How US farmland became a battleground in the fight against China

Published

2 years ago

May 24, 2023

admin

Chinese investors own about .03 percent of America’s farmland, according to federal data. But their land purchasing is becoming a major issue as politicians at the state and federal level ramp up their fight against perceived threats from China.

In the past couple of months, lawmakers in more than two dozen states have passed or considered legislation restricting Chinese purchases of U.S. farmland.

And former President Trump has promised that if he retakes the White House, he will ban Chinese investors from buying U.S. farmland and other critical infrastructure, and force sales of their current holdings.

“China has been spending trillions of dollars to take over the crown jewels of the United States’s economy,” Trump said in a campaign video in January.

“To protect our country, we need to enact aggressive new restrictions on Chinese ownership of any vital infrastructure in the United States, including energy, technology, telecommunications, farmland, natural resources, medical supplies and other strategic national assets.”

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) signed multiple bills this month that prohibit Chinese citizens from purchasing land in the state. Last month, the North Carolina House passed a bill that would ban the governments of “foreign adversaries” from purchasing agricultural land as well as any land within 25 miles of a military installation. And the Texas Senate passed a bill last month that would ban citizens of China from buying property, with certain exceptions.

Lawmakers on the federal level are also pushing legislation to block China from buying farmland. A bipartisan group of senators have introduced a bill, known as the PASS act, that would prohibit nationals of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea from buying U.S. agricultural land or investing in American agricultural businesses.

Other legislation focuses specifically on the Chinese government. The House easily passed an amendment to the Republican’s energy bill in late March prohibiting the Chinese Communist Party from purchasing U.S. farmland or land used for renewable energy. The broader bill was dead on arrival in the Democrat-controlled Senate. National security threat?

Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland has increased fivefold over the past decade, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data, from 69,000 acres in 2011 to almost 384,000 acres in 2021. That amounts to about 1 percent of the 3 percent of all U.S. farmland owned by foreign nationals.

The rate of this increase has not been even. A large portion of the increase came from a single purchase in 2013, when the Chinese company WH Group bought Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the U.S.

After that, the amount of U.S. farmland owned by Chinese investors remained largely stagnant until 2019. Chinese-owned farmland increased by more than 136 thousand acres between 2019 and 2021, but this was almost entirely from acquisitions by U.S. companies with Chinese shareholders.

The new Republican majority in the House of Representatives has sought to make China a central focus, creating a select committee on “strategic competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party.”

One of the Republicans on the committee, Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), has repeatedly introduced legislation to prohibit the Chinese government from buying U.S. agricultural land.

“I’ve always said that food security is literally national security,” Newhouse said at the committee’s first hearing in late February.

Former Trump national security adviser H.R. McMaster, who testified at the hearing, agreed that this issue is cause for concern. He said the Chinese government is engaging in a concerted effort to make U.S. agriculture dependent on China.

“I describe in my written testimony the three Cs of co-option, coercion and concealment,” he said. “Co-opt by trying to build dependencies from U.S. agriculture on the Chinese market. And then, hey, once your in, then to use that for coercive purposes.”

However, a 2021 analysis by the bipartisan Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) found that foreign purchases of U.S. agricultural land are not a major threat to U.S. food security.

“The United States currently produces more than enough food per capita, even after adjusting for food waste,” CSIS analysts Jamie Lutz and Caitlin Welsh wrote. “Food insecurity among U.S. families is primarily driven by poverty, not a lack of food.”

Newhouse’s press secretary, Mike Marinella, said in an interview that even though Chinese investors currently own only a small portion of American farmland, the U.S. should be concerned about what could happen in the future.

“We don’t want to have to buy our food from China,” Marinella said.

Another area of concern is Chinese land purchases near military infrastructure. In 2021, Texas lawmakers passed legislation to prohibit a company owned by a Chinese billionaire from building a wind farm on 15,000 acres of ranchland near a U.S. Air Force base.

That same year, Chinese food manufacturer Fufeng Group purchased 300 acres of farmland near Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota to build a corn mill, which the Pentagon deemed a threat to national security.

Eric Chutorash, the chief operating officer of Fufeng Group’s U.S. subsidiary, repeatedly denied that the plans posed a security risk, as the company is publicly traded and not affiliated with the Chinese government. In February, however, the Grand Forks City Council voted unanimously to block the project. Fueling anti-Asian sentiments

Some critics of efforts to limit Chinese purchases of U.S. farmland argue they could contribute to anti-Asian sentiments.

In a House Appropriations Committee hearing last year, Rep. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.) criticized an amendment from Newhouse to ban companies owned wholly or in part by the Chinese government from purchasing U.S. farmland. She said singling out China would “perpetuate already rising anti-Asian hate.”

“If the concern is about U.S. national security, other countries also should be included in this conversation,” Meng said.

