[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA: 2011 ANNUAL REPORT

=======================================================================

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

__________

NOVEMBER 3, 2011

__________

Serial No. 112-85

__________

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/

______

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
71-038 WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ELTON GALLEGLY, California ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
DANA ROHRABACHER, California Samoa
DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California BRAD SHERMAN, California
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
RON PAUL, Texas GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
MIKE PENCE, Indiana RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri
JOE WILSON, South Carolina ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
CONNIE MACK, Florida GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas DENNIS CARDOZA, California
TED POE, Texas BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
DAVID RIVERA, Florida FREDERICA WILSON, Florida
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania KAREN BASS, California
TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York
RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina
ROBERT TURNER, New YorkAs
of October 5, 2011 deg.
Yleem D.S. Poblete, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Democratic Staff Director

C O N T E N T S

----------
Page

WITNESSES

The Honorable Christopher Smith, chairman, Congressional-
Executive Commission on China.................................. 5
The Honorable Tim Walz, ranking member, Congressional-Executive
Commission on China............................................ 7
Ms. Chai Ling, founder, All Girls Allowed (student leader, 1989
Tiananmen Square protests)..................................... 13
Mr. Bob Fu, president, China Aid................................. 21
Mr. John Kamm, chairman, The Dui Hua Foundation.................. 32
Mr. Bhuchung K. Tsering, vice president for special programs,
International Campaign for Tibet............................... 40
Sophie Richardson, Ph.D., China director, Human Rights Watch..... 45

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

The Honorable Tim Walz: Prepared statement....................... 10
Ms. Chai Ling: Prepared statement................................ 15
Mr. Bob Fu: Prepared statement................................... 23
Mr. John Kamm: Prepared statement................................ 34
Mr. Bhuchung K. Tsering: Prepared statement...................... 42
Sophie Richardson, Ph.D.: Prepared statement..................... 47

APPENDIX

Hearing notice................................................... 68
Hearing minutes.................................................. 69
The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress
from the Commonwealth of Virginia: Prepared statement.......... 71
The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Florida, and chairman, Committee on Foreign
Affairs: Material submitted for the record..................... 73
Mr. Bhuchung K. Tsering: Material submitted for the record....... 75

CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA: 2011 ANNUAL REPORT

----------

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2011

House of Representatives,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 o'clock a.m.,
in room 2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. The committee will come to order.
After recognizing myself and my good friend the ranking member
for 7 minutes each for our opening statements, I will recognize
the chairman and the ranking members of our Subcommittee on
Asia and the Pacific for 3 minutes each for their statements.
We will then hear from our witnesses. Thank you, gentlemen,
for being with us. I would ask that you summarize your prepared
statements in 5 minutes each before we move to the questions
and answers with members under the 5-minute rule. And, without
objection, the witnesses' prepared statements will be made a
part of the record.
And members may have 5 days to insert statements and
questions for the record subject to the length limitations and
the rules. And, without objection, the written statement of
Under Secretary of State Marie Otero will be made a part of the
record.
The Congressional-Executive Commission on China has
recently issued its tenth annual report on China's human rights
and the rule of law developments. The report also marks a
decade since China acceded to membership in the World Trade
Organization, WTO, after being granted Permanent Normal Trade
Relations, PNTR, with the United States the previous year.
I opposed PNTR for China, given its abysmal human rights
record, its unfair trade practices, and its disdain for the
rule of law. Over a decade later, we can see that economic
engagement with and trade liberalization for China did not
produce political liberalization and, thus, granting PNTR in my
view was a mistake.
Documented in the Commission's report is a clear picture of
a China where human rights lawyers disappear, black jails
illegally imprison those who seek to voice dissent, Falun Gong
practitioners are mercilessly persecuted, and the internet is
censored by the thought police. In just the past 12 months,
Beijing has sought to disrupt the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony
for Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo; kept news of the Jasmine
Revolution in the Middle East from the Chinese people; and
disrupted a Christian service on Easter morning, the holiest
day of the Christian calendar.
The release of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi
by the Burmese junta in late 2010 left Mr. Liu the sole
imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize winner worldwide. He remains held
in a Chinese jail offering silent testimony to Beijing's
repression. It appears that Beijing is adhering to the old
Chinese adage of ``kill the chicken to scare the monkey'' by
making Mr. Liu an example of what dire consequences await a
person in China who is bold enough to speak out for democratic
reform.
The report also notes how the rights of ethnic groups in
China are constantly trampled. Whether it is a Mongolian herder
on the grasslands, a Tibetan monk praying in his monastery, or
a Uyghur Muslim seeking fair and equal employment, all face the
harsh backlash of Beijing's oppression.
In recent months, the desperation has intensified so
greatly that several monks of Tibet and nuns have set
themselves on fire to protest China's rule in Tibet. Beijing's
ultimate goal continues to be to displace Tibetans, Uyghurs,
and Mongolians in their traditional homelands with Han Chinese.
While Mao once claimed that ``women hold up half the sky,''
the Commission report notes that ``sexual harassment reportedly
remains prevalent in China.'' Trafficking for sexual
exploitation, forced labor, forced marriage, remain, according
to the report, a major impediment to the achievement of full
equality for women. North Korean refugee women are particularly
vulnerable to exploitation by China's sex trade.
It is imperative, given the exploitation of North Korean
refugee women and children, that Beijing provide access to the
U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, to interview refugees in
northeast China. And China must stop the forced repatriation of
North Korean refugees at once and comply with its international
obligations.
The Commission's report also chronicles how the so-called
``workers' paradise'' of the People's Republic of China has no
respect for its people and a complete disdain for workers'
rights. Factory owners and local officials conspire to poison
the environment of the people who live in the vicinity and to
exploit the workers who labor in deprivation and filth, worthy
of a Charles Dickens novel. Forced abortion mandated by a
coercive one-child policy has led to a widening gender
imbalance.
Nor is China in any way closer to becoming a fair trading
partner, as the countless unemployed Americans can readily
affirm. The report points to ``a lack of respect for the rule
of law extended into the international arena, where China
pursued domestic subsidies and industrial policies inconsistent
with China's commitments as a member of the World Trade
Organization.'' How can a ruling clique which causes human
rights lawyers to disappear, which persecutes and tortures
Falun Gong practitioners, which drives Tibetan monks to such
despair that they set themselves on fire, and which hunts down
North Korean refugees on its northeast frontier ever expect to
be regarded as anything but a barbaric regime, certainly
unworthy of the name responsible stakeholder?
I welcome recommendations from our distinguished witnesses
on follow-up actions for our Foreign Affairs Committee to take
as a result of the conclusions that you have reached in your
Commission's report. Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us.
I am now pleased to turn to my friend the ranking member
for his opening remarks.
Mr. Berman. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman, for
calling this hearing. As you pointed out, the Congressional-
Executive Commission on China was established in the year 2000
as part of the legislation that granted permanent normal trade
relations to China. And it now plays a key role in tracking
human rights conditions and the development of the rule of law
in China.
The Commission and the report that it issues every year
serves as a valuable resource for not only Congress but for a
much broader audience that wants to understand what is
happening in China on these critical issues.
Under the leadership of its two co-chairs, the
distinguished and irrepressible representative Chris Smith and
also distinguished and irrepressible Senator Sherrod Brown, the
Commission's recent report makes clear those human rights
conditions in China remain a significant concern.
While China's remarkable economic progress over the past 30
years has lifted millions of its citizens out of poverty, the
unfortunate fact remains that these economic achievements have
not led to commensurate gains in political freedoms and human
rights for the Chinese people.
The Commission's report goes into great detail on a broad
range of issues that are of vital importance, including freedom
of expression, religious freedom, worker rights, rule of law,
ethnic minorities, and democratic governance. The report notes
that China's record on human rights and rule of law has not
improved but, instead, has worsened in some areas.
Even more troubling, the report states that the Chinese
Government has grown more assertive in the violation of human
rights, disregarding the laws and international standards that
it claims to uphold while tightening its grip on Chinese
society. Specifically, the Commission's report found that
Chinese authorities instituted a major crackdown on internet
and press freedom, starting last February, after the appearance
of online calls for Jasmine protests in China following the
outbreak of demonstrations in the Middle East and North Africa.
In Tibet, Xinjiang, and other minority areas, China's
Government continued to promote policies threatening the
viability of the language and culture of these groups. The
report also notes that China implements industrial policies,
which are inconsistent with its commitments as a member of the
World Trade Organization and are incompatible with the rule of
law.
Promoting human rights and political freedom is a key tenet
of U.S. foreign policy. And these universal values must remain
a central focus in our relationship with Beijing.
Some argue that emphasizing human rights conflicts with
other priorities in our bilateral relationships: The currency
issue, Iran, North Korea, trade, and many other issues. But as
Americans, we must not simply check our morals at the door.
Regrettably, China's unelected leaders failed to recognize
that greater human rights protections are also in China's self-
interest. Repression, as we have most recently seen in the
Middle East, ultimately causes people to rebel against their
oppressors. If there is one thing Chinese leaders care about
most, it is domestic tranquility. Their current policies can
only result in that which they fear the most: Domestic turmoil.
Ultimately China's international image and economic growth are
dependent on developing a society based on the respect for the
rule of law and the rights of the Chinese people.
I look forward to the testimony of our colleagues,
Congressmen Smith and Walz, and the panel that will follow them
and in discussing ways with our witnesses that the United
States can help improve the deplorable human rights situation
in China.
And I yield back.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much, Mr. Berman.
Mr. Rohrabacher is recognized.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman and
Mr. Berman. I appreciate the leadership, both of you,
demonstrated on this very important issue.
Let's just note right off the bat, today is not in any way
a condemnation of the people of China. We, in fact, are today
expressing our solidarity with the people of China who long for
democracy and liberty, the people of China who want the same
kind of rights that every person in this world is entitled to
and that we as Americans believe is a gift from God and not
something that is a gift from the state.
What we have in China is the world's worst human rights
abuser. I don't know any other regime that will take political
prisoners, throw them into jail or take religious prisoners and
throw them into jail, and execute them and sell their body
parts. I don't know any other regime that has made it as
important to control the religious beliefs of their people than
the Chinese regime of today. This does not have to be.
We tried the strategy of, well, let's make them wealthy
and, thus, they will become less aggressive and more liberal.
That has not worked. We should try to determine strategy that
will help the people of China and secure the peace of the
world.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Madam Chairman.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Mr. Sires of New Jersey is
recognized.
Mr. Sires. I just wanted to compliment you on holding this
hearing. And I really want to compliment my colleagues for
coming before this committee, especially my colleague from New
Jersey, who has made this a lifelong battle. So I compliment
you both and thank you for being before this committee.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Albio.
Mr. Turner of New York is recognized.
Mr. Turner. I have nothing to say, Madam Chair.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, sir.
Judge Poe?
Mr. Poe. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Some people might think because China's economy has grown
and all this talk about it being the next super power that the
internal operation of China has changed. It has not.
I am glad that we had this hearing today. China needs to be
recognized for what they are: A socialist, Communist system.
And it continues to be one. And it does not exercise the
ability to allow freedom of religion. The only religion in
China is the worship of the political leader in the political
system.
Organized religion is a threat. There are over 500 cases of
political or religious imprisonment in China. The Chinese
Government has cracked down on churches, encouraging a
blacklist of church leaders that has grown up. One Chinese
newspaper says that Protestants are even encouraged, forced to
worship at government-sanctioned churches.
Freedom of religion is not granted by man. It is granted by
God, no matter what one's religious freedom. I hope we
recognize that. And I agree with my friend Mr. Rohrabacher this
is about the Chinese Government. It is not about the people of
China, whom we stand up and hoping they may also exercise
universal religious freedom that is given by the Creator, not
by government.
I yield back.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much, Judge Poe.
And now we are so pleased to welcome our first panel of
witnesses from the Congressional-Executive Commission on China
to discuss their 2011 annual report. First, we will hear from
Chris Smith, the chairman of the Congressional-Executive
Commission on China. He has been a member since 2007. He has
been a Member of Congress since '81. Welcome, Chris, and
another good friend, Tim Walz, the Ranking House Commissioner
since 2007, the year he was elected to Congress. So thank you,
Tim, for being with us also.
And I remind you to keep your oral testimony to no more
than 5 minutes. And, without objection, your written testimony
will be inserted in the record.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Chair.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. So welcome.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER SMITH, CHAIRMAN,
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA

