China’s soft-power trap in your backyard: How the CCP uses sister cities to undermine America



Battles are escalating regarding America's sister-city agreements with China. Critics express concerns about national security, while advocates of sister cities argue that the program fosters relationships that promote world peace.

There are over 100 "friendship" or "sister" city partnerships between the U.S. and China, according to a 2023 membership directory from Sister Cities International. Only Mexico and Japan have more sister-city agreements with the U.S.

'We are being overwhelmed by China on our own soil, so this is indeed an emergency.'

Sister Cities International, a nonprofit, was founded by former President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956 as part of his People-to-People program, which he believed was crucial for "helping build the solid structure of world peace."

"If we are going to take advantage of the assumption that all people want peace, then the problem is for people to get together and to leap governments — if necessary to evade governments — to work out not one method but thousands of methods by which people can gradually learn a little bit more of each other," Eisenhower stated during the People-to-People Conference in 1956.

During a 1961 speech at the World Conference on Local Governments, Eisenhower stated that 150 U.S. communities had already "established regular communication with their counterparts in more than 40 countries of the free world."

The sister-city program gained rapid momentum, but the first U.S.-China relationships were not formed until 1979. Although the program was created to promote global harmony, its expansion to communist nations has raised concerns in recent years amid increasing tensions with the CCP.

RELATED: China’s back door into our military? US recruiters use CCP-controlled messaging app to target Chinese nationals

Beijing City Promotion and Beijing-New York Sister City Concert, in New York on June 24, 2024. Photo by Winston Zhou/Xinhua via Getty Images

Some politicians and China experts believe sister cities are one of the Chinese Communist Party's many soft-power propaganda methods.

Gordon Chang, a Gatestone Institute senior fellow, told Blaze News, "China uses every point of contact to infiltrate, influence, corrupt, and take down our society. The sister-city relationships seem innocuous, but there is nothing innocent in anything the Communist Party does. Nothing."

"I would like to see President Trump use his emergency powers to prohibit these sister-city tie-ups," he added. "We are being overwhelmed by China on our own soil, so this is indeed an emergency."

One of the most notable spying cases in recent years can be connected to the United States' sister-city program. Christine Fang, also known as Fang Fang — a suspected Chinese spy who infiltrated political circles, allegedly assisted Rep. Eric Swalwell's (D-Calif.) re-election campaign, and even reportedly formed romantic relationships with two mayors — attended the 2014 Sister Cities International conference in Washington, D.C. As a volunteer in the office of former Fremont, California, Mayor Bill Harrison, Fang reportedly coordinated discussions to establish a sister-city relationship between Fremont and a city in China.

Arkansas and Texas draw a line

Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) signed House Bill 1352 into law in April, broadening a previous 2021 law prohibiting higher education institutions from hosting Confucius Institutes. The latest legislation extended that ban to "similar institutes related to the People's Republic of China, including without limitation a Chinese cultural center."

The bill also barred municipalities from having sister-city partnerships with a "prohibited foreign party." The legislation aimed to force Little Rock to end its relationship with Changchun, China, an agreement formed in 1994.

However, instead of complying with the new law, the Little Rock Board of Directors is trying to circumvent it by changing the partnership from a "sister city" to a "friendship city."

According to Sister Cities International, friendship cities are "less formal."

"In some cities, 'friendship city' is often used as a first stage in the relationship, and after it is strengthened and the partners are sure they want a long-term relationship they will become 'sister cities,'" Sister Cities International's website reads.

Sam Dubke, Sanders' director of communications, told Blaze News, "Governor Sanders has been clear Arkansas cities are prohibited from having sister cities in Communist China. The City of Little Rock's rebrand does not make their sister city agreement legal, and Governor Sanders will enforce Arkansas law."

Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) in June signed similar legislation prohibiting sister-city agreements with any "foreign adversary," including China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia.

The legislation is slated to take effect in September, and it will potentially impact relationships in Austin, Fort Worth, and San Antonio.

Fort Worth City Councilman Michael Crain, who lived in Beijing for eight years, has already opposed the governor's ban, calling the city's partnership with Guiyang "really just a beautiful relationship across the board, because people understand people on a one-to-one exchange."

