Editor's note: This article was originally published about two years ago - and is perhaps even more relevant today than it was then. Ties to CCP are still in existence and still concerning.
LET has followed the federal government's dealings with China closely the last several years. Here are a few other writings to support the belief that they're too close to the communist nation. For examples, click HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.
Burns was also found to have taken a "secret trip" to China in June of 2023, suggesting the relationship is in fact alive and well.
--
What exactly is it with the Biden administration and communist China anyway? The National Pulse has an exclusive report where they tell us that Joe Biden’s CIA director—William Burns—may have lied to the United States Senate in sworn testimony. The outlet reported that the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace—formerly led by Burns—has continued its relationship with influence groups working with the Chinese Communist Party despite his testimony to the contrary.
Burns, who became president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in March 2015, testified during Senate confirmation hearings that he had “inherited” the think tank’s relationship with the China-United States-Exchange Foundation (CUSEF). In testimony, Burns claimed to be “increasingly worried about the expansion of Chinese influence operations,” and was adamant he had cut the organization’s ties to CUSEF “not long after” he began his tenure at the think tank in response to questions by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL).
In questioning Burns, Rubio noted that CUSEF is part of the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Work Department, which he said works “to co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party” and “influence foreign governments to take actions or adopt positions supportive of Beijing’s preferred policies,” the U.S. government said.
In addition, the U.S. State Department compares the United Front to the Chinese communist regime’s “magic weapon” “to advance its preferred policies by infiltrating American politics, media and academia,” The National Pulse reported. After Rubio’s comments, Burns claimed:
In addition, it recently released yet another research paper on the subject of cyber attacks, in collaboration with CUSEF and other Chinese Communist Party-funded institutions. That paper was released this March, which completely contradicts Burns' testimony under oath, National Pulse asserts.
“Managing U.S.-China Tensions Over Public Cyber Attribution,” a 76-page document was a collaborative effort between Carnegie and the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies (SIIS). In fact, a foreword to the work by SIIS President Chen Dongxiao thanked CUSEF for its “generous support” of the effort.
Moreover, a number of persons who contributed to the paper included some from the SIIS Research Center for Global Cyberspace Governance—a “joint effort” which included China’s National Defense University and the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences (SASS). That organization has been identified by the FBI as having close ties to the Chinese Communist Party’s top spy agency, the Ministry of State Security.
In fact, the FBI openly labels SASS as a “front group for Chinese intelligence collection and overseas spy recruitment,” and identifies it as a key player in a 2019 criminal case involving a retired CIA operative selling classified U.S. defense documents to the Chinese Communist Party.
The 76-page publication consists of six papers, written by SIIS fellows and their contemporaries at Carnegie, which focused on how governments should publicly respond to cyberattacks. Among chapter titles are “Attribution and Characterization of Cyber Attacks” and “The Purpose of U.S. Government Public Cyber Attribution.”
In a disturbing portion of the paper which seems to be a threat to U.S. national security, it describes the U.S. government’s approach to responding—publicly and privately—to cyberattacks conducted by China, in essence giving the Chinese Communist Party the American “playbook” on the issue. In addition, the paper also “appears to undermine U.S. attribution of cyberattacks to Chinese actors,” with one SIIS official writing:
LET has followed the federal government's dealings with China closely the last several years. Here are a few other writings to support the belief that they're too close to the communist nation. For examples, click HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.
Burns was also found to have taken a "secret trip" to China in June of 2023, suggesting the relationship is in fact alive and well.
--
What exactly is it with the Biden administration and communist China anyway? The National Pulse has an exclusive report where they tell us that Joe Biden’s CIA director—William Burns—may have lied to the United States Senate in sworn testimony. The outlet reported that the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace—formerly led by Burns—has continued its relationship with influence groups working with the Chinese Communist Party despite his testimony to the contrary.
Burns, who became president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in March 2015, testified during Senate confirmation hearings that he had “inherited” the think tank’s relationship with the China-United States-Exchange Foundation (CUSEF). In testimony, Burns claimed to be “increasingly worried about the expansion of Chinese influence operations,” and was adamant he had cut the organization’s ties to CUSEF “not long after” he began his tenure at the think tank in response to questions by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL).
In questioning Burns, Rubio noted that CUSEF is part of the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Work Department, which he said works “to co-opt and neutralize sources of potential opposition to the policies and authority of its ruling Chinese Communist Party” and “influence foreign governments to take actions or adopt positions supportive of Beijing’s preferred policies,” the U.S. government said.
In addition, the U.S. State Department compares the United Front to the Chinese communist regime’s “magic weapon” “to advance its preferred policies by infiltrating American politics, media and academia,” The National Pulse reported. After Rubio’s comments, Burns claimed:
“…on the China-U.S. Exchange Foundation, this is a relationship that I inherited when I became president of Carnegie and that it ended not long after I became president precisely for the concerns that you just described because we were increasingly worried about the expansion of Chinese influence operations. Shortly after I ended that relationship, we began a program at the Carnegie Endowment on countering foreign influence operations which was aimed mostly at China and Russia and was supported in part from a grant from the Global Engagement Center at the State Department in the last administration.”
However, Burns’ memory is either bad or he was lying, with the think tank continuing to accept funds and collaborate with officials tied to CUSEF during his tenure there.In addition, it recently released yet another research paper on the subject of cyber attacks, in collaboration with CUSEF and other Chinese Communist Party-funded institutions. That paper was released this March, which completely contradicts Burns' testimony under oath, National Pulse asserts.
“Managing U.S.-China Tensions Over Public Cyber Attribution,” a 76-page document was a collaborative effort between Carnegie and the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies (SIIS). In fact, a foreword to the work by SIIS President Chen Dongxiao thanked CUSEF for its “generous support” of the effort.
Moreover, a number of persons who contributed to the paper included some from the SIIS Research Center for Global Cyberspace Governance—a “joint effort” which included China’s National Defense University and the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences (SASS). That organization has been identified by the FBI as having close ties to the Chinese Communist Party’s top spy agency, the Ministry of State Security.
In fact, the FBI openly labels SASS as a “front group for Chinese intelligence collection and overseas spy recruitment,” and identifies it as a key player in a 2019 criminal case involving a retired CIA operative selling classified U.S. defense documents to the Chinese Communist Party.
The 76-page publication consists of six papers, written by SIIS fellows and their contemporaries at Carnegie, which focused on how governments should publicly respond to cyberattacks. Among chapter titles are “Attribution and Characterization of Cyber Attacks” and “The Purpose of U.S. Government Public Cyber Attribution.”
In a disturbing portion of the paper which seems to be a threat to U.S. national security, it describes the U.S. government’s approach to responding—publicly and privately—to cyberattacks conducted by China, in essence giving the Chinese Communist Party the American “playbook” on the issue. In addition, the paper also “appears to undermine U.S. attribution of cyberattacks to Chinese actors,” with one SIIS official writing:
“Yet so long as the United States is making accusations outside of the international legal system and without sufficient evidence to hold the Chinese government accountable, Chinese observers will question the United States’ intention of launching unilateral accusations: Are they to warn against cyber operations? To simply point fingers at China? Or to ease domestic pressure? This further highlights the need for both states to strengthen communication and cooperation in public attribution.”
That paper follows on the heels of the Carnegie Endowment, which Burns said cut off ties with CUSEF-affiliated agencies, collaborating with SIIS on a publication which focused on nuclear energy collaboration in April 2021, The National Pulse continued. For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments