Just before his historic February 2002 visit to China, President Bush told an inquisitive reporter,

"I can tell you that in my last visit with President Jiang I shared with him my faith. I talked to him on very personal terms about my Christian beliefs. I explained to him that faith had an incredibly important part in my life, and it has a very important part in the lives of all kinds of citizens, and that I would hope that he, as a President of a great nation, would understand the important role of religion in an individual's life."

Weeks later, at his speech at Tsinghua University, Bush made perhaps his most inspired call for China to expand its realm of religious freedom, giving an impassioned speech that placed great emphasis on religious freedom and human rights. Bush explicitly addressed the issues of religious freedom and democracy, saying, "Freedom of religion is not something to be feared, it's to be welcomed, because faith gives us a moral core and teaches us to hold ourselves to high standards, to love and to serve others, and to live responsible lives." He ended his speech with the prayer "that all persecution will end, so that all in China are free to gather and worship as they wish."

Even after his trip to China, President Bush kept religious freedom as a major part of his foreign policy agenda toward China. In 2002 he joined several U.S. congressmen in trying to pressure the Chinese government on the issue of Li Guangqiang, a Chinese Christian who was taken into custody in May of that year for smuggling more than 16,000 Bibles from Hong Kong into southeast China. Then, in 2003, during the arrival ceremony for visiting Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, President Bush said that, based upon the maturity of the U.S.-Chinese relationship, it was possible to talk freely and openly about their differences, including religious freedom. "China has discovered that economic freedom leads to national wealth", the president observed. He continued by stating that the growth of economic freedom in China gives reason to hope for increased social, political and religious freedom and that "in the long run, these freedoms are indivisible and essential to national greatness and national dignity."

Institutionalizing Religion

In addition to the ways in which the faith of President Bush affects his foreign policy agenda toward China, religion impacts U.S.-Chinese relations in the official diplomatic policy arena as well. Under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA), the State Department and the bipartisan U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) monitor religious freedom across the globe and make recommendations to the president, who then can impose sanctions as deemed necessary. The establishment of the USCIRF and the Office of International Religious Freedom (OIRF) within the State Department, along with their obligations to monitor and report on issues of religious freedom worldwide, has given the issue of religious freedom an institutionally based position on the U.S. foreign policy agenda, and thus in U.S. China policy. China is today listed as one of only eight countries in the world designated as Countries of Particular Concern (CPC), a designation made because a government "is engaged in or tolerates particularly severe violations of religious freedom" in a manner that is "egregious, ongoing and systematic." (The others are North Korea, Eritrea, Iran, Burma, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia and Sudan.)

Over the years, both the USCIRF and the OIRF have recommended a variety of policy tools for the president's consideration. The true power of IRFA, however, lies in its requirement that the government automatically impose sanctions upon countries found to be in severe violation on matters of religious freedom. While some of these automatic provisions were eliminated during the drafting of the bill, IRFA does set out directives for the president to follow in response to findings of religious freedom violations. Although the directives referring to the president's role in protecting international religious freedom are set out clearly, according to specific domestic and international guidelines, the president still has a final, determinative voice on how and when to implement these recommendations. For example, while the act requires the president to oppose religious freedom violations and to "promote the right to freedom of religion" based upon the State Department's findings and recommendations in its annual report, the president is permitted to waive the application of severe sanctions if he finds that doing so would "further the purpose of [the act]", or if he is compelled by an "important national interest of the United States." The mandatory impact of IRFA is therefore less potent than some may fear, but if a president or secretary of state so desired, the act could be exploited more than it has been thus far.

In February 2004, the USCIRF recommended to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell that China remain on the list of CPCs, labeling the repression of religious freedom in China "a deliberate policy of the Chinese government." In support of their recommendation, the commission cited the "violent campaign against religious believers, including Evangelical Christians, Roman Catholics, Uighur Muslims, Tibetan Buddhists, and other groups, such as the Falun Gong", in the forms of "imprisonment, torture, and other forms of ill treatment."

In September 2004, the State Department released its annual International Religious Freedom Report. While the USCIRF's report was obviously taken seriously by the State Department's Office of International Religious Freedom, the report was much more diplomatic in its criticism of China, concluding only that the Chinese government's "respect for freedom of religion and freedom of conscience remained poor." The report also acknowledged the variation in religious freedom in different parts of the country (for example, Xinjiang) and in specific circumstances (differences in the way "house churches" or the Falun Gong are treated). The report highlighted two areas in particular, Xinjiang and Tibet, where the religious practices of Muslims and Buddhists, respectively, have been restricted and violated, but the report seemed sympathetic to China's plight in these regions, where religion, ethnic identity and separatist activities often become intertwined.

As in previous years, the secretary of state determined that in the case of China the operative sanctions under IRFA would be the existing restrictions on exports of crime control and detection instruments and equipment and that no new sanctions were warranted. In a statement made by Felice D. Gaer, vice chair of USCIRF, to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, while "the reliance on pre-existing sanctions may be technically correct under the statute, it is not defensible as a matter of policy", as it "provides little incentive for governments like China to reduce or end severe violations of religious freedom."

Democracies and Double Standards

The release of such reports as the International Religious Freedom Report and the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices are always welcomed by Beijing with an onslaught of criticism, labeling them as "extremely unfair", as "going against the facts", and as "interference" in China's internal affairs. This past March, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said that he hoped the United States would "put more focus on its own human rights problems and work harder to resume the China-U.S. human rights dialogue."

Perhaps to aid us in that regard, for the sixth year in a row, China has released its own Human Rights Record of the United States. As the report states in its opening lines, while the United States poses as the world's "human rights police", it keeps silent on its own "misdeeds in this field. Therefore, the world people have to probe the human rights record behind the Statue of Liberty in the United States." The report then "uncovers" America's record in "human rights" in such areas as the invasion of other countries, the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq, racial discrimination, and the conditions of women and children in America.

Behind all of this rhetoric, there may actually be a dialogue underway. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu stated just after the release of the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices that "only the Chinese people themselves have the right to comment on the human rights situation in their own country." China, of course, then turned around and issued its own report on U.S. human rights practices, an action which seems somewhat hypocritical. This sort of behavior may indicate that China recognizes the legitimacy of the practice of human rights monitoring, only seeking to deflect the unwelcome criticism. Whether or not this dialogue will have an impact on the policies of either country, however, remains unknown.

Evidence that China may be taking human rights more seriously as a result of U.S. monitoring and pressure may be found in the recently issued white paper on China's Progress in Human Rights in 2004. The eighth of its kind since 1991, the report only contains one section on religious freedom, and it shows little understanding of what we mean in the West by the concept of religious freedom. While the report states that Chinese citizens enjoy the freedom of religious belief, they do so "in accordance with law", and only "the legitimate rights and interests of religious adherents and their normal religious activities" are protected. Of course, it remains up to the state itself to determine just what the law is and how it is interpreted.

Essay Types: Essay