U.S. can't buy respect for rights from China, leading dissident says Henry Wu contends recent WTO deal will promote abuses

Human rights activists have long opposed trade with China, and among the loudest such voices has been Milpitas, California, resident Harry Wu. Imprisoned in China during the cultural revolution, Wu immigrated to the United States in 1985 and has testified frequently before the U.S. Congress about China's alleged human rights abuses.

In the early 1990s, Wu traveled to China to document conditions in forced-labor camps. He was expelled in 1995. Wu is executive director of the Laogai Research Foundation and a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.

Wu was questioned about his analysis of last week's WTO trade deal between China and the U.S. Here are excerpts from the interview:

Q. You have fought for years to stop the American government from giving China any special trade status until the country improves its human rights records. What does this latest trade agreement mean to you?

A. It sends a strong signal to the Chinese government that you can do with human

rights whatever you want, as long as we make money in your country. China is still a communist regime. It does not allow for freedom and democracy.

Bu putting money before democracy and liberty, America is engaging in a policy of appeasement and hypocrisy. The agreement is inconsistent with the U.S. foreign policy on other tyrannical regimes.... We boycotted South Africa. We (opposed) the Soviet Union until the Berlin Wall came down. We cut off Cuba, Burma and North Korea.

But when it comes to China, which has shown no respect for human rights, we give them money.

Q. Why should human rights be included as a condition for a trade deal?

A. We don't want a deal that will sustain the communist regime. We want to tell the government that when you enjoy money and technology from the West, you have to improve your human rights record.

Q. Supporters of the agreement say engagement, including admission to the World Trade Organization, will help China achieve greater freedom and democracy.

A. It's double-edged sword. There is no question that the money we put over there will benefit the ordinary Chinese who need it. But the government will benefit the most. The Chinese government is going to use the money to develop weapon systems.

What implications would this have for world peace and security? America is trying to change a tyrannical system through money. It thinks prosperity can open the door for democracy and human rights.

But I think peace and prosperity can be achieved only through openness, not the other way around.

Q. What kind of human rights improvements must China make?

A. For starters, China should allow Amnesty International to open an office there. It should allow pictures of His Holiness the Dalai Lama to be displayed in Tibetan homes.

It should allow the people to worship freely in Roman Catholic churches and the Red Cross to visit the prison work camps they call "vocational training grounds."

It should also stop the suppression of people who practice Falun Gong and

establish a free press where people can publish materials that are critical of the government.

Q. Do you think this agreement will benefit Americans?

A. Big businesses, yes. But it's not good for the common people. It could destroy the American textile industry and worsen the trade deficit. There will be more businesses going to China for cheap labor.

Q. Can the Chinese government keep its word in upholding the terms of the agreement?

A. If past actions are any indication, the Chinese government would be willing to violate foreign World Trade Organization promises for the sake of political stability.

Q. Any other thoughts?