Affichage des articles dont le libellé est Chinese spy. Afficher tous les articles
Affichage des articles dont le libellé est Chinese spy. Afficher tous les articles

mardi 5 novembre 2019

Chinese spy barred from entering Schengen Area

  • Song Xinning, former head of Confucius Institute at Vrije Universiteit Brussel, worked as a recruiter for Chinese intelligence
  • The Chinese spy has been banned from 26-nation free-travel zone for eight years
By Kinling Lo, Simone McCarthy, Stuart Lau, Keegan Elmer



A Chinese professor who headed a Confucius Institute in Brussels has been barred from entering the Schengen Area for eight years after being accused of espionage, amid growing scrutiny of the Beijing-run cultural offices that have been established at universities around the world.
Song Xinning, former director of the institute at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), had been accused by authorities in Belgium of supporting Chinese intelligence activities in the city.
The Schengen Area comprises 26 European countries that have abolished passport and other types of controls at their mutual borders.
The Belgian newspaper De Morgen reported on Tuesday that VUB had ignored a warning from the State Security Service about the institute’s activities. 
Song had acted as a recruiter for Chinese intelligence services and hired informants from the Chinese student and business communities in Belgium.
The Belgian government did not immediately reply to requests for comment.

Famous Chinese spy Song Xinning.

Song is also a professor at Renmin University in Beijing.
He said he suspected the decision to impose the ban had been influenced by the United States FBI.

The Chinese spy speaks at the Confucius Institute of the University of Helsinki in 2016. 

Song said he was told by the Belgian embassy in Beijing in September about the ban on him entering the Schengen Area. 
He is now appealing the ruling with the help of a Belgian lawyer, who Song said was in possession of a report from Belgium’s security services that accused the academic of having ties to Chinese security officials, luring Belgian scholars to spy for China and making plans to retire to Belgium.
Song said he did know Geng Huichang, a former Chinese state security minister, as they had both taught at Renmin University, and admitted to mingling with European scholars at academic conferences in China.
Confucius Institutes, which are overseen by China’s education ministry, have been set up in more than 480 higher education institutions around the world. 
Over the past decade they have come under increased scrutiny from Western governments over their espionage activities.
Several institutes in the US and Australia have been forced to close due to allegations they had undue influence on campus, while several Chinese academics and researchers have been investigated, dismissed and arrested in the US on accusations of stealing intellectual property or failing to disclose funding ties with Chinese universities.
In Europe, the Confucius Institutes at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, Stockholm University in Sweden and University Lyon in France have all been closed. 
And the British Conservative Party’s human rights commission earlier this year launched a campaign for schools to stop partnering with the institutes pending the results of a review.
Ingrid d’Hooghe, a researcher at the Leiden Asia Centre and Clingendael Institute who specialises in higher educational ties between Europe and China, said scrutiny of Chinese academics was increasing in Europe.
Song’s case was an example of how authorities in Europe have been watching China more closely, she said. 
The Chinese spy, who has now returned to his job at Renmin University, spent three years living in Brussels with his wife. 
He also worked from 2007-10 at UNU-CRIS, a United Nations research institute in Bruges.
Song is expected to be replaced at VUB by Zhou Jun from Sichuan University, who is currently awaiting his visa.
Professor Jonathan Holslag, who works at VUB and is also a special adviser to the European Commission, said it was “not a surprise” that Song had been banned from entering Belgium.
“Song is a polite guy but the institute is clearly an instrument of propaganda … and shouldn’t be part of the academic community,” he said.
The worrying part was its ability to “identify young and bright students with a potential to join the EU at a later stage” and to influence young European students with an uncritical, positive view about China, he said.

jeudi 4 juillet 2019

Sino-American Threat

SINO-AMERICAN STOLE MISSILE SECRETS FOR CHINA, FACES 219 YEARS IN PRISON
Shih Yi-chi, a Sino-American electrical engineer and former adjunct professor at UCLA, illegally sent semiconductors with military applications to China.
By Mark Magnier

Sino-American Shih Yi-chi has been found guilty of illegally exporting semiconductors to China.

A Sino-American electrical engineer faces up to 219 years in prison after a federal jury found him guilty of illegally shipping semiconductors with military applications to China.
After a six-week trial in southern California, Shih Yi-chi, a 64-year-old part-time Los Angeles resident and former president of a Chinese semiconductor company, was found guilty of making false statements to a government agency, mail and wire fraud and filing false tax returns.
Shih, who had also been an adjunct professor of engineering at the University of California, Los Angeles, was convicted of conspiring to gain unauthorised access to a protected computer and violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a federal law barring unauthorised exports, the Justice Department said on Tuesday.
Shih, a naturalised US citizen, was convicted of 18 counts on June 26 after being indicted by a federal grand jury.
Shih faces the forfeiture of hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of assets. 
US District Judge John Kronstadt has not scheduled hearings to consider the forfeiture issue or pronounce sentence.
“The department’s China Initiative is focused on preventing and prosecuting thefts of American technology and intellectual property for the benefit of China,” Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers said in a prepared statement. 
Demers credited the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) for its help in investigating and prosecuting the case.
The Canadians got involved because US authorities asked the RCMP to search the lab of Shih Ishiang, Shih’s brother and an associate engineering professor at McGill University in Montreal. 
The two have collaborated on numerous scientific projects and there are no export restrictions between the US and Canada.
According to evidence presented at the trial, Shih and co-defendant Kiet Ahn Mai, 65, of Pasadena, California, gained unauthorised access to a protected computer owned by a US maker of wideband, high-power semiconductor chips known as monolithic microwave integrated circuits, or MMICs. 
The identity of the American company was not given.
Shih gained access to the US computer’s systems through its web portal after Mai posed as a customer trying to buy custom-designed MMICs that would be used solely in the United States.
Shih and Mai concealed Shih’s intention to send the semiconductors to China.
“This defendant schemed to export to China semiconductors with military and civilian uses, then he lied about it to federal authorities and failed to report income generated by the scheme on his tax returns,” said Nicola Hanna, a US attorney for the Central District of California.
The chips are used in missiles, missile guidance systems, fighter jets, electronic warfare, electronic warfare countermeasures and radar applications, and the company’s customers include the US Air Force, Navy and the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency.
The company that the Justice Department declined to identify was Cree Inc, a foundry in Durham, North Carolina, that makes prototypes. 
The chips were sent to Chengdu GaStone Technology Company (CGTC), a Chinese firm building an MMIC manufacturing facility in Chengdu, where Shih was president until 2014.
Chengdu GaStone was placed on the Commerce Department’s Entity List in 2014, according to court documents, “due to its involvement in activities contrary to the national security and foreign policy interest of the United States – specifically, that it had been involved in the illicit procurement of commodities and items for unauthorised military end use in China”.
Shih used a Hollywood Hills-based company he controlled known as Pullman Lane Productions LLC to funnel funds from China to buy MMICs from the unnamed American company. 

Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers announcing the creation of the China Initiative, intended to crack down on hacking and intellectual property theft, on November 1 in Washington. 

Pullman Lane received funding from a Chinese company that was placed on the Entity List the same day as CGTC “on the basis of its involvement in activities contrary to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States,” according to court documents.
Mai pleaded guilty in December 2018 to one count of smuggling and is scheduled to be sentenced on September 19. 
He faces up to 10 years in federal prison. 
His lawyer could not be reached for comment.
“The FBI is committed to protecting institutions from adversaries who seek to steal sensitive American technology under the guise of research,” said Paul Delacourt, assistant director of the FBI’s Los Angeles field office.
Delacourt said the FBI would “identify and hold accountable individuals who plunder our research or intellectual property at the expense of the American people and our national security.”
US Attorney Nick Hanna said Shih "schemed to export to China semiconductors with military and civilian uses, then he lied about it to federal authorities and failed to report income generated by the scheme on his tax returns."
"My office will enforce laws that protect our nation's intellectual property from being used to benefit foreign adversaries who may compromise our national security," Hanna added.
Over the past few years, the US has stepped up measures to protect American intellectual property against what it calls China's unfair trade tactics. 
The trend has been accelerated under the presidency of Donald Trump.

vendredi 12 octobre 2018

HOW THE US FORCED CHINA TO TEMPORARILY QUIT STEALING—USING A CHINESE SPY

For years, China has systematically looted American trade secrets. Here's the messy inside story of how DC got Beijing to clean up its act for a while.
By Garrett M. Graff
Chinese spy Su Bin

