China has significantly expanded its legal framework to target those expected to or affiliated with threatening national security, putting pressure on the relationship between foreigners in China and Chinese working with foreign entities across all fields. Adding pressure to the already fragile relations, Chinese citizens are called upon to be vigilant against espionage and national security risks as part of a broader whole-of-society approach.
The amendment is one of the latest attempts by Chinese lawmakers to control the flow of information among growing national security concerns. Recently, authorities closed its most extensive academic database, the privately owned China National Knowledge Infrastructure for several non-Chinese institutes, also the country’s financial database restricted foreign access.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who recently returned from a visit to Beijing, said in an interview with CBS’ “Face the Nation” that she raised concerns with her hosts. “I certainly expressed concern about this action and contrasted it with the actions that we’ve taken. Our own actions are narrowly targeted to address national security concerns, and it’s not clear that the actions that the Chinese took are similarly narrowly targeted at their national security concerns.”
What has gotten people worried is the ambiguous and broadened definition of espionage, which, as described in article four, now also includes obtaining or sharing state secrets, intelligence, and other document, data, materials, or items related to national security, and seeking to align with an espionage organization.
“The revisions are broad, but so was the law before the revisions,” Jeremy Daum, senior fellow of the Yale Law School Paul Tsai China Center and founder of China Law Translate, told Fox News Digital. “Someone has decided that national security concerns can only be addressed by granting broad discretion, which may be true, but the vague language undermines the stability and certainty one seeks from a legal system.”
Daum argued that the changes are less consequential than some imagine. “The law has always given authorities incredibly vast authority and discretion to address perceived threats to national security. The revisions could have added restraints to law enforcement but have instead only continued them, making clear this is the intent. A lack of legal basis has not restrained authorities; I don’t think the revisions will make too many changes.”
TO DETER CHINA, THE US SHOULD BUILD RINGS OF FIRE
Other China experts are not so sure. “We should expect vigorous enforcement of the law after the current furor dies down,” Gatestone Institute Senior Fellow Gordon Chang told Fox News Digital.
Chang warned the Chinese landscape is becoming far more hostile. “China is not safe for any American. Xi Jinping is encouraging xenophobia, and foreigners could soon become targets, especially Americans. In any event, the Chinese party-state has been taking foreigners as hostages. This means anyone can be detained and held indefinitely.”
The fact that Chinese authorities already had the power to target those that were perceived a threat to national security became apparent earlier this year when China’s state security authorities raided the offices of U.S. firms Capvision, Bain & Company, and Mintz, questioning local employees, searching computers and confiscating property.
In the case of Bain & Company, five Chinese employees were detained. In the nearly 10-minute segment on the raids aired on state television CCTV, the foreign companies were accused of leaking secrets to bodies overseas. Some of the Chinese staff employed at these firms have been accused of (assisting in) setting up interviews with Chinese people knowing that they might have leaked information concerning China’s national security to foreigners.
AMERICAN COMPANIES KEEP DISTANCE FROM CHINA AI CONFERENCE AMID ACCESSIBILITY CONCERNS
Even though authorities arguably already had the power to take measures, the law and raids sent shock waves through the international community in China and Chinese people working with foreign entities, with many fearing the over-implementation of the precautionary measures.
This seems to be one of the objectives of the law: to increase pressure on people to be vigilant. Where the previous law prohibited “participation in an espionage organization or being tasked as an espionage organization’s agent,” it now included “seeking to align with an espionage organization and its agent.”
Any interaction with foreigners, from the private sector to academia and NGOs, could put Chinese citizens at risk, creating the effect that fewer Chinese citizens will want to associate with foreign individuals or organizations for fear of being viewed as a security risk.
Chang noted that this increased pressure may be because “Xi Jinping is trying to prevent pessimism from accelerating the departure of foreign companies. His policies are returning the economy and financial system to state control and have aggravated—not alleviated—fundamental problems.”
The notion that fear is omnipresent and that Chinese citizens should be vigilant is part of a more extensive state-orchestrated initiative, described in the whole-of-society approach, a mass mobilization and education campaign that makes everybody responsible for safeguarding national security.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“I think over the last several years, even before COVID, many Chinese have been more reluctant to publicly affiliate with foreign organizations – such as by having collaborative projects in many fields or giving quotes to overseas media. There are increased institutional burdens and risks of drawing unwanted attention that might make people think twice,” Daum said.
In addition to the new law, China National’s Peoples Congress passed its first Foreign Relations Law that authorizes Beijing to implement countermeasures against countries that sanction China. Although a lot remains unclear, what is clear is that with this new law, Beijing has added another legal tool to exert influence in extraterritorial conflicts.
Fox News’ Peter Petroff contributed to this article.
