Connect with us

SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS

Chinese companies corralling land around world

Published

on

Chinese companies are heavily invested in banana plantations in northern Myanmar, which began appearing around 2015, drastically altering the landscape.

Acquisition of nearly 6.5m hectares over 10 years sets off alarms

TOKYO/YANGON — China’s strategic muscle-flexing is not limited to its expansive maritime claims and vigorous infrastructure exports; Chinese entities have also been aggressively acquiring land overseas.

Chinese companies are buying up land in Asia and Africa. The combined area of land purchased or leased by such companies over the past decade is equal to the total land area of Sri Lanka or Lithuania and much larger than acquisitions by their counterparts in the U.S. and other major countries.

Concerns are growing that emerging and developing countries, as sources of supply for food and natural resources, will fall under China’s sway. The security implications are worrying as well.

Japan and other large countries cannot brush aside this Chinese buying spree as insignificant.

“Regulations should be further tightened to prevent the uncontrolled corralling of land,” said Hideki Hirano, a professor at Himeji University who studies foreign investors’ land acquisitions.

To give just one example, bananas are extensively cultivated in the northern Myanmar state of Kachin. Banana trees standing some 3 meters tall grow thick and throw deep shadows in plantation areas. The development of plantations began to accelerate around 2015 and has drastically changed the landscape.

Chinese companies are heavily involved in banana cultivation in the area, according to surveys by nongovernmental and other organizations. Banana exports from Myanmar soared 250 times from $1.5 million in 2013 to $370 million in 2020, according to data from the United Nations. Most of the produce goes to China.

Banana plantations have continued to operate in Kachin since the military coup in February, local residents say, because they are an important source of tax revenue for the Myanmar armed forces.

Chinese businesses are altering the landscape of many places beyond Myanmar. In the southern Vietnamese province of Binh Phuoc, natural rubber production is an important industry. But that industry is now under threat due to the activities of New Hope Liuhe, a leading Chinese livestock company, which is raising a huge herd of pigs on a 75-hectare plot of land developed in 2019. New Hope has expanded in central and northern Vietnam as well, using its year-old pig farm in Binh Phuoc as a model.

In all, Chinese companies have gained control of 6.48 million hectares of land devoted to agriculture, forestry and mining around the world from 2011 to 2020, according to Land Matrix, a European land monitoring organization. That figure dwarfs the combined 1.56 million hectares controlled by British companies, the 860,000 hectares held by American companies and the 420,000 hectares controlled by Japanese ones.

Chinese businesses are rapidly acquiring land overseas to meet burgeoning domestic demand resulting from China’s economic development. Acquiring land abroad gives these businesses stable access to natural resources as supplies tighten around the world.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo offers an illustration: Most of the land in the central African country, is forested. Amid soaring timber prices, a Chinese company, Wan Peng, has been shipping large quantities of timber from the country to China. The Congolese Embassy in Tokyo declined to comment on the contract with the Chinese company.

Chinese companies are also buying mines. China Minmetals invested $280 million in Tanzania, in southern Africa, in 2019, and China Non-Ferrous Metal Mining poured $730 million into a mining operation in Guinea in 2020, according the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, a think tank. The investments were reportedly aimed at gaining access to minerals for use in, among other things, batteries for electric vehicles.

Countries that accept Chinese investment are exposed to potential risks as they become more reliant on China. Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative, a huge multinational infrastructure development program, is a debt trap scheme, say experts. Host nations become heavily indebted to China in an effort to spur development and are later are unable to escape its control.

When CHEC developed a port in southern Sri Lanka, the country was unable to repay loans to China and handed over the port to CHEC on a 99-year lease — a typical example of the debt trap.

In May, China Harbor Engineering (CHEC) won an order to build an expressway in Colombo, Sri Lanka’s largest city. The Chinese company will continue to own the highway after its completion, handing it over to Sri Lanka’s control only after collecting tolls for 18 years. Criticism is also simmering about the murky bidding process for the highway order in Colombo.