Mr. Smith. And I want to join my friend, Congressman Walz,
the ranking member. And on behalf of Sherrod Brown, the co-
chair, we present this testimony. And thank you for convening
this hearing.
This year's tenth annual human rights report by the
Congressional-Executive Commission continues to be the most
comprehensive heavily documented review and analysis of China's
worsening human rights record.
The report's 225 pages of analysis and recommendations
followed by another 119 pages of meticulously researched
endnotes paints an extremely dire, frightening picture of
escalating human rights crimes, including torture, forced
abortion, religious persecution, and ethnic discrimination
committed with impunity by government personnel at all levels
and an ubiquitous secret police.
The report declares that ``in areas of human rights and
rule of law this year, China's leaders have grown more
assertive in their violations of rights, disregarding the very
laws and international standards that they claim to uphold,
thereby tightening their grip on Chinese society.''
In a shift, the report notes that ``China's leaders no
longer respond to criticism by simply denying that rights have
been abused. Rather, they increasingly use the language of
international laws to defend their actions.''
Even in the highly visible, patently unjust incarceration
of 2010 Nobel Peace Prize Winner Liu Xiaobo, the report points
out that the ``Chinese authorities sought to defend their
handling of the case as consistent with international law.'' Of
course, the big lie in Beijing completely collapsed under
scrutiny.
The U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded in
May of this year that it was the Government of China that had
violated international law in denying Liu's right to free
speech and his right to a fair trial. ``Official rhetoric
notwithstanding,'' the report notes, ``China's human rights and
rule of law have not improved and appear to be worsening in
some areas.''
Some of the profoundly troubling conclusions in the
report--and I go into this much more in the longer version of
my comments--``Beginning in February 2011, the Chinese police
took the unusual step of `disappearing' numerous lawyers in one
of the harshest crackdowns in recent memory.''
On coercive population control, the report found that
``this year in official speeches and government reports,
authorities used the phrase 'spare no efforts' to signify
intensified enforcement.'' Of course, they continue to monitor
women's menstrual cycles and unauthorized children. In other
words, the government says if a child is authorized or not. And
if that child is not authorized, that child is forcibly aborted
and that woman is so cruelly mistreated. And the report goes
into great expansion on that cruelty toward women and children.
Of course, the consequence, the missing children, the
missing girls, I should say, according to the Commission is the
highest sex ratio disparity in the entire world.
It also talks about enforcement campaigns and the use in at
least one area of man-on-man military tactics. They are using
all-out efforts to mobilize the ending of the lives of these
children and the cruelty meted out to those women.
In my personal view, having combated this abuse since the
early '80s, the Chinese population control program has and
remains a weapon of mass destruction deployed by the government
against its own women and children that is without parallel or
precedent in all of history.
The report also notes that the government continues to
carry out a campaign against the Falun Gong and then against
all of the various religious denominations: Catholic, Uyghurs,
the Tibetan Buddhists. And it goes into great detail about how
individuals who are not part of the officially licensed
churches are repressed, incarcerated.
One of the people spoken about in the report is Bishop Su
of Baoding. I met with Bishop Su in the early 1990s. He was out
of prison after spending decades of his life in prison. He was
the kindest, most gentle man you ever want to meet. And he
spoke about loving his captors and doing good to those who
persecuted, in 1996 rearrested. We haven't seen from him since.
The report goes into great detail on workers' rights, which
are nonexistent, but notes that young people are increasingly
dissatisfied with the status quo. Labor organizers continue to
be arrested, detained, and abused. Yet, they keep coming back
the way Lech Walesa did so greatly in Poland and others
throughout the world. These men and women are amazing. And,
yet, they find themselves in prison for trying to organize and
get some kind of workers' rights.
Internet regulation and censorship have gotten worse. As
Mr. Berman pointed out, there was a state Internet Information
Office established in May 2011. The report concludes, ``the
total number of Web sites in China decreased dramatically as a
result of'' this. ``Authorities continued to have no tolerance
for democracy advocates. Public security officers continued''
their detention through what they call reform ``through
labor.''
I was in one of those camps, Madam Chair, right after
Tiananmen Square with Frank Wolf. They are gulags. They are
concentration camps. And they can hold somebody up to 4 years
in those camps.
Finally, the Commission maintains the most extensive,
highly reliable, up-to-date database on political prisoners and
religious prisoners, some 6,623 as of September 1st prisoners
of conscience.
When members travel to China, when they meet with China
lawmakers, when they meet with China officials, have that
database with you. Give that to them. And say, ``We want
freedom for people like Chen Guangcheng, for Liu Xiaobo, Gao
Zhisheng, and all of these other great men and women who are
fighting the cause of human rights.''
I thank you.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Thank you for
making it your mission to point out the human rights abuses
worldwide. You are a champion. Thank you so much.
Tim Walz?

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE TIM WALZ, RANKING MEMBER,
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA

Mr. Walz. Well, thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Ranking
Member Berman and members of this committee. Thank you for
holding this hearing on the report from the Congressional-
Executive Commission on China but thank the two of you for
being beacons and role models for all of us on the quest for
human rights.
A special thank you to, as you saw, our irrepressible and
incredibly talented chairman. Chris Smith is someone I am proud
to call a colleague and a friend and as are people around the
world who are oppressed. Senator Sherrod Brown, who couldn't be
with us today, their bipartisan leadership is putting this
Commission's work to good use. And a special thank you to the
talented staff, who makes it possible.
The work of this Commission holds special significance for
me. More than two decades ago, I taught high school in China. I
was part of one of the first government-sanctioned groups of
American high school teachers to teach in Chinese high schools.
I developed a great admiration for and a close connection with
the Chinese people.
In my lifetime, I have witnessed the Chinese people make
significant strides. Living standards have risen. Brave Chinese
citizens are standing up for the rights of their fellow
citizens. They are seeking to clean up their environment,
improve working conditions, ensure the safety of their food.
For that, the Chinese people deserve much credit and our
support.
We are here today, however, to assess the Chinese
Government's records on human rights and rule of law. And,
unfortunately, the Chinese Government has fallen woefully short
of the aspirations of their own people. The report assesses
China based on China's own laws and international standard that
China has pledged to uphold.
Across the 20 issue areas of the report, the Commission
found much to be concerned about. One of the biggest concerns
was China's willingness to ignore the law when it suited them,
especially to silence political dissent.
The rights of freedom of expression and association were
brutally suppressed beginning in February, following the Middle
East protests and calls for protests within China. Most
disturbing were the enforced disappearances of human rights
lawyers, activists, and artists. These included the
internationally renowned artists and rights advocate Ai Weiwei.
Ai was kept at a secret location for 81 days, accompanied by
guards at all times.
The report, our China Commission's report, expresses
particular concern regarding proposed changes to China's
criminal procedural law that would legalize these enforced
disappearances.
Other Chinese citizens continue to be held illegally, even
after they were released from prison. This was highlighted in
the case of Chen Guangcheng. Chen was known and many of you
know as the self-trained lawyer who was blinded at a young age
and became a tireless advocate for the disabled, for farmers,
for victims of the brutal population-planning abuses. Local
officials punished his activism by locking him up for more than
4 years on a charge of blocking traffic.
Since his release in September 2010, officials kept him and
his family under illegal arrest. They had beaten him and his
wife. And they denied their 6-year-old daughter a chance to go
to school. Chinese supporters of Chen, and journalists who have
gone to visit him, have been beaten and detained.
Tibetans, Uyghurs, and other ethnic minorities continue to
struggle to maintain their religion, culture, and livelihoods
amid an intense government pressure. Officials continue to
discredit the Dalai Lama as a religious leader. No dialogue
between the Dalai Lama and Chinese officials took place last
year, the longest breaks in 2002. The Chinese Government
continues to prevent Catholics, Buddhists, Falun Gong
practitioners, Muslims, Protestants from freely practicing
their beliefs.
Workers in China still do not enjoy their fundamental right
to organize independent unions. Instead, they must rely on the
Communist Party-controlled union to represent their interests.
Without genuine labor representation, Chinese workers continue
to face poor working conditions, harassment, and low wages.
Commercially China continues to implement policies that are
inconsistent with its commitments to the WTO. China continues
to unfairly favor its domestic industries and exports through
currency manipulation, industrial policies, and illegal
subsidies.
The report acknowledges the efforts of well-intentioned
Chinese officials. The report cites potential for growth in
areas such as a draft mental health law, programs to expand
legal aid, and attempts to improve government transparency, but
overall the report paints a sober picture. The Chinese
Government still denies its citizens the basic universal rights
of free speech, press, religion, and assembly.
As this report illustrates, China's respect for human
rights and the rule of law has a direct impact on our lives.
When China censors its press, we know less about the safety of
food and products we buy from China. When China manipulates its
currency and suppresses workers' rights, Americans lose jobs.
When China disregards the rule of law in its treatment of its
own citizens, that raises serious question about China's
commitment to international agreements. But it isn't just the
impact it has on our lives. These rights are universal and ones
that people everywhere, including all Chinese, are entitled to
have.
This report will not change China. Only the Chinese people
will change China. But it is important for this Commission and
this Congress to continue to speak out. While the Chinese
Government works hard to remake its image in a positive light
around the world, we must make sure the other side of the story
is told. We must continue to signal to those in China who yearn
and hope for reform from the imprisoned human rights activists
to low-paid factory workers that the people of the United
States support and stand with them.
With that, I yield back, Madam Chairwoman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Walz follows:]

