congress has renewed China’s normal (most-favored-nation) trade status every year.

* In 1997, the Republican Congress breezily approved with scarcely a skeptical question a far-reaching deal opening the way for American companies to provide civilian nuclear technology to China.

* In 1998, the House passed a ban on sales of American satellites to China. But under the leadership of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), the measure was quietly killed in the Senate. Instead, Congress enacted a far more permissive bill readjusting the procedures for satellite exports.

None of this has improved the U.S. trade balance with China. In 1994, the year the Republicans won Congress, the American trade deficit with China was nearly $30 billion. Now it is nearly $60 billion.

So pardon me if I sense more than a little flim flam behind the Republicans’ sudden interest in Chinese spies. They’re hoping for a China issue that won’t upset the interests of the corporate donors on whom they, even more than the Democrats, depend for their campaign contributions.

I don’t question the sincerity of Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach), who led the recent investigation into China’s acquisition of American military technology. But I also think that the Republican leadership may be using Cox to create a diversionary China issue that won’t last.

It’s reminiscent of the way Clinton and Democratic Party Chairman Ronald H. Brown once used then-Sen. George J. Mitchell (D-Maine) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) to political advantage. In order to attack the Republicans during his 1992 campaign for the White House, Clinton embraced the Mitchell-Pelosi idea of linking trade to human rights. Then after taking office he backed away at the point where he would have had to carry through on his threats.

If Clinton’s policy of engagement with China will be an issue in the 2000 presidential election campaign, who among the Republicans will lead the way?

Texas Gov. George W. Bush? His daddy, as president, often seemed even more eager than Clinton to view the leaders of Beijing as his friends. His Uncle Prescott has business interests in Shanghai, once worked for a company consulting on satellite deals for China and is now the chairman of the U.S.-China Chamber of Commerce.

Elizabeth Hanford Dole? Her husband Bob’s approach to China policy was epitomized by a bizarre version of “linkage”: The Kansas senator once threatened to hold up China’s trade benefits unless Beijing agreed to buy more American wheat.

This column has often been critical of Clinton’s policy toward China. The administration has been motivated too much by commercial concerns and has pursued close ties with China as a goal in itself, rather than as a means of advancing American interests and ideals.

Fairness requires that the Republicans’ approach to China be subjected to the same scrutiny. Seizing upon and inflating a spy scandal may be good short-term politics for the Republicans, but it isn’t a China policy.

Americans deserve better and more thoughtful answers on how to deal with China from both of the major political parties.

Jim Mann’s column appears in this space every Wednesday.