China's "anti-secession law"

On 15 March 2005, Congressman Henry Hyde (R-IL) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations. On 16 March 2005, the Resolution was passed on the floor of the full House by a vote of 424 against 4 .

Expressing the grave concern of Congress regarding the recent passage of the anti-secession law by the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China.

• Whereas on December 9, 2003, President George W. Bush stated it is the policy of the United States to "oppose any unilateral decision, by either China or Taiwan, to change the status quo";
• Whereas in the past few years, the Government of the United States has urged both Taiwan and the People's Republic of China to maintain restraint;
• Whereas the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China passed its anti-secession law on March 14, 2005, which constitutes a unilateral change to the status quo in the Taiwan Strait;
• Whereas the passage of China's anti-secession law escalates tensions between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China and is an impediment to cross-strait dialogue;
• Whereas the purpose of China's anti-secession law is to create a legal framework for possible use of force against Taiwan and mandates Chinese military action under certain circumstances, including when "possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted";
• Whereas the Department of Defense's Report on the Military Power of the People's Republic of China for Fiscal Year 2004 documents that, as of 2003, the Government of the People's Republic of China had deployed approximately 500 short-range ballistic missiles against Taiwan;
• Whereas the escalating arms buildup of missiles and other offensive weapons by the People's Republic of China in areas adjacent to the Taiwan Strait is a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area;
• Whereas given the recent positive developments in cross-strait relations, including the Lunar New Year charter flights and new proposals for cross-strait exchanges, it is particularly unfortunate that the National People's Congress adopted this legislation;
• Whereas since its enactment in 1979, the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.), which codified in law the basis for continued commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people of Taiwan, has been instrumental in maintaining peace, security, and stability in the Taiwan Strait;
• Whereas section 2(b)(2) of the Taiwan Relations Act declares that ''peace and stability in the area are in the political, security, and economic interests of the United States, and are matters of international concern'';
• Whereas, at the time the Taiwan Relations Act was enacted into law, section 2(b)(3) of such Act made clear that the United States decision to establish diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China rested upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan would be determined by peaceful means;
• Whereas section 2(b)(4) of the Taiwan Relations Act declares it the policy of the United States ''to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States'';
• Whereas section 2(b)(6) of the Taiwan Relations Act declares it the policy of the United States ''to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan''; and
• Whereas any attempt to determine Taiwan's future by other than peaceful means and other than with the express consent of the people of Taiwan would be considered of grave concern to the United States: Now, therefore, be it
• Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that--
1. the anti-secession law of the People's Republic of China provides a legal justification for the use of force against Taiwan, altering the status quo in the region, and thus is of grave concern to the United States;
2. the President of the United States should direct all appropriate officials of the United States Government to reflect the grave concern with which the United States views the passage of China's anti-secession law in particular, and the growing Chinese military threats to Taiwan in general, to their counterpart officials in the Government of the People's Republic of China;
3. the Government of the United States should reaffirm its policy that the future of Taiwan should be resolved by peaceful means and with the consent of the people of Taiwan; and
4. the Government of the United States should continue to encourage dialogue between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China.