Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of my Special Order.

Mr. Speaker, I chair the Asia and the Pacific Subcommittee on Foreign Affairs. I have been in Congress for 5 years, and what I have noticed over the last, probably, 30 years is a growing China. China is a culture that has been around for thousands of years. What we have seen is a growing China, but, more recently, in the last 25 years, a more aggressive China, in the policies and the different things that they do around the world.

Twenty-eight years ago, Deng Xiaoping announced that China's strategy to accrue global power would be to ``hide one's strength and bide one's time.'' As I rise, today, in the House, this evening, it is clear that China is done biding its time.

I can remember seeing a documentary several years ago from 1986, where that leader, Deng Xiaoping, talked about that he could not compete with the U.S. or the Japanese in the intellectual property, computer manufacturing, or in IT.

What they said at that time was that they will compete by taking over the rare earth metals that are required in all of that. So, from that point forward, they led that charge to strategically set out a 100-year plan.

At China's 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China last October 2017, Xi Jinping announced a new era, in which China has started to overcome the humiliations of colonialism and that it has stood up, grown rich, and is becoming strong.

We talked about this. It came out in a meeting. Somebody brought up that, through their whole adult life, China was just kind of this big, stumbling child. But they had reached a point and grown through puberty, where the hormones had kicked in, and they found out how strong they were. Then they discovered how rich they were, and they started to flex both of those.

He explicitly offered the Chinese model as an alternative to liberal democracy. Liberal democracy, that is what the Western world and the United States rests on: allowing people to be self-determining, allowing people to be free-thinking, allowing people to be empowered. This is something that is to the antithesis of the Chinese doctrine, stating that ``the banner of socialism with Chinese characteristics is now flying high and proud for all to see,'' offering ``a new option for other countries and nations.''

Mr. Speaker, as the new year begins, we must decide how we want to craft policy and legislation that will address not just Xi Jinping's so-called new era, and China's. I say that we should welcome China's effort to assume its rightful place on the world stage. But we must also reject China's efforts to undermine the values, institutions, and rules that generations of Americans have died for, along with other countries, to establish and uphold. We must never allow a socialist, authoritarian model of government, to supplant the primacy of democracy, no matter how rich and how strong the authoritarians become.

China is not choosing to rise through the global order that the United States and our allies have built with our blood and our sweat--a global order made up of the international institutions that have held the peace since World War II; of the competitive and rules-based economic playing field; and of a free marketplace of ideas where people, not governments, decide what they will think.

Instead, China has grown to become a revisionist power--not rising within the current order, but seeking to change, subvert, or coerce it to suit China's end--not playing by the rules, but rewriting the rules to suit the needs of China.

China's foreign policy is rewriting the rules in three key areas:

First, China is replacing traditional soft power, which is based on a nation's attractiveness, with ``sharp power,'' which leverages coerciveness. The scale is astounding. China has used sharp power to buy political influence in Australia, academic influence on American campuses, and even bought off Panama's diplomatic alliance with Taiwan. The National Endowment for Democracy, which coined the term ``sharp power,'' has exhaustively documented China's efforts to turn Latin America elites into ``de facto ambassadors of the Chinese cause''-- right in our own backyard.

The world will not tolerate these coercive influence operations. Last month, Prime Minister Turnbull of Australia captured this indignation best when he used Mandarin to play on a classic Mao Zedong quote, ``the Chinese people have stood up.'' Turnbull said that ``the Australian people stand up.'' Congress must, likewise, ensure that the American people stand up to coercion in our politics, academia, and culture.

Second, China is rewriting the rules of engagement by using gray zone tactics that erode the distinction between peace and conflict. In the South China Sea, China has used what it has referred to as ``salami slicing'' to gradually attain its military objectives without provoking a confrontation, undermining the international mechanisms that are supposed to decide territorial disputes. It goes back to the saying of Deng Xiaoping: ``Hide one's strength and bide one's time.''

As I said, I chair the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, and at one of our hearings last year, one witness testified that ``by slowly changing the situation on the ground, China hopes to transform `Asia Mediterranean' into a Chinese lake.''

We can't keep standing idly by while China does these things. Xi Jinping once stood next to President Obama at the White House and pledged that he would not militarize the South China Sea.

As an aside, I was at a hearing. We were there with one of the representatives of the Chinese Government. They were talking about how everything they have done in the South China Sea was for peaceful navigational purposes. I brought up that I wish I could feel the love, or I wish I could feel the sincerity

of that, because our military satellites showed a 10,000-foot runway, our military satellites showed military barracks, our satellites showed both offensive and defensive weapons, radar systems. Yes, there was a lighthouse, but I didn't see a resort on there that showed peaceful navigational purposes.

