THE SCRAPBOOK has been enjoying voluminous nominations for the Dianne Feinstein Appease-China prize. What with the approaching Bill Clinton-Jiang Zemin summit, making goo-goo eyes at China is fast becoming the dominant indoor sport in the nation's capital.
Consider the "very urgent" memo we have obtained, which was sent last week by Robert A. Kapp, president of the United States-China Business Council, to the council's member companies. Kapp was concerned that a "House China Bill Juggernaut" would "prove very inflammatory, embarrassing to the Administration as it prepares to meet Jiang Zemin, and so embarrassing to the Chinese guests that their impact on the summit meeting itself . . . could be disastrous."
Of what, precisely, does this "juggernaut" consist? Five different bills in "mark-up" -- parts of which may or may not eventually be passed -- that Kapp describes collectively as "inflammatory," "punitive," and "intentionally polluting [of] the prospects for U.S.-China cooperation." This is ludicrous. One bill, finding that Iran has acquired Chinese cruise missiles, directs the White House to enforce a law already on the books -- the Iran-Iraq Non- Proliferation Act of 1992. Another would prohibit entry into the United States by Chinese officials who have been responsible for imprisoning, detaining, or otherwise repressing religious people in China. A third would appropriate $ 2.2 million over two years to monitor political repression in China. Another calls for a study on the feasibility of providing ballistic- missile defenses to Taiwan. And finally, there is a bill that would increase funding for Radio Free Asia and Voice of America broadcasting into China.
This last item's appearance on the Kapp hit list provoked a counter-volley from Alberto J. Mora, a member of the broadcasting board of governors that oversees VOA, Radio Free Asia, and other U.S. government broadcasting.
"There is nothing "inflammatory" about either Voice of America or Radio Free Asia broadcasts other than the truth, responsibly presented," wrote Mora to Kapp. "Nor is there anything embarrassing to the Administration about these broadcasts, as you mistakenly suggest . . . . How can broadcasts that lead to a better-informed Chinese citizenry and, consequently, increased mutual understanding between the United States and China ever be considered 'punitive?'"
How, indeed? The international-relations theory of the appeasement caucus seems to be Machiavelli-in-reverse: Since the United States is the world's most powerful nation with an economy 30 times the size of China's, and China is a Great Power wannabe desperate to buy our technology, we should therefore strive to give no offense to the sensitive Chinese dictators, whose constitutions are more delicate than a Faberge egg. The proper posture of a global superpower, the business-atany-price lobby wants to make clear, is prostrate, with an ingratiating smile across its face. Congratulations, Mr. Kapp. For your deft elucidation of this theory, you are this week's Dianne Feinstein laureate.