China’s Strategic Infiltration: Risks of Unchecked Investment in the U.S. and Lessons for Australia, By Chris Knight (Florida) and James Reed
The article "Are the Chinese Already Here?" by The American Conservative raises a chilling prospect: the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) may be conducting a covert invasion of the United States through strategic investments, land purchases, and technological infiltration, posing significant risks to national security. This is echoed by a Breitbart report detailing the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) National Farm Security Action Plan, which targets China's potential bioterrorism and land grabs. These pieces argue that unchecked Chinese investment, ranging from farmland acquisitions near military bases to control over critical supply chains and data, constitutes a multifaceted threat that could undermine U.S. sovereignty. For Australia, a nation grappling with similar concerns about Chinese influence, these developments offer critical lessons. This post expands on the case for vigilance, examines the risks of Chinese infiltration, and proposes actionable lessons for Australia to safeguard its national interests.
The Case for a CCP "Invasion" in the U.S.
The American Conservative article paints a sobering picture of China's strategic positioning within the U.S., framing it as a potential prelude to conflict. It cites several alarming developments:
1.Land Purchases Near Strategic Sites: Chinese entities have acquired approximately 384,000 acres of U.S. farmland, often near military bases and population centres. While ownership alone does not confirm malicious intent, the proximity to critical infrastructure raises red flags, especially given recent global precedents. For example, Ukraine and Israel used pre-positioned drones to strike Russian and Iranian targets, respectively, demonstrating the viability of "sleeper" weapons. The article suggests that China could similarly embed covert assets, such as drones or even nuclear devices, within U.S. borders.
2.Control Over Critical Technologies: China dominates 90% of the global drone market through companies like DJI, raising concerns about potential weaponisation or surveillance capabilities. Rogue communication devices found in Chinese solar panels further highlight the risk of espionage embedded in imported technology. Additionally, Michael Lucci of the State Armor Foundation warns of Chinese spyware in U.S. medical devices, which could enable data theft for genetic sequencing or bioweapon development.
3.Bioterrorism and Agroterrorism: The arrest of two Chinese nationals on June 5, 2025, for smuggling toxic fungi suggests potential agroterrorism aimed at disrupting U.S. agriculture. The Breitbart report amplifies this, noting over 100 FBI investigations into biosmuggling, with a Chinese citizen recently caught sending concealed biological materials. Senator Roger Marshall highlights the catastrophic risk of a lab-engineered virus targeting livestock, with China potentially holding exclusive vaccines.
4.Economic and Political Manipulation: The American Conservative details how the CCP funnels money through U.S. environmental groups like the Iowa Environmental Council (IEC), which receives significant funding from the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit with ties to Chinese state entities. This funding influences policies, such as opposition to legislation protecting Bayer's Roundup, potentially weakening U.S. agriculture while China, the world's leading glyphosate producer, benefits. Senator Chuck Grassley's allegations of Chinese interference in the 2020 election further suggest political manipulation.
5.Supply Chain Dominance: The Breitbart article underscores China's control over critical U.S. supply chains, including 25% of pork production through Smithfield Foods and significant seed technology via Syngenta. Peter Navarro describes this as treating the U.S. "like a colony," exploiting American reliance on Chinese goods. The State Armor Foundation warns that the CCP is pushing U.S. dependence on Chinese-controlled green technologies, such as batteries and solar panels, to weaken energy independence.
These elements collectively suggest a strategy of "unrestricted warfare," where economic, technological, and biological tools are leveraged to erode U.S. sovereignty without direct conflict. The American Conservative draws parallels to historical fears of "reds under the bed," arguing that while not all concerns may materialise, the CCP's opaque intentions and global track record justify heightened vigilance.
Recent global events validate these concerns. The American Conservative cites Ukraine's use of pre-positioned drones to strike Russian targets and Israel's similar attacks on Iran, demonstrating the feasibility of covert, long-range weapons. In Latin America, China's Belt and Road Initiative has secured economic dominance through predatory loans and infrastructure investments, isolating Taiwan and expanding influence. Australia itself has faced CCP interference, with reports of Chinese-funded lobbying and media manipulation, as discussed in David Llewellyn-Smith's Macrobusiness article, discussed at the blog today. These examples illustrate China's ability to exploit economic and political systems, a tactic now evident in the U.S.