Chinese moves to snap up assets abroad are generating countermeasures around the world.

In June, Japan’s parliament enacted a new law to tighten regulations on the acquisition and use of land in places deemed vital to national security. The law, aimed at China, is designed to prevent questionable land deals by foreign businesses. There are already cases of foreign entities owning land near the Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s base in Chitose, Hokkaido, for example.

Other types of land, such as general-use forests, have yet to be covered by such regulations. Foreign entities have acquired 46 hectares of farmland and 7,560 hectares of woodland, according to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

In addition, “there are cases of land owned nominally by Japanese citizens, but which are backed by Chinese entities,” said a person connected to the Public Security Intelligence Agency.

Original Source: asia.nikkei.com

Continue Reading

SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS

‘Food and fossil fuel production causing $5bn of environmental damage an hour’

Published

on

A farm worker ploughs fields overlooking Grangemouth petrochemical and refining plant in Scotland. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian

UN GEO report says ending this harm key to global transformation required ‘before collapse becomes inevitable’.

Continue Reading

SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS

Britain, Netherlands withdraw $2.2 billion backing for Total-led Mozambique LNG

Published

on

LONDON, Dec 1 (Reuters) – Britain and the Netherlands are withdrawing a combined $2.2 billion in support for the TotalEnergies-led Mozambique LNG project, they said separately on Monday, after both hired firms to probe human rights concerns surrounding the development.
Britain’s government said it was rescinding its $1.15 billion backing for project after promising in 2020 a $300 million loan and insurance worth about $700 million for the $20 billion project via UK Export Finance.
The Dutch government also said on Monday Total had withdrawn a $1.1 billion export insurance request for the project.
Atradius Dutch State Business authorised $1.3 billion in export insurance via two policies, the larger of which has been rescinded at the company’s request, the Dutch finance ministry said on Monday.
TotalEnergies declined to comment. Mozambique’s government did not respond to a request for comment.

CONSTRUCTION HALTED IN 2021, BUT DUE TO RESTART

Mozambique LNG’s construction was halted in 2021 due to an Islamist insurgency. Total lifted force majeure on its development in November, but made restarting conditional on the Mozambican government’s approval of a new budget, which the president said he may dispute.
“In preparation to restart the project, UKEF was presented with a proposal to amend the financing terms it had agreed originally,” British business minister Peter Kyle said in a statement.
“My officials have evaluated the risks around the project, and it is the view of His Majesty’s Government that these risks have increased since 2020.” The interests of UK taxpayers “are best served by ending our participation in the project at this time,” he added.
Jihadist attacks have been back on the rise in Mozambique, with Total bringing in workers and equipment this year by air and sea for security reasons.

PROJECT CAN PROCEED WITHOUT UK, DUTCH FINANCING, TOTAL HAS SAID

In April TotalEnergies CEO Patrick Pouyanne told investors that project partners could move forward without UK and Dutch financing, using equity.
More than 70% of the project’s financing is secured, and about 90% of the future gas production is commercialized via contracts with buyers.
Kyle said UKEF would pay back the project for any premium paid. A UKEF spokesperson declined to name the amount.
The Dutch finance minister on Monday said TotalEnergies had asked to cancel part of its insurance via a letter dated November 24, just as an independent human rights review ordered by the ministry was being finalised.
“This means that the Netherlands will no longer be involved in financing the project,” the statement reads.
A $213 million policy insuring Dutch contractor Van Oord remains in place, a ministry spokesperson said.
TotalEnergies holds a 26.5% operating stake in Mozambique LNG. Japan’s Mitsui (8031.T), opens new tab owns 20% in the project and Mozambique state firm ENH 15%, alongside smaller stakeholders including India’s ONGS and Oil India.