----------

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Tim. And I
congratulate you for taking so much of your time that you give
to this Commission. Both of you are to be commended for helping
the people of China, and people everywhere, be able to live in
a society where their rights are respected and their human
worth is celebrated each and every day.
So we thank you both for presenting the report to us. And
we wish you Godspeed as you prepare the report for next year.
We certainly hope that it is a better report than this dismal
one. Thank you so much for sharing it with us. Thank you.
And I now would like to welcome our second panel of
witnesses. I first want to introduce Chai Ling, one of the
leaders from the Tiananmen Square demonstrations of 1989. Who
can forget the photos of the young female student with the
microphone speaking truth to power during that long-ago spring?
Thank you, Ms. Chai.
I want to thank you also for providing me with an
autographed copy of your recent book entitled A Heart for
Freedom. It details your daring escape from China following the
Tiananmen Square. Thank you so much.
Since arriving to the United States via Hong Kong and
Paris, Ms. Chai has earned an MBA degree from Harvard Business
School and an MPA in public affairs from Princeton University,
no slacker there. She is also the founder of All Girls Allowed,
an organization dedicated to restoring life, value, and dignity
to girls and mothers and to revealing the injustices of China's
coercive one-child policy. Welcome to our committee, Ms. Chai.
Ms. Ling. Well, thank you so much, Ms. Chairwoman.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you. And we will begin with
you in a minute.
Ms. Ling. Okay.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. I am just going to introduce the
rest of the panel. We are also glad to see as a witness Bob Fu,
another Tiananmen Square student leader and a strong advocate
for religious freedom in China. As an underground church
organizer following the Tiananmen Square massacre, Bob faced
first imprisonment and then job loss.
Bob and his pregnant wife were able to flee to Hong Kong in
1996, before the British left, and made their way as refugees
to the United States through the intervention of President
Clinton. In the year 2002, Bob founded the China Aid
Association to focus international attention on Beijing's gross
human rights violations directed against underground church
Christians. Thank you so much, Bob, for being with us.
Next we want to welcome John Kamm. Thank you, Mr. Kamm, a
well-known advocate for human rights in China and the founder
and chairman of Dui Hua Foundation. Since 1979, Mr. Kamm has
made over 100 trips to Beijing related to human rights,
specifically focusing on the treatment of prisoners and the
conditions of the prisons. Mr. Kamm directs the project in
human rights diplomacy at Stanford University and sits on the
board of advisors of the Berkeley China Initiative.
He has received numerous human rights awards, including the
Eleanor Roosevelt Award for Human Rights from President George
W. Bush in 2001. We are glad to have you here, Mr. Kamm.
Welcome.
We also have with us a real privilege, Mr. Bhuchung
Tsering, vice president for special programs from the
International Campaign for Tibet. Bhuchung is also a refugee
from Chinese Communist oppression, having fled as a child to
India in 1960 in the wake of the Chinese invasion of Tibet.
He worked as a journalist in India before joining the
Tibetan Government in exile in 1984. He came to the United
States and joined the staff of the International Campaign for
Tibet in 1995, where he oversaw overseas Chinese outreach and
Tibetan empowerment programs. Welcome, Bhuchung.
After I say the name five times, then I finally get it
right. Thank you. Thank you for forgiving my mispronunciation.
I have a difficult name, too.
Lastly, the committee welcomes Sophie Richardson, the China
director for Human Rights Watch. Dr. Richardson has published
numerous articles on domestic Chinese political reform and
democracy efforts and human rights issues in China, Hong Kong,
Cambodia, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Vietnam. She is also
a commentator on Asian human rights issues, having appeared on
CNN, BBC, and National Public Radio. Welcome, Dr. Richardson.
I kindly remind our witnesses to keep your oral testimony
to no more than 5 minutes. And, without objection, your written
statements will be inserted into the record.
So we will being with you. Thank you so much for being with
us, Ms. Chai Ling. Thank you.
Ms. Ling. Thank you, Chairwoman.

STATEMENT OF MS. CHAI LING, FOUNDER, ALL GIRLS ALLOWED (STUDENT
LEADER, 1989 TIANANMEN SQUARE PROTESTS)

Ms. Ling. I am so honored to be here. I thank you and the
ranking members of the committee and the CECC members for your
excellent report.
At All Girls Allowed, we are committed to restore life,
value, dignity for girls and mothers in China to reveal
injustice of China's one-child policy, which is the largest
crime against humanity on Earth today. It took place 30 years
ago and had killed over 400 million lives. And today, every day
there are over 35,000 forced and coerced abortions are taking
place. Every day over 500 women commit suicide.
So, Chairwoman, I congratulate you and thank you for your
courageous challenge to President Hu Jintao when he visited
America in January. And among all the human rights abuses, this
is the only one question, your challenge to him to end the one-
child policy and forced abortions. Among all the human rights
abuses, this is the only one area he chose to answer. And he
said, ``There are no forced abortions in China.'' Our report
shows that he lied in front of the whole world. And we have
documented numerous amounts of cases throughout the past
several decades of women who went through forced and coerced
abortions.
I want you to focus attention to the picture on the screen
right now. The latest case involved Ma Jihong. You see she is
standing there with her husband. October 14th she was working
in the field at 9 o'clock a.m. She was pregnant with her second
child. A group of Family Planning police went to grab her. She
ran, ran into the cotton field. They caught her and brought her
into the forced abortion clinics.
By 9 o'clock p.m., her family was informed that she was
dead with her 7-month-old baby. And by the time her family
arrived, her eyes were still open. And her lips were purple.
Both her and her baby were gone.
You see, these are people making $1,500 a year, barely $2 a
day, which is a third of the Chinese families, Chinese
population--465 million people--live in that level of poverty.
And you look at the shack. That is the kind of conditions they
are living. And these people are suffering.
We also have cases like Ms. Ji Yeqing, who testified at the
hearing on the 31st anniversary this year. And she went through
two forced abortions. And after she went through the forced
abortion in 2007, the police sedated her. And during her
unconsciousness, they enforced and placed an IUD so she could
not have a baby again. And because the family realized she
could no longer bear child or bear son for the family, they
divorced her.
And in the same hearing, there was another lady who
testified. She endured five forced abortions in the '90s. And
every single time, she went to be given these kinds of
procedures with no anesthesia. Imagine a woman's body was
opened up with no anesthesia and was just being cut into
pieces. That is and should be defined as a torture under this
one-child policy.
So because of that reason, I would like to support the bill
which, again, a hearing was taking place yesterday for H.R.
2121, the China Democracy Promotion Act. I believe once that
bill is passed, that the Chinese leaders who are enforcing
these kinds of human rights violations, abuses, and torture
against their own people will be barring a visa to enter the
United States.
And because of that reason, we would like to ask that our
report of the 350 names of the top-ranking officials in China
among the major cities would be entered into the record and to
be the first group to be----
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Without objection, subject to the
limitations in the rules, we will enter that into the record.
Ms. Ling. Thank you very much.
We also have many cases documented in our All Girls Allowed
annual report on China's one-child policy with additional
detailed cases of these victims. And so I would like that to be
entered into the record as well.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Without objection, subject to the
length limitations, yes.
Ms. Ling. Thank you very much.
So recently there is a case of a 2-year-old girl who was
ran over in China by two vans. And 18 members--it was a
horrific crime on its own, but the worst is that 18 people
stand by, did not do anything.
So I urge the United States to end its current U.S.-China
policy, which has put business profit, security reasons, and
other interests above the basic human rights. It did not make
China a better country nor strengthen the United States. So let
us not be the same as those 18 people who stand by, chose to do
nothing. So I urge you to stand up, speak on behalf of those
who are voiceless.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ling follows:]

