As I revealed in the cover story this week, the House of Representatives select committee on the Chinese Communist Party has written to the acting British ambassador in Washington, James Roscoe, expressing dismay at the decision to drop the Cash-Berry spying case.
I’ve now got hold of the letter from the committee chairman John Moolenaar. It is punchy stuff. ‘By dropping these charges, and allowing these individuals to walk free without trial, the UK risks establishing a dangerous precedent that foreign adversaries can target democratically-elected legislators with impunity,’ he warns.
Moolenaar, a Michigan congressman, writes that the ‘initial April 2024 charges’ highlighted how ‘CCP intelligence operations seek to undermine democratic nations’ and how ‘the CCP is not a benign competitor, but a foreign adversary seeking to undermine the UK and Five Eyes nations in particular in pursuit of its malign objectives’.
The chairman points out that, ‘as a target of CCP-backed espionage activity myself, I am deeply troubled over the UK government’s seeming unwillingness to adequately support justice for the [MPs] involved. Allowing this PRC aggression to go unchecked would only incentivise the CCP to further interfere in western democracies.’
Furthermore, he warns that Labour’s ‘shift in China policy’ is ‘of deep concern to many of the UK’s core allies’, at a time when Britain has resumed a high-level UK-China Joint Economic and Trade Commission and ministers seem likely to give the green light to approve China’s proposed super-embassy in London.
‘I hope the UK government will not allow this case to falter and will instead take the steps necessary to ensure that both justice and due process are served,’ Moolenaar writes.
The letter concludes by demanding whether US politicians were compromised by Cash and Berry (who deny any wrongdoing). ‘Given the Select Committee’s close cooperation with UK counterparts, including those in the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), was any information pertaining to the House Select Committee on China, including our work and/or current or previous Members, included in the numerous reports allegedly sold to the Chinese government?’
Moolenaar also demands to know whether British officials have come under ‘coercive pressure’ or ‘retaliatory action’ by China over the espionage case or the super-embassy – and asks if China’s activities are not ‘deemed as “enemy” activity’ by the government, then ‘what is the UK government’s position on the PRC?’
A good question. As predicted, this mess now has an international dimension.
Comments