Rethinking the China Campaign

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

>Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 23:56:37 -0500
>From: Lee Siu Hin <siuhin at aol.com>
>Reply-To: kentwong at ucla.edu, elaine_bernard at harvard.edu
>Subject: [BRC-NEWS] Rethinking the China Campaign
>Sender: worker-brc-news at lists.tao.ca
>
>http://www.qc.edu/newlaborforum/
>
>New Labor Forum
>
>Fall/Winter 2000 (Pages 19-23)
>
>Rethinking the China Campaign
>
>By Kent Wong <kentwong at ucla.edu> and
>    Elaine Bernard <elaine_bernard at harvard.edu>
>
>On May 24, 2000, the American labor movement suffered
>a significant defeat in their attempt to block Permanent
>Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status for China. The House
>of Representatives voted 237-197 to approve PNTR for China.
>This was the labor movement's largest legislative campaign
>in years, which mobilized resources of the American labor
>movement from coast to coast. But was this the best step to
>take on the heels of the powerful anti-WTO coalition that
>emerged in Seattle last November?
>
>Why did this relatively narrow legislative issue (PNTR)
>deserve such prominence on the labor movement's agenda?
>The debate around China became a symbol for the American labor
>movement. It emerged as a test of labor's ability to influence
>Congress, and established a litmus test for politicians. The
>American labor movement's campaign against granting China PNTR
>as a prelude to its admission to the World Trade Organization
>became a symbol of labor's opposition to the threat of
>globalization and unfair trade agreements.
>
>Fundamentally, however, this approach and this campaign were
>counter-productive. While the campaign was launched with the
>intent of promoting internationalism and avoiding China-
>bashing, we fear that the ultimate impact of the campaign
>has been to fuel cold war politics, encourage an unholy
>alliances with the right wing, and has resulted in racially
>offensive messages. As well, the campaign has weakened the
>strong anti-corporate and international solidarity focus
>coming out of the anti-WTO protests in Seattle and
>dissipated some of the positive momentum from the
>Seattle action.
>
>
>Historic Perspective
>
>History is important, and though we might wish it to be
>otherwise, we need to examine the recent campaign against
>PNTR for China in the context of the long history of the
>American labor movement's policies towards China. Running as
>a fault line throughout its history, the US labor movement
>has been hostile to Asian workers. The early AFL had an
>explicit policy of forbidding Asian members from joining the
>ranks of the American labor movement. In 1903, for example,
>the Japanese Mexican Labor Association in California was
>denied charter membership with the American Federation of
>Labor, solely because they had numbers of Japanese American
>members. The American Federation of Labor under its first
>President Samuel Gompers embraced an exclusionary policy
>towards China and Chinese workers. This policy of exclusion
>and hostility continued well into the 20th century. American
>unions were major proponents of the 1882 Chinese Exclusion
>Act, which for the first time in U.S. history enacted
>racially exclusive immigration policies against a single
>country, China. Subsequently, these racist immigration
>laws were expanded to include other immigrants from Asia.
>
>While hostility to China declined somewhat during the Second
>World War with nationalist Chinese as allies in the war
>against Japan the post war victory of Mao Tse-tung and the
>Chinese Communist Party marked the beginning of the Cold
>War. During the Cold War, U.S. attitudes towards China led
>to renewed racist portrayals of China and Chinese people as
>"inscrutable", sinister, untrustworthy, and ruthless killers
>who do not value life. The "yellow hordes" of "coolies,"
>"low wage workers" and "strike breakers" of the 19th century,
>were transformed into the "red hordes" of the 20th century
>as Americans were taught to fear the hundreds of millions of
>"Red Chinese" who were considered a threat to U.S. security.
>The FBI was convinced that there were "Red Chinese" spies,
>and launched special investigations targeting Chinese
>American communities.