"Our city council and mayor sanctioned this relationship 15 years ago," Crain told WFAA-TV in May. "Their government is also involved because that's how you do the exchanges, but I think as you unpack it, this is about understanding other cultures, how they operate, and how we operate. That, in essence, we're a global society."

While Texas and Arkansas seek to clamp down on sister-city agreements over potential CCP influence in the U.S., a city in Iowa recently opted to renew its partnership with China despite warnings from its Republican governor.

Davenport Mayor Mike Matson announced in April that the city had signed an agreement to extend its sister-city status with Langfang, China, for another five years, even with Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds (R) expressing concerns last year that China has "grown significantly more aggressive on the world stage, constantly looking for any opening to assert themselves at the expense of our country."

'The history of the program demonstrates that all of China's partnerships aim to deliver asymmetric returns to China.'

Federal-level action

Building on these state-level efforts, federal lawmakers are taking action to address the issue at a national scale. In response to the growing threat from China, Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) in April introduced the Sister City Transparency Act, which aims to take a closer look at these relationships. If passed, the legislation would direct the comptroller general to conduct oversight of sister-city agreements with countries "with significant public sector corruption," including China and Russia.

Earlier this month, Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and John Moolenaar (R-Mich.) introduced the Washington Sister Cities Act to prohibit the U.S. Capitol from having a sister-city relationship with "foreign adversarial regimes," including the CCP.

A press release from Stefanik's office noted that the "primary focus" of the legislation is to force Washington, D.C., to end its partnership with Beijing, which was established over 40 years ago. Stefanik argued that the CCP has "weaponized" the sister-city agreements "to advance their malign disinformation campaign," ultimately forming a "pathway to spy on our government."

Moolenaar called D.C.'s relationship with Beijing "troubling," citing China's "worsening human rights conditions."

RELATED: University of Michigan now under fire after Chinese scholars allegedly smuggle bio-weapon

Photo by HECTOR RETAMAL/AFP via Getty Images

China's united front strategy

The CCP's management of its sister-city partnerships has been tied to its United Front Work Department.

According to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, the CCP's UFWD is responsible for coordinating influence operations to "neutralize sources of potential opposition" to its policies and authority. A 2018 report from the commission explains that the department "mostly focuses on the management of potential opposition groups inside China, but it also has an important foreign influence mission."

"To carry out its influence activities abroad, the UFWD directs 'overseas Chinese work,' which seeks to co-opt ethnic Chinese individuals and communities living outside China, while a number of other key affiliated organizations guided by China's broader United Front strategy conduct influence operations targeting foreign actors and states," the report reads.

The commission goes on to state, "It is precisely the nature of United Front work to seek influence through connections that are difficult to [publicly] prove and to gain influence that is interwoven with sensitive issues such as ethnic, political, and national identity, making those who seek to identify the negative effects of such influence vulnerable to accusations of prejudice."

Nathan Picarsic, senior fellow focusing on China at the nonpartisan Foundation for Defense of Democracies, elaborated on how China manages its sister-city relationships.

"Sister-city relationships are framed as mutually beneficial artifacts of people-to-people diplomacy," Picarsic told Blaze News. "But as is the case with most of China's international engagements, sister-city ties with a Chinese city trace back to Beijing and the Chinese Communist Party's centralized vision for global influence."

"The Chinese People's Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC), which is an organ of China's United Front, manages formal sister-city relationships," he continued. "And the history of the program demonstrates that all of China's partnerships aim to deliver asymmetric returns to China: whether that was inbound investment and technology access in the 1990s or subnational influence to subvert national security concerns in the current moment. China looks to use sister cities as a way to cultivate friendly voices and to localize China's arguments on a global basis."

Sister Cities International did not respond to a request for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

A president’s job is to stop the burning if governors won’t



In response to widespread rioting and domestic disorder in Los Angeles, President Trump ordered the deployment of National Guard units. More than 700 U.S. Marines from the Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms were also mobilized on Monday to protect federal property around the city.

As expected, critics pounced. They claim Trump’s orders violate American tradition — calling them anti-constitutional, anti-federal, and an authoritarian misuse of executive power. They say Trump is turning the military into a domestic police force.

