In the Context of Concerns Surrounding Chinese and CCP Laws

The Communist Party is pressuring overseas Chinese to act on its behalf. If these individuals refuse to cooperate, they are considered to have committed a crime in China. On the other hand, if overseas Chinese do collaborate with their home country, they may be in violation of U.S. laws. Non-cooperation with the Communists can lead to repercussions against the families and friends of overseas ethnic Chinese residing in China. This extends to all Chinese companies and individuals:

Huawei:

There's a growing apprehension that Huawei could be coerced into providing network data to the Chinese government when requested, alluding to China's national intelligence and counter-espionage laws. These legal statutes stipulate that organizations and individuals must "support, assist, and cooperate" with intelligence efforts upon the state's request, as detailed in Article 7 of China's 2017 National Intelligence Law and the 2014 Counter-Espionage Law.

Experts contend that these laws essentially leave Huawei with no recourse but to comply with demands from the Chinese government or the Communist Party to divulge data, create backdoors, or engage in surveillance. Huawei, however, refutes these allegations. The company's founder, Ren Zhengfei, asserts that Huawei has never engaged in espionage and would reject any such order. Nevertheless, experts argue that Huawei, in practice, may find it challenging to resist the demands of the Chinese state due to the broad nature of Chinese intelligence laws. China maintains that its intelligence activities are conducted within the bounds of the law and uphold rights, suggesting that U.S. concerns about Huawei and Chinese laws may be more motivated by the competitive race for 5G dominance rather than just espionage apprehensions.

Collaboration and Assistance to Foreign Entities Undermining U.S. Interests:

In the United States, there exists a comprehensive legal framework designed to address collaboration with, or assistance to, foreign entities or individuals engaged in unlawful activities. These legal provisions encompass various aspects, including:

• Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. § 793, § 794): This statute renders it illegal to gather, transmit, or lose defense-related information with the intent or reason to believe it could be used to harm the United States or aid a foreign entity. Violators of the Espionage Act may face substantial penalties, including imprisonment.
• Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.): FARA mandates that individuals acting as agents of foreign principals disclose their relationships with these entities and make periodic public disclosures of their activities and finances. Noncompliance can lead to imprisonment and fines.
• The Logan Act (18 U.S.C. § 953): This act prohibits unauthorized American citizens from negotiating with foreign governments involved in disputes with the United States. While rarely enforced, the Logan Act remains a part of the legal framework.
• Trading with the Enemy Act (50 U.S.C. §§ 4301–4341): This legislation grants the president authority to regulate trade with hostile foreign entities during times of war. Those who engage in trade with or assist enemy entities may face criminal penalties.
• Economic Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. § 1831): It outlaws the theft of trade secrets when the intention is to benefit any foreign government or agent.
• Seditious Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384): This statute makes it illegal to conspire to overthrow, destroy, or oppose by force the U.S. government or to levy war against the U.S. Those conspiring against the U.S. may be fined or imprisoned.
• Material Support to Terrorists (18 U.S.C. § 2339A and § 2339B): Providing material support or resources for acts of terrorism is illegal under these laws.
• Neutrality Act (22 U.S.C. §§ 441–457): This act prohibits U.S. citizens from engaging in military expeditions against countries with which the U.S. is at peace.
• Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) (18 U.S.C. § 1030): This legislation pertains to individuals who collaborate with foreign entities to hack or gain unauthorized access to computers and obtain information.
• The PATRIOT Act: The PATRIOT Act enhances measures to prevent, detect, and prosecute individuals involved in international money laundering and terrorism financing. It also broadens surveillance laws to include communication technologies, making it easier to track and intercept communications of individuals involved in terrorist activities.

Racketeering (RICO Act - 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968):

Originally devised to combat organized crime, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act could potentially apply if a pattern of racketeering activity by a person or organization becomes evident. For instance, if a foreign entity collaborates with U.S.-based individuals or organizations in activities like money laundering, kidnapping, bribery, or illegal gambling to destabilize the U.S. economy or political system, they could potentially face charges under the RICO Act.

Fraud:

Fraud entails deceptive actions with the intent of securing an unfair or unlawful gain. If a foreign actor or entity employs deceptive practices to interfere with elections, disseminate misinformation, or undertake actions that undermine U.S. interests, they could potentially be charged with fraud.

In all of these cases, the specific charges that may be brought against individuals or entities aiding or collaborating with foreign entities in activities against U.S. interests are contingent on the particulars of the case, available evidence, and various other factors.

Chinese Students in the US:

Hypothetically, China's intelligence and counter-espionage laws could extend their reach to Chinese students studying in the United States. These scenarios might encompass:

• Compelled Information Sharing: Chinese students may be obligated to provide information about their research activities, academic partnerships, or technological developments at their U.S. universities if approached by

  CNBC. (2019). Huawei would have to give data to China government if asked: experts. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/05/huawei-would-have-to-give-data-to-china-government-if-asked-experts.html

  U.S. Congress. (2017). China's 2017 National Intelligence Law (English translation). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1867/pdf/COMPS-1867.pdf