>
>Throughout this period, the US labor movement was at the
>forefront in supporting US Cold War policy. And while labor
>today has made an important change in its attitude towards
>immigrants, siding with undocumented workers and their right
>to organize many Cold War, anti-Chinese vestiges still are
>alive and well within U.S. society. China continues to be a
>major target of the conservative and religious right, who
>maintains this Cold War ideology in their crusade against
>China. The discrimination against Chinese Americans and
>Asian Americans continues. A few years ago, due to
>allegations of illegal fundraising activities involving
>a handful of Asian Americans, donors with Asian surnames
>were singled out by the Democratic National Committee and
>requested to produce proof of their ability to contribute
>to the DNC. Currently Dr. Wen Ho Lee of Los Alamos is being
>prosecuted for mishandling classified information. This case
>has generated national outrage from the Chinese American
>community amid charges of racial profiling, and unfairly
>scapegoating Chinese Americans because of their suspected
>disloyalty to this country.
>
>This historical context is vital for labor to take into
>consideration when deciding on tactics. It doesn't mean that
>labor cannot criticize actions by the Chinese government,
>but it does mean that extra care must be taken because of
>the legacy of racism and hostility against Chinese and
>Asian workers.
>
>
>Singling Out China
>
>The most recent campaign to deny China PNTR and admission to
>the WTO has been a step backwards in the campaign against
>corporate sponsored "globalization" and for fair trade,
>development and global solidarity. The AFL-CIO advanced the
>slogan, "No Blank Check for China." Not only was this slogan
>misleading, as PNTR was hardly a "blank check" but merely
>giving China the same status that the US gives other nations
>it trades with, but it also shifted the focus of the debate
>on globalization from corporations and the actions of the
>U.S. government to China. And China is hardly driving
>globalization. Whether or not China is granted PNTR does
>not change the fundamental problems of corporate control
>of trade policies. Whether or not China is admitted to the
>WTO does not change the fundamental problems of the WTO's
>refusal to address issues of labor, human rights, and
>environmental standards.
>
>China is not a major player in establishing international
>trade policies, nor have they been beneficiaries of
>corporate global domination. Historically, like other
>developing nations, China has been exploited for its natural
>resources and cheap labor by other countries. The campaign
>against China shifts the attention from the structural
>problems of the global economy created by unregulated
>corporate power, to targeting one country, China. Trade
>unionists and all people of conscious must actively oppose
>human rights abuses, labor rights abuses, and environmental
>degradation in China. Workers in China should be supported
>in their struggle to build democratic trade unions and to
>fight for social and economic justice. But the American
>labor movement must have a clear, consistent policy on
>global trade and development and human rights that does
>not unfairly single out China.
>
>The violations of political, labor, and human rights do
>not distinguish China, alas, from other countries that have
>permanent trade status with the U.S., or some of the 135
>governments who are presently members of the World Trade
>Organization. The U.S. government itself has a deplorable
>track record of supporting repressive regimes from Indonesia,
>Iran, the Philippines, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador,
>Nicaragua, Chile, and the list goes on. In many instances,
>the U.S. has used armed intervention to support military
>dictatorships.
>
>For the U.S. to challenge China's entry into the WTO because
>of political and human rights abuse amounts to hypocrisy.
>China should not be singled out for some of the very same
>human rights abuses that occur in the U.S., such as
>widespread use of prison labor. For union leaders to lead
>the campaign against China implies that China is the biggest
>threat to US workers, not corporate driven globalization,
>and the corporate dominated institutions driving the race to
>the bottom such as the WTO, World Bank, and International
>Monetary Fund. Worse yet, the campaign inevitably builds
>on the Cold War framework and racially hostile sentiment
>against China. The April 12, 2000 demonstration against
>China held in Washington, D.C. had the embarrassing
>consequence of providing a forum for Teamster President
>James Hoffa, Jr. and right-wing demagogue Pat Buchanan to
>address union members from the same stage. At the AFL-CIO
>rally, union leaders denounced China as a "godless" society.
>Unionists wore T-shirts demonizing China and Chinese people,
>promoting an image of Chinese as ruthless killers and
>torturers. At another rally in Washington, D.C. immediately
>preceding the congressional vote, union members joined a
>rally being chaired by an ally of right-wing Republican
>Gary Bauer.
>
>The new leadership of the AFL-CIO has done much to break
>with the Cold War positioning of the labor movement, and
>to construct a new alliance with communities of faith,
>immigrants, and social movements, on international as well
>as domestic issues. Unfortunately, the anti-China campaign
>has undermined some of these efforts.