Neysun Mahboubi, a research scholar at the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for the Study of Contemporary China, said the hostile rhetoric toward China can be dangerous.

“[In] our American political culture, once we identify something as threatening, we’re not very good about talking about it in a nuanced and subtle way,” he said. Target removes some LGBTQ merchandise from stores after threats to workers Most Americans favor clean debt ceiling increase: poll

Mahboubi said it is important to discuss threats posed by China in a nuanced manner, especially given the high amount of trade the U.S. conducts with China.

“We’re concerned about the implications for our food security of actions that China takes, [China could become] worried about what are the implications of their food security from actions that we take, until we’re locked in this sort of downward spiral,” Mahboubi said.

“I don’t think anyone can particularly anticipate how far it’s going to go or how damaging it could be.”

Business

Post Office Capture scandal: Sir Alan Bates calls for those responsible for wrongful convictions to be ‘brought to account’

Published

3 hours ago

June 20, 2025

admin

Post Office Capture scandal: Sir Alan Bates calls for those responsible for wrongful convictions to be 'brought to account'

Sir Alan Bates has called for those responsible for the wrongful convictions of sub postmasters in the Capture IT scandal to be “brought to account”.

It comes after Sky News unearthed a report showing Post Office lawyers knew of faults in the software nearly three decades ago.

The documents, found in a garage by a retired computer expert, describe the Capture system as “an accident waiting to happen”.

Sir Alan said the Sky News investigation showed “yet another failure of government oversight; another failure of the Post Office board to ensure [the] Post Office recruited senior people competent of bringing in IT systems” and management that was “out of touch with what was going on within its organisation”.

The unearthed Capture report was commissioned by the defence team for sub postmistress Patricia Owen and served on the Post Office in 1998 at her trial.

It described the software as “quite capable of producing absurd gibberish” and concluded “reasonable doubt” existed as to “whether any criminal offence” had taken place.

Ms Owen was found guilty of stealing from her branch and given a suspended prison sentence.

She died in 2003 and her family had always believed the computer expert, who was due to give evidence on the report, “never turned up”.

Adrian Montagu reached out after seeing a Sky News report earlier this year and said he was actually stood down by the defending barrister with “no reason given”.

The barrister said he had no recollection of the case.

Victims and their lawyers hope the newly found “damning” expert report, which may never have been seen by a jury, could help overturn Capture convictions.

‘These people have to be brought to account’

Sir Alan, the leading campaigner for victims of the Horizon Post Office scandal, said while “no programme is bug free, why [was the] Post Office allowed to transfer the financial risk from these bugs on to a third party ie the sub postmaster, and why did its lawyers continue with prosecutions seemingly knowing of these system bugs?”

He continued: “Whether it was incompetence or corporate malice, these people have to be brought to account for their actions, be it for Capture or Horizon.”

More than 100 victims have come forward

More than 100 victims, including those who were not convicted but who were affected by the faulty software, have so far come forward.

Capture was used in 2,500 branches between 1992 and 1999, just before Horizon was introduced – which saw hundreds wrongfully convicted.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), the body responsible for investigating potential miscarriages of justice, is currently looking at a number of Capture convictions.

A CCRC spokesperson told Sky News: “We have received applications regarding 29 convictions which pre-date Horizon.
25 of these applications are being actively investigated by case review managers, and two more recent applications are in the preparatory stage and will be assigned to case review managers before the end of June.

“We have issued notices under s.17 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 to Post Office Ltd requiring them to produce all material relating to the applications received.

“To date, POL have provided some material in relation to 17 of the cases and confirmed that they hold no material in relation to another 5. The CCRC is awaiting a response from POL in relation to 6 cases.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Business and Trade said: “Postmasters negatively affected by Capture endured immeasurable suffering. We continue to listen to those who have been sharing their stories on the Capture system, and have taken their thoughts on board when designing the Capture Redress Scheme.”

World

Donald Trump weighing up many risks before possible US strike on Iran

Published

3 hours ago

June 20, 2025

admin

Donald Trump weighing up many risks before possible US strike on Iran

This is the most significant statement from the US president in days, though it still keeps everyone guessing.

In a message conveyed through his press secretary, he is giving diplomacy up to two weeks to work.

“Based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,” Karoline Leavitt quoted him as saying.

It is not clear what “whether or not to go” entails.

Israel-Iran conflict: Latest updates

We know that he has been given a spectrum of different military options by his generals and we know that the Israelis are pressuring him to use American B2 bombers with their bunker-busting bombs to destroy Iran’s nuclear facility at Fodow.

The Israelis are encouraging no delay. But against that, he is weighing up many risks, both military and political.

Militarily, it is not clear how successful a bunker-busting strike on Fordow would be.

Experts have suggested it would require several of the massive bombs, which have never been used in combat before, to be dropped on the site.

