The Chinese Overseas Shipping Co. is pushing harder than ever to secure
a port facility at the former U.S. Naval Base in Long Beach, Calif.

“Most major carriers have their own terminals in the U.S., and it is
logical for COSCO, as a major carrier, to want to have their own terminal,”
explained Jiufeng Dong, the president of COSCO’s North American subsidiary
in a rare interview with the Journal of Commerce last week. “The site in
Long Beach, with the proper layout plans, would satisfy our needs.”

Despite the fact that other ports have been offered, the wholly owned
subsidiary of the People’s Liberation Army seems determined that Long Beach
is its best strategic location. And I believe the reason extends well
beyond the better layout plans.

Let’s put aside, for a minute, all the strings that were pulled from the
White House to put this project on the table in the first place. And let’s
examine the potential for a Long Beach base from the Chinese perspective.

COSCO has a long history of being used by its Chinese military masters
for spying and spreading chaos through smuggling of arms and drugs.

“China’s intelligence operatives are not stationed in embassies,”
explains Cmdr. Chip Beck, U.S. Naval Reserves (ret.) and a former CIA
station chief. “They work out of banks, shipping companies and businesses.”

Several members of Congress have also confided that the Chinese use
their industrial facilities and assets around the world as spy bases. Those
suspicions are not limited to conservative Republicans, either. Even
California Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer have enough
political sense to have urged a full national security review of the COSCO
Long Beach deal.

But, the question remains, why Long Beach? Why are the Chinese sold on
that particular site? What is it beyond a suitable layout that makes the
location so appealing?

Long Beach has many advantages. Strategically, it is within earshot and
sightseeing distance of all important commercial ports in California. It is
relatively close to America’s computer belt in the Silicon Valley. But more
importantly, it is near the Pacific Missile Test Center, the U.S. Naval
Weapons Station, Camp Pendleton and the Naval Amphibious Base in Coronado,
the Fleet Anti-Sub Warfare School, Sub Flotilla 5, the Naval Command
Station and the Miramar Marine Corps Air Station.

And, of course, as I’ve mentioned many times before, there’s the Sea
Launch facility a veritable stone’s throw away in the same city. That’s the
project, now under investigation by the Justice Department, for possible
security breaches. Sea Launch, which plans to blast satellites into space
from equatorial ocean platforms, is a partnership of the Boeing Corp. and
three foreign entities including one dominated by Russian intelligence.
Moscow and Beijing have a formal agreement to share intelligence
information, especially when it pertains to their “common adversary,” the
United States of America.

Do you get the picture? Could it be any more obvious? Why, then, is the
U.S. government still considering COSCO as a suitable tenant for such a
sensitive port facility? It would seem like a no-brainer.

Ah, but then we have a man in the White House who doesn’t believe the
Chinese pose a strategic threat to the United States. He is a man who
approved commercial projects with Beijing that permitted the Chinese to
improve their nuclear missile targeting on U.S. cities. He is a man whose
largest campaign contributors in 1992 and 1996 have strong economic and/or
espionage relationships with China.

And we have a Congress that is obviously afraid of the power that man

One of the brighter consequences of the abuse of power allegations
currently swirling around the White House is that that they open up the
possibility of derailing some truly evil and dangerous plans like the COSCO
deal. This was once considered a done deal. But court challenges have
stalled the administration’s best efforts to steamroll through its agenda.

Now, more than ever, is the time for mounting opposition pressure, lest
America’s future security be jeopardized because of a preoccupation on less
serious matters.

Joseph Farah’s exclusive 64-page report on COSCO and related plans is
available by calling toll-free: 1-888-622-2676. The report, which includes
a three-hour audiotape interview with Farah on the subject, is available
for $15 plus shipping and handling.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.