Then he built a network of air bases, missile emplacements, radars, and ports that we had seen. Four thousand acres of the South China Sea that were dredged, destroying the environment--coral reefs--and they put in this today, which is militarized, and they don't hide it. We should look to India's example rather than accept further lies. A little resistance to China's encroachment along their disputed border has prevented the same ``salami slicing'' from happening on land.

And, thirdly, China is rewriting the rules of trade and economics. At a hearing before my subcommittee last year, one witness warned that ``China has doubled down on its unfair, mercantilist strategies, and is now seeking global dominance in a wide array of advanced industries that are key to U.S. economic and national security interests.'' These zero-sum policies benefit China's domestic champions at the expense of fairness and competition in global trade.

At home, China wields its massive market as a blunt instrument, forcing foreign companies to divulge what it wants without giving them a chance to compete. Abroad, China is acquiring or stealing the industries of tomorrow, unfairly boosting its domestic innovation and hollowing out our competitors. Throughout the developing world, China has undertaken a massive infrastructure program that exports surplus industrial capacity and aligns closely with military interests.

In 2018, the United States must stand up to China's revisionism in these three key areas: sharp power influence operations, gray zone warfare, and mercantilist economics.

Some important policy steps have already begun. For example, Congressman Pittenger has introduced legislation in the House to improve CFIUS, which is a review, and the Treasury Department has undertaken a section number, called 301 investigation into China's innovation of mercantilism.

These actions will help protect the future of the U.S. economy. This is a warning sign that we have seen that we must rise up to and counteract, but more must be done.

We have to blunt China's sharp power in the United States by countering Confucius institutes at schools and propaganda outlets in our cities that spread communist propaganda. We have to respond to the malicious state-sponsored activity in shared domains like the cyber realm. We have to modernize our international development work to compete with China in the developing world.

This year I will be introducing legislation to accomplish these goals, and I hope my colleagues will join me in this important work.

We must also remember that standing up for American interests means standing up for our values. Xi Jinping's leadership has turned to creeping totalitarianism. He is building an unprecedented surveillance state, increasing the communist party's ideological control of society and the reconciliation of the party's authority over every aspect of life. Human rights and civil liberties in China is worsening, and Xi Jinping must be held accountable.

In the year ahead, I hope all of my colleagues would join me in standing up for America's interests and values, and resisting China's revisionism.

After the 19th Congress, the Communist Party Congress, Xi Jinping stood up and said the era of China has arrived. No longer would China be made or forced to swallow their interests around the world, nor should they, but he also said the era of China has arrived and it is time to take the center stage.

That is a threat, and not acceptable, I don't think, to the American people. It sounds like it is a warning that they are going to throw us off the stage. However, talking to people in the administration and the rest of the world, I think we would be willing to share the stage, but to think that they are going to supplant every other country is not acceptable.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), who used to be the chair of the Asia and the Pacific Subcommittee, and who has brought up some important legislation on this topic that we are talking about tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the kind words, and I look to follow in his footsteps.

I want to also give a shout-out that the first version of the six assurances, Mr. Chabot introduced to Congress on October 28, 2015, what the six assurances were proposed to be, and we will read those later on.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe). Judge Poe has been a strong supporter of the whole Asia-Pacific region and he has got some wise words that I think we all can learn from.

Mr. Speaker, the whole purpose of this Special Order is to draw attention to what China is doing, and I think, as Mr. Chabot brought up, we are not against China. It is the practices that they are doing that we need to make sure that the American people know, the American people know what is going on, the amount of theft that we see, intellectual property, that costs the American taxpayers between $300 billion and $600 billion.

I have been at expos held by the Department of Homeland Security where they have counterfeit products that come from American manufacturers that are in China on goodwill, good faith efforts to create a good product, to create jobs in China, but yet that product winds up being counterfeited by Chinese companies that we think the Chinese Government--and we have evidence that they are complicit in it. They are selling products against our own competition, our own manufacturers in this country, and it is eroding the American economy, and China gains from this. This is a practice that has to be stopped, and we have to stop allowing this to happen.

One of the other things, if we look back over history, in the 1840s, there were the opium wars between the United Kingdom and China. A lot of opium and drugs flowed into China, and it hurt the Chinese population. At one

point, 90 percent of the males in China were hooked on opium.

Yet today, in the 21st century, we are seeing the reverse of that, and we are seeing narcotics flow from China, or precursors of synthetic opioids flow into Central America, to Mexico, to come into our borders. There is no medicinal use for fentanyl other than pain control, or heroin. Heroin has no medicinal use, very limited.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Donovan), who, in the last Congress, introduced the Comprehensive Fentanyl Control Act to combat illegal fentanyl, a synthetic opioid, coming from China.