The risks of unchecked Chinese investment are manifold:
Strategic Vulnerability: Land ownership near military bases could facilitate espionage or sabotage. For example, a Chinese billionaire's 140,000-acre purchase near Laughlin Air Force Base and the Fufeng Group's attempted acquisition near Grand Forks Air Force Base raise concerns about surveillance or worse.
Economic Dependence: China's control over critical supply chains, such as rare earths, batteries, and agricultural products, threatens U.S. self-sufficiency.
Biological Threats: The smuggling of toxic fungi and biological materials suggests potential bioterrorism, with devastating implications for food security.
Political Influence: CCP-funded groups like the Energy Foundation manipulate U.S. policy, weakening domestic industries like agriculture while strengthening China's global position.
Technological Espionage: Chinese drones, solar panels, and medical devices could collect sensitive data or serve as platforms for sabotage, undermining national security.
The Breitbart article emphasises that these threats are not hypothetical, with the USDA's action plan reflecting bipartisan recognition of the need to counter China's strategic moves.
Australia faces parallel risks due to its economic ties with China and significant Chinese investment in real estate, agriculture, and infrastructure. The Macrobusiness article warns of the CCP's influence over the Chinese-Australian diaspora, particularly in key electorates, and its potential to sway foreign policy. Drawing from the U.S. experience, Australia can adopt the following measures to protect its national interests:
1.Restrict Strategic Land Ownership:
U.S. Example: States like Arkansas and Nebraska have banned Chinese-owned companies from owning farmland and critical infrastructure. Nebraska's legislation removed Chinese telecommunications equipment, and Governor Jim Pillen personally pressured Syngenta to sell its operations to a U.S. company.
Lesson for Australia: Implement federal and state-level bans on foreign ownership of land near military bases, critical infrastructure, or agricultural hubs. The Australian Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) should strengthen scrutiny of Chinese investments, ranking national security over economic gains. Legislation similar to the U.S.'s No American Land for Communist China Act (S.715) could be adapted to block CCP-linked entities from strategic purchases.
2.Enhance Supply Chain Security:
U.S. Example: The USDA's action plan prioritises American-made agricultural research and revokes certifications for foreign entities tied to adversarial regimes. The Trump administration is exploring a federal solution to reduce reliance on Chinese supply chains, such as rare earths and green technologies.
Lesson for Australia: Develop a "Made in Australia" mandate for critical industries, including agriculture, energy, and defence. Invest in domestic manufacturing of essential goods, such as solar panels and medical devices, to reduce dependence on Chinese imports. The government could offer incentives for local production, similar to the U.S. proposal to fund workforce training for critical infrastructure components.
3.Counter Foreign Influence:
U.S. Example: The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), now including the agriculture secretary, reviews foreign acquisitions for national security risks. Investigations into CCP-funded groups like the Energy Foundation aim to expose political manipulation.
Lesson for Australia: Strengthen the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme to require public disclosure of foreign-funded lobbying, particularly by CCP-linked entities. Ban Chinese diplomats from media platforms to curb propaganda, as suggested by Llewellyn-Smith, and regulate platforms like WeChat to prevent censorship and data harvesting.
4.Bolster Biosecurity:
U.S. Example: The USDA's action plan addresses bioterrorism risks, with the FBI investigating over 100 biosmuggling cases. The National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility in Kansas is developing countermeasures against engineered viruses.
Lesson for Australia: Enhance biosecurity protocols at borders and research facilities, learning from U.S. arrests of Chinese nationals smuggling biological materials. Australia's Biosecurity Act 2015 should be expanded to include stricter penalties for smuggling and mandatory testing of imported agricultural products for contaminants.
5.Promote Community Integration:
U.S. Example: The American Conservative warns of "sleeper" threats within diaspora communities, though it avoids direct accusations against Chinese-Americans. However, The New York Times notes a rightward shift among Chinese-Americans due to concerns about crime and affirmative action, highlighting the need for integration to counter foreign influence.
Lesson for Australia: Expand civic education programs for Chinese-Australian communities, emphasising democratic values and national sovereignty, as suggested by Llewellyn-Smith. Community outreach should foster loyalty to Australia while countering CCP propaganda, avoiding the alienation of diaspora groups.
