-Caveat Lector-

Insight Magazine
May 1999 Timothy W. Maier

The Chinese Ocean Shipping Co.'s bid to operate from the Long Beach
Naval Station foundered amid controversy, but the
City of Angels now is eager to make a similar deal.

They're back. The China Ocean Shipping Co., or COSCO, the merchant
marine for the People's Liberation Army, or PLA,
has returned with a vengeance. It didn't set well with COSCO when it
lost out on the former U.S. Navy base in Long Beach,
Calif., last year because an alerted Congress tucked legislation into an
appropriations bill prohibiting such a takeover.

. . . . But Beijing now may have an opportunity to slip through the back
door while Congress is focused on the Kosovo crisis.
COSCO's checkered past includes smuggling heroin and AK-47 assault
rifles into the United States and delivering arms
worldwide for the PLA, but it has not given up hope of securing a U.S.
mainland facility for its shipping and/or espionage
operations. Insight has learned that COSCO could end up with its port,
anyway, once another company takes over the old
Long Beach Naval Station and port facility.

. . . . If that fails, COSCO has set its sights on a base in Los
Angeles, which is only too eager to do business with the
comrades. Supporters of COSCO -- such as "honorary adviser" and former
secretary of state Al Haig and a host of Long
Beach and Los Angeles officials -- claim it is no threat, noting it has
been operating in the port for 15 years, sharing facilities as
it has done in New York and Miami.

. . . . But COSCO doesn't have its own port, with its own armed security
and potential base for espionage, which is a major
difference to concerned U.S. intelligence experts who long have warned
that allowing COSCO to operate its own port on U.S.
soil could create a national-security nightmare.

. . . . Sen. James M. Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican, has described the
PLA's shipping arm this way: "COSCO is not a
benign private commercial enterprise. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of
China's People's Liberation Army. It serves as the
merchant marine of the Chinese military, and there is every reason to
believe it will do their bidding in terms of smuggling,
intelligence-gathering and weapons shipments. Considering China's
long-term ambitions for superpower status in the next
century, it would be foolish for America to surrender control of a
strategically located West Coast port to an arm of the
Chinese military."

. . . . Just how foolish? Here's a snapshot of COSCO's history of
activity in U.S. ports. In 1992 the U.S. Federal Maritime
Commission fined COSCO $400,000 for paying kickbacks. In 1993 a COSCO
ship was caught transporting 87 pounds of
heroin. In 1996, a Justice Department sting operation exposed an attempt
to sell 2,000 AK-47s to California street gangs, with
the promise of delivering missiles to knock a 747 airliner out of the
sky.

. . . . Concern about this pattern of behavior last year prompted Inhofe
and California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter to use
an appropriations bill to prohibit COSCO from seizing the Long Beach
Naval Port. But this did nothing to prevent COSCO
from taking over a civilian port or even negotiating a port deal with
Los Angeles. Speculators are only too glad to work out a
land swap. Informed of COSCO's latest plan, Hunter tells Insight, "I'm
going to write a letter to the secretary of the Navy and
tell him such a land-swap deal using the Navy base as trade bait for an
alternative location for COSCO is an attempt to
circumvent Congress' intent."

. . . . Hunter says he also plans to introduce legislation calling for a
"comprehensive ban on shipping companies guilty of illicit
arms transfers, as COSCO is, from having access to American ports." He
adds: "It's sad to see commercial greed has
outbalanced legitimate security interests."

. . . . As of now, COSCO is subleasing port facilities in the Long Beach
area and in several other parts of the country. But it
wants its own secure port operation. Surprised that Beijing is planning
to go ahead, Hunter and Inhofe will have to move fast to
stop the Chinese military's merchant shipper from securing a permanent
U.S. base. Inhofe's spokesman, Gary Hoitsma, says
issues associated with the war in Kosovo have been taking up most of
their time, but they will take a hard look at COSCO to
see what sort of legislation would have to be passed to prevent it from
landing a port in a heavy high-tech and defense area.

. . . . President Clinton has no plans to thwart this Communist China
priority. In fact, the Clinton administration has done just the
opposite. At the very time the Justice Department launched its biggest
espionage case since the Rosenbergs, concerning
allegations that nuclear secrets were stolen by Beijing from the Los
Alamos National Laboratory, Clinton was paving the way
for COSCO to take over the port at Long Beach. Even as it denied
payments had been made by the government of China to
the Clinton/Gore campaign fund and other Democratic Party causes, the
White House pressured preservation officials in the
Navy, State Department and local government to abandon efforts to
preserve the historic buildings at the naval station.