KEVIN AND JULIA Garratt had spent nearly all of their adult lives in China.
A devout Christian couple in their fifties with an entrepreneurial streak, they operated a café called Peter’s Coffee House, a popular destination in the city of Dandong, according to Trip­Advisor.
Dandong is a sprawling border town that sits just across the Yalu River from North Korea. 
For tourists and expats, the Garratts’ coffee shop—just a short walk from the Sino-­Korean Friendship Bridge—was a hub of Western conversation and comfort food. 
“After time in North Korea a decent cup of coffee was one of those things I was really looking forward to,” one Australian tourist wrote in early 2014. 
“Peter’s was a perfect place.”
The Garratts had come to China from Canada in the 1980s as English teachers. 
They lived in six different Chinese cities over the years, raising four children along the way, before settling in Dandong. 
From their perch near the border, they helped provide aid and food to North Korea, supporting an orphanage there and doing volunteer work around Dandong itself. 
The Garratts had a strong social network in the city, so it didn’t seem odd to either of them when they were invited out to dinner by Chinese acquaintances of a friend who wanted advice on how their daughter could apply to college in Canada.
The meal itself, on August 4, 2014, was formal but not unusual. 
After dinner, the Garratts got into an elevator that took them from the restaurant down to a lobby. 
The doors opened onto a swarm of bright lights and people with video cameras. 
The Garratts initially thought they’d stumbled into a party of some kind, maybe a wedding. 
But then some men grabbed the couple, separated them, and hustled them toward waiting cars. Everything happened fast, and very little made sense. 
As the vehicles pulled away, neither Kevin nor Julia had any idea that it was the last they’d see of one another for three months.
It wasn’t until the two arrived at a police facility that they each realized they were in real trouble. 
And it wasn’t until much later still that the couple would understand why they had been taken into custody. 
After all, before their detainment, they’d never even heard of a Chinese expat living in Canada named Su Bin.

WHEN THE GARRATTS first arrived in China, in 1984, the country was still transitioning away from collective farms.
Shanghai had only just opened up to foreign investment; the future megacity Shenzhen still had just a few hundred thousand inhabitants.
Over the ensuing three decades, the couple would watch as China hurtled from eighth-largest economy in the world to second-largest, powered, famously, by mass migrations of people into new industrial cities and the erection of a vast manufacturing and export sector.
But especially in the later years of the Garratts’ career as expats, the country’s growth was also propelled by a more invisible force: a truly epic amount of cheating.
China has become one of the world’s most advanced economies overnight through the rampant, state-sponsored theft of intellectual property from other countries. 
This extended campaign of commercial espionage has raided every highly developed economy. (British inventor James Dyson has complained publicly about Chinese theft of designs for his eponymous high-end vacuums.)
But far and away its biggest targets have been the trade and military secrets of the United States. From US companies, Chinese hackers and spies have purloined everything from details of wind turbines and solar panels to computer chips and even DuPont’s patented formula for the color white. 
When American companies have sued Chinese firms for copyright infringement, Chinese hackers have turned around and broken into their law firms’ computer systems to steal details about the plaintiffs’ legal strategy.
Each theft has allowed Chinese companies to bypass untold years of precious time and R&D, effectively dropping them into the marathon of global competition at the 20th mile. 
China’s military has gotten a leg up too.
Coordinated campaigns by China’s Ministry of State Security and the People’s Liberation Army have helped steal the design details of countless pieces of American military hardware, from fighter jets to ground vehicles to robots. 
In 2012, National Security Agency director Keith Alexander called it the “greatest transfer of wealth in history,” a phrase he has regularly repeated since.
And yet, despite a great deal of restlessness in the ranks of law enforcement and intelligence agencies, the United States was, for years, all but paralyzed in its response to Chinese hacking.
China simply denied any hand in the thefts, professing to take great umbrage at the idea.
American diplomats were skittish about upsetting a sensitive bilateral relationship. 
And American companies, in turn, were often inclined to play dumb and look the other way: Even as they were being robbed silly, they didn’t want to jeopardize their access to China’s nearly 1.4 billion consumers.
John Carlin, who served as assistant attorney general for national security during the Obama administration, recalls one meeting with executives from a West Coast company whose intellectual property was being stolen by Chinese hackers.
The executives even projected that, in seven or eight years, the stolen IP would kill their business model; by that point, a Chinese competitor would be able to undercut them completely with a copycat product.
But the company’s general counsel still didn’t want the government to step in and take action.
“We are going to be coming back to you and complaining,” the general counsel said.
“But we’re not there yet.”
Finally, between 2011 and 2013, the US began to reach a breaking point.
Private cybersecurity firms released a string of damning investigative reports on China’s patterns of economic espionage; the US government started to talk more publicly about bringing charges against the country’s hackers.
But it was far from clear how any government or company might successfully turn back the tide of Chinese incursions.
Obama pressed the issue of cyberthefts in his first meeting with Xi Jinping in 2013, only to be met with more denials.
This is the story of how the US finally achieved some leverage over China to bring a stop to more than a decade of rampant cybertheft, how a Canadian couple became bargaining chips in China’s desperate countermove, and how the game ended happily—only to start up again in recent months with more rancor and new players.

ON MONDAY, MAY 19, 2014, nearly three months before the Garratts were whisked away into the Dandong night, the US Justice Department called a press conference at its headquarters in Washington, DC.
Attorney general Eric Holder took the podium to announce charges against five hackers for breaking into the systems of several US companies, including U.S. Steel, Westinghouse, and a renewable-energy outfit called SolarWorld.
The FBI had mocked up a bunch of “Wanted” posters, which made it strikingly clear that the hackers all shared an employer: the Chinese army.
Two of the men were even pictured in their crisp dress uniforms.
The press conference marked the first time the US had ever indicted individual foreign agents for cyber intrusions.
It made front-page headlines across the country, instantly bumping the issue of Chinese economic espionage off the back burner of public consciousness.
But the news came with an inevitable caveat: “The move by the Justice Department was almost certainly symbolic,” The New York Times wrote, “since there is virtually no chance that the Chinese would turn over the five People’s Liberation Army members named in the indictment.”
A few days later, Carlin and a Justice Department prosecutor named Adam Hickey were flying back from a meeting with the victims of the PLA hackers.
At the Pittsburgh airport, Carlin lamented the obvious: None of the hackers would face a US courtroom anytime soon.
Everyone at the Justice Department knew it would take more than a single “name and shame” campaign to change the calculus of Chinese behavior; the US needed to apply pressure on multiple fronts, perhaps building up to a threat of sanctions.
Now that they’d made their opening gambit, prosecutors needed a next move, preferably one that would actually put someone in handcuffs.
Sitting in the terminal Carlin said, “The next case, we need a body.”
Hickey smiled. “Actually, I’ve got a case I want to talk to you about,” he said.

