Phila. think tank fires China expert; observers differ on exactly why

Many Penn professors have ties to the Foreign Policy Research Institute. They said they don't know why Ross Munro was fired. Suspicion and ill feelings have surrounded the recent firing of Foreign Policy Research Institute scholar Ross Munro, whose new book -- The Coming Conflict With China -- criticizes FPRI Trustee Alexander Haig. Although FPRI severed its ties with the University in 1970, several University professors participate in the organization's symposia and contribute to its quarterly journal, Orbis. Munro's book -- co-authored with New York Times book critic Richard Bernstein -- has quickly become a staple of talk show and think tank discussion. And a recent Philadelphia Inquirer article implied that FPRI fired Munro over a chapter in the book perceived to be an assault on Haig's reputation. That chapter, "The New China Lobby," alleges that Haig and others tried to soften U.S. policy toward China because they hold business interests there. A legal settlement forbids both FPRI and Munro from commenting directly. But FPRI President Harvey Sicherman -- who served under then-Secretary of State Haig in the Reagan administration -- denies that the book got Munro fired. "Differences had developed over the past year-and-a-half with respect to management and the philosophy and the direction of the institute," he said. Sicherman and Haig recently co-wrote an FPRI Report, "New Directions in U.S.-China Relations." Asked if his leaving FPRI had to do with the book, Munro said, "Yes. But there was a settlement and I can't talk." He added that "the Inquirer story is accurate as far as I know." Some people associated with FPRI -- including University faculty members -- doubt Munro was so brazenly censored. "It's too coincidental for it to have happened just about the time of the book," Political Science Professor Avery Goldstein said. "I doubt that was the only reason they had a parting of the ways." He speculated that FPRI may be looking for a "more academic China scholar" instead of a journalist like Munro, who before coming to FPRI was an Asia correspondent for Time and the Toronto Globe and Mail. Goldstein said the book's stated thesis -- that "America's number one objective in Asia must be to derail China's quest to become a 21st century hegemon" -- is extreme, but not unheard of in scholarly circles. "If it were the case that [Munro's firing] were that simple, that would be disturbing," he said. "The impression that he was fired for what he wrote is not a good impression." Associate Director of International Relations Frank Plantan was similarly ambivalent -- even after receiving a telephone call from Munro. "[Munro] was trying to recruit me on this," he said. "If he's doing that, I'd be careful." Plantan described himself as "literally, formally indifferent." But he added that it is only natural someone in Munro's shoes would want to explain his side of things. A former colleague of Munro's in Asia said the firing is suspicious because Munro is a good fundraiser, and the institute is "on extremely shaky financial ground." "There are a lot of problems at that institute," the colleague said. "Ross had brought a lot of money into that institute. Some of that money may have come from sources that were not too friendly to China." Sicherman denied that FPRI was having financial trouble. "We had a very good year last year and we expect to have a very good year this year," he said, adding that he "was not prepared to go into any detail" on finances. But an observer sympathetic to FPRI, who described himself as "somewhat familiar with the case," seemed to acknowledge financial trouble. "There are financial problems everywhere," he said. "My uncle has financial problems; your father has financial problems." The observer said the coinciding of Munro's firing and the book's release makes it "a ticklish subject." "But the Inquirer article made it seem one way, and it isn't that way," he said. "The change in the relationship [between Munro and FPRI] has sources that precede this." He said Haig's advocacy of political openness with China predates his association with American companies doing business there. And he thinks the China lobby chapter in Munro and Bernstein's book is out-of-line. "You're asking [FPRI] to vouch for a book that directly attacks one of its own board members," he said. "How could any organization do that?" Similar sentiments were expressed in a lukewarm review of the book in the New York Times Book Review. "The chapter on the China lobby? is the most ill-considered section of the book," wrote National Interest Editor Owen Harries. "Sidney Hook once formulated a rule of controversy: 'Before impugning an opponent's motives? answer his arguments first'. "That rule is not respected here, and doubt is cast on the integrity of several distinguished Americans on the basis of some question-begging 'evidence'," Harries wrote. FPRI Board of Advisors member Martin Peretz sided with Munro through his magazine, The New Republic. Based on the Inquirer article, an anonymous blurb in TNR concluded that "the episode suggests that Munro may have become a victim of the very phenomenon he describes in his book: the new China lobby." Six paragraphs in The Coming Conflict focus on Haig, listing his business ties and alleged lobbying of Congress for China -- much of which had been previously reported. The authors conclude that "what is dubious is the double role played by figures like Kissinger and Haig, who use their prestige and influence both publicly and privately to advance policies from which they profit mightily." Haig refused to comment for this story, and Richard Bernstein did not return repeated phone calls.