Since the Clinton administration--arguing that trade most effectively transfers democratic principles abroad--delinked human-rights issues from those of trade, human-rights groups in the United States have denounced the government after every incident of the Chinese authority's abuse of its citizens. Especially after the State Department admitted last year that China's human-rights record had worsened, these groups dramatically increased their effort to hinder the White House's promotion of American industry in China.
One of their most recent successful cases of activism against the establishment of healthy Sino-U.S. commercial ties revolves around the Three-Gorges project--the dam construction slated to take place on the Yangtze River. Ganging up with the environmentalists, who have been making spurious claims about the environmental effects of the dam, human-rights groups have managed so far to block the Export-Import Bank from making cheap loans available to the American investors of the project.
As I observe this political development, I am once again disturbed by the parochialism that often plagues many Americans, who, blinded by ideologies, are failing to scrutinize the motives of the Chinese authority. To assess the current human-rights condition in China, one must try to understand the factors that may be affecting its domestic policy.
For instance, take a look at what U.S. foreign policy, particularly of the Clinton administration, in the last several years has done to the immediate surroundings of China. In the North is Russia, with which the U.S. has increasingly solidified its relations since the end of the Cold War. In the East is Japan, whose defense budget has grown to be the second largest in the world as the result of the U.S. government's push to give greater military autonomy to Japan.
In addition, despite its reputed one-China policy, the administration carelessly allowed President Lee Teng-hui of Taiwan to visit the U.S. last year. The White House, meddling in the affairs of North Korea, sent Jimmy Carter to freeze its nuclear program, and has also normalized relations with Vietnam, a country adjacent to China in the South.
Imagine that you are a member of the National People's Congress. Would not the word "containment" flash in your mind? How could you then easily tolerate the "American" democratic principles infiltrating your country?
The impending death of Deng Xiaoping is another factor influencing China's policy-makers. It is clear that in order to reassert its authority without the great father-figure of modern China, the NPC is pursuing aggressive, and often reckless, policy, domestically and internationally. Such insecurity is unfortunately forcing the government to jail numerous innocent dissidents.
Therefore, contextually viewing China, the U.S. must remain patient, for the Chinese are certainly experiencing, albeit slowly, fundamental social changes. For instance, just last month, to reform its judicial system the NPC passed astonishing laws, one of which endorses the philosophy that all defendants are innocent unless proven guilty. Other new measures include the curtailment of the period of police detention to 30 days, during which defendants can communicate with lawyers significantly more easily than before. The State Council can now declare martial law only by subjecting the proposal to NPC consent. No one can possibly overlook these incredible signs of China's transformation to a democracy.
And trade, primarily through foreign direct investment, is playing an essential role in this change. According to a London-based consultant, every dollar of private investment in China yields five-dollars worth of output, which requires ample foreign capital because its state-owned industries, deep in debt, squander two-thirds of the country's domestic savings.
This dependence on FDI will prove problematic if the Chinese authority remains arbitrary in its treatment of economic and social justice. Already investors are becoming less eager about their prospects in China, as other economies, such as those in Latin America, emerge as good substitutes in generating profit for their investments. Recently Levi Strauss pulled out of China because the costs of its business due to such arbitrariness simply became overwhelming. The latest judicial reform is an indication that the Chinese authority is realizing that the nation's future prosperity relies on democratization.
It is true that in the short run China's human-rights record has deteriorated in spite of the flourishing Western businesses in the country. However, we must see China in the context of its domestic and international circumstances, as well as from a long-term perspective. Then we shall begin to see the remarkable fledgling trends in the once-totalitarian regime, which is now actualizing the Kantian dream of universal democracy.