----------

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so very much, powerful
testimony. And, yes, we see the H.R. 2122 filed by Mr. Smith,
Mr. Wolf, Mr. Burton, and Mr. Rohrabacher. Thanks for bringing
that to our attention.
And this is her book, A Heart for Freedom and really is a
remarkable story. And it has got the photograph of when you
took that, the bullhorn, in Tiananmen Square. Congratulations.
Ms. Ling. Thank you very much.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. A brave fight. Thank you.
Ms. Ling. You are welcome to include that in the
congressional public record as well. [Laughter.]
I don't know if that is possible, but----
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. That will definitely be subject to
the length limitations.
And three beautiful daughters. Congratulations.
Ms. Ling. Thank you.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. They certainly wouldn't be around in
China. Thank you so much.
Mr. Fu, we are also welcoming you to our committee.
Mr. Fu. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF MR. BOB FU, PRESIDENT, CHINA AID

Mr. Fu. Thank you, Madam Chairman and the Honorable Ranking
Member. And I also want to thank the members of the CECC and
the leadership of Congressman Chris Smith and Senator Brown for
their excellent work.
In the first 10 months of 2011, religious freedom
conditions in China continued to be poor. In fact, religious
freedom conditions are at their lowest point since 1982, the
year Deng Xiaoping officially ended the policy of eradicating
religion.
We have seen a hardening in the government's attitude
toward religion, and policy changes that were implemented well
before the nascent Jasmine Revolution on February 2011 has
accelerated since that time.
At this time, the ruling Communist Party continues to see
those who peacefully advocate for religious freedom, free
speech, independent labor unions, ethnic minority rights, and
democracy as the biggest threat to its authority and future
power.
The Chinese Government tolerates the practice of religion
in a limited capacity within officially controlled
organizations and has permitted some discussion about allowing
faith-based charity work, but the fact remains that the
government also seeks to control and repress any religion or
religious group that refused to be totally controlled by the
government as well as those with extensive foreign ties and
those it regards as a potential threat to the Communist Party.
This includes not only just the house church Protestants but
other religious groups as well. As China's influence and power
grows, this pattern is unlikely to change and certainly not
before the 2012 transfer of power to a new generation of senior
leadership.
Nonetheless, we do have a two-fold message that offers some
hope, particularly if there is concerted, coordinated action
from the United States and other governments on human rights.
First, international attention matters and can make a
difference. That is because it constrains what the Chinese
Government does and how it uses its force against rights
advocates.
We have firsthand testimony from dissidents and prisoners
that international attention improved their conditions and in
some cases even protected them. Chinese security forces remain
brutal, but for imprisoned dissidents and religious leaders,
silence can mean death in Chinese prisons.
I want to just introduce you. In today's audience, there is
a lady from China. She is the wife of a Chinese democracy
advocate, Ms. Fung Xiao. And her husband was imprisoned for
democracy work already for 8 years. And in February 19th, he
was detained and arrested again for simply forwarding some
Twitter messages. He did not even organize anything, just
forwarding a few Twitter messages. And in the past 8 months,
both his wife, Ms. Fung Xiao, and their 6-year-old son were
denied any access to even visit their husband and their dad.
And Ms. Fung Xiao coming here, of course, risking lots of
things and quitting her job, just wants to make her voice to be
known. So I would really ask Members of Congress and media to
talk to her to let her know that her husband would not be
forgotten.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. We welcome you to our committee.
Thank you for your bravery.
Mr. Fu. Thank you. She is heading back to China tomorrow
morning.
Second, a growing rights consciousness is spreading across
China, exemplified by courageous human rights lawyers, such as
Gao Zhisheng, Chen Guangcheng, and many others, who challenge
the Chinese Government corruption and human rights abuses. The
growing netizen community in China is the main conduit by which
this religious consciousness is, the rights consciousness is,
spreading. The U.S. Government may be the only government that
China cares to listen to, must stand firmly and publicly with
those in China who are fighting peacefully for freedom and
rights. These brave and patriotic souls are fighting for a
future China that respects human rights and the rule of law.
The United States should make religious freedom and freedom
of expression on the internet priorities of the bilateral
relationship. Together, those two rights will do more to
improve U.S.-China relations than all of our trade,
investments, and cooperation on shared security interests.
I want you to also pay attention to the increasing
propaganda campaign by the Chinese Government in the United
States. Yesterday I was in Dallas after presenting a copy of
the Bible to the President Bush, former President Bush, and
First Lady Laura Bush as the freedom collection of his
Presidential center. The Bible was hand-copied by the Chinese
prisoners in the labor camps in order to read Bible.
And then I found the Chinese Government actually
orchestrated a so-called Bible exhibition campaign held already
in Washington, DC, and Chicago and this week in Dallas and next
week will be in the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and
is nothing but political manipulation, lies. The tragic thing
is our Americans--and I think should be awakened up--becomes
sponsors, raising funds for this propaganda all over the U.S.
What are they doing? Between those----
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you.
Mr. Fu. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fu follows:]

----------

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much, powerful
testimony.
Mr. Kamm, welcome.
Mr. Kamm. Thank you, Chairman.

STATEMENT OF MR. JOHN KAMM, CHAIRMAN, THE DUI HUA FOUNDATION

Mr. Kamm. And I would like to commend you for holding this
first-ever hearing on the report of the Congressional-Executive
Commission on China. Thank you for inviting me.
On August the 30th, the National People's Congress posted
on its Web site the text of a draft amended criminal procedure
law. While it may be revised, it is expected to pass at the NPC
meeting in March.
There are several positive aspects to the amended criminal
procedure law. I would point to, for instance, better treatment
for juvenile offenders and women in prison. However, in one
very important aspect, the amended criminal procedure law
represents a step backwards, a step in the wrong direction. And
that is in the treatment of those suspected of endangering
state security.
If passed, the draft amended criminal procedure law would
complete a move underway for many years to create a dual track
legal system: One for 99 percent of Chinese citizens suspected
of committing crimes, rape, murder, and so on; and the other
system for those suspected of committing crimes that threaten
the Communist Party and the government's grip on power. And the
most serious of those crimes, though by no means the only
crime, is endangering state security.
Around the time that the CEEC report is issued, the Chinese
Government, quite by coincidence I'm sure, releases statistics
on the number of people arrested and indicted for endangering
state security crimes in China as well as the number of trials.
What do these numbers tell us? Well, for the third
consecutive year, more than 1,000 people have been arrested,
indicted, and tried for endangering state security.
Now, in light of this high level of arrests and the virtual
absence of any acts of clemency toward prisoners convicted of
speech and association crimes, we now can say that there are
more people in prison for committing political crimes than at
any point since 1989. What can we say about these prisoners?
First of all, more than half are ethnic minorities. I am basing
this on a statement by the President of the High Court of
Xinjiang. More than half of the state security trials in 2010
were held in Xinjiang. Seventy-five to eighty percent of
endangering state security crimes are speech and association
crimes. And the sentences are long. Acquittals are unheard of
in these trials.
Now, in the 2 minutes remaining, I would just like to
quickly trace the route of a typical endangering state security
suspect through this separate legal system.
The new law provides for electronic monitoring of state
security suspects. When they are detained, their families are
rarely notified as this would ``hinder the investigation.'' The
new criminal procedure law allows for putting state security
detainees in non-residential surveillance. The combination of
non-notification of the family and placement in a place other
than the residence constitutes enforced disappearance under
international law. Access to counsel is restricted. The case
itself, the entire case, can be classified as a secret. And
once that happens, the trial is closed, nor can there be any
media coverage nor can even the family say anything about it.
After conviction, the convicts are sent into prison. In
prison, they are classified as so-called important prisoners.
There is a code on their uniforms that tells people, anyone who
looks at it, that they are a political prisoner.
In prison, they almost never get sentence reductions nor
paroles. We are not aware of a single case of a sentence
reduction or parole in over 2 years for prisoners serving
sentences for speech and association. After the sentence is
complete, they have to serve a sentence of deprivation of
political rights. And recently the Chinese Government has
dusted off a long unknown set of regulations which allow for a
special treatment during this period.
I would like to say one more thing about state security
detainees. And that is, despite the efforts of the Commission
and human rights groups represented here, we know less than 10
percent of their names. In other words, 90 percent of their
names we don't know. We must continue to find their names and
speak their names, remembering what Milan Kundera told us: That
the struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory
against forgetting.
Thank you, Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kamm follows:]

----------

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Powerful statement. Thank you so
much. I had forgotten that statement. Say that again.
Mr. Kamm. Excuse me?
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Give me that phrase again.
Mr. Kamm. Oh, yes. The struggle of man against power is the
struggle of memory against forgetting.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Mr. Bhuchung Tsering?

STATEMENT OF MR. BHUCHUNG K. TSERING, VICE PRESIDENT FOR
SPECIAL PROGRAMS, INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBET

Mr. Tsering. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Congressman Berman,
and members of the committee.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Hold that a little bit closer to
your mouth.
Mr. Tsering. This hearing comes at a critical juncture in
the modern history of Tibet. As, Madam Chairman, you yourself
referred, Tibetans in unprecedented numbers have started
resorting in their despair and some would say in their
extraordinary courage and conviction to the most extreme form
of protest imaginable: Self-immolation. Just today we received
news of another Tibetan who committed self-immolation and who
has died as a result of it.
We value the work of the CECC and commend its annual
report, not only for its rigor of its reporting but also for
the breadth of its scope.
I would like to comment on the CECC's report by linking it
to what is happening with Tibetans in Tibet today. With today's
development, 12 Tibetans have self-immolated since March 2009
and 11 since March of this year. All but three of these were
from the Kirti Monastery in Ngaba, a Tibetan region in Eastern
Tibet.
Why are these young Tibetans resorting to such grave
actions? And why are they mostly clustered around Kirti
Monastery? Much of the answers can be found in the annual
report of the CECC. It talks of very many religious
restrictions in Tibet today, including a rigorous campaign to
discredit His Holiness the Dalai Lama.
Similarly, the report highlights the fact that nine of ten
Tibetan autonomous prefectural governments have issued or
drafted regulatory measures to restrict religious actuators. On
top of these restrictions, specifically the Ngaba region has
been subjected to a severe security crackdown since the pan-
Tibetan demonstrations of 2008.
Although the recent developments have drawn attention to
Eastern Tibetan areas, the fact is that all over Tibet, the
Tibetan people are experiencing a tense atmosphere. A climate
of fear pervades in all Tibetan areas because of the misguided
policies of the Chinese Government.
The timing of today's hearing is propitious. This
afternoon, the elected head of the Central Tibetan
Administration in Dharamsala, Dr. Lobsang Sangay, will be
testifying before the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission. Since
the Dalai Lama relinquished his political role, the Kalon
Tripa, as Dr. Sangay's position is called, has assumed a much
more important role. Dr. Sangay will also be joined by Kirti
Rinpoche, the spiritual head of the Kirti Monastic community,
where much of these immolations have taken place. And I urge
members and all of you to attend this afternoon's hearing.
I would also like to request that the text of the
testimonies of Dr. Sangay and Kirti Rinpoche be inserted in the
record.
As Members of Congress deal with the recommendation of
today's hearing, we would like to support all recommendations.
Specifically we would also like to add three more
recommendations based on our perception: First, update and
strengthen the Tibetan Policy Act.
The Tibetan Policy Act of 2002 is a comprehensive and
pragmatic expression of congressional support for the Tibetan
people. We urge the committee to explore further ways to
strengthen the Act to take into account new developments in
Tibetan politics, including development inside Tibet.
Given Congress' longstanding promotion of international
religious freedom, the committee should explore whether the
Tibetan Policy Act can be used to clarify U.S. policy on the
succession or reincarnation of the Dalai Lama and issues that
might have much consequences in the coming period. That act can
also be updated to include legislature authorization and policy
guidance for assistance for Tibetan refugee settlements.
Second, promotion of the Tibetan-Chinese dialogue. The
Congress should continue to send the strong message to China
that it supports His Holiness the Dalai Lama's initiative for a
solution to the Tibetan issue through dialogue. And many
Members of Congress have referred to this issue.
Third, restrictions on Chinese delegations from or about
Tibet. The State Department reports that three-quarters of
diplomats' requests to visit Tibetan areas are denied by the
Chinese Government.
On the other hand, here in the United States, Tibetan
Americans are subjected to a racially discriminatory process
when they apply for visas at the Chinese Embassy and
consulates. And many of them do not get permission even after
that. However, China is freely able to send delegations to the
United States to denounce His Holiness the Dalai Lama and to
spread its propaganda about Tibet.
The Congress should look for ways to impose restrictions in
a situation where the Chinese Government is not respecting the
diplomatic principle of reciprocity. As an example, the State
Department could be asked to deny visas to those people who had
been involved with the current ongoing crackdown in Kirti
Monastery and to get an explanation of the pretext or
conditions under which monks have been removed and their
current whereabouts.
In conclusion, I once again appreciate the opportunity to
testify here today and welcome the committee's examination of
the human rights in China and Tibet through its oversight of
the CECC report.
Thank you, ma'am.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Tsering follows:]

----------

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much. Thank you for
testifying.
Dr. Richardson, you are now recognized.

STATEMENT OF SOPHIE RICHARDSON, PH.D., CHINA DIRECTOR, HUMAN
RIGHTS WATCH

Ms. Richardson. Thank you very much for having us, as
always, to members of the committee, also to the CECC for
producing another excellent report, and to my distinguished co-
panelists.
I was asked this morning to speak specifically about policy
recommendations, although I strongly share many of the concerns
that have been articulated, particularly about the immolations.
So I would like to focus on four particular issues.
First, I think there has never been a point in time when it
is so clear that the securing of U.S. interests, broadly
speaking, in China has a considerable bearing on securing human
rights and the rule of law there. Given that, the U.S. needs to
raise these concerns through diverse and coordinated actors,
not just the usual suspects of the State Department.
Doing so is more likely to produce results because it will
address a broader spectrum of Chinese officials and indicate a
seriousness of purpose by the U.S. While we do see more diverse
agency representation in the bilateral human rights dialogue
and the strategic and economic dialogue, that participation is
not being put to discernible use between meetings. Nor are all
of the relevant agencies given the opportunity and urged to
assume an obligation to discuss human rights issues.
Nearly 3 years into this administration, there is still no
functional interagency working group on human rights issues
that could coordinate such an effort, and critical
opportunities are being missed as a result.
We also continue to see cabinet members visit Beijing or
receive their counterparts and fail to raise human rights
issues. Attorney General Eric Holder is a laudable exception.
There is a human rights issue in China for every U.S. agency
and for every cabinet member. They must be tasked with raising
those issues in every interaction with their Chinese
counterparts. I think we should imagine what the world would be
like if Mr. Smith got to sit in on every high-level interaction
with the Chinese Government.
Second, we cannot emphasize enough how much continuity
matters when speaking about human rights issues with the
Chinese Government. They are as attuned to what goes unsaid
from one meeting to the next as they are to what is said or
what is said differently and are eager for an opportunity to
suggest that the U.S. has softened its stance.
This administration initially turned in a distressingly
weak performance on these issues, found its voice in late 2010,
but now seems to be fading again. Secretary Clinton's January
2011 speech and former Ambassador Huntsman's strong and
unapologetic remarks on human rights are fundamentally
undermined when Vice President Biden and Ambassador Locke in
September 2011 not only offer softer remarks but go so far as
to suggest that the Chinese and the American people, not
governments, have different views on human rights.
It is equally unhelpful that many American officials
continue to raise human rights following a disclaimer that it
is a topic about which the two sides will disagree. In fact,
there is strong popular support inside China for universal
human rights. Simply put, the U.S. needs to get and stay on
message.
Third, American officials do themselves and human rights
defenders in China little good when they merely say publicly
that human rights were discussed with the Chinese Government,
period, full stop, with no details.
A statement just last week exemplifies this problem, ``The
two sides also discussed the South China Sea and human
rights.'' But what got discussed? Individual cases? Broader
trends? The costs the U.S. would impose for noncompliance or
regression? And what was the outcome? An account of topics
discussed and outcomes not only serve to underscore U.S.
concerns but enables other actors to amplify the message and
judge progress or obstacles.
Assistant Secretary Posner helped buck this trend when he
spoke publicly after the last round in Beijing of the bilateral
human rights dialogue, describing the Chinese Government's
responses to queries about individual cases as ``having given
no comfort.''
Finally, while it is appropriate that the U.S. focuses some
of its human rights diplomacy on the Chinese Government, this
should not be to the exclusion of efforts directed at a much
larger Chinese audience and at independent voices. The U.S.
should put social media to better use, particularly by making
very senior officials available regularly to communicate with
people in China and do a better job of listening to and
acknowledging a far broader audience, rather than placing the
views of a decidedly unrepresentative government at the center
of its thinking.
President Obama should meet with former Chinese, Tibetan,
and Uyghur political prisoners, as many people on this
committee have, and publicly praise the countless acts of
bravery against arbitrary rule that take place every day. U.S.
officials manage in nearly every speech to reassure the Chinese
Government that the U.S. ``welcomes a strong and prosperous and
successful China.'' Could those officials not offer comparable
words of appreciation for those who are doing and risking the
most to actually affect the rule of law, greater transparency,
and decent governance? Short of having the Chinese Government
react constructively to their concerns, what could be more
empowering to those who struggle for what the U.S. says it
wants in China than hearing the U.S. raise their concerns about
human rights?
Even the most determined U.S. policy on these issues may
not yield immediate change from or with the Chinese Government,
but long term, the messages will be absorbed and not least will
immediately encourage those who are fighting every day here and
now to protect their rights.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Richardson follows:]