Kevin and Julia Garratt

THE FBI REMAINS cagey today about where and how the conspirators first appeared on the agency’s radar.
The bureau will say only that it opened its investigation after seeing emails between them.
Reading between the lines, the case likely began with intercepts from the NSA, passed through the intelligence community from Fort Meade to the FBI.
Eventually, in late summer 2012, a trove of emails between three Chinese agents landed on the desk of supervisory special agent Justin Vallese, who runs a squad of cyber agents in the FBI’s Los Angeles field office.
“From day one, we knew it was bad,” Vallese says.
“The contents of those emails are pretty explosive.”
One message, which bore an attachment entitled “C-17 Project Reconnaissance Summary,” appeared to suggest a broad outline of the project therein: a successful, long-term effort by hackers to steal the design secrets of one of America’s most advanced cargo aircraft, the C-17 military transport.
A $202 million-per-unit craft developed by Boeing, the C-17 had been one of the most expensive military planes ever developed by the US Air Force, costing more than $31 billion to create in the 1980s and ’90s.
Since its completion, the C-17 had become a key means of delivering troops, vehicles, and supplies to the front lines of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as delivering humanitarian supplies the world over.
It’s also used to transport the president’s armored limousines around the globe.
American intelligence agencies knew that, for years, the Chinese had been struggling to build their own large cargo plane, a necessary tool for any modern military that wants to project its power over a large area.
Now Beijing was evidently making some headway—by raiding Boeing’s trade secrets to build what was essentially a Chinese version of the C-17.
Right away, the FBI alerted Boeing to the intrusions. (Boeing declined to comment on this story.) After that, agents in Los Angeles began wading through encrypted attachments and translating each message from Chinese.
The emails would ultimately give them an incredibly detailed picture of the inner workings of a Chinese espionage operation.
Not only that, they realized, it might also give them a chance to actually arrest someone.
Two of the conspirators—the ones who did the actual hacking—were out of reach in China.
But the third was a successful businessman named Su Bin, and he was based right here in North America, just a three-hour flight from the agents’ offices in LA.
Su, who in the West went by Stephen, owned an 80-employee Chinese aviation-technology firm called Lode-Tech and, according to The Globe and Mail, had a comfortable $2 million house in Richmond, British Columbia.
He had two kids, both born in Canada; his wife had been a gynecologist, and his oldest son went to college in Switzerland.
In 2012, he was interviewed by The Wall Street Journal as part of a story about wealthy Chinese decamping for the West.
He said he was the son of an army officer and that he had made millions as an aerospace entrepreneur.
He told the Journal that he found the rules of the West less restrictive.
“Regulations [in China] mean that businessmen have to do a lot of illegal things,” Su said at the time.
From what the agents could reconstruct, the hacking conspiracy had begun as early as 2009. 
Su’s contributions as a spy, the agents realized, were intimately tied to his work as an entrepreneur. 
“Su Bin was what we’d call in the traditional espionage world a spotter—someone who would tee up targets for a nation-state,” explains Luke Dembosky, one of the prosecutors overseeing the case.
Through Lode-Tech, Su had a deep network of industry contacts, and his team’s espionage began with mining his knowledge of the field: He would direct his hacker colleagues toward particularly interesting engineers and corporate personnel in the aerospace industry. 
Then the hackers likely used basic techniques—standard phishing emails—to attempt to penetrate company executives’ email accounts and, from there, access restricted corporate networks.
According to court records, once the hackers got inside a network—through “painstaking labor and slow groping,” as they put it—they went back to Su Bin. 
They would send him lists of the files they’d uncovered; he would then highlight in yellow the most valuable documents that they should exfiltrate, guiding them through what they were uncovering. (Investigators came to enjoy the secret irony in Lode-Tech’s tagline, printed in big letters on its website: “We will track the world’s aviation advanced technology.”)
It was tedious work.
Some of the file directories ran to thousands of pages; in one dump of nearly 1,500 pages, Su meticulously highlighted 142 files that seemed most likely to be useful to his Chinese Army contacts—files with names like C17Hangar Requirements 112399.pdf and Critical Safety Item(CSI) Report_Sep2006.pdf.
In another 6,000-page ­directory, he picked out the 22 most promising file folders—hitting on one that FBI agents later calculated contained more than 2,000 files related to the C-17.

ALL TOLD, ACCORDING to their own accounting, Su and his two Chinese partners stole 630,000 files related to the C-17, totaling about 65 GB of data. 
“We safely, smoothly accomplished the entrusted mission in one year, making important contributions to our national defense scientific research development and receiving unanimous favorable comments,” the team wrote.
The C-17 wasn’t the hacker’s only target; they filched information about other aircraft as well. Investigators believe they pillaged 220 MB of data related to the F-22 Raptor, as well as files related to the F-35, including its flight test protocols, which Su carefully translated into Chinese. 
The thefts would be critical to helping the Chinese understand—and copy—the world’s most advanced multirole fighter plane, which had cost $11 billion to develop.
The more they dug, the more the agents realized what a uniquely valuable conspirator Su Bin was, perhaps even sui generis as a spy. 
He was conversant with the aerospace community, and he spoke English, Chinese, and the technical jargon of aviation in both languages, able to translate the complex world of industrial design schematics, plans, and handbooks.
“I don’t know how many Su Bins there are,” Vallese says.
Su’s hacking effort provided a staggering return on investment for the Chinese government: According to court documents, the operation cost China around $1 million—an absolute pittance compared to the decades of engineering knowledge, military technology, and construction details that Su and his team were able to steal from Boeing and the US Air Force. 
The team’s overseers ran such a tight ship that Su griped in an email about the difficulty of getting ­reimbursed for expenses.
According to court documents, the hackers covered their tracks by pinballing stolen files through a sophisticated international server network, with machines planted in the US, Singapore, and Korea. 
They carefully disguised documents as they stole them, so as to circumvent the internal intrusion alarms at Boeing.
Then they were careful to move their digital contraband through at least three foreign countries, ensuring that at least one had unfriendly relations with the United States, to throw pursuers off China’s scent.
Ultimately, the files would be deposited on machines near Hong Kong and Macau.
There, officials would pick them up and transfer them back to China—in person, further covering all tracks between the United States and China.
But the evidence the FBI had collected left no doubt that the ultimate customer was the Chinese military—and that Su Bin’s partners were members of the military themselves. 
While the two hackers in China have not been charged publicly, the US government knows who they are; according to court records, investigators intercepted an email that one of the hackers had received with a copy of his own ID card, which included his photo, name, and date of birth.
Similarly, emails the FBI traced to the other hacker, one with the subject line “boss,” included photos of both men in Chinese military uniforms.
By late spring 2014, around the time Carlin was sitting in the Pittsburgh airport with Hickey, the FBI had assembled everything it needed to make a case against Su Bin; as it happened, the timing coincided with the Justice Department’s newfound desire to charge someone with Chinese espionage. “We were fortunate to get Su into a place where there was an interest and an appetite for an arrest,” Vallese says.
“We had the right subject and had the ability to put hands on him.”
To actually arrest Su, the FBI needed the cooperation of Canadian authorities.
Once again, timing may have worked in the case’s favor.
Around the same time when the FBI was asking for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police’s help in detaining Su Bin, according to The Globe and Mail, Canada was responding to a massive attack by state-sponsored Chinese hackers who had penetrated the network of its National Research Council, which leads the country’s research and development efforts.
Given the chance to help break up a Chinese hacking ring, authorities north of the border were perhaps unusually motivated to help.
In any case, they said yes.
By June 2014, the investigative teams knew that Su Bin was planning to leave the country for China—though no one knew for how long.
They decided that now was the time to act.
A few days before his scheduled trip, Canadian authorities pulled Su Bin over and arrested him.
Right away, China knew that one of its most valuable intelligence assets had been caught.
While the “Wanted” posters and Eric Holder’s indictment of five military hackers had certainly made an impression on Beijing, Carlin says that the follow-up case against Su Bin—which actually brought a spy into custody—helped shape the Chinese response even further.
“The Su Bin case, all but unnoticed by the public, had a large impact on Chinese thinking,” says Carlin, who has coauthored with me a new history of the government’s approach to cyberthreats.
“In the space of barely a month, the United States had taken overt steps against two major Chinese economic espionage operations.”
Vallese says the FBI expected it would be an ordeal to get Su Bin back from Canada.
International extraditions, even from close partners and allies, are always complicated.
“We weren’t under any impression this was going to be easy,” Vallese says.
As Su Bin prepared for his initial court appearances, China quickly decided to send a not-so-subtle message to Canada.
To make America’s northern neighbor think twice about allowing the extradition of Su Bin to the United States, it appears the Ministry of State Security had Kevin and Julia Garratt invited to dinner in Dandong.

AFTER THEIR DETENTION, the Garratts found themselves caught in China’s Kafkaesque justice system, interrogated regularly but with nothing to confess.
Their family retained James Zimmerman, an American lawyer with the firm Perkins Coie, who had spent nearly two decades working in Beijing.
He began to piece together the case against the couple.
The Chinese government, he realized, was leveling charges against Kevin Garratt that were almost a mirror image of the US charges against Su Bin.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry told The New York Times that the Garratts were being investigated for stealing intelligence “about Chinese military targets and important national defense research projects, and engaging in activities threatening to Chinese national security.”
As if that weren’t menacing enough, on February 19, 2016, China amended the indictment against Kevin to include more serious charges.
The “evidence” against Kevin, though, appeared mainly to be that he had a history of taking fairly unremarkable photographs in public places—going to Tiananmen Square, say, and filming the soldiers marching around and raising the flag, Zimmerman says.
“Getting caught up with China’s politically driven criminal justice system can be a bleak, depressing experience,” Zimmerman says.
“Due process in China is a different animal than in most Western judicial systems. While the investigators are not allowed to torture the suspects, mistreatment is a matter of definition.”
He spent months shuttling back and forth between meetings with the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Commerce, and Canadian embassy officials.
“My goal was to plead to them that this case was not good for China given the dearth of evidence and the potential for a public backlash.”
Later, Kevin Garratt would precisely recall the outline of the cell he shared with as many as 14 prisoners in China: “About 12 paces by five and a half.”
But even if the diplomatic aftermath of Su Bin’s hacking operation was spinning wildly out of control, the operation’s military objective was just coming to fruition.
In November 2014, while Su Bin and the Garratts sat behind bars, the Chinese rolled out their own knockoff military cargo plane at an annual air show in Zhuhai.
At the show, the Xi'an Y-20—codenamed Kunpeng after a mythical ancient Chinese bird capable of flying long distances—was parked across the tarmac from an American C-17.
Aviation enthusiasts noted how similar the two planes looked, right down to the design of their tail fins.
The Chinese plane had met its American doppelgänger, just feet apart.

