Turmoil In China : The Struggle for Power : Cutting China Ties Would Be Wrong, U.S. Envoy Says

WASHINGTON — The U.S. ambassador to China said Sunday that despite current tensions between the United States and China over last weekend’s bloody crushing of the pro-democracy movement in Beijing, it would be a “terrible mistake” to abandon the relationship between the two countries.

“We’ve gone through many ups and downs with China, and I think right now we’re going through a down,” Ambassador James R. Lilley said from Beijing in an interview broadcast on CBS-TV. “But I don’t think we should sort of give up on it; I think that would be a terrible mistake.”

Lilley said the Chinese leadership was battling for control of the country and that U.S. comments and actions would have little impact in the midst of the crisis. He said the United States could exert influence through Voice of America broadcasts, day-to-day business dealings and the training of Chinese students at American universities.

Reflected Cautious Stance

Lilley’s remarks on “Face the Nation” reflected the cautious stance toward the Chinese crisis adopted by policy-makers in Washington.

President Bush, while cutting off all government and private military sales to Beijing last week, has refrained from sharply criticizing the Chinese government. He has not threatened to cut all economic and diplomatic ties to China, nor has he recalled Lilley as a sign of U.S. displeasure at the massacre and arrests of student demonstrators.

Lilley, echoing Bush’s moderate language, said: “At the moment, you have an overwhelming desire (by Chinese leaders) for survival, and that takes precedence over anything. What we do is we play for the long term, and we don’t look for a quick fix--a ‘feelie-goodie’ about this thing. We look for a long-term solution.”

Lilley declined to discuss what the United States plans to do about Fang Lizhi, China’s most prominent dissident, who has been given refuge in the U.S. Embassy in Beijing since last Monday. The ambassador said he had had talks in the past several days with senior Chinese officials about Fang, but he would not reveal the content of the discussions.

‘Best to Shut Up’

“It’s a very sensitive thing and it’s best to do it and shut up,” Lilley said.

The ambassador said he hopes the confrontation over Fang can be resolved soon.

“I don’t think we want irritants in the Chinese-American relationship,” Lilley said. “But we Americans stand for certain things, and I don’t think we’re going to change. And I think the Chinese stand for certain things and they’re not going to change. And then you strike a deal.”

The Bush Administration’s moderate approach does not sit well with many members of Congress. Sen. Alfonse M. D’Amato (R-N.Y.), reflecting broad sentiment in Congress for stiffer sanctions against the Chinese government, called for a halt in high-technology exports and for multilateral efforts to press China to end repression of the student pro-democracy movement.

“Certainly an immediate cutoff or break in relations or all economic trade, I think, would have been precipitous,” D’Amato said on “Face the Nation.”

No ‘Business as Usual’

“But we’ve got to let the Chinese Communist leaders, those old fellows who are clinging to power, understand there is not going to be business as usual, that there will be economic sanctions, that there will be a curtailment of our normal relations,” said D’Amato, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “And we’ve got to lead the world community in this direction.”

But Roger Sullivan, president of the U.S.-China Business Council, interviewed on the same program, said the United States should think twice before imposing harsh economic penalties on China.

“They have made it very, very clear by those pictures (of students being beaten by security forces) and by their statements and by their actions . . . that they really don’t care what world opinion is,” Sullivan said.

“We have to be careful that in trying to punish this government--we’re certainly not going to influence it--we do not unintentionally and inadvertently create a situation where it’s going to be more difficult or impossible to rebuild this relationship when it becomes possible to do so.”