Malaysia's experience with the Bank Of China as an instrument of the Communist Party Of China provides lessons for Australia that would already be in ASIO's files- Childlike to believe Belt & Road is not as extension of the policy of influence via ’’commercial intercourse”

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                         The Malaysian Chinese Association's excited response to
                                                                 the Belt&Road did not help change perceptions that anything
                                                                 had changed between the Communist Party Of China and
                                                                Malaysia's Chinese since the 1950s.

Unlike Australians who are only now becoming aware of the complexities surrounding investment by Chinese companies given their Communist Party Of China links, Malaysians and Singaporeans have had to deal with these issues since at least the 1950s.

The issues are outlined by former Malaysian diplomat Dato Ahmad Mohd Selat (who passed away in 2015), in his minor thesis authored while completing a Masters degree at ANU. He wrote: 

Apart from the policy of non-recognition (of the Government of China), the (Malayan) government also took positive steps to limit Peking’s influence by introducing the Banking Ordinance of 1958 which prohibited the operation of any foreign bank that was under the effective control of a foreign government. The new law was specifically tailored to the Bank of China as it was the only one affected by the new regulation. Though it was not specifically accused of carrying out propaganda activities the Legislative Council Paper No. 23 which was released in early 1959 did mention the activities of the CPC in indoctrinating the ’’overseas” Chinese through ’’commercial intercourse” a veiled reference to the activities of the bank. Such activities were neither new nor secret. Beginning in 1950 the overseas branches of the bank established their "Service Agencies". Overtly they were supposed to extend assistance to the overseas Chinese in sending remittances to China; to trace long-lost relatives; to arrange schools for those wishing to study in China; and even to provide services in writing letters for illiterates to their relatives. In reality they were representing the economic and political interests of China. 

While the Bank Of China was re-issued its license to conduct business in Malaysia in 2001 it is understood that China's commercial interests, together with all its other ’commercial intercourse” in Malaysia and in particular with local Chinese business people remains under close scrutiny. The phone taps which revealed former PM Najib Razak's deals with China to conceal his 1MDB theft are but one example. 

As mentioned previously on this blog ASIO's institutional memory includes 70 years working with and learning from Malaysia's Special Branch to counter Communist Party China and United Front activities.  In monitoring and checking China's Australian Belt & Road initiatives ASIO can easily rely on what it has learnt from Malaysia's Special Branch and other intelligence agencies.

END

SEE ALSO

https://www.facebook.com/MCAHQ/videos/1649772135068540

TO BE READ WITH 

Wednesday, September 9, 2020

Re-imagining China's role in the 1MDB cover-up : Chatham House paper presents China as an innocent bystander to Najib & UMNO's schemes, not an active player

by Ganesh Sahathevan


(From left) Nik Faisal Ariff Kamil, Low Taek Jho and Jasmine Loo. - NSTP/File pic
IGP: 1MDB scandal fugitives hiding in China

A recent UK Chatham House paper titled 
Debunking the Myth of ‘Debt-trap Diplomacy’: How Recipient Countries Shape China’s Belt and Road Initiative, concludes among things: 

-In Sri Lanka and Malaysia, the two most widely cited ‘victims’ of China’s ‘debt-trap diplomacy’, the most controversial BRI projects were initiated by the recipient governments, which pursued their own domestic agendas. Their debt problems arose mainly from the misconduct of local elites and Western-dominated financial markets. China has faced negative reactions and pushback in both countries, though to a lesser extent than is commonly believed, given the high-level interests at stake in the recipient countries.

While no one denies the Najib-Goldman-Jho Low-1MBD nexus, China's role in the cover-up is well known, and well understood, but not it seems to the authors of the Chatham House paper.

China's active role in the 1MDB cover-up and the additional debt laden on Malaysians has become even more evident in the past few months. Starting with the most recent revelations:

World's Biggest Bank - China's ICBC - Now Has HUGE Questions To Answer Over 1MDB

OUTRAGE! - Najib's Secret Deal With China To Pay Off 1MDB (And Jho Low's) Debts! - SHOCK EXCLUSIVE

How A Kuwaiti Royal Sheikh Jailed A 1MDB Whistleblower Whilst Laundering China Kickbacks For Najib - EXCLUSIVE

Loans to and from IPIC, China may be clawed back : Implications of not obeying Malaysia's External Loans Act 1963

Jho Low, 1MDB fugitives hiding in China, says IGP

Jho Low hiding in Macau, says IGP


Malaysians would of course be aware that the Najib era saw a relaxation of controls on Chinese investment into Malaysia which had been in place since at least the 1960s, when China supported Chin Peng and the Communist Party Of China.

China's recent 1MDB-Belt & Road loans have confirmed the reasons why the controls were put in place in the first place ie to ensure that China did not on its own and with the cooperation of local Chinese businesses gain control of the Malaysian economy. 


END