6.Investigate and Regulate Technology:
U.S. Example: The discovery of rogue devices in Chinese solar panels and concerns about DJI drones have prompted calls for a comprehensive review of imported technology. The Trump administration's border controls aim to prevent smuggling of harmful components.
Lesson for Australia: Conduct a national audit of Chinese-made technologies, including drones, telecommunications equipment, and medical devices, to identify espionage risks. Regulate or ban high-risk imports, and invest in domestic tech innovation to compete with Chinese companies like Huawei and DeepSeek.
Critics may argue that these measures risk economic harm, given China's role as a major trading partner for both the U.S. and Australia. Restricting investments or supply chains could increase costs and disrupt markets. However, the American Conservative counters that economic dependence on China is itself a security risk, as it enables the CCP to exploit vulnerabilities. Australia's experience with Chinese trade coercion, such as tariffs on wine and barley in 2020, underscores the need for diversification.
Another concern is potential xenophobia toward Chinese diaspora communities. The New York Times reports criticism of U.S. Senator Tom Cotton for conflating Asian identities, highlighting the need for precision in targeting CCP influence rather than ethnic groups. Australia must ensure policies focus on state actors, not Chinese-Australians, to maintain social cohesion.
Finally, some may claim the threat is exaggerated, citing China's demographic and economic challenges. However, the American Conservative argues that China's aggressive global strategy, evident in Latin America, Oceania, and the U.S., outweighs these limitations, necessitating proactive defences.
Australia's vulnerability to Chinese influence mirrors the U.S. experience. Chinese investments in Australian real estate, agriculture, and ports, combined with political lobbying and diaspora influence, pose similar risks. The Breitbart article's emphasis on food security as national security resonates with Australia, where Chinese ownership of agricultural assets could threaten self-sufficiency. The U.S.'s proactive measures, banning land purchases, strengthening CFIUS, and investing in biosecurity, offer a blueprint for Australia to counter these threats.
Moreover, the American Conservative's reference to China's "three-cushion shot" strategy, using green groups to weaken U.S. agriculture, parallels concerns about CCP influence in Australian environmental and academic sectors. Australia must investigate foreign-funded organisations and enforce transparency to prevent policy manipulation.
In conclusion the American Conservative and Breitbart articles present a compelling case that the CCP is infiltrating the U.S. through land purchases, supply chain dominance, technological espionage, and political manipulation, constituting a covert "invasion" that threatens national security. Australia faces analogous risks, amplified by its economic reliance on China and the CCP's influence over diaspora communities. By adopting U.S.-inspired measures, restricting strategic investments, securing supply chains, countering foreign influence, bolstering biosecurity, promoting integration, and regulating technology, Australia can protect its sovereignty. The U.S. experience serves as a warning: unchecked Chinese investment risks transforming a democratic nation into a strategic pawn. Australia must act decisively to ensure its land, food, and freedoms remain in Australian hands.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/are-the-chinese-already-here/
"Back on May 11, this author warned that the People's Republic of China could be pre-positioning weapons, including nuclear bombs, inside the United States with the idea that, in the event of hostilities, the Chinese could fire them off.
Three weeks later, on June 1, Ukraine used pre-positioned drones, bearing conventional warheads, to destroy Russian military assets thousands of miles behind the warfront. Twelve days after that, the Israels used a similar tactic to inflict massive damage on faraway Iran.
To put the matter plainly, the concept of activating "sleeper" weapons has been proved. Nobody wants a war with China, but even more, nobody should like the idea of the Chinese having planted dragon's teeth in our midst. It could happen here, some kind of Pearl Harbor or 9/11—or maybe something a thousand times worse. So we need a thorough national assessment of our vulnerability.
We could start with the sober knowledge that Chinese entities have purchased some 384,000 acres of land in the U.S. Many of those properties are near U.S. military bases and population centers. To be sure, ownership of land doesn't prove that the PRC has weaponized it, but the Russians and Iranians were insufficiently suspecting—and look what happened to them.
Happily, there's a significant effort to unwind those Red Chinese land purchases, and yet for the sake of safety, or at least peace of mind, it's best to apply the fearful Cold War joke: Maybe there really is a red under the bed.
Is this paranoia? It wasn't paranoiacs who built rogue communications devices into Chinese solar power components; it was the observant who found them. The discovery of those spy gadgets should convince us, once and for all, not to import such wares from China—and to examine all solar equipment, wherever it comes from.