Not only do they send the precursors, they send the presses to create the pills into these other countries. Again, it does not serve us or the American people or our economy at all.

If you are a trading partner and you want to go by the rule of law and you want to, hopefully, in trade, do what is best for your country, but you also want to have a benefit for your trading partner, this is a one-way street, and it is going to have to end.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the work that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Donovan) has done with the Comprehensive Fentanyl Control Act to combat illegal fentanyl. I thank him for his participation, being on the committee, and his passion for what he is doing.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hultgren), a good friend of mine and a good Member of Congress, to add to this discussion.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the remarks by Mr. Hultgren. He did a great job, and I hope that guy gets released.

The gentleman brought up a very good point, and this is something I have noticed. I am so blessed, and I know we are so blessed to live in this great country of ours. Our Founders got it right. I don't know how they did other than divine intervention, that our rights come from a Creator, not from government. Government is instituted by we the people to protect our God-given rights and our core values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Our government is a government that empowers the people. Empowered people do great things. In the 19th Congress, it was said--the Chinese Government has set up a Chinese United Front, which is to show soft power in the world instead of doing the things they have done, where they go into a country, put up infrastructure, suck out the resources, and leave and don't care. So they have changed their tactics. They have gotten smart, and they started the Chinese United Front.

But in that communique that they said, it said that the role of the citizens of China is to serve the Government of China. It is the antithesis of what we stand for, and that is why I feel confident in our form of government because we believe in the people. We believe in the greatness of people.

The greatest resource a country has is not their gold, their timber, or any of that other stuff; it is the people. And our country values that.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Garrett), a good friend of mine, a passionate speaker on China who sits on the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia, and if he wants to participate in a colloquy back and forth, we have a few more minutes. But I want to touch on some issues that I think we need to draw out again. I want the American people to understand what is going on.

When you buy something that says ``made in China,'' I want you to understand what is happening. China has gone from where they were in the 1970s and the 1960s. Richard Nixon went over there, kind of normalized relationships in 1972.

We had a relationship with Taiwan prior to that. I don't want to go into the history of the war between the KMT and Chiang Kai-shek back in the 1940s, but there was a relationship we had with Taiwan. We had a relationship with Great Britain on Hong Kong, and here we are in the 21st century.

Things have changed. Now we have got North Korea on the stage. It is a different world than what it was. We had some longstanding traditions that we stood by as a nation, and people respected that, and then I look at the trade imbalance that we have with China.

Here is a country that Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger in 1971 and 1972 opened up the trade that we have today, that has led to what we have today. And China has done great, and they ought to be applauded for what they have done. They have raised a lot of people out of poverty. But at what expense?

When I look at what is going on in the South China Sea, taking islands that were just coral reefs right under the top of the sea, and they have reclaimed over 4,000 acres--probably the largest ecological disaster and insult to the environment that the world has ever seen-- the world stood idly by.

One country, Vietnam, stood up, took them to the court in The Hague, the tribunals. The tribunal ruled against China, and again, the world stood by, did nothing.

The previous administration had a policy of strategic patience. The profession I come from, the veterinary profession, we call that benign neglect. That is where you have a disease that is not life-threatening and you hope it goes away if you ignore it.

But what was going on in the South China Sea could not be handled with benign neglect. What happened is China militarized the islands that they built, even though they said they wouldn't.

And if we look at the other things they said they would help us on with North Korea, China has the biggest influence with North Korea of anybody else. Ninety percent of the trade of North Korea goes through China. China says they are there with us, but yet we know fuel is going in there, coal is going in there. They are trading with them.

In addition, they are complicit in allowing other companies to have shell companies that keep the Kim Jong-un regime afloat developing nuclear weapons. They have a hand in bringing this to a close.

I look at the trade deficit we have with China. It is over $350 billion. Add to that the intellectual property theft, over $350 billion, some people say up to $600 billion. And China says: We are going to get it under control. But just last month they had a trade deficit of over $60 billion.

I want to pose a question to the American people: Do you want a trading partner that is doing these things?

They flood our borders with illegal drugs, as you heard Mr. Donovan talk about. They erode our culture. They kill our citizens. They break down our culture. Do you want a trading partner that steals the intellectual property at the cost of American entrepreneurship, American intellectual property, and American jobs?

Do you want a partner that does not honor their word when they said they are going to do something? You talk to other countries around the world and they say: We like doing business with America because you have a rule of law and you will follow it. China does not.

They have halfheartedly agreed to help us with North Korea. And so when you go into a department store and you buy cheap as far as cost and it says ``China'' on it, ``made in China,'' I want people to think: What are you selling? What are you buying, and what are you giving away for your future generation--not just of your kids, but for the posterity of this Nation?

And I would like to get Mr. Garrett's response on that or anything else he wants to add as an afterthought here.