TO ANYONE MONITORING the traffic of Chinese cyberthefts, the one-two punch of the PLA indictments and the Su Bin arrest seemed to make a real difference.
“Since mid-2014, we have seen a notable decline in China-based groups’ overall intrusion activity against entities in the US and 25 other countries,” the cybersecurity firm FireEye concluded in one report.
Many inside the government had worried that the Justice Department’s newly aggressive stance would backfire.
But as it turned out, it was the Garratts who suffered the negative repercussions; otherwise the indictments and Su Bin’s arrest seemed to have compelled China to put the brakes on its hacking.
Because the sky hadn’t fallen, the Obama administration felt emboldened to keep pushing harder. China, they figured, saw its economic espionage—like all espionage—via the lens of cost-benefit analysis.
With the indictment and arrest of Su Bin, the Americans felt that they had begun to change one side of that equation—and now it was time for them to up the ante.
Xi Jinping was scheduled to make his first state visit to Washington at the end of September 2015.
In the weeks leading up to the visit, the Obama administration set out to bring the tensions between the two nations to a head.
In August 2015, The Washington Post ran an article warning that the US government was getting ready to issue sanctions targeting China for its hacking.
In September, Obama addressed a group of business leaders: “We are preparing a number of measures that will indicate to the Chinese that this is not just a matter of us being mildly upset but is something that will put significant strains on the bilateral relationship if not resolved. We are prepared to take some countervailing actions in order to get their attention.”
Other officials, including national security adviser Susan Rice, pressed the message behind closed doors: China’s behavior had to change.
The warnings, both public and private, got through.
Just days before Xi’s visit, Beijing dispatched a large, high-level delegation to Washington.
“The Chinese saw they had a big potential embarrassment brewing,” Justice Department deputy assistant attorney general Luke Dembosky recalls.
No one on the Chinese side wanted Xi’s first state visit to become a showdown over cybersecurity. “They had to let the air out of the balloon.”
The conversations, which included Department of Homeland Security secretary Jeh Johnson and White House cybersecurity coordinator Michael Daniel, began with a firm message from the Americans: Don’t even bother denying this is your typical behavior. Let’s move past that.
For days, the negotiations were tense and stilted.
But finally, on the night before the delegation was set to return home, the Chinese called the White House for a final set of talks.
“I was all set to go home, and I got a call at 6:30: ‘Can you be at the White House at 8?’ ” Dembosky recalls.
It turned out to be too late to arrange access to the White House, so the groups met at the Omni Shoreham Hotel instead, perched on the edge of Rock Creek Park.
Aides from the White House, the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and the State Department, among others, talked through the night with the much-larger Chinese delegation. All of them were aware that the Chinese had a deadline to make their 7:30 am flight home.
“It was one of the most constructive dialogs I’ve ever been part of. For a brief moment, the stars were aligned. They were highly motivated to do the right thing,” Dembosky says.
By morning, they’d worked out an agreement for the two presidents to sign later in Washington.
A few days later, on September 25, 2015, Barack Obama and Xi Jinping met privately.
As Obama recapped the meeting to the press, he said he had “raised once again our very serious concerns about growing cyberthreats to American companies and American citizens. I indicated that it has to stop. The United States government does not engage in cyber-economic espionage for commercial gain.”
Then the president made an announcement in the Rose Garden that many US leaders had never thought they’d hear: “Today, I can announce that our two countries have reached a common understanding on the way forward. We’ve agreed that neither the US or the Chinese government will conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information for commercial advantage. In addition, we’ll work together, and with other nations, to promote international rules of the road for appropriate conduct in cyberspace.”

THE WORLD’S TWO largest superpowers had broken new ground, but the travails of the Garratts and Su Bin dragged on.
Julia had been released on bail but was ordered to stay in China, and in January 2016 the Chinese government announced it would try Kevin for espionage.
“Chinese authorities also found evidence that implicates Garratt in accepting tasks from Canadian espionage agencies to gather intelligence in China,” the Xinhua news agency reported.
Behind the scenes, though, the Chinese acknowledged that the charges were absurd—and that there was an easy path for the Garratts’ release, says the couple’s lawyer.
As Zimmerman told The New York Times, “The Chinese made it clear that the Garratt case was designed to pressure Canada to block Su Bin’s extradition to the US.”

STOLEN SECRETS
The C-17 isn't the only product to have its design lifted by hackers. 
Over the past decade, Chinese economic espionage has affected thousands of businesses worldwide, from vacuum-makers to paint manufacturers. —Andrea Powell

  • Dyson: Since 2011, British inventor James Dyson has been accusing China of hacking the trade secrets of his eponymous fan and vacuum empire.
  • DuPont: In 2014, a man in California was convicted of stealing DuPont’s formula for titanium dioxide—a white pigment used in everything from paint to Oreos—on behalf of the Chinese government.
  • American Superconductor: This maker of wind turbines lost more than a billion dollars after its Chinese partner company, Sinovel, used a spy to steal source codes for the machines.
  • Westinghouse: In 2010, while Westinghouse was building a few power plants in China, a hacker stole specs for how the company designs and routes the pipes running through its generation facilities.
  • Military Projects: In addition to helping Chinese hackers steal plans for the C-17, Chinese-Canadian businessman Su Bin was also charged with pilfering specs for the F-22 stealth fighter plane.


But in February 2016, Su Bin himself foiled China’s bargaining position.
He waived extradition, deciding he would go freely to the US to face charges.
His lawyer later told a US court that Su Bin knew that his extradition proceedings might last longer than the time he’d serve in a US prison.
FBI agents flew to Vancouver and prepared to take custody of Su; Vallese and several colleagues waited next to the FBI’s Gulfstream jet as a Canadian police motorcade pulled onto the tarmac.
“Su was in the backseat of the SUV, sandwiched between two Canadian law enforcement officers,” Vallese recalls.
“All of us got chills.”
On the flight back to California, Vallese says the talk among the agents and Su turned to aviation.
He complimented the FBI’s plane.
Making chitchat, one of the agents asked him if he had a favorite jet.
“Not the C-17,” Su deadpanned.
On March 22, 2016, Su Bin pleaded guilty.
His 35-page agreement was perhaps the most detailed firsthand explanation of China’s spying apparatus ever released in public.
“It was the first time we’d had that kind of success—the first time we’d had someone owning their part in an intrusion like this,” Vallese says.
Su Bin declined to speak publicly, though, in court: “I lost my words now,” he said at his sentencing, where a judge handed him 46 months in federal prison and ordered him to pay a $10,000 fine.
With time served, he was released in October 2017.
The case against the Garratts rapidly unraveled in the wake of Su Bin’s decision to waive extradition. Julia was able to leave China in May 2016, and Kevin was released that September, though he had to pay nearly $20,000 in fines and penalties—money that had been partly designated for a North Korean orphanage project and other aid work.
This spring, FBI director Christopher Wray stated in public what people in cybersecurity circles had been seeing for a while: China is back to its old tricks. 
It is once again infiltrating US computer systems and stealing information at a massive scale. 
“There’s no country that’s even close,” Wray told NBC News in March this year.
“We’re talking about big damages,” President Trump recently told Reuters.
“We’re talking about numbers that you haven’t even thought about.”
“There’s been a massive pickup in the last year and a half,” says Dmitri Alperovitch, cofounder of the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike.
For a variety of reasons, the 2015 truce between China and the United States didn’t hold—in a way, it’s because both countries have ceased to acknowledge it.
President Donald Trump’s trade war against China has largely been couched as a way to punish China for its years of rampant intellectual property theft. 
“After years of unsuccessful US-China dialogs, the United States is taking action to confront China,” wrote the US Trade Representative’s office.
Between 2005 and 2014, the main force behind China’s campaign of cybertheft was the People’s Liberation Army.
In turn, after the outing of the five PLA soldiers in 2014, that agency bore most of the embarrassment and blame for China’s weakened hand in negotiations with the US.
Since 2016, for a host of reasons, the army has had its wings clipped politically by Xi Jinping, both through a reorganization and through anticorruption drives that have seen numerous government officials sidelined, imprisoned, and, in at least one case, even sentenced to death.
Into the vacuum left behind by the PLA, the Chinese Ministry of State Security—a powerful agency that combines elements of the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA—has apparently stepped in and become China’s new central office for cybertheft.
“The PLA have stepped back significantly, but the MSS and their affiliated contractors have stepped into that void,” Alperovitch says.
These new hackers with the Ministry of State Security have evidently learned from the PLA’s mistakes.
“They’ve gotten steadily better,” Alperovitch says.
“They’re thinking much harder about how to be more stealthy.”
After all, no Chinese hacker wants to be the next one splashed across an FBI “Wanted” poster.

Adapted from Dawn of the Code War: Inside America’s Battle Against Russia, China, and the Rising Global Cyber Threat, by John P. Carlin, with Garrett M. Graff (PublicAffairs), published October 2018.

jeudi 11 octobre 2018

Chinese spy arrested in Belgium and extradited to US on charges of stealing aviation secrets

By Katie Benner




Yanjun Xu, Chinese intelligence official, was charged with espionage and extradited from Belgium to the United States, law enforcement officials said on Wednesday.

WASHINGTON — A Chinese intelligence official was arrested in Belgium and extradited to the United States to face espionage charges, Justice Department officials said on Wednesday, a major escalation of the Trump administration’s effort to crack down on Chinese spying.
The extradition on Tuesday of the officer, Yanjun Xu, a deputy division director in China’s main spy agency, the Ministry of State Security, is the first time that a Chinese intelligence official has been brought to the United States to be prosecuted and tried in open court. 
Law enforcement officials said that Xu tried to steal trade secrets from companies including GE Aviation outside Cincinnati, in Evendale, Ohio, one of the world’s top jet engine suppliers for commercial and military aircraft.
A 16-page indictment details what appears to be a dramatic international sting operation to lure Xu to what he believed was a meeting in Belgium to obtain proprietary information about jet fan blade designs from a GE Aviation employee, only to be met by Belgian authorities and put on a plane to the United States.
China has for years used spycraft and cyberattacks to steal American corporate, academic and military information to bolster its growing economic power and political influence. 
But apprehending an accused Chinese spy — all others charged by the United States government are still at large — is an extraordinary development and a sign of the Trump administration’s continued crackdown on the Chinese theft of trade secrets.
The administration also outlined on Wednesday new restrictions on foreign investment aimed at keeping China from gaining access to American companies.
The arrest of Xu “shows that federal law enforcement authorities can not only detect and disrupt such espionage, but can also catch its perpetrators,” Benjamin C. Glassman, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Ohio, said in a statement.
The coming trial, in federal court in Cincinnati, could further expose China’s methods for stealing trade secrets and embarrass officials in Beijing — part of what current and former administration officials said was a long-term strategy to make stealing secrets costly and shameful for China. 
Federal prosecutors will have to present additional evidence to prove their case, which could include intercepted communications between government officials or even testimony from cooperating witnesses.
“If you can make it less expensive in terms of money and reputation to instead invest in R&D, the country’s behavior can and will change,” said John Carlin, the former head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, referring to research and development.
The indictment outlines China’s courting of the GE Aviation employee starting in March 2017. 
The company, a subsidiary of General Electric, was a ripe target because it builds airplane and helicopter engines for the Pentagon.
An individual identified as an unindicted co-conspirator invited the GE Aviation employee on an all-expense trip to China to meet with scientists at Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics. 
Once there, the employee was introduced to Xu, who continued to be in touch by email after the trip.
In January, Xu invited the employee back to China and told him that he should bring information about GE Aviation’s “system specification, design process.” 
Over the next two months, Xu asked the employee for more details, including what the indictment said was proprietary information about fan blade design.
Xu and the GE Aviation employee discussed increasingly specific pieces of data that Xu wanted, and the employee even sent Xu a file directory of documents on the employee’s company-issued laptop.
The two never met again in China, but set up a meeting in Belgium for the employee to pass more secrets to Xu. 
In preparation for the employee’s trip to Europe, Xu asked the employee if he would use an external thumb drive to transfer information from the employee’s work computer when they met in person.
It is unclear from the indictment if the employee at this point was cooperating with the F.B.I. as part of the sting operation, and it is unclear if the employee ever traveled to Belgium. 
On Wednesday, the Justice Department praised GE Aviation for its cooperation in the investigation and internal controls that the department said “protected GE Aviation’s proprietary information.’’
Xu was arrested on April 1 in Belgium and remained in custody there until Tuesday. 
He is now being held in Cincinnati.
Employees of large American corporations traveling to countries like China are often targets for information theft because their devices can be hacked remotely and because they can speak too revealingly of their work while being wined and dined, said Joseph S. Campbell, the former head of the F.B.I.’s criminal investigative division who is now a director at Navigant Consulting.
“Employees who think they’re sharing unimportant information don’t realize that they’re adding to a broad matrix of knowledge,’’ Mr. Campbell said. 
“Even with unclassified information, China can put together a fuller picture of a company’s sensitive information.”
The government indictment against Xu leaves open the possibility that the government investigation is continuing. 
The document says that an unindicted co-conspirator referred to as CF brokered the meeting between Xu and the GE Aviation employee; it mentions that Xu was communicating with other Ministry of State Security agents about the spy operation.
The Justice Department is pursuing other thefts of trade secrets for prosecution, said John C. Demers, the head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. 
Together, he said, they show that China has a policy of developing its economy to the detriment of the United States.
“This case is not an isolated incident,” Mr. Demers said. 
It is part of an overall economic policy of developing China at American expense. We cannot tolerate a nation’s stealing our firepower and the fruits of our brainpower.”
China has also been targeting General Electric’s turbine technology. 
The F.B.I. arrested in August a dual citizen of the United States and China who worked at General Electric, charging him with stealing the company’s technology for the purpose of helping Chinese companies.

mardi 2 octobre 2018

Is everyone who is of Chinese origin a spy?

Chinese woman jailed in US over space tech smuggling scheme
By James Griffiths

A Chinese woman living in California has been jailed over a scheme to smuggle sensitive space and military communications technology to China.
Si Chen was sentenced to 46 months in federal prison Monday, after she pleaded guilty in July to conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which restricts the export of certain goods to foreign nations, according to a Department of Justice statement.
Chen, a 33-year-old resident of Pomona, a suburb of Los Angeles, was arrested in May 2017 and has been in custody since.
She also pleaded guilty to money laundering and using a forged passport.

Smuggling plot
According to prosecutors, between 2013 and 2015 Chen purchased and smuggled numerous sensitive items to China without the proper export license, including components used in military communications jammers and devices used for space communications.
"This defendant knowingly participated in a plot to secretly send items with military applications to China," US Attorney Nick Hanna said in a statement.
"The smuggled items could be used in a number of damaging ways, including in equipment that could jam our satellite communications. We will aggressively target all persons who provide foreign agents with technology in violation of US law."
Joseph Macias, a Homeland Security agent who worked on the case, added that the "export of sensitive technology items to China is tightly regulated for good reason."
"One of HSI's top enforcement priorities is preventing US military products and sensitive technology from falling into the hands of those who might seek to harm America or its interests," he said.
Chen went by several aliases, prosecutors said, including "Chunping Ji," for which she acquired a forged passport and rented an office in Pomona to take delivery of the export-controlled items.
From Pomona, the goods were shipped to Hong Kong and then on to China.
Court documents mention at least three unindicted co-conspirators who worked with Chen to smuggle the items to Hong Kong.