Speaking of gadgets that could have nefarious use, China controls an estimated 90 percent of the world drone market. Not only does that mean that the PRC can whip up locust-like—and mosquito-sized—drone swarms, it also suggests that Red China could use its economies of scale to accelerate drone innovation, e.g. further miniaturization and kit-compartmentalization, such that components to be smuggled into the U.S., appearing harmless and thus slipping past inspectors. So we need a thorough review of risks, being as imaginative in our defense plans as other countries have been in their attack plans.
Thankfully, most PRC-funded Confucius Institutes have been closed. Furthermore, it's a good thing that the Trump administration has locked down the border. Yet, in the most literal sense, we don't know who entered this country during the Biden years. So now have the task of surveilling—and perhaps apprehending or expelling—organized malefactors.
Just on June 5, two Chinese nationals were arrested on charges of smuggling toxic funguses that could destroy crops and God knows what else. Is this "agroterrorism"? Or just a bad science experiment? Inquiring minds want to know—and should probe deeply.
Yet it's also possible that we are being penetrated in ways that require no direct human invader. Let's keep asking: Was Covid 19, that worldwide pandemic, actually a Chinese bioweapon? Some well-credentialed experts allege that the Wuhan Bat Lady gain-of-functioned a lethal virus and released it in 2019, killing millions and costing the world economy tens of trillions.
In 2024, the Heritage Foundation released a bipartisan report, led by John Ratcliffe, formerly a member of Congress and director of national intelligence. The report didn't reach a definitive conclusion as to virological mass murder, but it perceived the Middle Kingdom through a glass darkly:
China has been in a league uniquely of its own in its active and aggressive opposition to honesty, transparency, and accountability regarding the virus and its spread. This behavior by the Chinese government, more than anything else, was the proximal origin of the COVID-19 pandemic.
A year later, Ratcliffe is the Trump administration's director of the CIA. So presumably, there will be more moments of hard-nosed looking at China's infectious misprisions.
And there are other ways of stealthily penetrating the U.S. In a May op-ed, Michael Lucci, CEO of the State Armor Foundation, a body that counts the former Trump national security adviser Robert O'Brien as one of its advisers, noted the presence of Chinese spyware in American medical devices. In addition to the obvious privacy and blackmail concerns, Lucci pointed out that the accumulation of medical data could give the Chinese an edge on genetic sequencing technologies that could, in turn, aid the production of new medicines—or, of course, new contagions.
There's more. On July 1, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) highlighted allegations that China interfered in the 2020 presidential election on behalf of Joe Biden. (Grassley further alleged that, five years ago, the ancien régime FBI leadership interfered with the field investigation. Now why might that have happened?)
Meanwhile, we should trust—but verify—that the Trump administration's dig, baby, dig policies are addressing the strategic problem of China's chokehold on rare earths.
Still, more concerns loom: It seems, for example, that hostile foreign powers are using our freedoms to manipulate Western political systems for their own interests.
It's long been recognized that the Russians have been funding green groups in Europe, even as Russia itself is not so green. Why this generosity to foreign ecological activists? The answer seems clear enough: to discourage European energy production and encourage importing of Russian energy. (And if useful-idiot greens discombobulate Western societies, that's gravy for Moscow.)
Now Beijing appears to be playing the same game. The Washington Examiner's Robert Schmad has detailed China's boosting the revenues of major U. S. philanthropies, through Uyghur slave labor and good deals with the People's Liberation Army. In turn, these philanthropies have amplified pro-Chinese policy positions on green issues. Given that China is not at all green—it belches more CO2 than the U.S. and the other 37 OECD countries combined—this merits examination.
In fact, it appears that the PRC is playing a geopolitical three-cushion shot: China money to green groups to hits on the U.S. economy. Schmad details how Chinese money is reaching into U.S. state legislatures, aiming to reshape policy.
To cite just one of Schmad's examples, the Iowa Environmental Council (IEC) has actively opposed state legislation that would establish a legal-liability shield around Bayer, the company that makes Roundup—Bayer having purchased the herbicide's original maker, Monsanto. Tort lawsuits on Roundup have cost Bayer some $11 billion, and the greens like it that way, hoping to eliminate the herbicide altogether, at least in the U.S..
