As China Trade Fight Nears, Public Is in Dark on Deal

As members of Congress prepare for what could be their major showdown of the year, the battle over granting China permanent normal trade ties is unfolding against an unusual backdrop: A recent deal that will transform Beijing’s economic relationship with the United States remains secret from the general public.

Lawmakers, senior staff and others with special security clearance are being allowed to review the document, which was negotiated last year and paves the way for China to become a member of the World Trade Organization.

But they are legally restricted from copying or discussing the 2-inch-thick set of rules and details that are stamped “confidential” and bear the initials of U.S. and Chinese negotiators. As a result, critics complain, one of the biggest foreign policy decisions the nation has faced in years will be made with an extraordinary lack of public knowledge and informed discussion.

“I’m like the average American--completely in the dark,” complained Scott Nova, director of the Citizens Trade Campaign, a coalition of trade policy critics in Washington. “Just as we don’t vote on tax cuts that the public doesn’t get to see before Congress votes, just as we don’t vote on environmental protections that the public doesn’t get to see, we ought not to be voting on trade deals before the public gets to know what Congress is voting on.”

Members of Congress have addressed other high-stakes issues that are not fully spelled out for the public, and legislators themselves are sometimes denied details related to national security and intelligence matters. Yet the shroud of secrecy--which has been seized on by China critics to stir suspicions about the agreement--is drawing increasing attention on Capitol Hill because it is a noteworthy departure from the prelude to other sweeping trade agreements.

Charges of hypocrisy are making the White House uncomfortable, because President Clinton has publicly emphasized the importance of greater openness in the WTO--which sets standards for global commerce and mediates trade disputes between member countries--even as the administration keeps the China agreement off limits.

The confidential treatment of the China deal has added an aura of mystery to an accord that White House officials say they have largely summarized for the public, and which they insist is strongly in America’s interest because China made all the concessions. Broadly speaking, the agreement would open up China’s markets to an array of U.S. services and would ease tariffs on many U.S. export products.

Clinton is expected to deliver the legislation to Capitol Hill today. The administration says its passage is necessary so the United States can enjoy the sweeping benefits that China says it will offer the rest of the world after its expected entry into the WTO.

In contrast to the U.S.-China deal, the North American Free Trade Agreement and the global Uruguay Round accord that created the WTO were both available to the public for about a year before their consideration in Congress. Close observers of trade policy are frustrated by the restrictions on reviewing the accord with China, which they say poses potential concerns related to labor standards, the environment and U.S. jobs--subjects they argue should be approached with a maximum degree of public scrutiny.

“We’re still formulating our position on it, but we’re very concerned about the whole secrecy issue,” said Daniel A. Seligman, a trade analyst for the Sierra Club in Washington.

In classifying the U.S.-China deal as “confidential,” U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky was following the routine practice of the WTO in not releasing tentative deals while related negotiations are still underway. China has not yet finished talks with the European Union, Brazil and a handful of other nations on its bid to join the WTO.

Beyond that, further details of China’s treatment in the global trading club are yet to be ironed out at the WTO, including how China’s compliance with its trade pledges will be enforced.

U.S. officials have argued that publicizing the terms of the U.S.-China deal right now would interfere with the other China negotiations, perhaps discouraging China from offering added concessions to other countries from which the U.S. would benefit after Beijing joined the WTO.

Nonetheless, Clinton administration officials seemed increasingly uneasy Tuesday about the secrecy. A recent slowdown in negotiations between China and Europe effectively doomed White House hopes that the whole global web of China talks could be completed before Congress considered the issue.

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) laid out the dilemma to Barshefsky at a Senate hearing Tuesday.

“You know, we represent our people back home,” he said. “It’s a little difficult to vote for an agreement that, although we can see, they can’t see. . . . Why can’t we be more transparent?”

Barshefsky answered: “With the delay in the European talks, we’re going to have to rethink this position. . . . I think we are moving toward the view that public availability will be important.”

Administration officials recently decided to speed up congressional consideration of the matter for fear that election-year politics would jeopardize the prospects of changing China’s trade status after about June. In particular, Democrats are under fierce pressure from organized labor to resist changing China’s status, which now requires an annual review before Beijing is granted the treatment accorded other U.S. trading partners.

A senior U.S. trade official said “it is really a struggle” for the administration to balance the desire to make all the fine print of the U.S.-China deal public against its reluctance to affect other negotiations in progress.

“We want this thing out there,” he said. “We want the world to see it. Yet we have legitimate economic interests and world interests that we have to balance against that.”

The administration’s supporters point out that it has released a 17-page summary of the agreement, has briefed officials and has provided detailed testimony in Congress about the agreement.

“We’d all prefer more disclosure,” said Rep. Robert T. Matsui (D-Sacramento). But Matsui said he is satisfied with the administration’s efforts to keep members of Congress informed.

Other supporters sounded more cautious.

“I have not envisioned the House of Representatives voting on permanent normal trade relations with China before the text of the U.S.-China bilateral trade agreement is made available to the American people,” said Rep. David Dreier (R-San Dimas).

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) made clear that the White House faces a major challenge in selling Congress on permanent normal trade ties with China.

“If you are [serious], you’ve got to do a lot more than you are,” Lott lectured Barshefsky at the Senate hearing. “Enough is not being done, and I’m not going to stick my neck out. If I don’t feel it, I don’t think it’s happening.”

*

Times staff writers Nick Anderson and Tyler Marshall contributed to this report.