. . . . In 1997, the New York Times raised questions concerning why a
"Clinton-administration official made what several
people involved describe as highly unusual telephone calls to push for
construction of a container terminal that would be leased
to a shipping company owned by the Chinese government."

. . . . But why would Clinton have a personal interest in COSCO? That
was never fully understood -- until now. Enter Johnny
Chung, friend of the president. Chung was sentenced to five years
probation after pleading guilty to charges relating to illegal
campaign monies received from the PLA. He now is cooperating with the
Justice probe dealing with Chinagate. Chung's claim
that Beijing dumped $366,000 into the Democratic fund-raising activities
is explosive, and the timing of the donations certainly
is suspicious.

. . . . In 1995, while the National Security Council staff was starting
to worry about Chung portraying himself as being
sanctioned by Clinton to negotiate the release of human-rights activist
Harry Wu from a Chinese gulag, Chung set up meetings
with then-Democratic National Committee, or DNC, chairman Don Fowler.
They met March 9, 1995, at about the same time
Chung was providing Hillary Clinton's top aide, Margaret Williams, with
a $50,000 political donation.

. . . . After the DNC meeting, Fowler arranged for Chung and his COSCO
friends to attend a Clinton radio address. Chung
and six Chinese "business executives" listened to the radio address and,
shortly afterward, Chung dropped $50,000 to the
DNC.

. . . . During the next two years, Chung incorporated seven companies
with investors from China. Federal Election Commission
records show several of his largest political donations were made as he
created shell corporations. . . . . As the money rolled in,
the White House aggressively began to pursue COSCO's project, finding
itself in the "unusual" role of making telephone calls to
Long Beach officials. Chung began dropping money to the DNC in 1994, the
very year the Clinton administration closed the
base. By March 1995 Chung is dropping big bucks --$50,000 a pop -- and
the Marines suddenly found themselves evicted
from Long Beach Naval Station. Soon the White House was pressuring Long
Beach to cut a deal with COSCO, with Dorothy
Robyn, a member of the Economic Council, calling local preservation
officials to discourage efforts to save buildings at the base
and allow them to be razed quickly. At the same time federal
institutions interested in using the base, such as the Marines and
the Federal Maritime Commission, were turned away because Clinton wanted
to give it to Long Beach with the understanding
it would be handed to the Chinese.

. . . . "It's very clear that the money that Chung gave from the Chinese
had influence in corrupting the entire base-closure
process," says Richard Fine, a citizens' advocate who sued Long Beach to
force creation of a commercial museum, arguing it
doesn't make economic sense to turn the Navy port into a container yard.
"The White House gets real active once the money
comes in. The only thing missing in this story is the White House quote:
'Johnny Chung is here with $366,000 and we'd like
your help with COSCO.' The timing chronology is too perfect. Chung gives
money and the White House comes calling. That
tells you the U.S. government is the cheapest government to buy."

. . . . Fine lost his case when the court ruled he had no standing to
sue, but he appealed. He argued that turning the naval station
into a port would result in $569.7 million of waste, create fewer jobs
than would the museum, destroy the local ecology and
demolish the historical buildings built by famous black architect Paul
Williams. Fine claimed it would take some 75 years for the
port to recoup its investment loss on the proposed deal and 52 years to
pay back the principal on the money that would be
borrowed to build new port facilities. . . . . If Fine wins his appeal,
it simply means COSCO will be more aggressively courted
by Los Angeles.

. . . . For now, the former naval station is gone and so are the
historical buildings, says Bill Hillburg, a reporter with the Long
Beach Telegram, who has followed the case. While some activists are
trying to get on the ballot to rebuild all those historical
buildings, it's unlikely that will happen -- just as it is unlikely that
COSCO will be stopped from operating a U.S. port. The
bottom line, Hillburg says, is that "COSCO will be in Long Beach or Los
Angeles."

. . . . Unless Congress stops it, the PLA will hit the beach on U.S.
soil with a facility so large and protected that it will be
impossible for U.S. Customs to monitor the contents of the huge cargo
containers moving in and out from China or the possible
clandestine activities that such a base would afford the People's
Liberation Army. U.S.


-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
->  Posted by: Bob Bartch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to