SUBSCRIBE TO THE NIXON CENTER EMAIL BULLETIN

ff

The Senate’s passage of Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) for China by a resounding 83 to 15 vote today was really a vote to extend the primacy of American interests abroad. When the president signs the bill and it becomes law, it will promote the very interests, such as religious freedom, that sponsors of amendments to PNTR attempted to achieve, but failed to achieve.

Throughout the PNTR debate, it was high drama in the Senate--a mixture of comedy and tragedy. Various amendments were paved with good intentions, but alas, they created the impression that America was quick to drop its mask of moral tragedy and wear its mask of economic comedy when it was convenient to do so.

However, adding amendments would have delayed PNTR (and the benefits flowing to the U.S.), which is against America’s national interest. Granting PNTR for China will not only mean improved access to China’s financial and agricultural sectors, but greater opportunities on a far more important market: China’s pool of technologically-skilled workers.

PNTR will further enhance America’s competitive advantage: its technological innovation. For instance, five years ago, the cream of America’s technology crop began exploring ways to maximize the growing but heretofore underutilized tech-savvy talent pool in China. It is no wonder that hallowed industry leaders such as Lucent, Intel, Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft have established a research presence in China. Any technological discoveries made by Chinese nationals will belong to U.S. companies.

This is a critical point because advances in technology at these U.S.-led research institutions will serve to promote American interests, both technological and financial. There is now a deficit of researchers in the U.S. This shortage will be even more pronounced as the trends toward retirement increase and those pursuing hard sciences at U.S. institutions of higher learning decrease.  Moreover, the U.S. cannot rely on the behemoths of industry to sustain its competitive advantage. Start-ups and medium-sized U.S. firms need the incentive to invest in research in China. This can only be realized after PNTR creates the proper environment with reduced tariffs and incentives for further foreign investment.

Why was the PNTR debate temporarily diverted by those on the right and left of the aisle on the Senate floor? Producing an odd couple of the Senate, if there ever was one, Senators Helms (R-NC) and Wellstone (D-MN), a staunch conservative and an avowed liberal, respectively, entered into a marriage of convenience in order to introduce a religious freedom amendment to the bill, which was voted down in swift fashion, 30 to 67.

Senators Helms and Wellstone were doing a disservice to the very cause they espoused to help. The Senators pursued this course of action with full knowledge that their proposed amendment would be voted down--perhaps to send a message to their constituents and have their opinions memorialized in the Congressional Record.

Similarly, the Thompson-Torricelli amendment (also known as the China Non-Proliferation Act) would have required the President "to impose measures against companies in key supplier nations who have been identified as proliferators." Senator Baucus correctly pointed out that the president already has at his disposal a sanctions regime against perpetrators.

It’s the ‘boy who cried wolf’ syndrome—threaten nations with unilateral sanctions, needlessly offend other nations, and ultimately have the amendment rejected by Congress. When the Thompson-Torricelli amendment failed, as was expected (and as was the fate of the Helms-Wellstone amendment and others), it communicated the opposite message of what its sponsors intended. The sponsors of these two amendments, in particular, meant to convey a resolute message: the U.S. is deeply concerned about religious freedom and nonproliferation. They failed on all counts.

Senators supporting PNTR gave impassioned speeches about how the level of U.S. exports will benefit from reduced tariffs in China. Take, for instance, Senator Grassley’s (R-IA) comments on the Senate floor: "When you have an opportunity for our people to export to China, to sell to China, on the same basis that China has been able to do with the United States, it is a win-win situation. My Midwestern common sense tells me this is a good situation for America."

It is more than just common sense that PNTR passed. There are facts to substantiate it. Granting countries privileged trading status is now an anachronism that steps back to 1974 at the creation of the Jackson-Vanik amendment, the primary purpose of which was to deter the then Soviet policy that barred emigration.

Thus far, advances in technology have explained why the U.S. economy has experienced unprecedented and continued growth. With this new wealth has come a distinct rise in philanthropy in the private sector. With government coffers overflowing, it was an even easier decision to increase the salaries of men and women in military service by over three percent.

Technology has its limits but it is like a tent that stretches over more than just the internet. It encompasses engineering, biology, chemistry, medicine, pharmaceutical, building materials, space, and others areas where the U.S. holds the lead. PNTR will further enhance Pax Americana.

PNTR was a vote to lead or ultimately be led in technology. Today’s vote in the Senate signaled that America has chosen the former.

(Mark T. Fung is Assistant Director and Research Fellow in Chinese Studies at The Nixon Center).