CRITICISM FROM ENVIRONMENTAL, HUMAN RIGHTS GROUPS

Human rights nonprofit ECCHR last month filed a criminal complaint against TotalEnergies, alleging it was complicit in torture and enforced disappearances allegedly carried out by government soldiers in Mozambique.
In April, UKEF hired law firm Beyond Human Rights Compliance LLP to investigate risks around Mozambique LNG following initial media reports of the alleged torture, three people interviewed by the firm told Reuters.
TotalEnergies has said those claims lack evidence.
The Dutch government said on Monday the two firms it hired to investigate — Clingendael and Pangea Risk — found the torture allegations credible, though they could not ascertain Total’s knowledge or role, if any.
A London court in 2023 dismissed a court challenge by environmental group Friends of the Earth against the British government’s funding for the project.

Continue Reading

SPECIAL REPORTS AND PROJECTS

The secretive cabal of US polluters that is rewriting the EU’s human rights and climate law

Published

on

Leaked documents reveal how a secretive alliance of eleven large multinational enterprises has worked to tear down the EU’s flagship human rights and climate law, the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). The mostly US-based coalition, which calls itself the Competitiveness Roundtable, has targeted all EU institutions, governments in Europe’s capitals, as well as the Trump administration and other non-EU governments to serve its own interests. With European lawmakers soon moving ahead to completely dilute the CSDDD at the expense of human rights and the climate, this research exposes the fragility of Europe’s democracy.

Key findings

  • Leaked documents reveal how a secretive alliance of eleven companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Koch, Inc., has worked under the guise of a “Competitiveness Roundtable” to get the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) either scrapped or massively diluted.
  • The companies, most of which are headquartered in the US and operate in the fossil fuel sector, aimed to “divide and conquer in the Council”, sideline “stubborn” European Commission departments, and push the European People’s Party (EPP) in the European Parliament “to side with the right-wing parties as much as possible”.
  • Chevron and ExxonMobil were in charge of mobilising pressure against the CSDDD from non-EU countries. The Roundtable companies endeavoured to get the CSDDD high on the agenda of the US-EU trade negotiations and also worked on mobilising other countries against the CSDDD, in order to disguise the US influence.
  • Roundtable companies paid the TEHA Group – a think tank – to write a research report and organise an event on EU competitiveness, which echoed the Roundtable’s position and cast doubt on the European Commission’s assessment of the economic impact of the CSDDD.

While Europeans were told that their governments were negotiating a landmark law to hold corporations accountable for human rights abuses and climate damage, a secretive alliance of US fossil fuel giants was working behind the scenes to destroy it. Collaborating under the innocent-sounding name ‘Competitiveness Roundtable’, eleven multinational enterprises have worked closely to eviscerate several EU sustainability laws, including the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). This Competitiveness Roundtable may be unknown, but its members are a who’s-who of polluting, mainly US, multinationals, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Dow. The group seems to have run rings around all branches of the EU and the Trump administration to get what they want: scrapping, or at least hugely diluting, the CSDDD.

 

Leaked documents  obtained by SOMO reveal how, under the pretext of the now-near-magical concept of ‘competitiveness’, these companies plotted to hijack democratically adopted EU laws and strip them of all meaningful provisions, including those on climate transition plans, civil liability, and the scope of supply chains. EU officials appear not to have known who they were up against. But the documents obtained by SOMO show a high level of organisation and strategising with a clear facilitator: Teneo, a US public relations and consultancy company.

The documents indicate that many of the companies involved wanted to stay hidden from view. After all, if it were widely known that a secretive group of mostly American fossil fuel companies like Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Koch, Inc. was working as a coordinated organisation to dilute an EU climate and human rights law, that might raise questions and serious concern among the public and the policymakers they were targeting. Many of the companies in the Roundtable have never publicly spoken  out against the CSDDD.