To that end, IEC assigned no fewer than seven lobbyists to work against the shielding legislation, which is backed by Hawkeye State farm groups. And here's Schmad's kicker:
Describing itself as a "nonpartisan alliance of diverse organizations and individuals working together to protect and preserve Iowa's environment," the Iowa Environmental Council has, since 2015, consistently received a large portion, at times a majority, of its funding from the Energy Foundation, an international green nonprofit group with deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
According to another digging journalist, Thomas Catenacci, while the Energy Foundation is technically headquartered in San Francisco, its true hub is in China. For instance, the CEO of the Energy Foundation is one Ji Zou. Catenacci adds:
Zou previously served as the deputy director general of China's National Center for Climate Change Strategy, an agency within the Chinese government's National Development and Reform Commission. Ping He, a senior policy adviser at the group, worked for eight years at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, a leading state-run research institution.
The Energy Foundation is not small: According to Pro Publica, its revenues in 2023 totaled $286 million. So in addition to its funding of activities in Iowa, it can afford to fund similar lobbying efforts in other states, like Florida, Idaho, and Missouri.
For its part, American agriculture fears this onslaught. In the words of Missouri State Senator Kurtis Gregory, Show Me State farmers are "under attack from two fronts: trial lawyers looking to cash in on frivolous lawsuits and Communist China, which aims to infiltrate and control our agricultural industry." Gregory adds, "Legislation to end lawfare against Roundup is a critical line of defense to protect Missouri's farmers and keep our food supply secure."
To add another twist to the tale, China is the world's leading producer of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup—and the country shows no inclination to halt its own production. So if Roundup is sidelined in the U.S.—with likely deleterious effects on U.S. farm production—the PRC stands to gain from the vacuum.
Maybe that's the grand strategy: The Chinese are working hand-in-glove—perhaps money-in-palm is a better way to put it—with American green groups to manipulate American politics.
To be sure, some will argue that health concerns about Roundup are perfectly valid, and that IEC and other green groups would be acting exactly the same way without any help from the Chinese (even if it seems inarguable that they'd have fewer resources with which to lobby). That's why we need rigorous investigations—including from the legislatures of the affected states—threshing out legit fears from fake news. Policy ought not to be made, as it often is now, by green groups and their close allies, the tort lawyers.
In the meantime, admittedly, a blow to American agriculture is not the same thing as a mass-casualty event. Still, it is a cut—one of a thousand the Chinese could be inflicting.
And yes, the U.S. might be preparing sneaky stratagems of its own to affect China. To which we can say: Good. It's good, that is, to have deterrence.
Valuable perspective comes from the aforementioned State Armor Foundation:
Bottom of Form
The Chinese Communist Party's (CCP's) plan to defeat America includes maneuvering the United States into dependence on China for energy and other critical supplies while preventing the U.S. military from intercepting China's energy sources. To secure U.S. dependence, the CCP has been co-opting the progressive American climate change lobby to push a transition from fossil fuels and other critical inputs on which the United States (or the broader West) is self-reliant onto "green" technologies controlled by China. Through this strategy, the CCP has already increased U.S. dependence on their batteries, solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations, and other components produced in China. The CCP is now trying to compel further shifts of the U.S. electricity grid and fertilizer market away from Western companies.
It's through this bleak template that we might consider all the other concerns about Chinese activities that touch the U.S., from TikTok to AI to more familiar types of espionage.
Admittedly, this is a depressing topic, all this long-twilight-struggling, as we are forced to contemplate the many threats and terrors creeping towards us like so many Lovecraftian tentacles. Yet the prospect of actually losing a war is even more depressing, so that should help keep us watchful.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture formally announced its National Farm Security Action Plan on Tuesday, rallying top Trump administration officials, Republican governors, and lawmakers around a resolute effort to protect American farmland, food supply chains, and agricultural research from foreign threats, especially Communist China.
"American agriculture, in American hands, is a positive good," said Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins. "Every family, every home, every community, depends upon what our farmers do, and they support and sustain us, not merely by keeping us materially fed, but by keeping us spiritually strong. That's exactly why it is under threat—from criminals, political adversaries, and hostile regimes."
In addition to unveiling the USDA National Farm Security Action Plan, Rollins revealed she is now officially a member of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), who has pushed for her inclusion, described CFIUS as "a group of high-ranking Cabinet members in the White House that determine who buys what" and insisted the agriculture secretary needs to be at the table "to protect our farmland." Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) echoed that support.