In moments like this, the republic must defend itself.

But that argument isn’t just wrong — it’s nonsense on stilts.

The U.S. Army Historical Center has published three comprehensive volumes documenting the repeated and lawful use of federal military forces in domestic affairs since the founding of the republic. From the Whiskey Rebellion to civil rights enforcement, history shows that federal troops have long been a constitutional backstop when local authorities fail to maintain order.

Certainly, the use of military forces within U.S. borders must be limited and considered carefully. But the Constitution explicitly grants this authority. Article IV, Section 4 states: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.”

That clause isn’t a suggestion — it’s a command. A republican government exists to safeguard life, liberty, and property. The First Amendment protects the right to peaceably assemble and petition the government, but it does not shield acts of arson, looting, or assault. When rioters threaten the public, federal intervention becomes not just permissible but, in this instance, necessary.

Article II empowers the president, as commander in chief of the Army, Navy, and National Guard (when called into federal service), to act decisively against both foreign and domestic threats. That includes quelling insurrections when state leaders fail to uphold public order.

The National Guard is not the “militia” the founders discussed. That distinction was settled with the passage of the Dick Act in 1903, which clarified the Guard’s federal identity in relation to state control. Since then, the Guard has operated under dual federal and state authority — with federal control taking precedence when activated. Once federalized, the National Guard becomes an extension of the U.S. military.

Congress codified this authority in 1807 with the Insurrection Act. It authorizes the president to use military force when ordinary judicial proceedings fail. This provision enabled presidents throughout history to deploy troops against domestic unrest. During the 1950s and ’60s, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy used it to enforce desegregation orders in the South.

In 1992, President George H.W. Bush relied on the same statute to deploy Army and Marine forces alongside the California National Guard during the L.A. riots following the Rodney King trial verdict. That was done without sparking cries of dictatorship.

RELATED: Why Trump had to do what Gavin Newsom refused to do

Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

Those accusing Trump of violating norms by acting over a governor’s objection should revisit 1957. After Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus (D) defied federal orders to desegregate Little Rock Central High School, President Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and sent in the 101st Airborne Division. Democratic Sen. Richard Russell of Georgia decried the move, comparing the troops to Hitler’s storm troopers — a reminder that hysterical analogies are nothing new.

Americans have sought to limit military involvement in domestic life. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was designed to do just that — restrict the use of federal troops in civil law enforcement without explicit authorization. But even that law has historical nuance.

The concept of “posse comitatus” comes from English common law. It refers to the authority of sheriffs to summon local citizens to restore order. In early American history, federal troops often supported U.S. Marshals. They enforced the Fugitive Slave Act, stanched the bleeding in Kansas, and helped capture John Brown at Harpers Ferry.

After the Civil War, the Army played a key role in enforcing Reconstruction and suppressing the Ku Klux Klan under the Force Acts. Southern Democrats opposed this use of federal power. But by the 1870s, even Northern lawmakers grew uneasy when soldiers were ordered to suppress railroad strikes under direction of state and local officials.

The Army eventually welcomed Posse Comitatus. Being placed under local political control compromised military professionalism and exposed troops to partisan misuse. Officers feared that domestic policing would corrupt the armed forces.

I’ve long argued for restraint in using military power within U.S. borders. That principle still matters. But lawlessness, when left unchecked, can and will destroy republican government. And when local leaders fail to act — or worse, encourage disorder — the federal government must step in.

President Trump has both the constitutional and statutory authority to deploy troops in response to the violence unfolding in Los Angeles. Whether he should do so depends on prudence and necessity. But the idea that such action is unprecedented or somehow illegal has no basis in law or history.

If mayors and governors abdicate their duty, Washington must not. The defense of law-abiding citizens cannot hinge on the whims of ideologues or the cowardice of local officials. And in moments like this, the republic must defend itself.

Executive director of Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport seriously wounded after exchanging gunfire with feds: Report



The executive director of an airport in Arkansas is fighting for his life after reportedly exchanging gunfire with federal agents who showed up at his residence to serve a search warrant earlier this week.