----------

Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much. Good policy
recommendations.
I will ask the first questions. I wanted to talk about the
one-child policy. And Ms. Ling can answer or anyone else. You
had pointed and we saw the photo of what had happened in one
family's struggle just a few weeks ago. And in the report, they
highlight one case, a similar case, in October of last year,
where local family planning officials in southern China
kidnapped a woman.
Ms. Ling. Yes.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. She was 8 months pregnant----
Ms. Ling. Yes.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen [continuing]. With her second child.
They detained her for 40 hours----
Ms. Ling. Yes.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen [continuing]. Forcibly injected her
with a substance that caused the fetus to be aborted. And
during that time, the husband was not permitted to see her. And
I wanted to ask you, how widespread are such coercive
practices, the example that you showed us, the many examples in
the report?
And related to that, the population statistics, as you
point out, clearly indicate a growing gender imbalance in China
with a lack of female children and young women of marriageable
age due to this coercive----
Ms. Ling. Yes.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen [continuing]. One-child policy that
they say does not exist and their preference for male children.
Many have termed the selective abortion of female fetuses as
gendercide.
Ms. Ling. Yes.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Why do you think that this is being
done? Why don't they realize that the obvious problems that
they will be facing in the future in the increasing shortage of
women and girls? And why don't they alter their policy to at
the very least for their own survival be able to stop this
practice?
Ms. Ling. Yes. Thank you, Chairwoman, for this excellent
question. First of all, CECC did an excellent report, the one-
child policy abuses, including that case you mentioned. That
was caught on Aljazeera's TV. And the woman, who was 8 months
pregnant, with her belly full--the baby was almost full term--
was already injected with poison and was dead. That video is on
All Girls Allowed's Web site as well.
And I, working with my lawyers, went to her aid afterwards.
Unfortunately, we did not know beforehand. We learned after we
intervened, that the government compensated them for some
financial compensation and housing assistance. What I want to
say is, affirming all of the panelists' suggestions, is that
when we speak out, China does cave in, does cooperate, does
make improvements in human rights.
The second thing regarding China's current enlarging gender
imbalance also shows and also confirmed by China's recent
census report that China has a large gender imbalance. For
every six girls that are scheduled to be born, the number six
girl will be aborted, or killed right after birth, or
abandoned. And so, therefore, the number six boy would have
grown up with no wife to marry.
So after 30 years of this policy, China today has over 37
million single men, called single branches. As a result of this
large amount of men who, you know, could not find a wife to
marry, they become a major source for sex trafficking. Today 60
percent of the world's trafficking takes place in China.
And, in addition to that, China had our expert testify in
June at the Ending Gendercide Coalition meeting. They believe
China is on the verge of HIV and other sexual disease epidemic
breakout because of that very reason, because the commercial
sex industry is unregulated.
The third thing is China has a rising problem with sex
trafficking against young girls. We discovered in our report in
Putian, one city has over 3 million residences, up to between
100,000 to 600,000 people, might be the result of child bride
trafficking.
What has happened is that families are taking matters into
their own hand. They go to the black market. They create the
black markets to demand girls to be bought at ages as young as
3 years old to eight or nine. So All Girls Allowed volunteers
were able to reunite 4 of these families in China, but every
year there are over 600,000 cases where children are
trafficked, mostly women.
You asked the question, why does China not take action to
end this? Yes, we heard the All Women's Federation and the
central government's Family Planning Committee, making noise
about how they have got to eradicate this kind of gendercide.
They are going to take the family who is going to bore their
baby girls into serious punishment. But why have they not done
this effectively, aggressively?
For example, there is another way to do it, is to welcome
baby girls to come in. All Girls Allowed has a baby shower
program. For as little as $240 a year, $20 a month, we can
work. We can save a baby girl and her mother and last year we
were able to save 550 baby girls. And these are the pictures.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you. Is that part of your----
Ms. Ling. Yes, it is part of the report. And so it can be
done. So we encourage U.S. to continue to do some of that. Just
welcome baby girls.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much.
Ms. Ling. And change the culture. But there's an alarming
trend, which we suspect is taking place. The government does
not want to get rid of all the single man because these single
man are a resource for potential military expansion together
with its nationalism and ambition. And they never gave up to
use military force to take over Taiwan.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you.
Ms. Ling. There could become a global threat to peace, to
the U.S. and the world.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. That is true. Thank you so much.
Thank you for that testimony.
Mr. Berman is recognized for his questions.
Mr. Berman. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. And thank
all of you for your testimony and a number of your
recommendations.
In some of your testimony, you contrast the Chinese
Government and the Chinese people. Prime Minister Wen, called
for political reform in China and acknowledged the Chinese
people's need for democracy and freedom is irresistible. What
do you think he meant by ``political reform''?
Our general view of the Chinese Government is a totally
top-down democratic centralism. Is there some debate within
Chinese Government leadership circles about this irresistible
need for greater democracy and freedom? What is your sense from
following what the Chinese, what the Communist Party and the
Chinese Government are doing on this? What did he mean?
Ms. Richardson. I can try to take a stab at this. I think
there's a big asterisk at the end of that phrase, which is that
he's talking about democracy or political participation with
Chinese characteristics, which means that the Chinese Communist
Party remains in power and unchallenged.
And by ``political reform,'' I think he means ways of
resolving serious kinds and incidents of protest or unrest or
grievances but not by offering up, for example, competitive
elections. It does not by any stretch mean democracy in the way
that you or I would understand it. It is about resolving
isolated problems without really allowing genuine political
participation. This is my interpretation.
Mr. Berman. Did you want to just--because I have one more
question. So if one of you could just speak? And then I want to
ask my other question.
Mr. Fu. Okay. I think the observation is, of course, you
know, maybe as an individual. As a leader, Premier Wen has the
intention or wanted to advance some kind of political reform.
But, of course, words need to meet with action. I think it is
more fundamental to protect the control and dictatorship of the
one-party political system as well as their economic interest
of the----
Mr. Berman. So basically what you are really saying is he
is saying that this is a maneuver to enhance the ability of the
party to continue control, show a little leg or something, as
part of a strategy of maintaining control?
Mr. Fu. Yes, like, you know, the government leader has been
talking about, loudly about, the building of harmonious
society.
Mr. Berman. Right.
Mr. Fu. At the same time, the capital city of China, every
week they are cracking down a church.
Mr. Berman. Let me just see if I--on the internet, battle
between the government censors and the people who are trying to
circumvent that censorship. What is the most effective U.S.
policy to help promote internet freedom in China? Do any of you
have any thoughts about that?
Ms. Richardson. I will take a stab at it.
Mr. Berman. Sure.
Ms. Richardson. Well, first of all, I think ensuring that
U.S. companies are themselves not part of the problem, but,
rather, a part of the solution I think making sure that the
U.S. as part of its diplomacy is really engaging through these
means and using it as a way of demonstrating the normalcy of
people communicating with government officials, there have been
various legislative attempts to push for greater internet
freedom in China and other places. I think the current version
of GOFA, which Mr. Smith started, includes a lot of the
concerns that we have, both about how to characterize
countries, how to sanction ones that restrict internet access.
But I think demonstrating or leading by example should be at
the core of the thinking.
Mr. Berman. All right. I think my time has expired.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much, Mr. Berman.
Mr. Rohrabacher, the chairman of the Subcommittee on
Oversight Investigations, is recognized.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
I want to follow up on what Mr. Berman was just getting to.
And that is the role played by U.S. corporations. If you could
just give me very short answers? Because I have got a couple of
other questions I would like to ask.
Do you believe that American corporations that are now
doing business in China have had a positive impact on the level
of human rights, respect for human rights, by the government or
have they, instead, created an impression that Americans don't
really care, thus having a negative impact? Just could you give
a very, very short answer for each of you?
Ms. Ling. Yes.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Negative impact or a positive impact? Have
American corporations given the impression that we Americans
believe in this and, thus, the people they work with, at least
the local officials, know that we stand for something different
or have they, by and large, given the impression we don't care
about it and, thus, encouraged them to encourage local
officials in the wrong direction?
Ms. Ling. Our understanding is the American corporations in
China have not set a good example. And they basically, you
know, came out with a dictatorship, making profit. As a result
of that, America's middle class and poor people are losing our
jobs to China. And the rich people----
Mr. Rohrabacher. No, no, no, no. I'm asking whether or
not----
Ms. Ling. Right. Sorry.
Mr. Rohrabacher [continuing]. American corporations have
had a good impact on----
Ms. Ling. Human rights.
Mr. Rohrabacher [continuing]. On, actually, enforcement of
human rights or have they had a negative impact?
Ms. Ling. Negative impact. Sorry.
Mr. Fu. Much more negative than positive.
Mr. Rohrabacher. More negative than positive?
Mr. Kamm. In the area of civil and political rights,
marginal at best.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Marginal at best?
Mr. Kamm. I would say more on the negative side.
Mr. Tsering. I would say more on the negative side.
Ms. Richardson. I'm with John on this, more on the negative
side with some marginal improvement, very marginal.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Okay. What especially is true, Madam
Chairman, with those corporations that sell electronic
equipment or other types of equipment that permits the Chinese
dictatorship to more efficiently oppress its own people and
track down its opponents and those are things that we should be
embarrassed as Americans that any of our citizens would stoop
to that level.
I would like to ask a question about the forced abortions.
Did you say there were 400 million babies that have been
forcibly aborted?
Ms. Ling. Yes. This is the number that was given by Chinese
Government. They were boasting under the one-child policy, they
were able----
Mr. Rohrabacher. So one needs to do something that will
demonstrate the magnitude of what 400 million fetuses, 400
million human beings are all about. That is more than the
population of our country. So it is probably the population of
North America. And gone, dead, you know, snuffed out. People
need to know the magnitude of this crime----
Ms. Ling. Absolutely correct.
Mr. Rohrabacher [continuing]. Monstrous crime against
humanity, not just against the women of China but all humanity.
Now, how have women rights organizations in the United
States responded to this massive crime against women? Have they
played a positive role or have they, like our corporations,
ignored this issue?
Ms. Ling. From our knowledge, they have done very little.
Mr. Rohrabacher. So are women's rights organizations, the
great bastion of liberal change in America, like our corporate
leaders, not standing up for, what should be, the principles
which they stand for? Do you agree with that?
Mr. Fu. Yes. I agree.
Mr. Kamm. I would agree with that.
Mr. Tsering. I would think so, yes.
Ms. Richardson. Yes and no.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes or no? I can't hear you.
Ms. Richardson. There are some organizations that have done
