Published by: World Tibet Network News , Friday, June 13, 1997

Friday, June 13, 1997 The Washington Post

PRESIDENT CLINTON is approaching a golden opportunity to show that his China policy is not shaped, as critics contend, entirely by a desire to maintain cordial trade ties. The leaders of the top industrialized nations will gather for a summit in Denver a week from now. Mr. Clinton, as host, should make sure that China is on the agenda.

The G-7, as this club of leading nations is known, hasn't succeeded in coordinating China policy since the immediate aftermath of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989. Recently, in fact, the allies have become more fractured. Earlier this year, for example, France ran for cover instead of supporting in a U.N. forum a resolution calling for improved human rights policies in Chi a. The Chinese promptly rewarded France with valuable commercial contracts, while taking business away from Dutch and Danish firms in retribution for their nations' firm stand.

_Many of our allies abandoned the effort," Mr. Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, recently acknowledged in reference to the U.N. human rights resolution. _But a lonely voice is better than no voice at all." That may be so. But surely a chorus would be more effective still. It is no mark of foreign policy success that the United States was unable to rally a coalition.

At the Denver summit, Mr. Clinton and his colleagues from France, Britain, Canada, Italy, Ger many and Japan should look for ways to keep China from again playing one against the other. This is an opportune time for such a discussion. New governments have just taken power in France and in Britain, where Prime Minister Tony Blair has pledged to make human rights an important component of foreign policy. The recent death of Deng Xiaoping marks the beginning of a new era in China. And Hong Kong's reversion will take place barely a week after the summit.

No one is suggesting that the G-7 should or could adopt joint trade sanctions or any other punitive measures, but the leaders could agree on a set of priorities to emphasize both publicly and in private discussions with Chinese officials. These could include China's adherence to its promise to respect civil and political liberties in Hong Kong; the need to free political prisoners and provide International Red Cross access to those who remain in jail; opening Tibet to international human rights monitors; and taking other specific measures to promote the rule of law.

A joint statement on such issues would carry considerable weight. Consistency in G-7 policy after the summit would be even more valuable. And the leaders could extend their influence still further if they made clear that they will review progress on all these issues when they meet again one year from now.