c. 1997 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ Their goal is the same: ending the religious repression suffered by millions of evangelical Protestants and Catholics in China. But as Congress gears up for its annual debate over granting trade privileges to China, conservative Christians are discovering that moving from principle to policy remedies can be a complex endeavor.

Sharp disagreements are emerging among several Christian groups about whether renewing China’s preferential trade benefit, known as”Most Favored Nation”(MFN), status will help or hurt Chinese churches.

Over the past year, several evangelical groups have been urging Congress and the Clinton administration to develop new policy initiatives to combat religious persecution around the world.

Four influential conservative advocacy and religious groups _ the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, the American Family Association and the Southern Baptist Christian Life Commission _ have told congressional leaders they believe revoking China’s MFN status would be one effective way to do that.

But several evangelical organizations and mission agencies are critical of the anti-MFN effort, saying it will result in more religious persecution.

In a Feb. 27 letter to House and Senate leaders, Family Research Council President Gary Bauer said his coalition opposes renewal of MFN for China out of concern not only for Chinese Christians, but also the Chinese government’s suppression of Muslim Uighurs and Tibetan Buddhists.”China, bluntly, is an equal opportunity brutalizer of people of faith,”Bauer said.”I am unwilling that economic interests claimed by some influential groups should trump vital questions of human rights.” At a March 20 news conference, Bauer joined former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan and Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes in urging Congress to revoke China’s MFN status when it votes, probably in June, on the issue.

Countries with MFN status are able to ship goods to the United States with the lowest possible tariffs. The status is reviewed annually. Generally, MFN votes are pro forma, but in recent years, several congressional human rights advocates have urged revocation of China’s status.

Although Republicans usually favor free trade and business, increasing numbers of GOP social conservatives are urging economic leverage be used against nations violating religious freedom. “Today, our nation’s economic prosperity and our desire for more are deceiving many into believing that the business of America in China is only business,”Bauer said.”But there is more to foreign affairs than foreign exchange.” However, the anti-MFN campaign has drawn fire from the China Service Coordinating Office, a Wheaton, Ill.-based umbrella group representing more than 100 evangelical organizations working in China. “However well-intentioned such political activism may be, a public Christian stance against MFN status for China is not in the interest of the church in China, and it will seriously hamper the efforts of Christians from outside China who have spent years seeking to establish an effective Christian witness among the Chinese people,”the group said in a March 27 statement.”This will likely result in greater persecution of Christians inside China and will close doors of opportunity for witness and service from outside China,”it said.

Among the groups represented by the coordinating office are the Evangelical Fellowship of Mission Agencies, the Interdenominational Foreign Missions Association, World Evangelical Fellowship and the Chinese Coordination Center of World Evangelism.”Christians ought not to be making a high profile MFN statement because this just reinforces the perception in the minds of Chinese leaders and the Chinese people as a whole that Christians are a threat and are anti-China,”said Brent Fulton, executive director of the China Service Coordinating Office and managing director of the Institute for Chinese Studies at Wheaton College’s Billy Graham Center.

(BEGIN OPTIONAL TRIM)

On Capitol Hill, similar disagreements are emerging as well. One leader of the movement to revoke MFN is Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., a longtime congressional religious liberty advocate.”For years, we’ve been told that if we cut trade off or use any MFN leverage, things would get worse, but what we’ve actually seen is that each year, we grant MFN and human rights and religious freedom deteriorate. On the other hand, we’ve never had the opportunity to try revoking MFN to see if it would indeed bring about change in China,”said the Rev. Stan DeBoe, a Roman Catholic priest and legislative aid to Smith.

DeBoe said because of the broad coalition being created around the issue, he is optimistic the anti-MFN effort may be successful this year.”It’s good to see many of the Christian organizations now taking an active interest in what’s going on,”he said.

But Rep. Joseph Pitts, R-Pa., a frequent Smith ally, won’t be part of this effort. Pitts, who has also been outspoken against the global persecution of Christians, said he fears revoking MFN would put the United States”in a confrontational mode”inhibiting its ability to make human rights appeals.”I think everybody is well intentioned but I don’t believe the confrontational approach is the proper approach to bring about the results we all desire,”Pitts said.”We don’t need to enter into a Cold War with China.” Pitts emphasized the complexity of the situation.”It’s not one simple answer, not one simple solution,”he said.

(OPTIONAL TRIM _ STORY MAY END HERE.)

Some Christian groups are not taking a position on the issue.

A”statement of conscience”on religious persecution released by the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) in January 1996 called on the U.S. government to instruct”senior officials engaged in trade or other international negotiations, when dealing with officials of countries that engage in religious persecution, to vigorously object to such religious persecution and to link negotiations with the need for constructive change.” However, NAE policy analyst Richard Cizik said his organization has not come down”one way or another on MFN to China or any other country at this time.” Cizik said the NAE believes”there is the potential for a legislative venue that would conform to the statement of conscience,”but he said,”at this point, it certainly doesn’t lead us to take a position on MFN.”

MJP END LAWTON