[This doesn't mention Tibet, but it's an interesting analysis of the failure of Clinton's "constructive engagement" (means $) policy for China.]

January 30, 1997

The New York Times - Editorial

Bill Clinton offered a revealing glimpse into his thinking about China when he predicted this week that liberty would eventually triumph there, much as freedom brought down the Berlin wall. The demise of Communism may come someday in China, but it would be a mistake to adopt a passive American policy based on that optimistic prospect, as Mr. Clinton seems to be doing. There is already abundant evidence suggesting that Communism in China is not dying but is instead mutating into a new form that tolerates economic liberties while still suffocating political freedom.

Mr. Clinton's press conference remarks, read closely, were an argument against pushing China hard on human rights and internal political reform. The problem with this analysis is that it indulges Chinese repression and may be taken by Beijing as a sign of American weakness. Likening China to Europe, when it comes to the course of Communism, is a risky approach.

America does not face a new cold war with China, and does not need a containment policy to deal with Beijing. But Washington does need to be more assertive about its interests, more demanding in seeking an end to China's human rights abuses and less willing to sacrifice American principles for American commerce in China.

There is a good chance that Mr. Clinton's stewardship of American foreign policy will be judged in substantial measure by his handling of China as it takes its place among the great powers. So too will the leadership of Vice President Al Gore, who plans to play a larger role on China in the months ahead, and that of Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, whose commitment to human rights and democracy faces its severest test in China.

Mr. Clinton's faith in the power of trade and information to liberate China is stirring but unrealistic and his analogy to the Berlin wall oversimplified. The increasing flow of information and the allure of free markets helped undermine authoritarian governments in Eastern Europe, but these regimes did not voluntarily surrender power. Communism in Eastern European states collapsed abruptly because the Soviet Union declined to sustain it any longer with force and economic aid, and most of East Europe's corrupt regimes lacked the means and killer instinct to terrorize their citizens. In the case of the Soviet Union itself, economic stagnation, an explosion of nationalism and political reforms initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev played a decisive role in the demise of Communism.

Chinese conditions are quite different. The country, unlike those behind the Berlin wall, is gaining economic strength, not losing it. Communism is not maintained by an outside power but by the Chinese Government itself, with the assistance of the military. Suppressed ethnic nationalism is not an explosive force. With China's leaders maneuvering for power in anticipation of the death of Deng Xiaoping, there is little likelihood of political liberalization anytime soon.

The economic reforms initiated by Mr. Deng in 1979 have indisputably introduced free markets in China, and prosperity has spread to its major cities, producing the beginnings of a middle class. But even China's economic experimentation has been controlled by a Government determined to maintain its political authority.

There is little sign that China's booming economy has produced concrete political change, or even the intangible spirit of liberty that Mr. Clinton considers inevitable. China has done its best to restrict the flow of information to citizens, even limiting access to financial data and the Internet.

In recent months the Government has rounded up political dissidents and consigned them to long prison terms after carefully managed trials. The State Department reports that by the end of last year, all active dissidents in China had been jailed or exiled, a disheartening record that even the Soviet Union could not match once Stalin was gone.

On the clearest current question of Chinese intentions, the return of Hong Kong to China this summer, Beijing has left little doubt it will strip Hong Kong of its liberties, even if that diminishes the economic benefits of the transfer to China.

It is welcome to hear Mr. Clinton acknowledge that "constructive engagement" with China has yielded disappointing progress on human rights issues. Unhappily, he seems to be under the illusion that future results will be different.