Queensland Congressman George Christensen upheld Bob Cutter’s motion to regain Darwin Harbor from a Chinese company that owns a lease in 1999 amid concerns about security in northern Australia.
The motion called on the Australian government to force the Chinese company Landbridge to sell Darwin Harbor to Australian buyers, and Kristensen said it was a matter of “national sovereignty.”
“We look at Darwin Harbor, and frankly, every bit of the Chinese Communist Party or its minions, all of Australia’s nationwide strategic assets, strategic infrastructure, and strategic ports. I want to, “said Kristensen. Told to 2GB June 9th radio.
“That’s the purpose of this movement we advocate,” he added. “We are currently considering ownership of the port, so that’s a very good move.”
He believes there is support from both government and opposition MPs, crossbenchers, and senators to bring Darwin Harbor back under Australian control.
Mr Christensen said the motion was in the hands of a parliamentary selection committee that decided whether to include the motion for debate.
“It’s rare for government lawmakers to support legislative legislation from Bob Cutter, but it’s all about the sovereignty of our country, which goes beyond the loyalty of the party,” he said. I told the Epoch Times.
Katter gave strong praise for supporting Christensen’s move, given that Christensen came from various political parties.
“If you’re certainly ready to cross the floor that makes you very powerful, and especially in Congress where the numbers are finely owned,” Cutter told The Epoch Times.
Mr. Cutter said his move was not a “political ploy” and did not attempt to “confuse the government” by introducing it. Instead, he knows that his concerns are shared by other MPs about the foreign ownership of the port.
“I’m very skeptical if anyone in Congress truly believes that foreign ownership of a major port of entry to northern Australia is a good idea,” Cutter said.
One of his concerns was focused on the paramilitary capabilities of some Chinese merchant ships and the risks posed by access to Darwin Harbor.
Under Beijing’s 2010 National Defense Mobilization Law, Chinese merchant shipping companies are expected to support the PLA and militia in defense mobilization efforts.
According to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, some state-owned shipping companies have their own paramilitary capabilities, including in-house militias, that can be “mobilized by the Chinese government to defeat threats to the interests of CCP.” I’m waiting.
Katter may be aware of the risks this could pose to northern Australia if leasing owners at Darwin Port work with the PLA during conflict, during peacetime, or in the gray zone.
Gray zones refer to activities by foreign governments that are below the traditional threshold of warfare.
ASPI reports the “Leap Across the Sea” report, which used the gray zone tactics used by Chinese fishing boats (probably belonging to the country’s “maritime militia”) in early 2019 when they struck the eyes of the Royal Australian Army. I showed an example of. South China Sea helicopter pilot (pdf).
Due to this incident, ASPI speculates that ships carrying militias, such as those using Darwin Harbor, may be ordered by commanders to take similar actions against targets in Australia or the United States. I am.
“Doing so would put an escalation burden on the ADF or the US military, as Beijing is likely to see the dynamic reaction to merchant ships as a de facto declaration of war,” the ASPI report said.
Christensen is also Petition To get Darwin Port back from China on his website.