An accusation of alleged espionage in Paraguay again fueled tensions between China and the United States, with a diplomatic crossing that already has echoes in Panama.
In a statement released on Tuesday night, the Chinese Embassy in Panama strongly questioned a signed statement from the U.S. Southern Command and the Paraguayan Ministry of Information and Communication Technologies on cybersecurity, in which they identify a group of hackers called Flax Typhoon, which allegedly had links with the Chinese government and which would be infiltrating the Paraguayan government.
The document, of just three paragraphs, explains that the “hallazgo” occurred during a joint review of Paraguay’s government cybersecurity networks, focused on protecting the country’s critical assets.
This cyber review was part of the ongoing cooperation between the United States and Paraguay to build a safer and more resilient digital infrastructure, and to meet the shared challenges in cyberspace, underscored the statement, which was retweeted by the official accounts of the U.S. Embassy in Panama and Southern Command on the social network.
In an airtous response, the Chinese embassy called the accusations “sational and baseless.”
In a statement titled “The thief judges by his status,” the Chinese argue that the US government takes advantage of its dominance over international submarine cables to “perform listening and theft of secrets massively in the world.”
The Dean contacted the U.S. Embassy in Panama to learn about its position on the Chinese pronouncement, but it only referred its comments to the official communiqué of its embassy in Paraguay, one of the 13 only countries in the world that still has relations with Taiwan.
Espionage and cold war.
This is not the first time Washington has questioned China of cyberespionage, and mentions “Flax Typhoon.” U.S. media reported a complaint from the FIB last September, when they accused the group of “introducing malicious software” on routers, cameras and devices of at least 200,000 users in the United States. The White House has pointed out, without presenting evidence, that these incidents are part of a policy of the Chinese Communist Party (PCCH), measures that have provoked sanctions and the possible prescription in the United States of the popular Chinese social network Tik Tok, as they are a source to undermine data for PCCH.
The United States is not the only country with complaints to Beijing in the West; from several European countries – allies of Washington – criticism has the same tone, to which is added the concern of the strengthening of relations with Moscow.
For its part, China insists on pointing out that there is a double standard of Washington as cyberespionage. And although it has not presented evidence, it has recently strengthened its technology policies, such as the implementation of the Personal Information Protection Act (2021), which regulates the collection of data by private companies, and the reform of its counter-espionage law (2023), which extends the already broad powers of the authorities in cybersecurity.
In the statement, Beijing accuses the United States of forcing its major Internet and technology companies to deliver user data. Some scientific companies and technologies, for greater profit, offer to collaborate to spread the false narrative about the alleged attacks of Chinese hackers. “We urge the U.S. Embassy in Panama to stop judging others on their own condition,” the embassy said.
Following the scandal in 2018 of data analytics company Cambridge Analytica, which revealed that personal information was compiled from millions of Facebook users without their consent, and then used for political purposes, alarms were triggered about the use of big data from private companies. Three years earlier, in 2015, the leak of 1.8 million official documents by the former CIA and NSA (National Security Agency), Edward Snowden, uncovered a massive surveillance network about U.S. citizens and even leaders of U.S. allied governments.
A scenario of espionage and counter-espionage that, in the opinion of international analysts consulted on the issue, will deepen as geopolitical clashes between China and the United States increase, which have as their fundamental backdrop control of markets and access to resources.
For economist and university professor René Bracho, behind the strategic contradictions of both powers underlies an economic component. On the one hand, the element of loss of relative competitiveness between American companies with transnational influences and their products that have been displaced in market shares by Chinese companies and products. This has happened in sectors as diverse as: cars, mobile telephony, digital platforms, energy, among others, says the researcher.
Another aspect that stands out is the gradual loss of hegemony of the dollar, in which Washington sees a threat in China. Is that loss expressed in the changes in the international monetary architecture driven by the Brics – emerging economies. The gradual lower use of the dollar in international commercial transactions. For example, at present, 20 per cent of transactions in the oil market are made with other currencies, he said.
In the midst of the crossing of accusations between the two embassies, the President of the Republic, José Raúl Mulino, stepped out as a distance from the diplomatic clash. This Wednesday, during a tour of the province of Chiriquí, the president responded to journalists with a brief phrase, but clear: Since I was in school they told me: don’t get into big fights.
Despite the traditional U.S. link with Panama, China has increased its presence in recent years, with the establishment of diplomatic relations in 2017 the most relevant step. Both powers are the main users of the Canal and important business partners in the country, which, according to international security specialists, force Panama to maintain a firm balance sheet policy that avoids taking a side in this scenario of this new cold war.
Panama has no candle at that burial, especially since the incident is not properly clarified. The first thing is to define whether or not what is said is true. But, the country has nothing to do with that, said the internationalist and professor at the University of Panama, Eucides Tapia.
The specialist said that, although the country has a Canal under a regime of neutrality with the 1977 Treaty, this is a sui generis neutrality being lower – under the umbrella of the Pentagon, and which in theory only occupies the interoceanic path and not the integrity of the entire territory.
Tapia stressed the importance of Panama ' s strictly law-abiding foreign policy, and that it should not take a stand, unless the country’s interests are at stake or faced with a violation of international standards.
A position of Panama must take place to the extent that it affects us or affects humanity. It must occur when lives are at stake or countries commenting on violations of international law, the commission of genocide or other crimes are presented. “If not, we don’t have to get in,” the teacher reflected.
This article was translated after appearing in La Estrella