It is not as simple as one clean strike and job done.

Politically, the president is under significant pressure domestically not to get involved in Iran.

Within his own MAGA coalition – influencers, politicians and media personalities are lining up in criticism of involvement in the conflict.

One of those leading the criticism, his former chief strategist Steve Bannon, who maintains huge influence, was seen entering the White House on Thursday.

His press secretary reiterated to us that the president always wants to give diplomacy a chance and she confirmed that his Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff has spoken to the Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi.

European leaders, including the UK foreign secretary David Lammy, who is in Washington, are meeting Mr Araghchi in Geneva on Friday.

The two-week window – assuming it lasts that long – also gives space to better prepare for any strike and mitigate against some of the other risks of US involvement.

There are 40,000 troops in bases across the Middle East. It takes time to increase security at these bases or to move non-essential personnel out. It also takes time to move strategic military assets into the region.

The USS Nimitz aircraft carrier and its support vessels were redeployed from the Indo-Pacific on Monday. Their last known position was the Strait of Malacca two days ago.

The Nimitz Carrier Group will overlap with the USS Carl Vinson group which was deployed to the Middle East in March.

The potential two-week window also allows for more time for a ‘day after’ plan, given that the Israeli strategy appears to be regime change from within.

Since the Israeli action in Iran began last week, the worst-case scenario of mass casualties in Israel from Iranian attacks has not materialised.

The president is said to be surprised and encouraged by this. “Israel has exceeded a lot of people’s expectations in their abilities,” press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.

The Israeli success, the absence of a mass casualty event in Israel, and the lack of any sustained counterattack by Iranian proxies in the region remove reservations that previous presidents have had about taking on Iran.

That said, sources have told Sky News that the president is determined that the diplomatic solution should be given a chance despite current pessimism over the chances of success.

A critical two weeks ahead.

World

Regime change in Iran is ‘unacceptable’, says the Kremlin

Published

3 hours ago

June 20, 2025

admin

Regime change in Iran is 'unacceptable', says the Kremlin

Regime change in Iran is “unacceptable” and the assassination of the country’s supreme leader would “open the Pandora’s box”, the Kremlin has said.

In a rare interview with a foreign media organisation, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Sky News that Russia would react “very negatively” if Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed.

The comments came as US President Donald Trump said he will decide within two weeks whether America will join Israel’s military campaign against Tehran, after earlier speculating on social media about killing the Iranian leader.

“The situation is extremely tense and is dangerous not only for the region but globally,” Mr Peskov said in an interview at the Constantine Palace in Saint Petersburg.

“An enlargement of the composition of the participants of the conflict is potentially even more dangerous.

“It will lead only to another circle of confrontation and escalation of tension in the region.”

They are the Kremlin’s strongest comments yet regarding the Israel-Iran conflict, which has stoked fears in Moscow that it could be on the verge of losing its closest ally in the Middle East.

Russia has deepened its ties with Iran since invading Ukraine, and the two countries signed a strategic partnership in January.

“[Regime change in Iran] is unimaginable. It should be unacceptable, even talking about that should be unacceptable for everyone,” Mr Peskov said, in a thinly veiled reference to Washington.

But Mr Peskov refused to be drawn on what action Russia would take if Khamenei was killed, saying instead it would trigger action “from inside Iran”.

“It would lead to the birth of extremist moods inside Iran and those who are speaking about [killing Khamenei], they should keep it in mind. They will open the Pandora’s box.”

Vladimir Putin’s offers to mediate an end to the conflict have so far been rejected by Mr Trump, who said on Wednesday that he told the Russian president to “mediate your own [conflict]”, in reference to Russia’s war against Ukraine.

Mr Peskov denied the American president’s words were insulting, adding: “Everyone has a different language.

“President Trump has his own unique way of speaking and his unique language. We are quite tolerant and expect everyone to be tolerant of us.”

The Trump administration’s own mediation efforts to end the war in Ukraine have failed to yield any major breakthroughs, despite two rounds of direct talks between Moscow and Kyiv.

Moscow has stepped up its aerial bombardment of Ukraine in recent weeks and continues to reject Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s calls for a 30-day ceasefire.

“Now we have a strategic advantage. Why should we lose it? We are not going to lose it. We are going further. We’re advancing and we’ll continue to advance,” Mr Peskov said.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

Russia has previously said it would only commit to a ceasefire if Kyiv stops receiving foreign military support, fearing that a pause in the fighting would offer Ukraine a chance to rearm and regroup its forces.

Asked if Moscow could commit to not using a ceasefire in the same way, Mr Peskov said: “A ceasefire is a ceasefire, and you stop.

“But America is not saying that ‘we’ll quit any supplies’. Britain is not saying that as well. France is not saying that as well. This is the problem.”