some work on this issue, but it has certainly not--you know, I
think if we are talking about 400 million people----
Mr. Rohrabacher. Okay.
Ms. Richardson [continuing]. It is not at least that order
of magnitude.
Mr. Rohrabacher. You know, shame on us if we don't live up
to our own ideals.
Finally, one last question for Mr. Tsering. Does your
organization believe that--let me make sure I get the wording
down for this question. In 1987, President Reagan signed into
law a congressional resolution condemning China's occupation of
Tibet as a country. In 1991, another resolution was signed into
law that stated that Tibet was an occupied country. Does your
organization believe that what is going on in Tibet today is a
violation of human rights of Chinese people who live in Tibet,
meaning you're Chinese, or is this a violation of your human
rights as the people of Tibet, which is an occupied country?
Mr. Tsering. I think if you look at history, it is
categorically clear that Tibet is an occupied country.
Mr. Rohrabacher. So your organization believes that Tibet
is another country that the rights of the people are being
violated by foreign power?
Mr. Tsering. Historically if you look at it, it is so.
Mr. Rohrabacher. Okay. Thank you very much.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much, Mr. Dana
Rohrabacher.
Mr. Higgins of New York is recognized.
Mr. Higgins. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Ling, I was noticing in your biography that you were a
student leader in the Tiananmen Square uprising some 22 years
ago. And I look at that as the precursor of what we have
witnessed over the past year in the Arab world with a lot of
uprisings there. It is often said that the two most powerful
forces in the world today are youth and technology and that
these uprisings are not about material things. They are about
people that wanted to be treated as citizens and not subjects.
I am curious to know from you. Twenty-two years ago we
didn't have Twitter. We really didn't have Facebook. We didn't
have YouTube. We clearly had the internet but in its infancy.
What was the means of communication to effectively organize--
because, you know, today's technology is used both for
aspirational purposes but also for organizational purposes as
well, what was the means of communication 22 years ago that
brought so many young people into Tiananmen Square,
particularly in the midst of a government that is very good at
repression?
Ms. Ling. I was one of the key leaders of 1989's movement.
And I just recently finished my memoir 22 years later, A Heart
for Freedom, to put all of these pieces together. What brought
us together, what led to the crackdown, and what is the meaning
and why?
What brought us together is the desire to be free, the
desire to create a better, peaceful China. What led to the
crackdown was the government's fear that they would lose
control and the desire that they can do whatever to massacre
their own people and they would be able to get away with that.
And they were right for the most part. The rest of the world,
you know, all screamed for a few years, went back to them, now
do business, resumed diplomatic relationship, that is wrong.
That was no mean to China. Yes, youth and technology are a
key part, but ultimately is the heart for freedom, the desire
for freedom placed by God into us. And that is what I learned.
One recent example is that Canada's strong condemnation of
persecution of Falun Gong did not halt their corporation. In
fact, it was followed by a new trade agreement expanding
Canada's grain export to China.
So be strong. Be courageous. That is all I can say. And we
are going to visit Europe next week. I will definitely present
all the report we are doing today. We are creating. We are not
stopping creating an international coalition effort to
strengthen the human rights voices.
Mr. Turner. Thank you for your courageous efforts.
Ms. Ling. Thank you.
In China, through the massacre, God brought the best out of
an evil situation. He is freeing China by bringing more and
more people to come to know Him through Jesus.
Mr. Higgins. You know, I understand the issue of emotion
and the heart, but the tools of organization, the tools of
collaboration are found in social media.
Ms. Ling. Yes.
Mr. Higgins. And we see other parts of the world where
people who feel oppressed are rising up using those tools,
again both for aspirational purposes and organizational
purposes. My question is, you know, you can ban all of these
media outlets, but what the internet has allowed us to do
today----
Ms. Ling. Right.
Mr. Higgins [continuing]. Is take something that is
occurring in a very remote part of the world and put it on a
global platform.
Ms. Ling. Absolutely.
Mr. Higgins. And that gives you the ability again to
organize to inspire.
Ms. Ling. Yes, yes.
Mr. Higgins. Why haven't the oppressed Chinese people been
able to successfully utilize the social media to do a modern-
day demonstration, much like you did 22 years ago in Tiananmen
Square?
Ms. Ling. They are doing that. The cases from Aljazeera
that were able to feature the woman with the forced abortion
was exposed on China's Twitter, through micro blogging in
China. So those kinds of works are taking place. They are not
clear yet, but it is still brooding. It is taking place.
And I do want to advocate for Voice of America and Radio
Free Asia. Those media in 1989 were instrumental to help bring
the voice of freedom back to China. I give you an example.
Four days after the massacre, when the whole world did not
really know what happened at Beijing, I was on my way to
escape. And when I saw the leaders were denying about the
massacre, I made a radio tape and that radio tape was smuggled
out of China before me and 2 days later when I was hiding
inside China, I heard my own voice coming back through the
Voice of America.
I do believe we should continue leveraging the traditional
media and the new media and to encourage the Chinese people to
rise up, to collaborate. We also should remember that the
Chinese Government is becoming much more sophisticated as well.
And so our challenge is bigger. And that is why I believe
fundamental spiritual beliefs and strength from the faith,
knowing the God who will set China free will inspire people to
put their lives at risk again to continue to search for
freedom. And that day will come.
Mr. Higgins. Thank you. I am out of time, and I yield back.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you very much, Mr. Higgins.
Mr. Turner of New York is recognized.
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Madam Chair.
We are fortunate to have two Tiananmen survivors here with
us today. I would like to ask you how you feel about the
lifting by the EU of the Tiananmen sanctions against China and
what effect the human rights situation in that country will be.
Also, what is the effect on morale, people who are striving for
human rights with this apparently lifting of the sanctions?
Mr. Fu. Certainly, the lifting of the sanctions that has
been upheld starting right after the Tiananmen massacre sent a
very wrong signal, sent one signal to the Chinese dictators
that after years of economic diplomacy, they can win, at least
approval, from important international body. It sent the wrong
signal to the Chinese people. Of course, that only maybe
economic matters is the most important.
I think the spirit, however, the spirit of the Chinese
people for freedom is continuing to grow. And you have like
the--every Sunday in the past 30 Sundays, one church, house
church, in Beijing with 1,000 members, they lost their property
to worship. And they have to go outdoors.
So every Sunday there are deliveries, sometimes as many as
500. They risk their own lives because the guards, the security
forces were right out the doors. So they climb the windows in
the darkness, sometimes from Saturday, Friday night, hiding in
the parks, hotel room, in order to go to the worship place to
have altar worship. And so far in the past 30 weeks, already
over 500 of the members were detained. All their church
leaders, pastors, elders had been under house arrest without
any freedom of movement. Yet, they are still doing it.
And even the blind activist, you know, Chen Guangcheng, the
government has mobilized maybe 200 or maybe even more hooligans
or government hired guards tried to pick up the visitors. Yet,
you know, every day now the netizens, they just keep going,
keep going through picking up, but they are not discouraged. We
think freedom will prevail.
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Mr. Fu. Did you ever----
Ms. Ling. Would you like my comments as well? Thank you.
Mr. Turner. I most certainly would.
Ms. Ling. Yes. Thank you.
I do believe EU lifting the human rights ban is a huge
mistake. And appeasement with evil does not work. It never
worked in the past. It would not work with China. Rather, I
wanted to point out when international communities stand up
against China on basic human rights, instead of losing ground,
they are gaining.
Mr. Turner. Just on a different note, not that many years
ago, as a businessman, I thought prosperity would bring in
democracy there, contact with the West, contact with Hong Kong.
And, instead, what we have seen is a morphing economically from
communism to fascism and keeping the worst elements of both
philosophies. So keep up the fight.
Ms. Ling. Thank you very much. I am an entrepreneur myself.
I completely agree with you. President Hu Yaobang, his death
led to the movement in 1989. He was advocating for three
reforms: Economical, political, and spiritual. I am glad to
report back economically after the reform Deng Xiaoping wanted
China to have this total rich and poor gap.
Five thousand families own 70 percent of China's wealth.
And the other middle class people divide the other 20 percent.
But 465 million people live in extreme poverty. And they're
forgotten because the world only sees the glimpse and glare of
the rich.
And politically there are continued human rights abuses,
very little, no political reform. But China has a vibrant faith
movement on Earth today. That is the hope.
Back 22 years ago, I did not understand what he meant by
three reforms. Now I think that is a good recipe for a free
China. So don't give up.
Mr. Turner. Yes.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you.
Mr. Turner. Keep educating us. Thank you.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Turner.
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Mr. Connolly of Virginia is
recognized.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Madam Chairman. And welcome to our
panelists.
Let me ask Mr. Fu and maybe Ms. Ling. What lessons do you
think the Chinese Government has learned or taken away from its
own experience with the Tiananmen Square tragedy?
Ms. Ling. The Chinese Government--so in doing my memoir, to
research that, I wanted to understand what made Deng Xiaoping
want to kill. He was terrified because he realized that
Tiananmen was not just a student movement. It was an
international force for democracy. If he did not stop that
trend, China would be set free. In his mind this was making
chaos. And so he had to use tanks.
One raised questions about opposition, saying, ``How would
the international community react to it?'' And he said, ``Well,
don't worry about it. They will yell and scream for a few
years. And then they will come back because we are such a big
piece of meat. And they all want a piece of action off us.''
And, unfortunately, his prediction was correct. So that is
what happened in the past 22 years, both in the U.S.-China
relationship and also the European-China relationships. That
needs to be stopped. The Chinese Government has been rewarded
for their brutality by us being silent, by us trading off human
rights, human dignity, humanity with trade, with national
security, all the other interests. And that did not make
America stronger. We are a much weaker United States as a
result of that.
As Tocqueville said in 1831, America is great because it is
good. Once it ceases its goodness, it will cease to be great.
That is why I am so thankful today as the chairwoman is hosting
this first ever CECC report hearing. It is so important to know
that appeasement does not do America any good where the
crossroads----
Mr. Connolly. Ms. Ling, we are dealing with foreign policy
here in the House Foreign Affairs Committee. And you used the
word ``appeasement.'' So what is the alternative? Would you
have favored the severing of diplomatic relations and trade
relations and economic relations between the United States and
the People's Republic of China over Tiananmen Square?
Ms. Ling. No, I would not favor totally abolishing our
relationship, but I would favor when we go in, we come back to
our staff according to a godly manner that is act justly, love,
mercy, and walk humbly with our Lord, our God. The Chinese
Government itself is finding their own faith. And the very fact
they are having a Confucius statue right in front of Mao's
memorial is their own declaration that the communism ideology
is dead.
The Tiananmen massacre not only killed the faith of the
Chinese people toward the ideology. It also killed their very
own belief. So they are looking. They will look after people
who really have true faith, have true value. Yet, what I would
encourage us, is engage them on the dialogue, on the trade
relationship, particularly on the trade relationships, to have
a code of conduct in accordance with basic respect for human
rights. Instead of just focusing on trade and profitability,
that worsen the basic labor conditions, and human rights
abuses, I would like to see U.S. pass a trade code of conduct