Mr. Speaker, I need to make a correction. I said it was Vietnam that took China to court. It was the Philippines.

But along these lines that you were just talking about, when you look at the word of a nation, the integrity of a nation, I think of Hong Kong. Great Britain and China came to an agreement in 1996, 1997 that Hong Kong would revert back to China.

There was a 50-year agreement that China was to allow them to have self-rule, the rule of law, self-determining, their own government, the right to choose that. Twenty years into this, China has got a strong influence. The freedom in Hong Kong is going backwards.

If we look at the Tibetan people, the Tibetan are probably one of the most peaceful populations on Earth, but yet I can't travel there as a U.S. dignitary or as a U.S. Member of Congress. They can't come here and be recognized. The Dalai Lama can't come here and be recognized because China gets mad. Beijing gets mad.

The Tibetan people have a way to pass on the Dalai Lama to the next generation. China kidnapped the Panchen child and said: We will replace it with who we think should be the next leader, and it is somebody they are going to groom.

And I look at our country, being a Christian. That would be like one of the kings of the Old Testament going in and stealing the baby Jesus and saying: Well, we will put in who we think should be the leader of Christianity.

It is ludicrous what is going on.

And then I think of Taiwan. Taiwan is our 10th largest trading partner, and we have had an agreement since before Richard Nixon. But during Richard Nixon's time, there have been three communiques that talked about how we were going to deal with Taiwan.

And I just want to reiterate the six assurances that Ronald Reagan and Steve Chabot talked about, and they are:

Number one, we did not agree to set a date certain for ending arms sales to Taiwan. Robert Gates talked about this in his book, ``Duty.'' We had had this agreement for years, and during that time, about 2012, we were having our arms sales agreement with Taiwan. China raised holy heck about this, and our negotiators said: What is your problem? We have been doing this since the 1970s?

China's response was this, and I think this sets the tone for the future: Back then, we were weak. We are strong now.

I think that speaks loudly of China's intention.

Number two, we see no mediation role of the United States between Taiwan and the PRC.

Number three, nor will we attempt to exert pressure on Taiwan to enter into negotiations with the PRC.

Number four, there has been no change in our longstanding position on the issue of sovereignty over Taiwan.

Number five, we have no plans to seek revision of the Taiwan Relations Act.

And number six, the August 17 communique should not be read to imply that we have agreed to engage prior consultations with Beijing on arms sales to Taiwan. And we tend to stay with that in this administration.

So with that, does the gentleman from Virginia have any closing remarks?

Mr. Speaker, I am ready to close.

I thank everybody for their participation, and I want the American people, again, when you look at something that says ``made in China,'' how is that affecting the future of America?

And nothing against China. If they play fair, they play by the rules, we wish them the best of luck, but we will not be supplanted from our role in the free world.

And again, I feel confident about where America will be 100 years from now because we believe in our people, we empower our people, and we have a government that will stand and protect our constitutional rights that come from a creator.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is humbling to have the opportunity to stand in this Chamber to speak on so important a subject as China's role in the world in 2018.

Having had the privilege also of leading American soldiers on foreign soil, Mr. Speaker, I understand that the last resort in any circumstance should be military action, and so I wish to make clear that the strong words that will follow are not directed to be a threat to the People's Republic of China but, instead, to be encouragement to the people thereof.

We want peace and to work alongside all nations in a community of nations, but it is our duty, as free people, to express the basic rights inherent to our very existence in this world.

Mr. Speaker, I would say to the Chinese people today that we still hold these truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--this message directed, again, to the people of China because the oppressive Communist, dictatorial regime seems hell-bent upon denying these very rights not to nations across the world aside from China, but to the

very people whom they purport to serve; and in so doing, they not only oppress those people, but also perpetrate schemes that lead to a lower quality of life and enhanced threats to people across the globe.

Industrial espionage costs the very livelihoods and well-being of workers in every continent of the world. Intellectual property theft isn't about the hundreds of billions of dollars stolen from those who had the wherewithal, energy, and vision to create, but about the child who won't have an opportunity to attend college because the job that his or her parent might have had has been quite literally stolen by Chinese malfeasance.

Propping up a regime in North Korea that literally engages, in the year 2018, in the enslavement of their own citizens and turning a blind eye on those practices, which, Mr. Speaker, I suppose shouldn't be a surprise when you look at the human rights record of the People's Republic of China itself, I don't have time, nor do my colleagues, though I commend Congressman Yoho for this hour, to recount the number of victims of human rights violations, of prisoners of conscience, of victims of state oppression, of those who had the temerity to stand up and suggest that individuals have certain basic fundamental human rights only to reap horrific consequences underneath a totalitarian Communist regime in the People's Republic of China.

