“A story with disturbing implications. China must respond.” Says Fassino

A massive data-collection operation by a Chinese company to the detriment of Italy. A seemingly private company whose leadership and objectives are not yet known. It is for these reasons – as he explains to Il Foglio in this conversation – that the Chair of the Chamber of Deputies’ Foreign Affairs Committee, Piero Fassino, has requested a hearing with the Chinese ambassador. An invitation, but a firm one. A moment of clarification which, for Fassino, can only be “unequivocal and immediate” and which is in everyone’s interest – certainly Italy’s, but also China’s – because “there can be no lack of transparency or ambiguous grey areas”.

Indeed, for the former secretary of the DS and PD leader, the investigation published by Il Foglio requires rigorous analysis because, on reading it, it has all the hallmarks of “a disturbing affair” that needs to be thoroughly examined. This means delving deeply into the investigation (“I want to understand the facts before forming judgements or making assessments,” Fassino points out), and giving the Committee the opportunity to gather and examine all the information on the company that, in effect, spied on our data. So what will the Foreign Affairs Committee ask the Chinese ambassador? For Fassino, these are the unavoidable questions: “First of all, we need to know who is behind this company. Is it truly private? Is there any Chinese state involvement? What is the relationship between the company and the Chinese authorities? Who are the clients? Did it make use of Chinese telecoms operators’ databases? And how was it able to do so? Do privacy regulations not prevent this? For what purpose and to achieve what objectives did the company build this database?” Fassino explains.

It remains to be seen whether this data, which has come into the possession of the company Zhenhua, was acquired through open channels or through confidential channels. In either case, it would constitute a data-collection operation, and for Fassino, “there is no doubt about this. ‘It’s clear.’ He says: ‘We do not yet know whether the data was obtained through open channels. In that case, it would constitute data collection for lobbying purposes, but even this activity is subject to very precise rules and regulations that would have been breached.’

This is a huge issue concerning national data security and highly sensitive information. This vulnerability – if indeed it is a vulnerability – deserves more than just a hearing. It is true that states have always spied on one another and that in 2001 – to cite one of the most recent cases – the Echelon affair, an American surveillance programme, alarmed Europe, but we are facing something far more serious here if this is confirmed. Fassino, who has seen it all, remembers this, which is why he is not playing it down. “If our data is at risk – though we can only clarify this after a careful investigation – we would be faced with an inescapable democratic problem that would require a redefinition of relations between Italy and China. In a globalised world,” Fassino explains, “we cannot avoid having relations with China, but not at the expense of respect for fundamental principles, nor by looking the other way in the face of violations of human rights and civil liberties, as is happening in Hong Kong.”

Fassino is unequivocal: “Our relationship with China must be based on clear foundations. China is a major global economic player and it is in Italy’s interest to foster economic ties, as evidenced by the strong presence of our companies in the Asian market.” However, he adds, economic considerations must not be allowed to undermine other foundations. “We cannot accept any form of interference or violation of our sovereignty.” At the same time, China must be asked to show “full respect for human rights and civil liberties”. Is he certain that Italy has the strength to demand this? Fassino replies not only in the affirmative, but also that the demand must be “clear and resolute”.

That is what Angela Merkel manages to do. “Germany has very close trade links with China, but this does not prevent the Chancellor from voicing even harsh criticism. The issue of human rights cannot be sidestepped.” Luigi Di Maio, our Foreign Minister – has he always been so independent? The defence of the “Silk Road”, 5G. Is it certain that the government has never shown even a hint of deference? We always ask Fassino this. “I don’t think Di Maio has held back on criticism. He has been clear on Hong Kong. Of course, the minister is particularly attentive to the economic dimension – so much so that he sought to transfer responsibility for foreign trade to the Foreign Office – but his stances have always been correct and never at the expense of human rights.” These are the rights that the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee describes as “non-negotiable”, because “they belong to every person, whatever the colour of their skin, the god they pray to, the language they speak, or the gender they identify with. And no political, cultural or religious reason can justify the violation of those rights”. In short, Fassino is calling on China to clarify the matter, and soon, because “it would be foolish to think of marginalising it, but this does not mean we must stop being who we are”.