>
>
>Evaluating Arguments Supporting the Anti-China Campaign
>
>Progressive proponents of the anti-China campaign argue that
>this was an important tactical battle in the fight against
>corporate-led globalization. Because major U.S. corporations
>are at the forefront of advancing PNTR, labor should oppose
>it. They also argue that this campaign could undermine the
>corporate agenda, and force change within the WTO and in
>future trade negotiations.
>
>Progressives further argue that granting China PNTR and
>allowing its entry into the WTO would adversely affect
>the lives of workers in both China and the U.S. As they
>correctly point out, policies of corporate globalism have
>resulted in greater economic inequality, dislocation of
>workers, and more opposition to worker rights and organized
>labor. Finally, they argue that China is a major human
>rights violator and that its entry into the WTO will make
>it difficult if not impossible to include labor and human
>rights in trade relations.
>
>With regard to the first argument, the tactical campaign
>against PNTR has failed. Worse than just losing an important
>campaign, however, the loss has left some in labor tactically
>aligned with the conservative right. Further, it has continued
>the long tradition of demonizing China, without adequately
>educating American workers on the true nature of the global
>economy.
>
>The campaign was also tactically flawed, because it
>undermined labor's own political agenda in this crucial
>election year. It has promoted greater divisions within
>labor and with labors efforts in working with the Democrats
>to recapture the House and Senate. Industrial unions have
>been the most vocal in denouncing the White House's campaign
>for PNTR. These same unions have historically been strongest
>in the Midwest states, which have emerged as the central
>battleground for the November Presidential election. If
>this conflict is not brought under control, the resulting
>political fallout could be considerable. Finally, while PNTR
>was clearly an important issue for business, for labor even
>a victory in denying China PNTR status would be a Pyrrhic
>victory at best. If labor had won, it would simply mean that
>the debate over China would have continued annually on the
>renewal of its Most Favored Nation (MFN) status.
>
>With regard to the negative impact of China's PNTR status,
>the verdict is still out. Increased trade with China may
>cause downward pressure on wages in the United States,
>though trade with China has been on the increase without
>PNTR. Clearly, the US corporate agenda of free trade,
>privatization and deregulation are taking their toll on
>workers domestically. But to blame China for U.S. capital
>flight, and U.S. corporations shifting production to the
>Third World, is neither fair nor accurate.
>
>China's admission to the WTO may have a negative impact
>on Chinese workers. However, it is problematic for the
>U.S. labor movement to attempt to speak on behalf of Chinese
>workers. When we advance international policy, it must be in
>the spirit of internationalism. There is no clear consensus
>among human rights and labor activists in China with regard
>to PNTR or WTO. It is chauvinism for the American labor
>movement to unilaterally speak on behalf of Chinese workers,
>without even engaging in dialogue with Chinese workers. Within
>the international labor arena, there clearly is no consensus
>of support on the U.S. labor movement's anti-China campaign.
>The campaign amounts to unilateralism, not internationalism.
>
>China will no doubt oppose the inclusion of human rights
>and worker rights in trade agreements. China, however, is
>not alone in this stance. Most Asian countries, indeed, most
>third world governments oppose such linkage. China will not
>have a veto within the WTO, and like all 135 member countries
>will be expected to follow its rules. The WTO has unequivocally
>opposed inclusion of labor and human rights in its mandate, and
>while this will hardly change with China's inclusion in the WTO,
>it's hard to imagine that rejection of PNTR status to China
>would have forced a change in the WTO's stance.
>
>
>Where do we go from here?
>
>With or without PNTR trade with China is increasing, and
>relations between our two countries will grow. Labor needs
>to encourage critical engagement with China, not isolation.
>This does include criticism of China's human rights
>practice. But China is too important for the US labor
>movement to simply speak to via the US media alone. The
>American labor movement should take a bold step and seek to
>open up dialogue and cultivate relationships with workers
>and trade unions in China. While American labor leaders
>should continue to meet with Chinese political dissidents,
>it would also be important to meet with other union leaders
>and workers in China.