But in the limited time that I have, forced abortions of human life, to the tune of tens and tens and tens of millions; Mr. Speaker, child labor laws drafted by the People's Republic of China that look wonderful on the global stage, but practices that one recent survey indicated would have the entire population of the State of Ohio worth of 10- to 14-year olds working what one recent news story characterized as 16 hours a day, 28 days a month in 2018.

Their laws indicate that they have ended the practice of organ harvesting, and yet mathematical data indicates that, in China, if you are part of the ruling class, it is not hard to find that kidney, that bone marrow, that heart.

This sort of oppression is foisted upon the people of China, while all too often the United States and other nations of the world turn a blind eye not in the interest of respecting cultural differences, but in the interest of our pocketbooks.

We still hold these truths to be self-evident. And if I could do nothing else while I am here, Mr. Speaker, but to speak and encourage nations of the world, but, more importantly, the people oppressed by regimes such as that of the Chinese dictatorial, Communist, totalitarian state, and tell them that we understand, we have their backs, they have our support, then I will have accomplished something.

I am of an age, Mr. Speaker, when one of the images permanently seared in my memory is of a lone man standing in Tiananmen Square facing down a main battle tank. And when I think of that image and then I think of the United States, I think of Patrick Henry, who not only said, ``Give me liberty or give me death,'' but also said, when someone yelled from the back of the room, ``Treason,'' ``If this be treason, make the most of it.''

I think of a 16-year-old girl in Farmville, Virginia, Barbara Johns, whose family had to move because she had the temerity, after discussing the Declaration of Independence with her uncle Vernon Johns, to question why there was a school that only White kids could attend.

And I think of the charge in the Constitution of the United States not to be a perfect Union, because we are not there yet, but to be a more perfect Union.

So then I contemplate my responsibility not only as a Member of this body, and it is obviously to serve the constituents of the Fifth District of Virginia in the United States of America, but also to stand up for human beings across the globe.

And China, we still hold these truths to be self-evident. We will not turn a blind eye on policies that lead to forced abortions of living humans, that lead to child labor policies of 16 hours of work a day, 28 days a month of a number of kids between the ages of 10 and 14 that mirrors the population of the State of Ohio.

We will not turn a blind eye to policies and public statements saying you have ended organ harvesting when all data indicates that you haven't. And then we will not turn a blind eye to the oppression of any minority, and particularly religious minorities, whether it is Falun Gong or Christians or Muslims in the west of China.

So I know in this age of the internet, this age of the world wide web and global communication, that the people of China, though their government seeks to inhibit the flow of information, will hear this, and the message is simple: You are my brothers and sisters. You are human beings just like us. You have the same rights that we have. You will not be given these rights by a government but by a creator or by nature, depending on your belief structure. And if you have the courage to stand up, understand this: We will support you.

Mr. Speaker, I would just, again, commend the Member from Florida, Congressman Yoho, as it relates to this opportunity.

I think it is important to remember that, just like Americans, whether it was the Revolutionary War or the civil rights movement, the Chinese people have bled. They have sweated. They have paid the price for the basic human rights that we all enjoy here.

And again, I would commend the American consumer to consider the reality of child labor, of exploitative policies as relates to industrial espionage, of exploitative policies that literally deprive Americans of livelihoods perpetrated by the Chinese, and to shop with that in mind until we see real reform from China.

I have been frustrated heretofore with the efforts sometimes of our very own government as it relates to putting any force or its proverbial money where its mouth was to this end, but I believe there is power in the people of the United States.

And so I would encourage people, again, to shop with their consciences until we see actual acts beyond words from a regime that has a history of saying and doing all the right things in public but allowing the perpetuation of horrific, horrific circumstances on their very people at home, in private.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I also thank him for pulling together this Special Order here this evening.

As the gentleman mentioned, I used to be the chair of the subcommittee that he now chairs, and that is the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. I have been on the Foreign Affairs Committee for over 20 years now. We do a lot of important things on that committee, and our view of China has evolved somewhat over that time.

Do we want to have good relations with China?

Absolutely. It is in our best interests, it is in China's best interests, it is in the world's best interests. We passed normal trade relations some years ago. It used to be called the most favored nation; now it is normal trade relations. We trade with them a lot.

Many would argue that American jobs have gone to China. They have stolen our technology, our intellectual property secrets, and a whole range of other things. So they haven't been terribly cooperative in that area, yet they have benefited a great deal.

One of our strongest allies, Taiwan, the PRC--China--has been bullying for years. Too often, China has gotten their way. They have been able to keep Taiwan out of international health organizations that would be helped by having the Taiwanese expertise in that. They have done a whole range of things.

When I first came here, there were several hundred missiles in the PRC--China--pointed at Taiwan. Now there are over 1,600 missiles, and they threaten them on a whole range of things. So it is very important that we continue to have strong relations with Taiwan.

