Chinese spying on Dutch industries 'intensifying': Dutch defence minister
SINGAPORE, May 31 (Reuters) - Chinese efforts to spy on the Dutch are intensifying, with the focus on semiconductors, Dutch Defence Minister Ruben Brekelmans said on Saturday.
"The semiconductor industry, which we are technologically leading, or technology advanced, of course, to get that intellectual property - that's interesting to China," Brekelmans said in an interview on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue security meeting in Singapore.
The Dutch military intelligence agency said in its annual report in April last year that Chinese spies have targeted the Dutch semiconductor, aerospace and maritime industries to try to strengthen China's armed forces.
When asked if the spying had stopped, Brekelmans said: "It's continuing. In our newest intelligence reports, our intelligence agency said that the biggest cyber threat is coming from China, and that we do see most cyber activity when it comes to us being as from China. That was the case last year, but that's still the case. So we only see this intensifying."
China's foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Beijing routinely denies allegations of cyber espionage and says it opposes all forms of cyberattack.
Dutch intelligence agencies first publicly attributed cyber espionage to China last year, when they said state-backed cyber spies had gained access to a Dutch military network in 2023.
Brekelmans said security is becoming increasingly important for the Netherlands as China is "using their economic position for geopolitical purposes and also to pressure us".
The minister said the Netherlands has introduced instruments to protect key industries and vital interests but the country and region also need to reduce their dependency on China for critical raw materials.
"Both on the European Union level, but also on the national level, we need to make bigger steps in order to reduce those dependencies."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Millennial investors bought cheap stocks in Trump tariffs market turmoil
More than a third of millennial investors bought stocks and shares in the market turmoil that followed US President Donald Trump's 'liberation day' tariffs, a survey reveals. The age group took advantage of the volatility that swept across the world's financial markets to buy cheap stocks, according to the research from Charles Stanley Direct. Some 38% of millennial DIY investors said they bought stocks and shares in the aftermath of Mr Trump announcing a sweeping set of new tariffs on exports to the nation. This compares with 16% of the baby boomer generation – those aged between 60 and 78. DIY investors refers to those who actively pick their own investments, also including assets such as cryptocurrency and gold. Across all age groups, 31% bought stocks in the market dip, the survey of 1,000 investors showed. Stock markets around the world suffered sharp drops in the days following the so-called 'liberation day' announcements on April 2. The UK's FTSE 100 saw its worst single day of trading since the start of the Covid pandemic, while European, US and Asian indexes also took a battering. The US's S&P 500, which tracks the country's biggest listed firms, lost about five trillion dollars (£3.7 trillion) in value over a two-day record run of losses. However, most indexes, including the FTSE and the S&P, have since recovered the losses as the US has struck new trade deals with countries including the UK and China. Mr Trump is also facing roadblocks to his trade policies from the US courts. On Thursday, a federal appeals court said it was allowing Mr Trump to continue collecting import taxes for now, a day after a lower court blocked the duties. Rob Morgan, chief investment analyst at Charles Stanley Direct, said: 'The fallout following the imposition of universal tariffs in early April was widespread, and especially alarming for investors as markets plummeted and carefully curated portfolios were blown off course. 'However, a large cohort of DIY investors were not simply looking to sell up or ride out the wave, but saw the market turmoil as an opportunity to seek discounts and reposition their investments.' Meanwhile, other, more risk-averse investors flocked to so-called 'safe haven' assets during the stock market turbulence. About a fifth bought alternative assets, such as gold, the survey showed. The precious metal hit its highest price in April, hitting about 3,500 US dollars (£2,600) per ounce, but has eased back slightly since.
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
Oil rebounds after OPEC+ sticks to same output hike in July vs June
SINGAPORE, June 2 (Reuters) - Oil prices rebounded more than $1 a barrel in early Asian trade on Monday after OPEC+ decided to increase output in July by the same amount as it did in each of the prior two months, in line with market expectation. Brent crude futures climbed $1.06, or 1.69%, to $63.84 a barrel by 2244 GMT while U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude was at $61.95 a barrel, up $1.16, or 1.91%. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and their allies decided on Saturday to raise output by 411,000 barrels per day in July, the third straight month of increase by the same amount, as the group known as OPEC+ looks to wrestle back market share and punish over-producers. The group had been expected to discuss a bigger production hike. "Had they gone through with a surprise larger amount, then Monday's price open would have been pretty ugly indeed," analyst Harry Tchilinguirian of Onyx Capital Group wrote on LinkedIn. Oil traders said the decision for a 411,000-bpd output hike has already been priced into Brent and WTI futures which slipped more than 1% last week.
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
The UK must raise defence spending
The danger with any defence review is that it ends up fighting the last war or failing to anticipate the next threat. We are about to have the third in 10 years, which suggests the long-term planning that supposedly underpinned the previous reviews has been found wanting. The current review has been undertaken by, among others, Lord Robertson who as Labour defence secretary under Tony Blair oversaw an earlier iteration completed in 1998. It created the Joint Reaction Force and most controversially commissioned two new Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers seen at the time as a sop to Scottish shipyards and Labour's MPs north of the Border. One of those carriers, HMS Prince of Wales, together with accompanying strike group, is on an eight-month deployment to the Indo-Pacific at a time when tensions with China are growing. The US defense secretary Pete Hegseth has somewhat alarmingly suggested that a possible assault on Taiwan is imminent. This has been denied in Beijing but the military build up is ominous and is causing concern in the region. Australia's defence minister has called on China to explain why it needs to have 'such an extraordinary military build-up'. His counterpart in the Philippines has called China 'absolutely irresponsible and reckless' in its actions. In the face of this development, the £6 billion investment in carriers able to project UK power as part of a wider coalition designed to stop Chinese expansionism does not seem such a poor investment after all. The UK will also build up to a dozen new attack submarines under a multi-billion pound programme It has taken close to 30 years for the threat to materialise in the way it has, which is precisely what a strategic review is supposed to do – look to the long term. The latest takes place against the backdrop of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, something that was considered highly unlikely as recently as the 2015 review, even though by then Crimea had been annexed by Moscow. Anticipating the threats to national, regional and global security is difficult but they have not really changed that much in the past three decades. The biggest upheaval is in the willingness of the US to continue bankrolling the rest of the democratic world, which it is no longer prepared to do. The new reality is that much more money needs to be spent on defence than the 2.5 per cent of GDP promised by the Government. Unless we see a financial commitment commensurate to the threat this latest review risks foundering before it takes off.
