Subject: [fwd] my view on MFN, Li-Shi Luo

From: dong (D.C.)
Date: Mon, 23 May 94 11:24:53 CDT

My dear fellow veterans of IFCSS,

I am  compelled to  write  this message to   you all after I  read the
message by Mr. Cheng Liu, a current term Council member of IFCSS.

I am not so much concerned with the content of the letter regarding to
the issue of MFN --  it is an  important issue we all should seriously
debate about.  What  really bothers me is  that, despite the fact that
the Congress  of IFCSS has repeatedly  adopted  Resolutions to support
the conditional renewal of the MFN trade status  for China, Mr.  Cheng
Liu acts in his official function of an IFCSS Council member to openly
oppose the effort so  clearly defined in  the Resolutions. So far as I
can tell,  the most important  duty  of the  Council  is to faithfully
carry out the missions defined by the Resolutions, regardless whatever
poll results are.  Now, with my due respect, I like to ask a question:
What  are you doing,  Mr. Cheng Liu?  Have you ever been serious about
the business of IFCSS?   If you  want to  act against IFCSS'  official
position and advocate  your own ideas, that  is perfectly alright, but
you should not use your official position in IFCSS to do so.  Because,
you are simply not entitled to.

It  has  been a noticeable phenomenon  in  the Council  lately: Record
shows that a group of Council members  has consistently and repeatedly
ignored or neglected  the  Constitutions and  Bylaws of IFCSS,  either
unintentionally or intentionally.   Either   way, these people    have
seriously failed to  fulfill the duty of a  Council member. Even let's
forget about the rules, they do  not even have the basic institutional
royalty to IFCSS.

Let me also  use this opportunity  to express my  own views on the MFN
issue.  Before    getting into  the  MFN issue,   we  must  answer the
following question first: Given the situation in China now, should we,
the overseas Chinese community as a whole, try  to exert some pressure
on the current regime in Beijing to force it to change for better?  My
answer   to this  question is:  Yes,  we definitely  should  use every
possible means to do so.  To those who say No to  this question, I can
only  ask them to join IFCSS  and have a serious  debate in public, so
the  public can make an  informed decision.  To  those who say Yes but
oppose to use MFN as a tool for whatever reasons,  I would like to ask
them for  alternatives. If we agree upon  the firm stance on the first
question, that is,  to  apply whatever  foreign pressure  possible  to
change China for better, then the MFN issue (or any other such similar
issues)   becomes a technical   one.   It should   be discussed with a
broader perspective.  We  should neither take  the MFN  as an isolated
issue, nor mix  the principles with  tactics.  I am willing to replace
the MFN by any other more or equally effective means, if there is any.
I simply won't  give it up before a  replacement can be found.  To let
the current regime in  Beijing go free and  do whatever it wishes does
not seem  justified  at all   -- this is   the regime  which committed
massacres of innocent people, our people, under the  day light, and it
is still continuing political   persecution to its own   people today.
The justice has  not been done,  yet!  What are we  going to say about
that?!   We should  not betray   our basic  conscience  and  sense  of
justice.

Now,  about polls.   Yes,  IFCSS should pay  serious  attention polls,
objective ones  or not. We should work  with those  who hold different
point of  view and make their  view  point become constructive  in our
decision  making  process, and  we should not   let them alienate from
us.  However,  these  polls  should  not be    used to  overwrite  the
Resolutions adopted by the  Congress of IFCSS.  Or, should they?!  The
adopted Resolutions only stress our basic  stance, there are freedoms,
in  my opinion, for us  to maneuver under different political climate.
Unfortunately, the   current term  Council   has never  suggested  any
constructive ideas in this  regard, although some Council members want
to take control of the business so badly.

More about polls. Polls  tell popularity, also  political correctness.
But, they are not equal to correctness.  Mr. Adolf Hitler had over 99%
popular  support from German  people  for his  atrocity  against other
races  and  world peace.  At  same time,  in Britan Mr.  Champlain had
overwhelming support for his appeasement to the Nazi. In contrast, Sir
Winston  Churchill was not so popular  before the War  began. The late
Chairman Mao had the overwhelming popular  support from Chinese people
for  almost  all of  his disastrous campaigns.    Of course, these are
extreme examples. Nevertheless they serve to  make my point just fine.
In my view,  the Council should   not just follow whatever  polls say.
Rather, it should make its own judgments and provide leadership in the
processes of policy making, with careful consideration of poll results
and many other important factors, such  as the move of U.S. Government
and the Congress, and Chinese government's  reactions, etc.  I like to
ask each Council number a question: Have you provide any leadership in
making a sounded and practical policy  on the issue of  MFN, or on any
other important issues for that matter, lately?

IFCSS has been  consistent with its  official stance on the MFN issue,
that  is,  IFCSS supports the  conditional  renewal of the  MFN. IFCSS
never,  to   my knowledge, advocates   to  revoke  the  MFN  status of
China. Personally, I do support such a stance.  Furthermore, I support
to exert foreign pressure on the regime in Beijing. One very important
function IFCSS has is to influence U.S. government in making its China
policy.  In  the past five   years, the influence  of  IFCSS has  been
somewhat depending  on  the ability  of the  elected   officers in the
Headquarters.   This factor  certainly  creates some   fluctuations in
carrying out  a consistent policy.    However, more serious  than  the
constant personnel change is the fact that  IFCSS does not have, up to
this  date, a comprehensive  and coherent policy  on issues related to
China.  We should foster a policy toward to China which firmly adheres
to the principles  we have  stood for,  yet has enough  flexibility on
tactics we can apply. Those  who oppose to  conditional renewal of the
MFN or advocate unconditional renewal of the MFN have not come up with
or suggest any thing of  the sort.  The  open  campaign by some  IFCSS
officers certainly creates    a problem, that   is,  to undermine  the
credibility and ability  of  IFCSS being consistent in   upholding its
principles.   This will do  more damage  than just discrediting  IFCSS
ultimately.  By  advocating the renewal  of MFN to China alone without
suggesting any other replacements to exert  pressure, we compromise on
certain principles.  These principles, such human rights, should never
be compromised, if we still have some ultimate concern for humanity.

This may  be the time  for us to  think seriously  about the reform of
IFCSS.  To  make a comprehensive and coherent  China  policy for IFCSS
and to guarantee the implementation of such  a policy with consistency
to certain extent,   both the Headquarters and   the Council are   not
reliable parties so far, and the Supervisory Committee simply does not
have the function.  Should  we consider to  establish a fourth body on
top of the existing three  to accomplish the aforementioned task?  The
sole function of  the  fourth body  should  be: To create  policies on
important issues such as the MFN by bring together expertise with wide
range spectrum of view point, and  to oversee the Headquarters and the
Council to faithfully  carry out the  defined policies. For the future
of IFCSS and the welfare of Chinese people, I remain

Sincerely yours,

Li-Shi Luo
SVC Coordinator