Legislation that I have proposed and that we have passed here before in our committee and that we hope to pass in the House as well--and then we hope the Senate will take it up as well--is to allow high- ranking Taiwanese officials to come here to the United States, particularly to Washington, D.C., to meet with our officials here in our Nation's Capital. That makes sense, and hopefully we will do that in the very near future, but China has been very uncooperative, obviously, with respect to Taiwan.

They have been particularly uncooperative with respect to one of our greatest threats in the world right now, and that is North Korea. We get a lot of lip service from China, but very little action.

North Korea is a threat. For a long time, they were a threat to the region. We cared about that and we worked with our allies on that. But now they are a threat to Washington, D.C., and Seattle and Los Angeles and my home city, Cincinnati, and cities all over the United States, because we believe they can now reach the United States with nuclear weapons.

That is the first time. A lot of us were concerned about that day ever coming. Previous administrations tried to get China to lean on North Korea because China has the greatest clout with North Korea because China provides most of their food and most of their fuel. About 90 percent of North Korea's trade is with China. China acts like they are going to be helpful, and then they are not.

The last thing we want to see is military confrontation. You will have some folks in our country that that is their principal priority, they don't want any confrontation, but then they will be satisfied to have North Korea have nuclear weapons.

We can't tolerate somebody as unpredictable, somebody as dangerous as Kim Jong-un or his predecessors, his father or grandfather, people like that to have nuclear weapons. It is just unacceptable to the United States and most other countries around the world, but the rest of the world looks to us to act.

This is a case where we really do need China to step up and do the right thing. Thus far, they have not been willing to do that.

So the question is: How do we get China to do that?

In the past, a number of us thought the way you got China's attention was

to at least discuss with our allies in the region--South Korea, Japan, even Taiwan, perhaps--to consider having nuclear weapon programs themselves. And maybe even talking about that would be off-putting enough to the PRC that they would lean on North Korea to back off their program.

Well, we are probably beyond that now because North Korea not only has a nuclear program, but they have one that could now hit the continental United States.

I think the only thing at this point that works is any leverage that we have with China itself, that if they don't act, then they can either trade with North Korea or they can trade with us. That ought to be a pretty easy deal for them to make. The economy in North Korea is in shambles. The people are starving. The people are repressed by their own illegitimate government. So there is not a lot of trade. It is not of great import to China. In fact, their relationship with North Korea--I think the way they look at it--it keeps us off balance. So they can trade with North Korea or they can trade with us.

Now, trade with the United States is very significant to the PRC. It means millions and millions and millions of jobs.

Are we willing to go that far?

Well, I think we should be when you are considering war, which is the alternative to actually getting North Korea to back off their program.

So in this case, I think we ought to make it clear to China that we are serious about this; whether it is the financial system, international banking, cutting that off. We ought to fully cut that off with North Korea and at least on the books we have, but China has ways of getting around that and propping up their ally, North Korea.

So this is the time. It has got to happen soon. North Korea has, we think, probably 20 or so nuclear devices at this point. You wait another year or 2 years, they are going to have dozens and dozens and dozens of them.

Not only is that dangerous because they have them, but it is dangerous because they will sell those nuclear devices to organizations, al-Qaida, perhaps even ISIS, or other organizations that would love to smuggle those things into this country and use them. They would use them in a heartbeat if they had them. We can't let that happen.

So things that we talked about in previous administrations and that administrations would negotiate--we had six-party agreements and we would get together--and North Korea would agree:

Okay. For food and fuel, we will end our nuclear program.

On the books it was ended, but underground or in the mountains, it was continuing.

Both previous Republican and Democratic administrations essentially let that happen, and it was bad, but they couldn't reach the United States. Now they can reach the United States.

So we are at that time now that years ago we warned about. We are there now. So I would strongly encourage this administration to take this seriously and do whatever is possible, short of war--we want to avoid that if at all possible--to make sure that China finally leans on North Korea to back down.

Mr. Speaker, I thank again the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho), who is doing a fine job as chair of the Asia and the Pacific Subcommittee. I also thank him for the opportunity and pulling this together this evening.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1872) to promote access for United States officials, journalists, and other citizens to Tibetan areas of the People's Republic of China, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 1872, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1872, the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act of 2018, addresses an issue of longstanding and increasing concern regarding China's treatment of Tibetans living in the Tibet Autonomous Region, also known as TAR, and other Tibetan areas controlled by China.

In 1950, the Chinese People's Liberation Army went into Tibet in order to establish control over the region. In the years since then, as noted by the U.S. Department of State, the Chinese Government has ``imposed severe restrictions on Tibetans' ability to exercise their human rights and fundamental freedoms.'' Such restrictions occur with regard to religious practice, freedom of travel, freedom to practice cultural and language preferences, and other aspects of everyday life.

