Summer’s over. Get ready for action. Congress, be forewarned. The Clinton administration’s biggest step yet with China is coming, within a matter of weeks if not days.
The administration now is pushing quietly but determinedly to conclude a deal with China that will permit its admission to the World Trade Organization. For President Clinton, such an agreement would serve as the capstone to a foreign policy that has been characterized above all by his eagerness to expand the global marketplace for American business.
This week, Clinton will travel to Auckland, New Zealand, for a summit meeting of Asian leaders and a one-on-one session with China’s President Jiang Zemin. At the least, the American and Chinese leaders are likely to announce a renewed effort to finalize the WTO deal, which was nearly completed when Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji visited Washington in April.
In fact, administration officials are privately hoping to go further and faster. It’s conceivable that the WTO deal could be reached over the next week. U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky is scheduled to meet with Chinese Trade Minister Shi Guangsheng in Auckland on Thursday, two days before Clinton meets with Jiang.
Even without a final agreement in New Zealand–and so far, there have been no signs that the Chinese regime is preparing its public or its bureaucracy for anything so soon–then the deal will probably come within the following weeks.
That will set the stage for an epic struggle in Congress over trade with China.
To put the WTO deal into effect, the administration will have to ask Congress to make China’s trading privileges (most-favored-nation benefits) permanent. That would end the current requirement for annual renewal that has produced, for the past decade, a contentious congressional reexamination each year of U.S. policy toward China.
Clinton is a veteran of legislative wars over his trade agenda. In his first two years, he persuaded Congress to approve the North American Free Trade Agreement and a new General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade expanding world trade. In 1997-98, he tried but failed to persuade Congress to approve legislation expanding his fast-track authority to conclude trade deals without fear of congressional amendments.
A WTO pact would have ramifications not just for Congress, but for presidential politics as well. It would probably exacerbate the divisions over China among the Republican candidates.
Populist conservatives such as Gary Bauer and Patrick J. Buchanan have already hammered away at the theme that China does not deserve even the past annual extensions of its trade benefits. They would vehemently oppose making China’s benefits permanent, and the issue could well be a centerpiece of any right-wing drive to prevent Texas Gov. George W. Bush from gaining the Republican nomination.
Among the Democrats, Vice President Al Gore and his rival, Bill Bradley, have similar positions on trade with China. Like Clinton, both favored imposing some conditions on such trade when the Democrats were the opposition party in 1989-1992, and both turned around and supported unrestricted trade with China after Clinton came to the White House in 1993.
Gore, Bradley Seek Labor’s Backing
Both Gore and Bradley now are courting the support of organized labor, which has long opposed extending China’s trade benefits. But it’s doubtful that either of the Democratic candidates will support labor’s position on this China issue. Even House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), who is strongly pro-labor, has suggested he may support Clinton on bringing China into the WTO.
If Clinton succeeds in persuading Congress to approve a deal for China’s WTO entry, it would underscore his remarkable sense of political timing.
In April, he backed away from a deal with Zhu, the Chinese premier, even though both National Security Advisor Samuel R. “Sandy” Berger and Barshefsky were advising him to accept the terms Zhu was offering.
Clinton and other top aides–including Robert E. Rubin, then the Treasury secretary–were worried that the political climate was bad, and that Congress might shoot down a China trade deal.
On the eve of Zhu’s trip, House Republicans were preparing to issue the report of the committee headed by Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach) on China’s acquisition of American technology. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) was suggesting he would lead Senate Republicans in opposition to a WTO deal.
Now, five months later, the furor over the Cox report has subsided, and there is little sign the Republicans in Congress will coalesce in opposition to the WTO deal. In fact, as the presidential race makes clear, the China issue may help Clinton and Gore by causing acrimony within Republican ranks.
The WTO agreement could well prove significant for Chinese politics too. If Jiang signs the deal, it would symbolize his emergence as a strong Chinese leader, willing to forsake his past caution and take some political risks in pursuit of deepening economic ties with the West.
Make no mistake, this one will be a very big deal for both the United States and China.