Big Oil’s ‘Competitiveness Roundtable’

The Competitiveness Roundtable is dominated by fossil fuel companies, including three Big Oil companies (ExxonMobil, Chevron, TotalEnergies) and three other companies with activities in the oil and gas sector (Koch, Inc., Honeywell, and Baker Hughes). Other members are Nyrstar (minerals and metals, a subsidiary of Trafigura Group); Dow, Inc. (chemicals); Enterprise Mobility (car rentals); and JPMorgan Chase (finance).

Teneo, the Roundtable’s coordinator, has a track record(opens in new window) of working with fossil fuel companies, including Chevron, Shell, and Trafigura, and was hired by the government of Azerbaijan to handle public relations(opens in new window) when it hosted the COP29 climate conference.

In February 2025, the European Commission published the Omnibus I proposal(opens in new window), which aims to “simplify” several EU sustainability laws, including the CSDDD. The documents obtained by SOMO reveal that the Roundtable companies, which have been meeting weekly since at least March 2025, worked on deep interventions within each of the three EU institutions to get the Omnibus I package to align exactly with their views. The EU institutions are expected to reach a final agreement on Omnibus I by the end of 2025.

The documents reveal that the Roundtable companies’ activities in the Parliament are far more significant than what is visible in the EU Transparency Register(opens in new window) Eight of the Roundtable’s lobbying meetings during the Strasbourg plenary sessions of May and June 2025, listed in the Transparency Register, show Teneo as the only attendee, thereby failing  to disclose the names of other Roundtable companies that participated in these meetings. Another three meetings the Roundtable held were not found in the EU Transparency Register(opens in new window) at all.

“Divide and conquer” the Council

In the European Council, the Roundtable plotted to “divide and conquer” EU governments to get the climate article in the CSDDD deleted. In June 2025, during the final weeks of negotiations in the Council on the Omnibus I proposal, the Roundtable discussed lobbying EU government leaders to “intervene politically” to ensure its priorities were included in the Council’s negotiation mandate. Subsequently, German Chancellor Merz and French President Macron reportedly(opens in new window) personally intervened(opens in new window) in the Council’s political process, leading to a dramatic dilution(opens in new window) of the texts(opens in new window) negotiated in the months before the intervention. Several of the changes made to the texts strongly align with the Roundtable’s demands, including delaying and substantially weakening the climate obligations, scrapping EU civil liability provisions, and limiting the responsibility of companies to take responsibility for their supply chains (the ‘Tier 1’ restriction).

Competitiveness Roundtable meeting document, 11 July 2025.

Additionally, the documents reveal that the Roundtable is still aiming to drum up a “blocking minority”  to overturn the Council’s negotiation mandate during the trilogue negotiations, which started in November 2025. By “tak[ing] advantage of the ‘weak’ Council negotiating mandate” and disagreements between EU Member States on “contentious articles”, the Competitiveness Roundtable companies hope to force the Danish Council presidency  to give up on including any form of climate obligations in the CSDDD – despite EU Member States’ agreement on this in the June 2025 Council mandate(opens in new window) .

To implement the divide-and-conquer strategy, the Roundtable assigned specific companies to “establish rapporteurships” with different EU governments. TotalEnergies would target the French, Belgian, and Danish governments, and ExxonMobil would target Germany, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Romania.

Competitiveness Roundtable meeting document, 16 May 2025.

Competitiveness Roundtable meeting document, 11 July 2025.

Circumventing “stubborn” European Commission departments

The Roundtable also discussed working on “circumvent[ing]” two “stubborn” European Commission departments involved in the Omnibus political process, DG JUST and DG FISMA,  which, in their view, were “unlikely to be willing to see our side of the story”. According to the documents, DG JUST opposed deleting the climate article and restricting the Directive’s scope to only very large enterprises. The Roundtable aimed to diminish the role of these departments by pressuring President Von der Leyen and Commissioners McGrath (DG JUST) and Albuquerque (DG FISMA) by “organising letters from Irish and German business groups” and using an event held by the European Roundtable for Industry to “target” Von der Leyen and McGrath.

Read full report: Somo.nl

Source: Somo

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter