Americans and Chinese share a willingness to be creative and energetic in the effort to improve the Chinese legal environment in a remarkable variety of ways.

One of the lessons of Chinese language study is that some English words translate effortlessly, while others are much more complicated. "Sodium chloride" is a snap. "Father" and "mother" are pretty straightforward. Even "economy" and "government" are generally clearcut, though their historical and linguistic trappings are heavy.

"Law," on the other hand, is something else indeed.

The core Chinese character in any translation of "law" is pronounced "fa." Around the third century BC, Chinese political theorists known as "Legalists" argued that the ruler should rule the state by using "fa"--a kind of primordial "rule of law."

But for the Legalists, the interests of the ruler and the state were everything. They argued that the central goal of the ruler is to preserve his rule, and that the goal of the state is to maximize its own power. The way to do so was to keep the people orderly and submissive; the tyrant could best do that by using "fa," an elaborate penal code detailing every (draconian) punishment for every conceivable offense. Once every would-be offender clearly understood what was coming to him, he would toe the line, and the state would be strong.

Though the Legalists only dominated China for 15 years, the residual impact of Legalism on the Chinese political system has been evident ever since, modulated but not eliminated by imperial Confucianism, with its own emphasis on loyalty and "right behavior."

More than 2,200 years later, China and the United States both focus their attention on the "rule of law" in China. Some American observers rightly note that China's translation of this foreign term, "yi fa zhi guo," can be translated either as the familiar "rule of law" or the less appetizing "rule by law," the latter suggesting that today's Chinese rulers see "fa" in a manner not too dissimilar from their ancient forebears.

Nevertheless, as China comes to terms with the most massive single legal obligation it has ever undertaken, namely its commitment to the terms of its World Trade Organization (WTO) accession--which have the force of law within China--the US-China dialogue on the rule of law suggests something far more positive, albeit far from complete.

The contribution to this rule of law dialogue by the US-China Legal Cooperation Fund, an effort launched by the US-China Business Council with the voluntary contributions of member companies, reflects this more positive interpretation.

It was in 1997, and again in 1998, that the presidents of the United States and the People's Republic of China, seeking to reestablish the foundations of US-China civility after the 1995- 96 Taiwan Strait crisis, solemnly pledged to strengthen their nations' cooperative efforts in the field of law--an area in which China's leadership clearly understood the need for education and institution-building, and in which Americans from many walks of life saw the importance of sharing knowledge and experience.

It was in 1998, again, that the US-China Business Council, faced with a Congress that quickly smothered any attempt to dedicate public funds for legal cooperation with China, went to its member companies to seek their commitments to a purely voluntary, low-key private-sector effort to support legal development in China. Thanks to the commitments of some Council member firms, the US-China Legal Cooperation Fund (www.uschinalegalcoop.org) came into existence as an activity of the China Business Forum, the Council's educational and cultural affiliate.

The US-China Legal Cooperation Fund is now in its fourth year, operating quietly and with resources so limited that it doesn't even spend money touting its own achievements. The fund has received literally hundreds of proposals from US and Chinese partners for support of their efforts in legal development in China.

The range of interests and goals brought to the fund's attention has exhilarated and surprised the fund's trustees, who come from the companies that provide financial support. The fund has sought, whenever it could do so responsibly, to provide assistance to grassroots efforts in China, away from the traditional centers of learning, power, and influence. Businesspeople with experience in China have embraced the fund as a way of doing something meaningful for real people living real lives.

A look at the fund's awards to date gives evidence not only of what has been done, but also of what can be done in the future. By January 2002, the fund had awarded 29 grants for 27 projects by Chinese and American cooperating partners (see below).

What does the experience of the USChina Legal Cooperation Fund suggest?

• First, that Americans and Chinese share a willingness to be creative and energetic in the effort to improve the Chinese legal environment in a remarkable variety of ways.
  
  
• Second, that there is no use in waiting for governments to do everything in this regard, especially in the United States. The US political process renders official rule of law cooperation with China uncertain and perpetually politicized.
  
  
• Third, that there is value, and virtue, in small efforts. No one should claim that any one American or foreign initiative with China on legal development will suddenly create "the rule of law in China." But reading the reports of programs that the USChina Legal Cooperation Fund has helped to animate leaves no doubt as to the value of even inconspicuous Sino-American efforts in dozens of legal fields affecting the lives of China's people.
  
  
• Fourth, that nothing that American business does in China will satisfy all its domestic critics. Even far bigger businesssupported endeavors than the US-China Legal Cooperation Fund will fail to convince those who assume that business is inherently iniquitous and that business with China is ethically offensive. Recent corporate scandals in the United States will merely buttress the arguments of those who focus on the perceived deficiencies of business conduct in China.
  
  
• Fifth, that while we beaver away at rule of law cooperation with China, we need to be realistic about our own strengths and weaknesses. Chinese observers have noted that even in the United States, with all of its rule of law, transparency, regulatory mechanisms, limitless resources of trained financial and legal regulatory personnel, and deeply embedded legal traditions, a handful of people can make a pretty good run at walking away with billions while tens of thousands of employees as a consequence lose their jobs and their retirement savings. We should approach rule of law work with China in a spirit of confidence as to what we have to offer, but with humility as to what we have not fully accomplished at home.
  
  

Only a few days ago, I had an experience that summed up the way the USChina Legal Cooperation Fund works. A prestigious American institution of higher learning, to which the fund had provided $25,000 in partial support for a project in China, sent in its final report on the program. With it was a check for $3,000--a pittance that could easily have been squirreled away in the recipients' expense reports, but which, because the grantee had not spent it, deserved to come back to the fund. I was impressed and grateful.

That's the spirit in which this Council's low-key project approaches its tasks. Corporate contributors are always recognized, as well they should be; they have many places to put their money, and their support of the Council's program requires nothing less than full acknowledgment. I hope American companies will be there when the fund turns to them this spring.

The US-China Legal Cooperation Fund, Grants Awarded, 1999-2001 Comparative study of human rights protections and the administration of justice in China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong Improvement of Chinese administrative procedures and practices Preparation of an English-Chinese dictionary of Anglo-American legal concepts and terms Compilation of a handbook for village elections in China Production of Internet-based seminars for Chinese judges, lawyers, and law students about the US legal system Improvement of delivery of legal aid to the poor in China Improvement of teaching of business law and securities law in China Training of Chinese administrators, regulators, and lawyers in the application of legal rules in the WTO environment Development with the All-China Lawyers Association of an improved code of legal ethics for Chinese lawyers Study of the rule of law, constitutionalism, and judicial independence in China Study of the legal impact of China's WTO accession on China and the United States Drafting of a codification system for Chinese laws for use by lawyers and non-lawyers Study of US securities law by Chinese securities regulators and Chinese students Identification of the administrative law reforms and laws with respect to transparency that China must enact to comply with WTO requirements Workshop and research project on freedom of information and open government in China Field research in two locales to identify impediments to full implementation of China's labor law Assessment of legal aid needs in one Chinese province and creation of a criminal investigation and defense manual for Chinese legal aid attorneys Interdisciplinary seminars in China on WTO standards, structure, and procedures, focusing on rule of law and conflict Enhancement of legal skills training for providers of legal services for women, especially in the area of domestic violence Development of a web-based WTO course for Chinese provincial and local officials and enterprise managers International symposium for Chinese policymakers and legislators on rural land law reforms in China Development of a cooperative teaching program on alternate labor dispute resolution