In addition, the Chinese Government routinely engages in human rights abuses, such as extrajudicial killings, torture, and arbitrary arrest. In fact, the Chinese Government's actions are so severe that, in recent years, over 150 Tibetans have self-immolated in a last-ditch effort to get the rest of the world to focus on this problem.

In order to prevent documentation of the religious freedom restrictions and other human rights abuses to the outside world, the Government of China has severely limited access by foreign nationals to these Tibetan regions. Such limitations prevent access to U.S. officials seeking diplomatic and consular access, journalists, human rights workers, and even tourists. When rare access is granted, activities are closely monitored by the PRC and information dissemination is restricted.

Matteo Mecacci, the president of the International Campaign for Tibet, has stated that the Chinese leadership is seeking to enforce complete isolation of Tibet, often described as being worse than in North Korea, where at least some foreign media are based. Independent international observers are shut out of Tibet or allowed to visit only under strictly controlled circumstances, while numerous delegations of party officials face no obstacles in traveling to Western democracies to spread their propaganda.

In fact, travel by Chinese nationals, including those with direct and substantial involvement in the formulation of policies to restrict access to Tibet, is routinely allowed by governments all over the world, including the United States. During fiscal year 2017, for instance, nearly 1.5 million tourist visas were issued by the United States to Chinese nationals. Those visas are valid for 10 years, during which the Chinese nationals can visit the United States multiple times. During that same period, the United States issued nearly 4,500 diplomatic visas to Chinese officials.

H.R. 1872 prohibits an individual who is ``substantially involved in the formulation or execution of policies related to access for foreigners to Tibetan areas'' from being granted a U.S. visa if the Secretary determines that: one, the requirement for specific official permission for foreigners to enter the Tibet Autonomous Region remains in effect; or, two, such requirement has been replaced by a regulation that has a similar effect and requires foreign travelers to gain a level of permission to enter the Tibet Autonomous Region that is not required for travel to other provinces in China; and, three, restrictions on travel by officials, journalists, and citizens of the United States to areas designated as ``Tibetan Autonomous'' in the provinces of Sichuan, Qinghai, Yunnan, Gansu of China are greater than any restrictions on travel by such officials and citizens to areas in such provinces that are not so designated. Any visas currently held by such individuals will be revoked under the bill.

The bill then requires the State Department to report annually to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees as well as the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the number of actions taken regarding visas pursuant to this legislation.

According to the State Department, in recent years, there have been very small inroads made with regard to access to the Tibetan areas. And while some have expressed the concern that maybe this bill could make the Chinese Government roll back some of those inroads, moving this bill is the right thing to do. It is time that Congress takes a stand with regard to access by foreign nationals to the Tibetan regions.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Congressman McGovern for his work on this issue.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Foreign Affairs,

Washington, DC, August 31, 2018.

Hon. Bob Goodlatte,

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Goodlatte: Thank you for consulting with the

Foreign Affairs Committee regarding H.R. 1872, the Reciprocal

Access to Tibet Act, and for considering our input during

your markup of the bill. I agree that the Foreign Affairs

Committee may be discharged from further consideration of

that measure, so that it may proceed expeditiously to the

House floor.

I am writing to confirm our mutual understanding that

forgoing further action on this measure does not in any way

diminish, alter, or prejudice the jurisdiction of the

Committee on Foreign Affairs, its jurisdictional prerogatives

on this bill or similar legislation, or its right to seek an

appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate

conference involving this bill.

I ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter

be included in the Congressional Record during floor

consideration of H.R. 1872.

Sincerely,

Edward R. Royce,

Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minority leader for her comments on this issue and strong bipartisan support for human rights, not only in Tibet but all over the globe. Really, this is a great moment, I think, for this body.

I will repeat again that it is time that Congress takes a stand with regard to access by foreign nationals to the Tibetan regions. Again, I want to thank Congressman McGovern for his work on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1872, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Tibet are living under China's repressive rule and their culture, religion, and way of life is at risk of being extinguished. The human rights abuses and constant repression on Tibetans perpetrated by China are intolerable and must be resisted by the United States and this Congress. Religious freedom and the preservation of Tibetan cultural and linguistic traditions are essential to a new generation of Tibetans, both inside Tibet and in exile communities in India, Nepal, and the United States (including our vibrant community in Minnesota).

Past U.S. administrations have supported human rights, democracy, and education programs for the people of Tibet. Whether it is Tibetan language broadcasts as a source of independent information, the Tibetan Scholarship Program, or the Ngawang Choephel Fellows Program, these modest U.S. investments have had a strong and positive impact on creating a pathway for Tibetan leaders and voices of freedom. USAID has made important investment in support of Tibetans inside Tibet and living as refugees.

