Although the 108th Congress has adjourned for the year, the House International Relations Committee held a hearing on December 14 to examine China’s “One Child” policy and human rights abuses in the country.
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) chaired the hearing, explaining that much of the testimony would focus on the “deplorable case” of Mao Hengfeng, a female activist from Shanghai who was forced to undergo an abortion in 1990 when she became pregnant with her third child. She continued to argue her case after the abortion, and in 2004 petitioned to have her case heard by party leaders at the National People’s Congress in Beijing. Ms. Mao was arrested and sentenced to 18 months of reeducation through labor (RTL) for “for disturbance of the peace.” She remains in RTL today.
With regard to China’s “One Child” policy, Rep. Smith cited a State Department Human Rights Report that found that “one consequence of ‘the country’s birth limitation policies’ is that 56 percent of the world’s female suicides occur in China, which is five times the world average and approximately 500 suicides by women per day.” He also chastised the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), stating, “Since 1979, UNFPA has been the chief apologist and cheerleader for China’s coercive one child per couple policy. Despite numerous credible forced abortion reports from impeccable sources, including human rights organizations like Amnesty International, journalists, former Chinese population control officials and, above all, from the women victims themselves, high officials at UNFPA always dismiss and explain it all away. UNFPA has funded, provided crucial technical support and, most importantly, provided cover for massive crimes of forced abortion and involuntary sterilization.” Rep. Smith lauded the Bush administration for redirecting UNFPA funds to other international health programs.
Pointing out the irregularity of holding a committee hearing while Congress is in recess, Ranking Member Tom Lantos (D-CA) explained that the “urgency” of Ms. Mao’s case “demands our immediate attention.” He called China’s family planning policy “incomprehensible and insane” and argued that when women have access to education and a full range of reproductive health services, they choose to have smaller families.
Testifying on behalf of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Acting Assistant Secretary of State Michael Kozak summarized human rights abuses recorded in China in 2004, noting that violence against women “continued to be a problem, including the imposition of a coercive birth limitation policy that resulted in instances of forced abortion and forced sterilization.” Secretary Kozak also updated the committee on the status of Mao Hengfeng, explaining that she “is currently being detained along with fellow activists…and other inmates who are described as ‘politicals.’ Since her incarceration, Mao has refused to be intimidated and has responded to demands that she write a letter of contrition by defiantly writing ‘Down with Reeducation Through Labor.’ According to her relatives, with whom our Consulate in Shanghai has kept in close touch, she is denied her right to contact her family, held with drug addicts who are allowed to abuse her, and has been strapped down to her bed for hours at a time.” He added, “Mao’s case is an example of what can and does go wrong in China.”
Representing the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Assistant Secretary of State Arthur Dewey said that on September 1, 2002, China implemented the national Law on Population and Birth Planning that requires the state to “employ measures to place population growth under control, improve the quality of the population, and conduct birth planning.” He explained that the law “grants married couples the right to have a single child and allows eligible couples to apply for permission to have a second child if they meet conditions stipulated in local and provincial regulations. Many provincial regulations require women to wait four years or more after their first birth before making such an application. These regulations also prohibit single women who become pregnant from giving birth, but enforcement of this prohibition reportedly varies widely throughout China.” Secretary Dewey noted that party members and civil servants could face administrative sanctions if they parent an “out-of-plan” child and other couples could be assessed a “social compensation fee, which can range from one-half the local average annual household income to as much as ten times that level.”
With regard to UNFPA, Secretary Dewey explained that the State Department sent a Blue Ribbon Team to China in May 2002 in order to investigate the organization’s work: “On its return from a week in China, the team recommended continuation of funding of UNFPA. But it also suggested doing what it lacked time to do during its brief mission, that is to translate the legislation governing birth planning policies in the countries where UNFPA worked, and also to find out how these policies were implemented and enforced. The evidence drawn from these follow-on steps clearly showed us that the large fees and penalties for out-of-plan births assessed in implementing China’s regulations are tantamount to coercion that leads to abortion. UNFPA support of, and participation in, China’s population-planning activities allows the Chinese government to implement more effectively its program of coercive abortion, thus triggering the Kemp-Kasten prohibition on support of any organization that supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.”
John Aird, a former senior research specialist on China for the U.S. Census Bureau, summarized the “often neglected aspect” of China’s population law: its impact on women. “Defenders of the Chinese program sometimes argue that it has emancipated women, permitted them to control their own fertility, and allowed them to participate in productive and leisure activities denied to child-burdened women in earlier generations, all of which is true. But it is also obvious that the worst aspects of the Chinese family planning program mainly afflict women, who have suffered most of the sterilizations, all of the IUD [intrauterine device] insertions, all of the mandatory quarterly IUD check-ups, and all of the abortions. Girls are the main targets of sex-selective abortion, infanticide, neglect, and abandonment. Now the shortage of girls and women, instead of increasing their social value, are subjecting them to further abuse,” he stated.
Laogai Research Foundation Executive Director Harry Wu said that the policy “has a serious impact on Chinese society in terms of significant gender imbalance…While the world’s overall male-to-female birth ratio, which measures the number of males born for every 100 females born, is between 103 and 106 males, China’s ratio was calculated in 2000 to have reached about 117-134. When this ratio is superimposed on China’s massive population, the imbalanced ratio translates into almost a million ‘missing’ baby girls per year.” He also explained that the law “engenders criminal behavior such as corruption, bribery and human trafficking. Corrupt family planning cadres and doctors abuse their authority to exact fines and accept bribes to give couples birth permit certificates, fake sterilization certificates, fake IUD checkup certificates, etc. Meanwhile, the surplus in female infants and the sex ratio imbalances has led to an increase in the trafficking of infants and women. It is estimated that after a decade, about 30 million Chinese bachelors will not be able to find a wife. This dire situation will result in instability even across the border and will have a negative influence on China’s neighboring countries.”
T. Kumar, advocacy director for Asia and the Pacific at Amnesty International USA, defended UNFPA, stating that he “is not aware of UNFPA’s involvement in forced abortions or sterilizations in China,” adding, “Amnesty International believes that UNFPA’s work to ensure universal access to reproductive health, including family planning and sexual health to all couples and individuals, is vital in the context of world poverty and lack of access to reproductive services.” Mr. Kumar called on the Bush administration to sponsor a resolution on China at the next session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. Pointing out that the 2008 Olympics will take place in Beijing, he also urged the administration and Congress to “take full advantage of this opportunity to set in motion a comprehensive plan of action to improve human rights in China in the run up to the Olympics.”
