The United States has spent years warning that Beijing uses commercial power to advance military and intelligence goals.
Now lawmakers want to know why ships operated by a Chinese state-owned company with alleged military ties were receiving reduced inspection treatment at American ports.
The Coast Guard has ordered an immediate review of vessels operated by COSCO Shipping after three House committee chairmen raised espionage concerns and demanded that the Department of Homeland Security reconsider the company’s participation in the Qualship 21 program.
Qualship 21 is designed to reward high-performing foreign vessels and operators. Enrollment can mean fewer routine Coast Guard inspections — exactly the kind of special treatment Congress says deserves another look when the operator is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party and has been identified by the Pentagon as a Chinese military company.
Photo: US Navy/Petty Officer First Class Alexander Kubitza, public domain; faithfully cropped and color-enhanced.
House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party Chairman John Moolenaar, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, and House Homeland Security subcommittee Chairman Carlos Gimenez sent the demand to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin on October 14.
The lawmakers’ public message was blunt.
The House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party says COSCO’s special inspection treatment is incompatible with the risks lawmakers identified. Its October 14 letter asks DHS to revoke current Qualship 21 enrollments for COSCO-operated vessels, refuse renewals, and increase screening when the company’s ships call at American ports.
The chairmen argue that safety compliance and national-security trust cannot be treated as the same question. A vessel may satisfy ordinary maritime standards while its operator’s state ownership, military links, equipment, and data practices still demand closer scrutiny.
They also want DHS to explain how COSCO vessels qualified for the program and what counterintelligence factors the Coast Guard considered. Their request turns a broad warning about Chinese commercial influence into a concrete test of who receives streamlined access at American ports.
Fox News reports that the Coast Guard commandant responded by directing an immediate review of COSCO vessels in the program. As of July 15, the report says, 11 COSCO-operated ships were participating.
That does not mean those ships sailed into the United States without any oversight. Qualship 21 is not a blanket exemption, and the Coast Guard can still board or inspect a vessel when circumstances warrant.
But the program does reduce the frequency of routine examinations for operators deemed to have a strong safety and compliance record. That creates the central question: should an operator’s safety history earn it streamlined treatment when Congress and the Pentagon are raising a separate national-security concern?
COSCO is not an ordinary private shipping line. It is a massive state-owned enterprise that moves cargo around the world, including through ports that serve both commercial and military purposes.
In January 2025, the Pentagon added COSCO to the Section 1260H list of Chinese military companies operating directly or indirectly in the United States. The list is a formal national-security designation rather than a criminal judgment.
Its purpose is to expose connections between ostensibly civilian companies and China’s military establishment.
A 2024 congressional investigation into port security described COSCO as a state-owned enterprise and said the People’s Liberation Army has used company ships and ferries for military transportation and embarkation training.
The same report warned that Chinese companies have gained extraordinary visibility into global logistics through control of shipping operations, port infrastructure, equipment, and data. In a crisis, information about cargo movement, port activity, military deployments, and supply bottlenecks could be enormously valuable to Beijing.
That concern becomes even sharper near installations used by the U.S. military.
Modern commercial ships carry sophisticated sensors, communications equipment, cameras, and navigation systems. Much of that technology has a perfectly legitimate operational purpose. The allegation from lawmakers is that equipment aboard COSCO vessels could also collect information as the ships travel near American coastlines and sensitive sites.
COSCO denies the espionage allegations. The company says its equipment is used for normal commercial operations and that it follows applicable laws and regulations.
That denial matters. Congress has made a serious allegation, and the public record cited so far does not amount to a court finding that a specific COSCO ship conducted espionage.
The Coast Guard review is therefore the right response: examine the evidence, evaluate the risk, and decide whether privileged treatment remains justified.
America has repeatedly learned the danger of separating economic policy from national security when dealing with the Chinese Communist Party.
Chinese-made cranes became embedded across American ports before officials seriously confronted the possibility that their software, sensors, and remote access could create surveillance or disruption risks. Telecommunications equipment from companies linked to Beijing spread through American networks before Washington moved to remove it.
Critical supply chains migrated to China because the immediate commercial savings looked more important than the strategic dependence.
Each time, the same argument appeared: the product is commercial, the concern is hypothetical, and stronger scrutiny would be inconvenient.
Then the security risk became impossible to ignore.
No foreign operator has an inherent right to expedited treatment at an American port. Qualship 21 is a privilege granted because the Coast Guard has confidence in an operator’s performance.
When credible national-security questions emerge, reviewing that privilege is basic prudence.
The review should be rigorous and transparent. DHS should explain how it separates safety compliance from counterintelligence risk, what information participating vessels can collect during U.S. port calls, and whether a company on the Pentagon’s Chinese military list can satisfy the trust standard the program is supposed to represent.
If COSCO can answer those concerns, the evidence should show it. If it cannot, the special treatment should end.
America’s ports are commercial gateways and strategic infrastructure. They move the fuel, equipment, food, technology, and military cargo on which the country depends.
The burden should not be on Americans to prove beyond all doubt that a state-owned Chinese shipping giant poses a threat before ordinary safeguards return. The burden belongs on the company seeking privileged access to demonstrate that the trust is deserved.
This is a Guest Post from our friends over at 100 Percent Fed Up. View the original article here.
Continue reading...
[ H/T WLT Report ]