Heightened tensions
Chen's case comes a week after another Chinese was arrested in the US.
Ji Chaoqun is accused of acting as an "illegal agent" at the direction of a "high-level intelligence officer" of a provincial department of the Ministry of State Security, China's top espionage agency.
According to the complaint against Ji, he was tasked with identifying individuals for potential recruitment as Chinese spies, some of whom were working for US defense contractors.
A student of electrical engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, Ji also enlisted in the US Army Reserves under a program in which foreign nationals can be recruited if their skills are considered "vital to the national interest."
The arrest comes a day after CIA boss Gina Haspel referenced China when she said her agency would focus more on nation state rivals after over a decade of counter-terrorism dominating its goals.
China is "working to diminish US influence in order to advance their own goals," Haspel said in a speech at the University of Louisville.
Tensions between the US and China are ramping up amid an escalating trade war between the two nations and disagreements over Taiwan and the South China Sea.
On Sunday, a US Navy ship had an "unsafe" interaction with a Chinese vessel during a freedom of navigation operation near the disputed Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, causing the US ship to maneuver "to prevent a collision," according to US defense officials.

jeudi 2 août 2018

Sino-American Loyalty

Feinstein was 'mortified' by FBI allegation that staffer was spy for China
By Lukas Mikelionis 

U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein fired a staffer a few years back who was part of an effort to spy and pass on political intelligence to the Chinese government.
The staffer, based in the Democrat's San Francisco office, was delivering political intelligence to officials based at the local Chinese Consulate, Politico reported.
The FBI informed Feinstein, the then-chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, about five years ago about the staffer and allegations that the staffer was a spy.
The source who confirmed the incident to the San Francisco Chronicle said “Dianne was mortified” upon learning about it.
The Chinese spy served as the lawmaker’s driver in California, but took on other roles as well, including helping out in her San Francisco office and being Feinstein’s liaison to the Sino-American community in the state. 
He attended Chinese Consulate events on behalf of the senator.
The spy’s handler “got an award back in China” for his efforts to penetrate Feinstein’s office and pass on intelligence.
The driver was recruited years ago after he being befriended on one of the trips to Asia by someone from China’s Ministry of State Security, the country’s intelligence and security agency, the Chronicle reported.
“He didn’t even know what was happening — that he was being recruited,” a source told the publication. 
“He just thought it was some friend.”
The FBI wasn’t able to charge the individual, possibly because he was passing on political intelligence rather than classified materials – making the prosecution nearly impossible.
“They interviewed him, and Dianne forced him to retire, and that was the end of it,” the Chronicle’s source said. 
“None of her staff ever knew what was going on. They just kept it quiet.”

mardi 13 juin 2017

CHINA’S OPERATION AUSTRALIA

The go-betweens
ALP donor Helen Liu had deep ties to Chinese spy Liu Chaoying, who was caught out trying to influence US politics. So why did ASIO give Helen Liu the all clear?

By Richard Baker, Nick McKenzie and Philip Dorling
Helen Liu with John Howard and Joel Fitzgibbon.

As befitted a man who spent his life in the shadows, General Ji Shengde chose to wait in the kitchen of an abalone restaurant in the Chinese coastal resort town of Zhuhai until his dining companions arrived.
The ultra-secretive chief of Chinese military intelligence was on the lookout for his protege, a well-dressed, 37-year-old businesswoman called Liu Chaoying
She was bringing her new friend, a California-based entrepreneur called Johnny Chung who had a penchant for over-the-top jewellery and a knack for getting inside Bill Clinton’s White House.
Once the pair arrived and the group was seated, they talked American politics. 
It was 1996 and Clinton was running for a second term.
“We really like your president. We hope he will be re-elected,” General Ji told Chung.
“I will give you $300,000. You can give it to your president and Democrat party.”
A few days after this August 11 meeting, Liu Chaoying wired $300,000 into Taiwan-born Chung’s account. 
This money ended up in the coffers of the Democrat’s Clinton re-election campaign in breach of US laws banning foreign political donations.
This transaction later became the focus of US criminal and congressional investigations into a major political scandal dubbed Chinagate by the US media. 
It was part of a broad Chinese plan to influence American politics to favour Beijing’s acquisition of sensitive, advanced technology.
Today, Fairfax Media can reveal a direct Australian connection to the Chinagate scandal that raises serious questions about a series of Chinese donations to the Australian Labor Party.
A summary of banking records contained in NSW Supreme Court files show that, just 10 days after the meeting in the abalone restaurant, a Sydney-based company owned by Chinese-Australian businesswoman, Helen Liu, wired $250,025.00 from her Australian company into the account of one of Liu Chaoying’s Hong Kong companies called Marswell Investments.

Just why Helen Liu’s company Wincopy Pty Ltd sent this money to Liu Chaoying is not known. Whatever the case, the transfer effectively topped up the bank account of a company US prosecutors later claimed as a front for China’s military intelligence. 
A copy of Wincopy’s financial statements and reports prepared by the company's accountant -- and obtained from a Federal Court file -- recorded the $250,025.00 transfer as “overseas marketing expenses”.

Like the others, Helen Liu was interested in politics. 
But her focus was Australia. 
At the time of the quarter-of-a-million-dollar transfer into Liu Chaoying’s Marswell company, she had just made her first donation to the ALP and had forged links to the federal Labor front bench and the NSW Labor government.
Australia’s freewheeling donations laws meant that Liu’s donations never created a scandal like that seen in the United States, and the links have never been adequately examined by Australian authorities. 
But evidence uncovered by Fairfax Media and the ABC means that might be about to change.

The networker

Helen Liu arrived in Sydney from Shandong province in northern China in the late 1980s as a seemingly modest student and worked at a firm exporting wool to China. 
But it did not take too long for her life to undergo a massive transformation.
“It was like the tap had been turned on and all this money suddenly started pouring out,” said a close associate at the time. 
“Top-line European cars were being bought with cash.”
The money came from Chinese Government-controlled entities such as the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, Beijing Hengtong Trust, the Jinan Iron and Steel Group and the Shandong Fisheries Corporation. 
All had entered into joint ventures with companies associated with Helen Liu and her then boyfriend, Humphrey Xu.
The pair set about amassing a Sydney property portfolio worth tens of millions of dollars. 
Among their tenants was a NSW government department. 
They exported Australian iron ore and wool to China. 
In their homeland, the couple embarked on huge real estate developments across several provinces in close co-operation with local officials.
They achieved Australian citizenship through sham marriages to a far younger Sydney couple then began building a network of politically powerful friends in their adopted country. 
Their target: Australia’s most ruthless political faction, the NSW Labor Right.
The foundation stone of this relationship was laid in 1993 when one of Helen Liu’s companies, Diamond Hill International, took a knockabout federal Labor MP, the late Eric Fitzgibbon, on a first-class trip to Liu’s home province of Shandong. 
Fitzgibbon’s job was to shake hands with an array of Communist Party officials and tell them just what a big deal Helen Liu and her boyfriend were back in Australia.
Eric (above) and Joel Fitzgibbon (at right) in Shandong in 1993.

Eric Fitzgibbon asked if his son Joel, a rising star in NSW Labor, could come along. 
Joel Fitzgibbon, a trained auto electrician who was working as his father’s electorate officer, was Eric Fitzgibbon’s prospective successor as Labor candidate in the working-class regional seat of Hunter at the 1996 federal election.
That Shandong trip was the beginning of a long friendship between Helen Liu and the Fitzgibbons which only became public in 2009 when Joel Fitzgibbon was Australia’s defence minister. 
His early political career was supported by $40,000 in donations from Helen Liu, including $20,000 for his 1998 election campaign from her company Wincopy – the same company that sent $250,000 to Liu Chaoying’s Hong Kong account in 1996.
Fairfax Media makes no accusation of wrongdoing or impropriety against Joel Fitzgibbon in this report. 
No evidence has emerged to suggest he knew of Helen Liu’s links to Liu Chaoying.
In a statement made through her Sydney lawyer, Helen Liu has admitted a personal and business relationship with Liu Chaoying. 
But she has sought to distance herself from the more controversial aspects of Liu Chaoying’s life.
While she has not outright denied the Wincopy payment of $250,000, she has attempted to cast doubt on the documents obtained from Federal and Supreme court files in NSW which formed part of a bitter 1990s legal battle with her former boyfriend and business partner Humphrey Xu.
Fairfax Media has found no evidence to suggest Helen Liu or her legal team during the 1990s had contested the veracity of these financial documents, many of which were obtained under subpoena.
Helen Liu and Bill Clinton.

