Bush Was Right on China

To the Editors of The Crimson:

We are writing to set the record straight on the Bush Administration's policy of dealing with events in China since the tragic and violent repression of pro-democacy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square last June 3-4. The Executive Board of the Harvard Republican Club gives its full support and admiration to the Chinese students' courageous fight for liberty, as does President Bush. However, we feel that the editorial cartoon published in the Feb. 1 issue of The Crimson which blasted Bush for vetoing a bill allowing Chinese students to remain in the U.S. after their visas expire, overlooked some key facts and was misleading to the uninformed reader. An examination of the facts shows that a Presidential veto was warranted and does not compromise the safety of Chinese students in the U.S.

To begin with, the Congressional legislation was redundant. Immediately after the massacre, President Bush issued an executive order allowing all Chinese nationals in the United States as of June 6, 1989 to remain here until at least June 5, 1990. No Chinese student or any other Chinese national has been sent back to China since Tiananmen massacre, as the cartoon would have one believe. Moreover, Bush has stated that visas will be extended as long as there is danger in China for returning nationals.

In addition to extending visas to the 32,000 Chinese students now in the U.S., the Administration has stopped all weapons sales to the Chinese government, including technical assistance licenses. It has also deferred consideration of new loans to China by multilateral development banks.

Critics contend that a law would solidify the guarantee to Chinese students that they would not be forced to leave the U.S. Although Bush has the power to rescind the executive order, he would never use that authority while there is danger waiting for the students in China. Concern for the Chinese strudents and their families is foremost in the President's mind.

China has shown itself capable of repressing widespread internal demands for change and has historically ignored external pressures. The bill passed by Congress, if signed into law, would have provoked a severe reaction from China's leaders, quite possibly endangering the families and friends of the very people congress was trying to protect. China did, in fact, react vehemently to the original passage of the bill and to the House's override of the veto. Unfortunately, the ultimate goal of both the Chinese students and President Bush--freedom for the people of China--requires a continuing dialogue with the Chinese government. Bush's carefully thought-out program does not shut off China from U.S. contacts, necessary for change in China's domestic policy.

Why, if all these reasons are true, would the bill draw such widespread support in Congress? Republicans and Democrats in both houses stood to gain politically by supporting the bill, for it is impossible to criticize their intentions. Democrats, especially, could get political mileage by equating a veto of the bill with a callous, cold-hearted President. But the legislation would have had serious consequences for our relationship with China, which over the past 20 years has been mutually beneficial, both economically and socially. As a State Department official said last July 13, "legislation such as this, which severely limits the President's ability to respond quickly in a rapidly changing situation, would only take us down the road toward economic sanctions, and the latter have generally proven ineffective, easy to circumvent and costly to the economic interests of those countries which have imposed them."

Contact with the U.S. was undoubtedly a factor in the democracy movement in China. Sanctions by the U.S. and cutting diplomatic ties with China will not move the Chinese leaders to be more open. President Bush knows this and has managed to keep open the channels of communication with China, while not giving up his fight for the preservation of human rights. The Harvard Republican Club Executive Board   Sumner E. Anderson '92,   President