If some Democrats get their way, the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party will be scuttled by the incoming Democratic congressional majority. Or be turned into a travesty of its former self. (Either fate would be “terribly shortsighted,” says Free Beacon’s Mike Watson.)
The elements of travesty already exist in the person of Democrat Ro Khanna, somehow a ranking member. But until now in its short life, the Committee, established in 2023, has been led by a sane if imperfect Republican who recognizes that the Chinese Communist Party is to be thwarted and stopped, not treated as a partner to be accommodated and appeased. Over the last four years we have seen a constant stream of press releases, hearings, and reports from the Committee highlighting and documenting various aspects of the CCP threat.
Some Democrats assert that the Committee is dispensable because its work is merely duplicative, or would be duplicative if other committees started doing the work that the House Select Committee on the CCP has been doing. According to Representative Ami Bera, “For a lot of what the China committee was doing—we’ve already got a Foreign Affairs Committee, we’ve already got the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. We could do a lot of the work; I think Ways and Means could do a lot of the trade policy stuff.”
Moolenaar’s view
In response to such talk, on November 9 the current chairman, Congressman John Moolenaar (shown above, left), issued this statement:
“For nearly four years the Select Committee has brought together Republicans and Democrats to address the grave threats the Chinese Communist Party poses to U.S. interests and values. We have worked hand-in-hand with other committees and administrations of both parties to secure vital policy changes that strengthen our nation and protect the American people. We have shined a light on the CCP’s exploitation of the U.S. economy, our workers, and our innovators, led bipartisan efforts to secure critical supply chains and deny the CCP key inputs to advance its dangerous ambitions, and championed those fighting for freedom and dignity.
“The challenges we face as a nation are only becoming more urgent given the high-stakes technology competition in AI and the CCP’s growing coercion targeting America’s allies and partners. The coming two years will be a critical period—and an opportunity to meet the moment through the Select Committee’s bipartisan mandate and work.”
The saboteurs’ view
If the Committee is retained, its mission may be perverted to accommodate sentiments like the ones expressed in a letter to the Democratic leadership signed by various “progressive” and/or pacifist political groups:
We write to urge your support for reforming and continuing the House Select Committee on China for the 120th Congress, providing an opportunity for Democratic leadership to advance a more constructive vision for one of the world’s most consequential bilateral relationships.
Many of our organizations opposed the committee’s original creation and have been deeply concerned by its direction under Republican leadership. Rather than promoting a balanced and productive approach to U.S.-China relations, the committee has too often advanced confrontational policies, contributed to an atmosphere of hostility and suspicion, and promoted measures that unfairly target Chinese nationals and Asian Americans.
At the same time, we have been encouraged by early signs of a different approach under Ranking Member Ro Khanna…. We believe Democratic leadership now has an important opportunity to build on this progress and demonstrate a more responsible and constructive approach to U.S.-China relations.
Legitimate economic competition should be pursued through investments in American workers, industries, and innovation, rather than efforts to undermine China’s development….
For organizations that opposed the committee’s original establishment, supporting its continuation under a fundamentally different mandate is not a departure from our principles.
A “more responsible” and “more constructive” approach to U.S.-China relations than that exemplified by the Committee’s work to date? There is nothing in the letter quoted above about the things that the CCP and its top boss, Xi Jinping, do; for example, to Chinese nationals. The letter talks about “peaceful coexistence” as essential to the vision of U.S.–China relations to be advanced by a reconstituted Committee. Is the CCP willing to drop all of its aggressive activities in order to conform to this vision? What would be the basis for optimism on this point?
If the Committee will soon have the mission not of exposing and thwarting the CCP and its enablers but of acting as one of those enablers, what happens to the work of members like the soon-former chairman, John Moolenaar?
If he continues as a member, will he be allowed to do anything? Will he get the staff support he needs to churn out hard-hitting new reports on the Party’s latest acts cruel treatment of innocents at home and transnational repression, espionage and sabotage abroad? Whether Moolenaar is involved or not, would any such reports be issued under the aegis of a chairman striving to make the Committee “more responsible” and “more constructive” vis-à-vis appeasing the CCP?