There is no doubt that NSW Labor itself reaped at least $100,000 from Helen Liu and her sister Queena in donations and fundraising between 1999 and 2007. 
During this time, Helen Liu grew close to other Labor politicians as notable as long-serving NSW premier Bob Carr
She was photographed with former prime ministers John Howard and Kevin Rudd and former Opposition leader Kim Beazley – not to mention Bill Clinton, who her friend Liu Chaoying was also snapped with.
Helen Liu’s friends in the ALP have long decried any notion that financial support from her or other Chinese donors raises a national security risk. 
But the revelation that Helen Liu had a direct connection to a key player in the Chinese military intelligence operation to influence an American presidential campaign makes it necessary to examine her involvement in Australian politics through a different lens.
The admiral’s daughter

When Liu Chaoying came to spend time with Helen Liu in Sydney in 1997, those who met her were left in no doubt as to her importance. 
With a love of high fashion and gambling, Chaoying was never shy about her position near the top of China’s government and military.
“She was introduced to me as a director of China’s Long March missile program,” recalled one of Helen Liu’s long-standing business associates, “and she was straight down to business. The first thing she asked me was if I knew where she could source metallurgical coal for making steel.”
Liu Chaoying was vice-president of China Aerospace International (CASIL) Holdings, a state-owned company responsible for China’s missile, satellite and rocket technology. 
She was also a Lieutenant Colonel in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), working closely with its military intelligence unit, the Second Department of the PLA General Staff.
China Aerospace runs China’s missile and satellite technology.

Her biggest claim to fame was that her father, Liu Huaqing, was the most senior military officer in China during the 1990s. 
Credited with building China’s modern navy, Admiral Liu was vice-chairman of the country’s Central Military Commission and a member of the all-powerful Communist Party Politburo Standing Committee.
That family connection made Liu Chaoying a so-called princeling, a child of the Communist revolution’s elite. 
Her heritage and connections opened doors and opportunities in China and abroad. 
Like other princelings and other Chinese intelligence assets, her personal and business interests were often closely entwined with those of the state.
Liu Huaquing in Beijing in 1996.

What is known of Liu Chaoying’s military and business career shows that she had a deep involvement in the procurement of weapons and military technology as well as communications. 
It has been reported in the Hong Kong press that she played a crucial role for Chinese military intelligence in financing the deal that procured the former Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag from Ukraine. 
Now refurbished and renamed, the carrier Liaoning is the pride of China’s rapidly expanding navy.
For most ordinary Chinese, someone like Liu Chaoying was an untouchable.
She was an intimidating figure, someone to treat with caution and respect. 
But for Helen Liu there was no sign of deference. 
“They were like sisters,” recalls one observer.
According to Helen Liu’s statement though, she had no idea about Liu Chaoying's military role: “Helen only knew that Liu Chaoying was a director of Hong Kong listed company and knew her through the business relationship in the telecom company. She did not know (if it be the case) that Liu Chaoying worked for China’s military intelligence or the PLA.”
Helen Liu was also from a family of some renown in China, particularly in Shandong province. 
Her father, who she described in a court affidavit as a “ranking official” in China’s government, was responsible for appointing various Communist Party officials to provincial power. 
This created a powerful network for his family.
By 1997, Helen Liu’s property empire in Sydney and China was worth tens of millions of dollars. 
She was a fixture on the NSW Labor scene, mixing business and pleasure through lavish dinners at the Golden Century Chinese restaurant next to the ALP’s NSW headquarters in Sydney’s Sussex Street. 
Her connection with the Fitzgibbons, Joel and his father Eric, and her generous donations were well known to senior NSW Labor figures.

Helen Liu’s companies also paid for wave after wave of Chinese officials such as current Hebei province party secretary Zhao Kezhi -- who some tip to be a future Chinese leader -- to visit Australia. 
Itineraries for these visits show that meetings were scheduled with Labor Party figures such as Bob Carr, Joel Fitzgibbon and Mark Arbib
Often when a senior Chinese leader, such as former presidents Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao, toured Australia and the Pacific, Helen Liu was in the travelling party.



Helen Liu and former PLA officer Ren Xingliang at a Communist Party event in Henan Province. 

This made Helen Liu the ultimate go-between. 
Chinese government companies tasked her with sourcing iron ore from Rio Tinto, BHP and Gina Rinehart’s Hancock Prospecting.
Helen Liu became vice-chairwoman of a Chinese government-linked organisation called the World Federation of Overseas Chinese Associations. 
This organisation was led by a former PLA officer, Ren Xingliang, and worked closely with the Communist Party’s United Front Work Department to promote Beijing’s objectives through the Chinese diaspora. 
US intelligence analysts have long regarded the United Front as a facilitator for China's overseas influencing campaigns.
Helen Liu enters court for a defamation case in 2011.
A bombshell
While Helen Liu’s star was rising, Liu Chaoying had some real troubles. 
Early in 1997, legendary Watergate reporter Bob Woodward dropped a bombshell report in the Washington Post declaring that the FBI and US Justice Department were investigating foreign donations to the Democratic campaign to have Bill Clinton re-elected in 1996.
The money trail from Johnny Chung led back to Liu Chaoying and Marswell Investments and, soon enough, their names were on the front pages of America’s biggest newspapers. 
Liu Chaoying was publicly identified as a Chinese military intelligence officer in Newsweek magazine and elsewhere.
Liu Chaoying

But the Chinagate publicity in the US did little to temper Liu Chaoying’s ambition to expand her corporate presence in Australia. 
Throughout 1997 and 1998, records show that she established four companies in Australia. 
She also became a director of the Australian branch of China Aerospace.
Links with Helen Liu were evident in many of her dealings. 
Paperwork for one of Liu Chaoying’s personal companies, Llexcel Pty Limited, was filed by a young Sydney lawyer called Donald Junn who had power of attorney for all of Helen Liu’s main Australian businesses.

The Sydney address given by Liu Chaoying for Llexcel was the same one Helen Liu used to register a company in Hong Kong in the same year.

Being outed as a Chinese intelligence operative didn’t stop Liu Chaoying from expanding her operations in Australia. 
Her precise objectives remain unclear but almost certainly involved a mixture of her own interests and those of the Chinese state.
As for Helen Liu, she claims in her statement that she was not aware of her business partner’s troubles in America. 
And she said that the common address for their respective companies was the Sydney residence of her sister, Chun Mei Liu.

The congressman
Liu Chaoying’s $300,000 payment to Johnny Chung is the case US Republican congressman Mike McCaul can’t let go of.
McCaul was a prosecutor at the Department of Justice before entering politics. 
He spent 1997 and 1998 leading the investigation into the political financing activities of Chung, Liu Chaoying and other players in the Chinagate scandal.
McCaul, who now chairs the US House of Representatives’ Homeland Security Committee, secured Johnny Chung’s testimony about the meeting with General Ji and Liu Chaoying in the abalone restaurant and his receipt of $300,000.
Although he knew more than anyone about Liu Chaoying’s business activities, McCaul said he was not aware of an Australian connection to her until he was approached by Fairfax Media and Four Corners with records showing Helen Liu’s company’s $250,000 transfer. 
McCaul was unable to uncover the Australian transfer because the Chinese government had blocked his attempts to access Liu Chaoying’s Hong Kong bank accounts.
Of the company Liu Chaoying used to make the US political donation, McCaul said: “I believe Marswell was really a front for Chinese intelligence activities.”
McCaul believes the Chinese wanted Clinton re-elected because his administration had eased export restrictions on satellite technology to China. 
This area was one of Liu Chaoying’s specialities at China Aerospace.
The congressman’s view is supported by the finding of a bipartisan congressional committee, which is specially convened to investigate China’s political donations. 
It described the $300,000 as an attempt to “better position [Liu Chaoying] in the United States to acquire computer, missile and satellite technologies”.
Classified US intelligence material provided to congressional investigators also put Liu Chaoying at the forefront of illegal arms sales and smuggling operations. 
She was twice found to have entered the US using false identities.
McCaul said the revelation that a prominent Chinese donor to Australian politics such as Helen Liu was financially and personally involved with Liu Chaoying at the time of Chinagate was “deeply disturbing”.
“Quite frankly, I was a bit surprised [to learn] that Australia does allow foreign contributions.”
“And if you look at the numbers, which I was privy to, a lot of these donations are coming from China. They want a stronger presence in Australia and what better way to do that than to influence political figures through foreign contributions,” McCaul said.
Despite the controversy in the US, Helen Liu appeared unperturbed about continuing to do business with Liu Chaoying. 
Hong Kong court records show the pair established a company in the British Virgin Islands in 1999 with the intention of investing in telecommunications in China.
But their relationship soured in 2001 when a Hong Kong bank took them to court after they failed to make repayments on a substantial loan.
Helen Liu in 2011 during a court action against The Age. 

