男女羞羞视频在线观看,国产精品黄色免费,麻豆91在线视频,美女被羞羞免费软件下载,国产的一级片,亚洲熟色妇,天天操夜夜摸,一区二区三区在线电影
Global EditionASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
Opinion
Home / Opinion / Editorials

Snatch-and-grab does Australia no favors: China Daily editorial

chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2025-05-28 20:26
Share
Share - WeChat
 Machinery can be seen sitting at the Port of Darwin, located in the Northern Territory's capital city of Darwin in Australia, April 21, 2017. [Photo/Agencies]

It has been a while since a US private equity firm started preparing a bid for Darwin Port in Australia, which is currently owned by a Chinese firm, Landbridge Group.

But it was not until last week that the Chinese side responded to the matter, after the Anthony Albanese government pledged during the election campaign to revoke the operating rights of the Chinese company over the Australian port, which prompted China to make clear its stance on the issue.

In an interview with Australian and Chinese media, Chinese Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian made it clear that the Australian side should view the Darwin Port project objectively, honor its binding commitments under the contract, and respect the autonomous decisions made by businesses based on development needs.

The 99-year lease agreement between Landbridge Group and the port is a legal and binding commercial contract, which was reached a decade ago through an open and transparent bidding process, fully compliant with Australian laws and market principles. Over the past 10 years, the Chinese company has made significant investments in maintaining and building Darwin Port's infrastructure, optimizing its operations and management, and expanding its customer base. These efforts have brought remarkable improvements to the port, turning its financial situation from losses to profits and contributing positively to local economic and social development without posing any threat or risk to Australia.

Such win-win cooperation deserves encouragement, not punishment, as Xiao pointed out in the interview. "It is ethically questionable to lease the port when it was unprofitable and then seek to reclaim it once it becomes profitable."

Undoubtedly, it is the push from the US administration, taking advantage of the country's recent election, that has made the otherwise model project a "problem" for Australia. The United States is also making similar moves to control other strategically important international logistics hubs, including the ports on either side of the Panama Canal owned by a Hong Kong-based company, to try and control them for its own narrow ends.

Australia is well aware of the US' intention as well as the fact that continuing the contract with the Chinese company is not only legal, but also serves the interests of Australia. There is no reason for the Australian government to toe the US' line on Darwin Port. If Australia does try to politicize the issue by ending the lease contract and offering the port to the US company, it will only be shooting itself in the foot.

Although it is not known whether the US firm could operate the port well, it is highly likely to interfere in China's trade with Australia through the port if it controls it.

That will not only seriously damage Sino-Australian relations by ruining the tender mutual trust between Beijing and Canberra, but also show the world it is politics, not laws and legal contracts, that defines the business environment of the country. By taking this action, the Australian government risks undermining its global standing by aligning too closely with US interests, potentially facilitating policies that could disproportionately affect the operations of a thriving Chinese enterprise.

If so, China will by no means sit idle while its companies' legal rights and interests are trampled upon in such an open and humiliating manner. Although it has been China's consistent policy to maintain the healthy development of Sino-Australian economic and trade cooperation, it will never sacrifice its interests for the sake of sustaining the continuity of that policy if the other side is not genuine in its efforts to do the same.

Australia used to foot the bill for the US' China containment strategy, only to learn an expensive lesson that it cannot decouple from China. And the exploitative approach the US administration takes against Australia as well as its other trading partners in its tariff war should prompt Canberra to handle the Darwin Port issue prudently.

Since China and Australia are comprehensive strategic partners, they should foster mutual trust, as mutually beneficial cooperation aligns with their shared interests.

It is to be hoped that the Australian federal government and the government of the Northern Territory, where the port is located, will create a fair, transparent and predictable business environment for Chinese enterprises operating in Australia.

Most Viewed in 24 Hours
Top
BACK TO THE TOP
English
Copyright 1995 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

Registration Number: 130349
FOLLOW US
主站蜘蛛池模板: 泰宁县| 射阳县| 潮州市| 宁都县| 桦川县| 南充市| 平顺县| 麦盖提县| 望江县| 宁化县| 邵阳县| 普定县| 腾冲县| 共和县| 务川| 民权县| 阿拉尔市| 颍上县| 武山县| 赞皇县| 澄江县| 新乡县| 平定县| 乐业县| 盐城市| 浠水县| 花垣县| 三门峡市| 岫岩| 茌平县| 内乡县| 东明县| 常熟市| 油尖旺区| 永年县| 永宁县| 南召县| 侯马市| 荣昌县| 南康市| 黄陵县| 贺兰县| 仙桃市| 甘孜| 南皮县| 庆元县| 和平区| 辽中县| 金山区| 翁牛特旗| 宝应县| 吉木萨尔县| 漯河市| 淮南市| 邢台市| 上蔡县| 宁陕县| 台山市| 林口县| 鸡西市| 榆树市| 西青区| 渭南市| 织金县| 达尔| 云南省| 义乌市| 临城县| 康乐县| 彭泽县| 朝阳区| 大余县| 盈江县| 锦州市| 沅江市| 英超| 大城县| 栾川县| 威海市| 桂林市| 崇左市| 和静县|