Over the past few years, alarming patterns have emerged regarding land purchases near U.S. military bases by Chinese entities with ties to the Communist Party. One stark example involved MineOne, a company owned predominantly by individuals from the People’s Republic of China. The firm bought 12 acres close to Francis E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming and plans to develop a cryptocurrency-mining operation on this sensitive site. The acquisition raised red flags and prompted a national security review from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).
In another significant case, billionaire Zhong Shanshan spent $67 million on 23 acres of land in Nashua, New Hampshire. This property is near strategic defense locations, including L3Harris Technologies and BAE Systems. Notably, the sale sidestepped CFIUS scrutiny, raising serious concerns about oversight and the protection of national security interests.
Further complicating the picture, the Fufeng Group purchased 370 acres near Grand Forks Air Force Base in 2023. This area has been identified for growing intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance operations. Chairman Li Xuechun’s affiliations with the Shandong Province People’s Congress and the Party’s guiding role in corporate development cast further doubt on the motives behind acquiring this land. The deal faced nearly immediate backlash from the Pentagon, which successfully halted the project.
Land acquisitions have surged, specifically from figures linked to Chinese military interests. Sun Guangxin, a former captain in the People’s Liberation Army, bought over 140,000 acres near Laughlin Air Force Base. His extensive connections to the Chinese Communist Party, including ties to former PLA generals, highlight potential risks to national security. The purchase includes a private runway, illustrating the strategic importance of the land and its proximity to military training facilities.
Some purchases obscure their true connection to the Chinese Communist Party through complex webs of shell companies and intermediaries. Esther Mei and Cheng Hu, for instance, acquired properties near several military installations, including the Knob Noster Trailer Park and the Pecan Grove Mobile Home Park. Such targeted investments in remote trailer parks raise eyebrows, suggesting motivations beyond simple real estate investment.
Moreover, their links to the New Federal State of China, a movement associated with Miles Guo, raise serious questions about ties to Chinese intelligence. This connection has led to their involvement in activities that have drawn scrutiny and legal action, including harassment allegations by journalist Gao Bingchen.
Esther Mei’s role with Urban Select Capital, later rebranded to Roadman Investments Corp., further illuminates troubling connections to the Chinese state. The firm has engaged in investment strategies that intertwine with the Communist Party’s initiatives, raising alarm about the infiltration of U.S. economic sectors by Chinese interests. Involvement with entities based in Suzhou Industrial Park, a region housing companies under U.S. sanctions for military links, underscores the stakes involved.
In response to these worrying trends, several states have taken measures to restrict foreign ownership of land, particularly near military bases. Nebraska has outright blocked acquisitions by entities from nations of concern, while Utah has tightened regulations on investments from China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. A broader attempt at national protection came when the Trump administration proposed a ban on Chinese ownership of farmland, emphasizing the risks posed by purchasing near sensitive military installations.
Despite growing concerns around national security, opposition persists against restricting foreign investment in land. Critics argue such measures could be racially motivated, dismissing the legitimate threats presented by individuals connected to the Chinese Communist Party and the People’s Liberation Army. As these discussions unfold, it remains vital to scrutinize foreign acquisitions that might pose risks to U.S. security and sovereignty.
The landscape of foreign ownership of U.S. land is shifting, and the implications for national defense are profound. The thread of Chinese influence woven into these transactions continues to be a critical point of contention that warrants intense scrutiny from policymakers and the public alike.
"*" indicates required fields