An unusual letter
In February 2009, a senior Australian defence department official posted anonymous letters to two of the journalists who have written this story, one at the investigations unit of The Age, the other then at The Canberra Times.
The letter referred to a potential conflict of interest involving Fitzgibbon’s brother’s company, health insurer NIB, and its interest in government contracts. 
But much of the letter was taken up with the then defence minister’s relationship with a Chinese-born businesswoman and Labor donor named Helen Liu.
The letter revealed that the minister received a suit from his friend and was living in a Canberra townhouse he rented from Helen Liu’s family. 
Most notably, the letter specifically asserted that Helen Liu was associated with Chinese military intelligence.
Until this point, Helen Liu was unknown to anyone in the Australian media let alone the wider public. Despite 15 years of involvement in Australian politics through donations and fundraising, she remained beneath the radar. 
Fitzgibbon’s register of interests lodged with Parliament made no mention of Helen Liu despite their long friendship.
Ahead of the publication of a series of Fairfax articles about Helen Liu in 2009, Fitzgibbon was asked if he had received any gifts or benefits from Helen Liu that would require declaration. 
His answer was no – as it was when asked the same question at a doorstop on the day the story broke.
But later that night, his office announced that the minister had forgotten to declare two very quick trips to China in 2002 and 2005 that had been paid for by Helen Liu. Just why he took those trips and what he did on them remains unclear.

The failure to declare the trips badly weakened his grip on his Cabinet position.
Since amending his records, Joel Fitzgibbon has consistently maintained he has received nothing further from Helen Liu that he needed to declare nor had ever been involved in or benefited from her business affairs.
Fairfax Media makes no suggestion that Fitzgibbon has anything else to declare. 
But he has not answered questions about whether other members of his immediate family, such as his late father Eric Fitzgibbon, had received cash, gifts or company shares from Helen Liu.
Fresh documents obtained by Fairfax Media show Helen Liu was often keen to include a meeting or a meal with her friend Joel Fitzgibbon MP on the itineraries of Chinese officials she would pay for to tour Australia.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with meeting and dining with visiting foreign dignitaries. 
It is an often tedious but necessary part of the job for many Australian MPs.
Joel Fitzgibbon said he could recall possibly two occasions where he had dined with Chinese associates of Helen Liu during their visits to the Hunter Valley. 
“My memory is that they were Government officials,” he said.
Fairfax Media understands that federal and state Labor politicians used their official letterheads to write to various Chinese leaders and Australian immigration officers on behalf of Helen Liu and her immediate family. 
Mr Fitzgibbon said he was not among them. 
“I have never written to a Chinese official,” he said. 
Helen Liu said she had no recollection of asking any politician for such favours.


The ASIO all-clear
Perhaps the strangest thing in the Helen Liu saga was the statement released by Australia’s top counter-espionage agency, ASIO, a day after the initial story about her broke in late March 2009.
Kevin Rudd’s Labor government was already having problems on the China front. 
The Mandarin-speaking Rudd had just been criticised after he “secretly” hosted the Chinese Communist Party’s propaganda chief at the Lodge. 
Before that, Rudd and other Labor MPs were in the gun over a series of trips they made – and declared appropriately – to China paid for by Chinese entrepreneur and political donor Ian Tang.
ASIO’s customary approach is to never publicly comment on security matters involving individuals or organisations. 
It is a policy endorsed by both Coalition and Labor governments and almost always strictly adhered to.
But in the case of Helen Liu, Rudd’s government decided to buck convention. 
There is not yet evidence that Kevin Rudd received money from Chau Chak Wing

Hours after Fairfax’s first article about Helen Liu was published, the office of Labor’s attorney-general, Robert McClelland, released a statement saying “the Acting Director General of Security has advised me that ASIO has no information relating to Ms Helen Liu which would have given rise to any security concern regarding her activities or associations.”
Paul Monk is one of Australia’s foremost experts on China’s intelligence apparatus. 
A former head of the China desk at Australia’s Defence Intelligence Organisations, Monk is perturbed by the circumstances that led to the former Rudd government releasing such advice from ASIO.
First, [that the ASIO statement] contravened long-standing intelligence community practice in commenting publicly on operational matters; second, that it should have lacked such information, in all the circumstances; and, third, that unimpeachable information has now come to light showing that, in fact, there were, well before 2009, grounds for very grave concern about Helen Liu’s bona fides and links with Chinese military and intelligence agencies at the highest level,” Mr Monk said.
The ASIO statement was used by the Labor government as a shield against critics raising security concerns in relation to Helen Liu and her close ties to the defence minister. 
Ministers relied on it to repel opposition Senate estimates questions.
Helen Liu’s closest friends in Labor went on the attack.
Bob Carr said it was “pretty shameful for the media to brand this woman as suspect on security grounds without the remotest evidence – indeed in the face of ASIO stating she is of no interest to them.”
NSW state MP Henry Tsang wrote that Helen Liu has been “wrongly portrayed as a national security threat”. 
Joel Fitzgibbon said his friend was a “highly regarded and respected Australian businesswoman”.
“Her name has been dragged through the mud … and her reputation has been tarnished in a highly defamatory way. I’ll certainly be taking any action I can to ensure she’s not personally attacked in that way in the future.”
The ASIO statement was even used by senior Australian Defence Department officials to privately assure their American counterparts that there was no need to be concerned about Helen Liu, according to leaked State Department cables released by Wikileaks.
As for Helen Liu, she told News Limited tabloid The Daily Telegraph she was “brokenhearted”.
“It is unfair to me what people have said. I know people have said that I am a national security threat.”
China's fifth column: Joel Fitzgibbon in 2017.

Litigation and legacies
Joel Fitzgibbon survived as defence minister until mid-2009. 
And it wasn’t his ties to Helen Liu that did for him in the end. 
It was a conflict of interest involving his brother’s company.
But the story of Helen Liu wasn’t going away. 
Subsequent reports based on material supplied by new informants resulted in a long-running and expensive legal battle instigated by Helen Liu in a bid to find out their identity.
Thanks to his standing in the NSW Labor right, Joel Fitzgibbon became federal Labor chief whip in 2010 and served as a member and briefly chairperson of the Parliament’s influential Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade.
Following the June 2013 Labor leadership spill, he was appointed agriculture minister in Kevin Rudd’s second ministry. 
He now serves as shadow agriculture minister on Labor leader Bill Shorten’s front bench.
As for Liu Chaoying, she and her family appear to be on the rise again in China after some difficulties in the early 2000s when her father fell out with then president Jiang Zemin, resulting in her brief arrest, and her boss, General Ji, receiving a 20-year prison sentence for corruption.
In 2007, US diplomats reported that Liu Chaoying was “involved in arms sales to foreign countries through Huawei and other military or quasi-military companies on whose boards she sat”. 
Her elder brother, Liu Zhuoming, is an influential navy admiral and member of the National People’s Congress.
In September last year, Xi Jinping paid a lengthy personal tribute to Liu Chaoying’s late father on the occasion of the centenary of his birth, declaring Liu Huaquing to be one of the greatest leaders of the modern Chinese military.
Meanwhile, it is understood that Helen Liu has spent nearly all of her time in China in recent years. 
Two of her family’s companies have encountered some legal trouble in China. 
A 2014 court judgement from Hainan Island records that the chairwoman of Australia Diamond Hill Holdings Limited admitted to having bribed a local official with $34,000 and a bottle of red wine.
The judgement identifies a female with the surname "Liu” as chairwoman but does not specify whether it is Helen Liu, her sister or someone else.
Chinese media reports between 2000 and 2012 name Helen Liu as the chairwoman of Australia Diamond Hill Holdings. 
In her statement she denied any recent involvement with the companies named in the Hainan court judgement.
Her Double Bay residence has long appeared neglected and empty. 
Recently, however, she and her sister re-established a corporate presence in Australia. 
Just what this means remains to be seen.