- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
- news@lemmy.world
[You need to register -it’s free- for reading the linked article or you can use the link in 12ft.io.]
Concerns about China’s government gaining insight into the operations of foreign governments, segments of the economy, or citizens have been sufficient to cause the US House of Representatives to pass legislation requiring the sale of a social media platform or face a ban from US app stores. And a few experts have warned the European Commission of the risks entailed by Chinese state-owned companies owning infrastructure in the 27 member states. But oversight mechanisms the EU has put in place to guard against outside influence have not been enough to keep China’s Cosco and CMG out of major European ports.
When Jacob Gunter, an economic analyst at the Berlin-based Mercator Institute for China Studies (Merics) heard about the 67 per cent controlling stake Cosco had managed to amass in Piraeus by late 2021, it set alarm bells ringing. “It seems bizarre to me that Cosco has managed to take complete control of a strategically located European port,” Gunter said. “Being dependent on a foreign power is always risky – we learned that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine,” when Moscow threatened to cut off its outsize share of the European energy supply in response to sanctions.
Shanghai-based Cosco owns 496 container ships and has 17,000 employees worldwide (including subsidiaries), which makes the state-owned company the fourth largest shipping company after Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A (Switzerland), A.P. Møller-Maersk A/S (Denmark) and CMA CGM (France).
Together with the Vienna Institute for International Economics, Merics was commissioned by the European Parliament to analyse Cosco and CMG’s acquisition strategies for critical infrastructure in Europe. Gunter found that state-owned companies’ interest in the Union is not limited to Greece. The 2023 report he co-authored determined that Cosco and CMG together have invested more than 9 billion euros just in the maritime infrastructure of member states, including the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Spain, and Greece.
While I agree that the OP is very selective in what they post, I don’t quite agree that this institute is a misinformation source.
After researching them a bit now, they seem to be a relatively independent source funded by a German billionaire family that got rich with a grocery chain.
They seems to be relatively progressive and have an explicit pro Muslim integration stance which seems to have resulted in this institute publishing about the discrimination of Uyghurs in China, which drew the negative attention of the Chinese government.
Maybe I can shine some light on @bungalowtill@lemmy.dbzer0.com’s remarks.
Merics has been heavily criticized by the Chinese government almost since its inception in 2013 (I have my personal opinion on the reasons for that, but let’s keep that aside, I report the facts).
In 2018, for example, the Chinese propaganda outlet Global Times published an article about Merics, heavily attacking the insitute. You can find a brief comment about that as well as an English translation of this article here (archived link to ‘The China Media Project,’ another good source). If you read through the Global Times text, you may recognize where @bungalowtill has their arguments and wording.
In 2021, China imposed sanctions against 10 European individuals and four organizations in retaliation for the European Union’s sanctions on four Chinese officials for their role in carrying out human rights abuses in China’s Xinjiang region. Merics was among the sanctioned. China’s move has been heavily criticized, e.g., by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
The linked study has been conducted by Merics and the Vienna Institute for International Economics. These are two excellent research organizations. There is absolutely no doubt about their academic capabilities and their ethics.
Hold on, you are shining a light on my remarks by stating the Chinese government‘s line? Want to imply that thing here? Just as a reminder, I am not the one throwing what have you at the wall hoping for something to stick. Day in day out.
I wouldn‘t call it misinformation but I definitely think it is propaganda. It was rather the framing of those two articles not the data presented, that I find problematic (the misleading title was OP‘s). This and what I read about its involvement in the Munich Security Conference and critique by other think tanks is what made me come to the conclusion, that Merics is engaging in anti Chinese propaganda.
I don‘t know what’s up with OP, but he‘s very busy stoking anti China sentiment by posting multiple articles a day in that vain.
@bungalowtill@lemmy.dbzer0.com
The title I have chosen in the link above is the original title. Which other title did I edit? (Post the original title here and my supposed edit, and then explain how it is misleading.)
Which ‘other think tanks’ have criticized Merics?
Merics’ ‘involvement’ in the Munich Security Conference should not come as a surprise as the institute’s research is -among other topics- focused on European security. So what is the problem?
What are alternative, better sources on that topic that you don’t consider as propaganda?
[Edit typo.]
I am talking about this post:
https://feddit.org/post/1019342
Original title: Europe must end its quantum technology research with China
Title of the post: Europe must end its quantum technology research with China over security and military risk of collaboration, researcher says.
I think „researcher says“ is misleading, because it makes it seem as if a quantum research researcher is warning about the collaboration, which would be relevant. In fact it is the article‘s writer referenced in the title.
The critique of Merics by other experts in the field is pointed out in the German Wikipedia article.
I can‘t point to a single source for trustworthy reporting on China, there are articles I feel are informative, others I deem to be propaganda.