Now, led by the United States, some Western countries have started to openly seize, what is international order? What is that? I've never heard of it.
After the Trump administration came to power, the so-called international order has been continuously collapsing. Unrestrainedly imposing tariffs, arbitrarily plundering other countries, even sending troops into other countries, arresting a country's president, plundering Venezuela's oil, eyeing other countries' territories, and wanting to annex Greenland in Denmark, even powerful Canada has become an object of America's desire to absorb.
After the tariff war and trade war, the United States found that it could not shake China, so it changed its methods, inciting some countries to use rule-breaking means to suddenly target China's overseas operations in January 2026.
The first country to take action against China's overseas operations was Australia.
On January 28, Australian Prime Minister Albanese arrived in Darwin. During this time, he claimed that Australia would push forward the recovery of the operating rights of the Darwin Port from China. Albanese said that this move is in line with Australia's national interest, and commercial negotiations involving this content have already begun.
Albanese even said that the possibility of forcibly recovering the operating rights of Darwin Port cannot be ruled out if the negotiations fail.
So why is Australia so desperate to recover the operating rights of Darwin Port, which still has 89 years until the lease expires? Let's analyze the reasons and the possible political and economic risks for both China and Australia.
Originally, when Darwin Port was operated by Australia itself, there was no business. No business meant no money, and without money, it was impossible to expand the business. Since its construction, Darwin Port has been stuck in such a vicious cycle and could not get out.
In the eyes of the Australian government, Darwin Port is a bone to chew, tasteless but hard to give up.
Unable to do anything else, the Australian side came up with a trick, holding an international bidding process, looking for a sucker to take over Darwin Port, quickly getting rid of the hot potato of China.
If it can become a golden goose that lays eggs, that's best. If not, the loss will be borne by the one who takes over, while Australia will make a profit without any risk.
In 2015, the Northern Territory government began the bidding for this project. After intense competition, a Chinese company called Lanyu Group stood out among many competitors, winning the 99-year operating rights at a price of 506 million Australian dollars, with the contract expiring in 2114.
It can be said that whether it is a Chinese company or a company from another country, obtaining the operating rights of Darwin Port is a normal commercial act, legal and compliant.
Australia is a country that values integrity, and the winning enterprise only needs to operate according to market rules, with self-responsibility for profits and losses, depending on their own luck.
After taking over, Lanyu Company immediately carried out large-scale improvements to the infrastructure of Darwin Port, investing astronomical sums of money.
After the massive investment by the Chinese company, combined with the increase in Sino-Australian trade, the transformed Darwin Port finally experienced a rebirth and became profitable starting in 2024.
But just as it started to turn a profit, Darwin Port was targeted by Australia under the pretext of national security, and the Chinese operating company was frequently troubled with various excuses.
However, after multiple reviews, the Australian authorities found no violations during the operation process, and the so-called threat to Australia's national security was baseless.
In 2023, the Australian authorities finally announced the results of the review, stating compliance, "no need to cancel or change the lease."
As a result, the issue of Darwin Port's operating rights temporarily subsided.
In 2025, Australia's new election began, and "recovering Darwin Port" became a political gimmick used by both parties. Albanese stated during the campaign that if he were re-elected, he would continue to focus on this issue.
Indeed, Albanese took action.
This matter, for Australia, is merely an excuse, behind which lies the shadow of the United States. It should be noted that the US also has a presence in Darwin Port, that is, a military base.
After Trump came to power, he repeatedly claimed that China's infrastructure affected American national security, including Darwin Port.
As soon as Australia announced its intention to reclaim the operating rights of Darwin Port, the next day, on January 29, the Supreme Court of Panama declared the operating contract of the Chinese company for the ports of Balboa and Cristobal at both ends of the Panama Canal invalid, revoking the concession rights of Cheung Kong (Holdings) Limited.
The Supreme Court of Panama gave the reason that it was unconstitutional. The reasons include financial violations, tax arrears, and damage to Panama's sovereignty and national interests.
In fact, these are all excuses, following the same approach as Australia reclaiming the operating rights of Darwin Port.
The operating contract signed by Cheung Kong and Panama was in January 1997, with an operating period of 25 years. After expiration, it was automatically renewed once, gaining another 25 years of operating rights until 2047.
After Trump came to power, he repeatedly claimed that the US would send troops to directly "take over" control of the Panama Canal.
After the rejection of the acquisition of Cheung Kong's Panama Canal rights by BlackRock Group, the US did not give up its attempt to seize control of the Panama Canal. The recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Panama is the latest development.
After Australia and Panama both took actions against Chinese companies, U.S. Secretary of State Rubio no longer pretended, directly stating that "China's influence is unwelcome in the Americas," and that the US would directly take over the control of the Panama Canal in the future.
Evidently, Rubio's words mean that the United States is no longer pretending, and is about to openly seize. Rubio's words actually serve as a challenge to China; we must accept it.
Regarding the actions of Australia and Panama, we must take strong countermeasures, otherwise, it will cause a chain reaction in the international community. Countries influenced by American pressure will take this opportunity to act against China's overseas operations. ASML in the Netherlands is the most severe example.
Therefore, we must protect China's legitimate rights and interests overseas through legal means, and even consider using military measures if necessary.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7601497408626852402/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author himself.