American Chamber of Commerce of Beijing Remarks As Prepared for Delivery by U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman American Chamber of Commerce of Beijing April 26, 2000 [As prepared for delivery] "Thank you very much. It's an honor to be here and to meet with this group of distinguished private sector leaders. "One of the reasons I've come here with this Congressional delegation is that, as you well know, there is an intense debate back home. Depending on the outcome, you may become more empowered than ever before in your efforts to penetrate the Chinese market...or you may find yourselves left behind, as Canadian, European and Japanese companies swoop in and reap the benefits of Chinese trade liberalization. "Permanent Normal Trade Relations is one of the most important decisions facing the Congress and the nation this year. Passing it will allow the United States to be a constructive partner for China, as it slowly but inevitably moves toward greater social, political and economic freedom. Rejecting it could badly fracture the bilateral relationship, aggravating tensions and reopening old wounds between the world's largest nation and the world's largest economy. "The economic benefits of PNTR are undeniable. In agriculture alone, we expect that, within five years time, American exports to China will increase by $2 billion a year. Whether you're in agriculture, manufacturing, financial services, civil aircraft or just about any other industry, you will have unprecedented access to a growing consumer class in a nation that is home to one out of every five people on earth. "We have absolutely nothing to lose. PNTR isn't like a traditional trade agreement, because the U.S. gives up nothing. We've already granted China full access to our market. Now it's our turn to receive concessions from them. "For 20 consecutive years, often with minimal debate, Congress renewed Most-Favored-Nation trading status, which gave China trading privileges in the U.S. Now, finally, as China offers to reciprocate, we're arguing over whether it's the right thing to do. This strikes me as just a bit peculiar and ironic. "Should PNTR fail, China will still, in all likelihood, join the WTO. That train is leaving the station; it's just a matter of us deciding whether to hop along for the ride. If we don't pass PNTR, we leave ourselves on the outside looking in, inviting our competitors to take advantage of the terms we negotiated and capture the market share that should be ours. As a recent Boston Globe editorial recently put it, "America would find itself in the ludicrous position of having opened Chinese markets to the rest of the world while becoming the only country with no legal right to those markets." "But I think even many of the PNTR skeptics would concede that it has economic benefits. What we hear from them is concern about Chinese policy on human rights, labor standards, Taiwan and other issues. Those concerns are, of course, legitimate, and they are shared by President Clinton and his Administration. "But there are constructive ways to address those concerns through appropriate channels. For example, throughout this week, our delegation, in addition to meeting with business groups like yours, will also sit down with religious leaders, with Martin Lee, with Chinese academics and with Wang Daohan to talk about the Taiwan relationship. Just today, the Clinton Administration has indicated to the Chinese government our serious concerns about yesterday's crackdown on the Falun Gong and the arrest of peaceful protesters. "However, rejecting PNTR as a form of protest against some of the policies of the Chinese government is not constructive. It won't protect a single Chinese dissident or increase the wages of a single Chinese worker. "I believe that we can increase trade and make progress on other issues in the bilateral relationship. In fact, I would argue that we can't do one without the other. By enhancing trade ties, we keep the government-to- government dialogue open on everything from nuclear non-proliferation to religious freedom. By maintaining a commercial presence in China, we expose the Chinese people not just to American products but American values. By promoting free markets, we lessen the Chinese people's dependence on the state. By helping build a more open Chinese economy, we inevitably help build a more open Chinese society. "I think it's important to emphasize the non-commercial benefits of PNTR, especially for you in the business community. To be perfectly frank, you have more credibility when you're not framing this issue in a way that merely highlights your own self-interest. "A few weeks ago, there was an op-ed piece in the Washington Post by a United Technologies executive who talked about how American businesses in China are doing a lot more than collecting profits. He talked about his experience working on a joint venture in China and what it meant to Chinese workers to be a part of a workplace where meritocracy and accountability ruled the day, where privacy was valued and business ethics were enforced. Once they've experienced freedom, fairness and rule of law on the job, it's just a matter of time before they begin to demand the same treatment from their government in other aspects of their lives. "United Technologies has put together a collection of testimonials from Chinese employees of one of their joint ventures. In addition to the higher salaries, they talk about management training opportunities, promotion possibilities and the security of knowing that worker safety regulations are observed. One production line worker was impressed simply with the way that all the tools were neatly arranged, as opposed to the mess and disorganization he experienced working for a state-owned enterprise. It's clear that American trade and investment is a progressive force in the Chinese workplace and Chinese society. "The stakes on PNTR are enormous. It's about expanding American exports, but it's also about enhancing our national security and living up to our obligations as a world leader. "Think about it. China, the world's most populous country, is in the midst of a gradual but far-reaching social, political and economic transformation. What kind of message does it send if we walk away from China at this critical moment, instead of doing everything in our power to advance and cultivate Chinese reform? "Many times in our history, we've risked a lot more in the name of exercising global leadership. This does not involve sending troops to a dangerous part of the world. It doesn't even entail any economic risk. As I said, the economic benefits are all on our side. "Just over 50 years ago, Secretary of State George Marshall came up with his plan to help rebuild the European nations that had been devastated by World War II. It was bold, and it was controversial. But we did it because it was the right thing to do, not just for Europe but for us as well. And today, we recognize the Marshall Plan as the birth of the Western alliance that has been the foundation of global peace and stability for the last half century. "Now, we can't perfectly equate the Marshall Plan with PNTR...or Europe in 1947 with China in the year 2000. But there are some parallels. Then, as now, the forces of isolation howled with opposition. And, ultimately, I believe that PNTR could be as important to shaping the geopolitics of the 21st century as the Marshall Plan was to fashioning the post-war world. "There is one major difference: the Marshall Plan was expensive; it involved an enormous commitment of government resources. PNTR asks nothing from the American people. It doesn't require that we take any kind of economic hit. On the contrary, PNTR allows us strengthen our economy, at the same time that we achieve a major foreign policy objective. It's a win-win, and it's imperative that we not let the opportunity pass us by. "Thank you very much." # # #