law to require all companies, for example, to refuse----
Mr. Connolly. Thank you.
Ms. Ling [continuing]. And not tolerate fascism imposing
the one-child policy and forced abortion.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you very much.
Ms. Ling. You're welcome.
Mr. Connolly. Ms. Richardson, my time is running out here.
The Nobel Peace Prize last year was awarded to the imprisoned
Chinese literary critic and dissident Liu Xiaobo. To what
extent do you think that the award of that prize had an impact
on the Chinese Government with respect to human rights
observance, if any?
Ms. Richardson. Oh, it made them nuts. They hated it. And
the reaction it prompted I think really was extraordinary. And
it demonstrated their true colors in the sense that what other
government would dispatch a deputy foreign minister to Norway
to try to intimidate the Norwegian Government and a
nongovernmental organization into not doing this? You know, who
would prevent so many people from going? Who would prevent the
lawyer's wife from going? Who would have locked this guy up?
You know, I think it really sort of laid bare the way the
government----
Mr. Connolly. Of course, we had people in this country
making fun of the fact that the President of the United States
was the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, but that is a
different issue we will talk about some other time.
Go ahead.
Ms. Richardson. No. Just one or two other very quick
points. I think part of what is being said here is that part of
what our community often asks for is simply that human rights
issues get the same kind and amount of attention as trade
issues or security issues and that the U.S. be consistent in
its discussion of human rights issues with China, as it is
elsewhere.
To me, it is astonishing that, for example, we are heading
into a leadership transition in China. There is no discussion
about whether there should be competitive elections. That is
just off the table.
You know, the new Tibetan prime minister in exile, it is
true that the man may have only gotten 40,000 votes, but that
is 40,000 more votes than Hu Jintao ever got. And, you know,
the U.S. does not step forward to recognize these attempts at
democratic rule.
You know, this is not a guy who has received an appropriate
level of high-level attention. This is the kind of consistency
in attention that we are asking for.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam
Chairman.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Manzullo, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and
the Pacific, is recognized.
Mr. Manzullo. Thank you, Madam Chair, for calling this
important hearing.
The Congressional-Executive Commission on China, on which I
have had the honor of serving as a commissioner for several
years, is charged with the singular mission to improve and
monitor human rights and development of rule of law in China.
The Commission's annual report is an important tool for human
rights advocates around the world. It shows that there are over
5,600 people in prison in China for violating basic concepts of
human rights. China's progress on the rule of law development
is equally lacking.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and
as founder of the Manufacturing Caucus, time after time after
time, manufacturers, many of which are in my district, come to
my office showing the latest rip-off in intellectual property,
sham court trials, et cetera.
We are always asking the administration to do more to urge
China to improve its human rights. I will be holding a hearing
this month on the administration's efforts to give China $4
million of taxpayers' funding to help promote the use of clean
energy technology in China. Some say American aid is as high as
$300 million to China. Our subcommittee will be exploring that.
This is the same time that our U.S. Trade Representative is
fighting the case at the WTO against illegal Chinese Government
subsidies in the clean energy sector.
I am also very much appalled over the lack of basic freedom
of worship in China. The Chinese Government itself is setting
up a sham Catholic Church, not allowing the real Catholic
Church the right to be governed by the Holy See; that is, the
Pope, and also the uprooting of Protestant churches,
dismantling of the home churches, et cetera.
Pastor Fu, you mentioned in your testimony under
conclusions and recommendations that the U.S. Commission on
International Religious Freedom, which is a different
commission than the Congressional-Executive Commission, has
many excellent policy recommendations. I was looking at the
recommendations of the Commission on International Freedom. One
is the right of Catholics to recognize the authority of the
Holy See in matters related to the practice of their faith,
including the making of bishop appointments, the right of
Protestants to worship free from state controls over doctrine,
and to worship in unregistered house churches free from
harassment, detention, and other abuses. I don't even have time
to mention what is going on with the Buddhists, Muslims, and
other people in other faith communities.
Pastor Fu, how do you see the United States Government
trying to implement at least these two recommendations of the
U.S. Commission on International Freedom?
Mr. Fu. I think the U.S. Government, especially the
administration and Congress, should have, one, the China expert
in the use of the Commission, Dr. Scott Flipse, described it as
a Facebook policy, like transparent, consistent, coherent
policy, on this issue, not this administration have under-the-
table thing. That administration at one time, they have some
talk about a little bit and the other administration maybe just
using the human rights dialogue or doing something.
I think this should be consistent policy and transparent to
stand very clearly and state very clearly this is what the
United States of America stands for. And every congressman or
senator, every administration official or, you know, even the
state officials when they visit China, they should talk a lot
and clearly make this as a priority.
Mr. Manzullo. Well, Pastor Fu, I chaired the U.S.-China
Interparliamentary Exchange for several years. We brought up
these topics at the talks, and nothing would come of it. How
much more forceful can this country be?
Mr. Fu. I do have specific recommendations, such as I think
the U.S. Embassy and consulates in different cities should
invite those, the internet activist leaders or democracy
activists, or even active civil society builders or historic
leaders, to have tea or, you know, the Chinese security forces
always force them to have tea. But I think the U.S. Embassy
officials and designated personnel should invite them to go in
the Embassy parameter and regularly and publicly announce and
even business leaders to let them mingle together to talk to
each other. I think that will send a very strong signal.
And another thing, when there is a rest for dissidence,
like Mr. Teng Biao, his wife is here, Ms. Fung Xiao. Like that,
if there is a case like that, I think the Embassy officials
should make a formal request to attend a court hearing. And you
prevent it from going, but I think the fact when the Nobel
Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo's trial was there, I think the
European Union, the human rights officer, the U.S. Government
officials were also--just in front of the Embassy, in front of
the courtroom I think itself would send a strong signal of
solidarity.
Mr. Manzullo. Thank you, Pastor Fu.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Mr. Manzullo, for
those questions.
I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to Mr. Rivera, my Florida
colleague, who, similar to my district, represents so many
constituents who understand what living in a Communist regime
is like. Mr. Rivera?
Mr. Rivera. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Thank you for
having this important hearing.
I know we like to refer often to the Chinese leadership as
Chinese officials or Chinese leaders. I am going to refer to
them what I think is more appropriate and justified in light of
what happened in Tiananmen Square, in light of what has
happened historically in Tibet, in light of what has happened
with the one-child policy as really the butchers of Beijing.
And I would refer to a couple of incidents. For example,
when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in her inaugural trip
to Asia, when she met with some of the butchers of Beijing and
she stated, ``It might be better to agree to disagree on human
rights'' as a perfect example of what you spoke of in terms of
appeasement to tyrants and why that type of appeasement doesn't
work.
It seems that perhaps with this administration, it has been
more important to worry about our debt obligations to the
butchers of Beijing than speak out against continued widespread
human rights abuses.
I know at a private dinner in January, I doubt very much
whether President Obama when he met with the chief butcher of
Beijing, Hu Jintao, whether he raised any of these important
issues or Vice President Biden in his August trip to China,
where he met with several of the butchers of Beijing focused
more on the U.S. debt problem than he did on human rights
issues.
I think what we need to do is make sure and put the focus
where it should be, on many issues that you have raised. And,
in particular, I would like to ask a question regarding some of
the activities of the butchers of Beijing with respect to Tibet
and to Mr. Tsering specifically. There has been unrest, which
has increased since 2008 in Tibetan ethnic areas under
Beijing's administration, which have taken a new tragic turn in
the past year with the practice of self-immolation.
Last week a monk reportedly became the tenth person this
year to set himself on fire in protest of the Chinese
occupation. Nine other Tibetans in their late teens and 20s,
including 5 monks, 3 former monks and a nun, have self-
immolated since March, with 5 or more of them dying from their
injuries.
The Miami Herald reported on November 1st that ``The
response so far by the Chinese Communist Party, the butchers of
Beijing, has been to knuckle down even more.'' Towns in the
area are reportedly full of police. Internet access is shut off
in many areas.
Those suspected of sympathizing closely with activist monks
are said to have disappeared. These protests seem directly
connected to the suppression taking place at nearby Kirti
Monastery, where 300 monks were taken away earlier this year
for reeducation and disappeared. Is this the case? And what do
you know about this?
Mr. Tsering. Congressman, that certainly is the case. And I
have to go back. We learned that today yet another Tibetan had
committed self-immolations. And she died as a result.
I think there is no doubt that all of these are taking
place because of the repressive policies of the Chinese
Government in all Tibetan areas. And it is particularly so that
in recent years, the Chinese policies have been restricting or
even further limiting the small freedom that Tibetan people had
to express themselves, their identity, their religion, their
culture.
And initially in the past, maybe before 10 years ago, some
areas, like the areas where Kirti Monastery or in other areas,
had relatively more flexible policy than the Tibetan Autonomous
Region, which the Chinese call Tibet. But now the Chinese
Government has sort of blanketly imposed restrictions all over
Tibetan areas, even in nonpolitical matters, so much so that
they affect the very life of the Tibetan people. And when
people are forced to choose means like self-immolation, it
shows that it is a desperate situation.
Mr. Rivera. Well, to continue that, with respect to
relocation, there are indications that the protests broke out
as a result of Chinese policy decisions designed to displace
ethnic Tibetans in the area with Han Chinese settlers. Is this
also an issue?
Mr. Tsering. I cannot say that we have evidence to say this
is the policy, but what is happening in Tibetan areas today is
that more and more non-Tibetans, particularly the Han Chinese,
are coming in, which in a way marginalizes the Tibetan society.
And since the very identity of the Tibetan people is linked
with our culture, our religion, when these freedoms are being
curtailed on the one hand, and on the other hand, there are
other players, so to say, in the society in which they live, it
creates conflict with the situation. And when the government
doesn't pay attention to it, it results in such consequences.
Mr. Rivera. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Chairman Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so very much for excellent
panelists. Thank you for your powerful statements, for your
policy recommendations. And I thank the audience also for
staying with us and members of the press as well and members of
our committee. With that, the committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:53 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

A P P E N D I X

----------

Material Submitted for the Hearing RecordNotice deg.

\\ts\

\
statt\

\s
\t
\

Material submitted for the record by the Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen,
a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida, and chairman,
Committee on Foreign Affairs

\s
\

Material submitted for the record by Mr. Bhuchung K. Tsering, vice
president for special programs, International Campaign for Tibet

__________

[Note: Material submitted for the record by Ms. Chai Ling, founder, All
Girls Allowed, is not reprinted here but is available in committee
records.