Counselor to the President Peter Navarro warned that the Chinese Communist Party has used American supply chains and food systems as weapons against the United States. "We're the United States, but they treat us like a colony," Navarro asserted, pointing to the Chinese acquisition of Smithfield Foods and Syngenta. "Seeds really can be the revolution that keeps the world fed—and China now owns a key part of it."
Attorney General Pam Bondi shared that two Chinese nationals were recently charged in Michigan for attempting to smuggle potential agroterrorism weapons into the country. Soon after, a Chinese citizen was arrested for sending packages of concealed biological materials into the United States. "We will prosecute you. We will hold you accountable," Bondi vowed, adding that the FBI has opened over 100 biosmuggling investigations in recent years.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth underscored the national security stakes of foreign land purchases near U.S. military installations. "As someone who's charged with leading the Defense Department, I want to know who owns the land around our bases and strategic bases. We would be asleep at the wheel if we were not fully a party to an effort like this to ensure that our nation had the food supply it needs. No longer can foreign adversaries assume we're not watching and we're not paying attention and we're not doing something about it."
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, a lifelong farmer and rancher, emphasized that her experience shaped her belief that food policy is national security policy. "A country that cannot feed itself, cannot take care of itself, and cannot provide for itself, is not secure, and we have to be able to feed ourselves to make sure that no other country ever controls us," Noem declared. "In South Dakota, China does not own any of our land, nor will they ever own any of our land."
Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R-AR) recounted how Arkansas became the first state in the nation to kick a Chinese-owned company off its farmland and passed new laws blocking foreign land purchases near military installations and critical infrastructure. "A country has to be able to feed itself, fuel itself, and fight for itself to truly be free," she stated.
Gov. Jim Pillen (R-NE) explained that Nebraska has taken aggressive action to push Chinese companies out, beginning with legislation passed in 2023 to remove all Chinese equipment from telecommunications systems statewide. "That was the first step," Pillen said. "Second step was making sure that no land is purchased by any foreign adversaries in the state of Nebraska. Third step is simply that we have direct conversations with companies that are from China." He added that he personally refused to meet with representatives from Syngenta and urged them to leave the state. "I have no interest in you being in Nebraska. My suggestion would be to get a different job." Pillen confirmed that Syngenta had sold its Nebraska operations to a family-owned U.S. genetic company.
Tuberville stressed that foreign adversaries own over two million acres of farmland in Alabama alone. "They are dominating us in almost everything that they do, because we've sat back and the politicians have been counting their money instead of doing what's right and helping this country stay in the front," the senator argued. "We've got to be number one. We can't be number two. We've got to fight back. They are coming into our country and buying our farmland."
Congressman GT Thompson (R-PA) noted that the One Big Beautiful Bill included historic investments across the agricultural value chain, strengthening biosecurity, providing tax relief, and supporting affordable energy policies to keep family farms running and food prices low. He pointed to foreign threats, intellectual property theft, and high energy costs as among the major challenges facing America's farmers.
Rollins affirmed that the USDA will prioritize American-made research and revoke certifications for foreign entities tied to adversarial regimes like China, North Korea, Iran, and Russia. "The red states are the ones that are banning the Chinese-owned farmland, and this is true," she affirmed. "But I have to believe that Democrat governors and even the blue states realize what a massive threat this is to national security and how important it is. We plan to work with everyone, no matter which party, no matter which side of the aisle they're from, to ensure that the people of this country and our agriculture farmland is protected."
Marshall contended that Chinese land ownership is just a small piece of a much larger threat. He pointed to foreign control over as much as a fourth of America's protein processing industry through companies like JBS and Smithfield, as well as ongoing intellectual property theft by Chinese researchers operating inside U.S. universities. "What really keeps me awake is bioterrorism," Marshall cautioned, describing a scenario in which a Wuhan lab-engineered virus wipes out global livestock while adversaries protect their own with exclusive mRNA vaccines. "That's why I'm a big proponent of the work being done in Manhattan, Kansas at the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility. The biggest active threat I see is bioterrorism."
Rollins previously told Breitbart News the Trump administration is exploring a federal solution to stop China from buying American farmland, calling it "one of the very, very top" national security priorities and warning that much of the land is located near U.S. military outposts.
Comments