It is unacceptable that the Trump administration's fiscal year 2018 budget eliminates funding for many of the important programs supporting the people of Tibet. It is up to Congress to ensure necessary funds are appropriated to sustain the Tibetan programs for the coming fiscal year. Eliminating these funds, as proposed, is an abandonment of the Tibetan people and will give China a green light to accelerate their cruel repression and destruction of Tibetan lives and culture.

There is one additional issue that is of utmost urgency, the appointment of a new Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues at the Department of State. This position, authorized in the Tibetan Policy Act of 2002, is intended to guide U.S. policy toward Tibet and communicate directly with the Chinese government. I would urge Secretary Tillerson and the White House to fill this position immediately.

Last weekend, Minnesota had the honor of hosting His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. I had the privilege of attending a public event with His Holiness and giving remarks before Minnesota's large and strong community of Tibetan refugees. The remarks below were delivered at that event and I ask that they be included in the Record:

Remarks by Congresswoman Betty McCollum--Community Public Talk with the Tibetan American Foundation of Minnesota Honoring His Holiness the 14th

Dalai Lama of Tibet, Minneapolis, Minnesota, June 24, 2017

Good morning! I am so pleased to be here with Minnesota's

strong and thriving Tibetan community.

I wish to thank the Tibetan American Foundation of

Minnesota for inviting me to join you this morning.

Only one month ago--in May--I was in Dharamsala, India as

part of an official congressional delegation led by the

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. In Dharamsala my colleagues

and I were humbled to be received very warmly and graciously

by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. We had a very special visit

with His Holiness.

Today, it is our honor to welcome His Holiness to Minnesota

and his presence is a blessing and inspiration for all of us.

Please accept my offer of strong support for Tibetans in

Minnesota and across the U.S., for the Tibetan community in

India and Nepal, and all Tibetans living in exile.

The refugee experience, being forced from ones homeland,

fleeing violence and persecution, is a journey of loss, pain,

and suffering. You never forget home, but now you have a

second home and together we must make this home in America

one of safety, hope, and opportunity.

We want this home to be welcoming for your families and a

place where you have the freedom to maintain your culture,

practice your beliefs, and sustain your rich traditions as

Tibetans. I know firsthand the important contributions

Tibetan-Americans are making here in Minnesota and I am

grateful. Your community makes Minnesota a stronger, better

state.

In 2015, I was in Tibet, your homeland. I experienced the

mountains, the thin air in my lungs, and the warmth of the

Tibetan people I met. But, there was also the heavy burden of

a land that is not free. The people of Tibet are not free.

Today, let us focus our minds, our hearts, our prayers,

and, as free people, let us work to make the people of Tibet

free. It is long past time for China's repression in Tibet to

end. The human rights abuses must stop. The prisoners of

conscience must be set free. The destruction of Tibetan

culture and the repression of Buddhist monks and scholars

must stop.

With great sadness, I must tell you that two weeks ago I

received a letter from China's Counsel General in Chicago

asking me to refrain from ``any contact with the Dalai Lama

in any form.'' The letter called today's gathering a platform

for a separatist plot.

There is no plot, only a path of peace and dialogue. Let us

follow His Holiness on that path, a path to separate the

Tibetan people from political repression, a path to separate

Tibet from endless acts of cultural destruction, and a path

to separate the political and religious prisoners from their

cells and their suffering.

As a Member of Congress, I urge the Congress and the

President of the United States to stand with the people of

Tibet to promote human rights, religious freedom, and a

meaningful political dialogue.

China is a powerful country. But, the United States is a

free and powerful country. The United States must never

abandon our commitment to freedom, justice, and human rights

around the world. And, we must never abandon the people of

Tibet.

I will work in Congress to continue U.S. funding for all

Tibetan programs, scholarships, and assistance for refugees.

And, I will work to pass H.R. 1872--the ``Reciprocal Access

to Tibet Act of 2017.''

Let me also urge President Trump to meet directly with His

Holiness the Dalai Lama and listen to his wise and

compassionate insights. Mr. Trump needs to hear why ongoing

U.S. support for Tibet is vital.

The teachings of His Holiness are not only wise, they are

in the best interest of the United States and of all of

mankind. Let us love our planet and work to stop climate

change. Let us welcome refugees and all who flee violence and

suffering whether Buddhist, Christian or Muslim. Let us open

our hearts to the poor and the vulnerable--in our own

communities and around the world.

Minnesota is blessed by our Tibetan brothers and sisters.

And, today we are blessed by the presence of His Holiness and

his teachings.

May peace be upon us all and may we follow its path

together.

Thank you.