>
>China is home of the largest trade union confederation in
>the world. While it is true that Chinese trade unions are
>not independent from the government, they are legitimate
>worker organizations with 100 million members, and reflect
>great diversity depending on the industry, sector, geographic
>area, and individual union leadership. The policies of the
>Cold War have prevented the American labor movement from
>establishing fraternal relations with trade unions in China.
>Decades after President Nixon went to China, opening US
>relations with the People's Republic of China, maybe it's
>time for AFL-CIO President John Sweeney to consider such
>an initiative and reach out to Chinese workers.
>
>As recently as 1995, American labor movement representatives
>were discouraged from attending the Beijing Women's Conference,
>sponsored by the United Nations, because China was hosting it.
>To this day, the AFL-CIO does not recognize the Chinese trade
>union movement, and Chinese trade unionists cannot visit the
>United States as official representatives of their unions.
>
>The reality is that China has undergone tremendous change
>in the past few decades. The Chinese economic system has
>rapidly transformed from one that was centralized and state-
>run towards a mixed economy, with a growing market and
>increasing foreign investment. The results have been both
>positive and negative for Chinese workers. The economy has
>experienced significant growth and development, along with
>dislocation and growing economic inequality. Human rights,
>political repression, and environmental degradation are
>crucial issues. In this context of change, would not more
>worker-to-worker and union-to-union exchange be positive? 
>Inevitably, the problems facing China will have to be
>addressed by the Chinese people themselves. There is a wide
>range of political and philosophical perspectives among
>Chinese trade unionists. There is a major generational
>transition taking place in China, and a new emerging
>leadership within the government and within labor unions.
>Through engaging in more dialogue and exchange with Chinese
>workers and unions, the American labor movement could
>identify new leaders of China who embrace a similar
>perspective on global corporate domination, and the
>need to defend human rights and labor rights.
>
>The main threat to economic security, dignity and human
>rights of U.S. workers is domestic and global corporations
>and their institutions: the WTO, the IMF, and the World
>Bank. We need to keep our eyes on the prize, move beyond the
>Cold War, move beyond unilateralism, and move toward genuine
>international labor solidarity.
>
>--
>
>Kent Wong is the Director of the UCLA Center for Labor
>Research, and Elaine Bernard is the Executive Director
>of the Harvard Trade Union Program.
>
>Copyright (c) 2000 Kent Wong and Elaine Bernard.
>
>
>[IMPORTANT NOTE: The views and opinions expressed on this
>list are solely those of the authors and/or publications,
>and do not necessarily represent or reflect the official
>political positions of the Black Radical Congress (BRC).
>Official BRC statements, position papers, press releases,
>action alerts, and announcements are distributed exclusively
>via the BRC-PRESS list. As a subscriber to this list, you
>have been added to the BRC-PRESS list automatically.]
>
>[Articles on BRC-NEWS may be forwarded and posted on other
>mailing lists, as long as the wording/attribution is not altered
>in any way. In particular, if there is a reference to a web site
>where an article was originally located, do *not* remove that.
>
>Unless stated otherwise, do *not* publish or post the entire
>text of any articles on web sites or in print, without getting
>*explicit* permission from the article author or copyright holder.
>Check the fair use provisions of the copyright law in your country
>for details on what you can and can't do.
>
>As a courtesy, we'd appreciate it if you let folks know how to
>subscribe to BRC-NEWS, by leaving in the first seven lines of the
>signature below.]
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>BRC-NEWS: Black Radical Congress - General News Articles/Reports
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo at tao.ca?body=unsubscribe%20brc-news>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo at tao.ca?body=subscribe%20brc-news>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Digest: <mailto:majordomo at tao.ca?body=subscribe%20brc-news-digest>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Help: <mailto:worker-brc-news at lists.tao.ca?subject=brc-news>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Archive1: <http://www.mail-archive.com/brc-news@lists.tao.ca>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Archive2: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/brc-news>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Archive3: <http://archive.tao.ca>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Post: <mailto:brc-news at lists.tao.ca>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
><www.blackradicalcongress.org>  | BRC |  <blackradicalcongress at email.com>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------