At around 6 a.m. on Tuesday, agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives arrived to serve a search warrant at a residence in Little Rock owned by Bryan Malinowski, the 53-year-old executive director of the Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport. Suddenly, during an execution of the warrant, shots rang out, leaving two wounded, including Malinowski.

Neighbor Shea De Bruyn recalled hearing five or six loud bangs. "My heart was racing and the dogs were barking," she recalled. "I’m just really curious as to what was going on just a few houses down."

An ATF statement claimed that the "subject of the investigation opened fire at ATF agents resulting in an agent-involved shooting when an agent returned fire." A statement from Arkansas State Police added that Malinowski was treated at the scene and then taken to an area hospital.

The situation appears grave. Malinowski's older brother, Matthew Malinowski, claimed that Bryan had sustained a shot to the head and was on life support. "We don’t know if he’s going to make it in the next 24 hours," Matthew said.

An unidentified ATF agent was likewise wounded during the shooting, but the injury is considered "non-life-threatening," police said.

The ASP Criminal Investigation Division has been tasked with investigating the incident. "An investigative case file will be presented to the prosecuting attorney, who will determine whether the use of deadly force was consistent with Arkansas law," ASP's statement said.

Details about the search warrant for Malinowski's home have not been released, though NBC News reported that Malinowski has no prior arrest record. Friends told the Arkansas Times that he enjoys buying and trading firearms, and witnesses did report seeing agents remove guns and tools from Malinowski's home and placing them in a U-Haul truck.

Malinowski has been working at the Clinton National Airport for more than 15 years. He makes more than $250,000 a year and regularly comes in contact with powerful people, including U.S. senators, Matthew Malinowski said. Matthew added that his brother has "much to lose" and "no incentive to do anything wrong."

Airport Commission Chairman Bill Walker issued a statement about the shooting as well. "Today’s incident saddens us, and we pray for everyone involved," he wrote. Walker added that deputy executive director Tom Clarke will take over Malinowski's duties at the airport but that otherwise "the airport’s day-to-day operations continue as normal."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Chief Justice Roberts Stressed Dangers To The Supreme Court — Here’s Why Experts Think They Could Get Worse

Little Rock Nine

Far-left journalist among group charged in BLM firebomb attacks on police vehicles in Arkansas



A far-left journalist was among four suspects who face federal charges in relation to firebombings of police vehicles in Arkansas. The anti-police attacks happened during a Black Lives Matter protest in August.

A large group of BLM protesters gathered at the Little Rock Police Department's 12th Street Substation on Aug. 25. Rioters slashed the tires of police vehicles and threw Molotov cocktails. Authorities reviewed surveillance footage that showed two people lobbing Molotov cocktails at the fenced police parking lot.

Then on Aug. 28, an Arkansas State Police vehicle was vandalized and burned at the Arkansas State Police Headquarters in Little Rock. "One vehicle had been set on fire, one had been vandalized with spray paint, and several others had punctured tires," according to the Department of Justice. One state trooper cruiser was spray-painted with the message: "STOP KILLING US." Investigators also discovered a detonated Molotov cocktail that was constructed from a bottle of brandy.

Three individuals were caught on surveillance video "entering the vehicle storage area wearing dark clothing and backpacks." The complaint reads, "The video shows them bending down in a motion consistent with slashing vehicle tires as well as throwing a lighted object into a police vehicle."

Federal search warrants were executed to obtain cell phone data, which showed that the suspects were in the location of Arkansas State Police Headquarters during the time of the attacks.

There was a months-long investigation by the ATF, Arkansas State Police, North Little Rock Police Department, and Little Rock Police Department. On Dec. 17, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Arkansas announced that Brittany Dawn Jeffrey, 31, Emily Nowlin, 27, Aline Espinosa-Villegas, 24, and Renea Baek Goddard, 22, had been arrested.

New report: 4 far-left activists have been arrested following ATF investigation into firebombing attacks in Little… https://t.co/NPVTib4mAt
— Andy Ngô (@Andy Ngô)1608843248.0

Federal investigators allege that Goddard, Nowlin, and Espinosa-Villegas orchestrated the attacks and "conspired together, aided and abetted one another." The group utilized encrypted applications to communicate with each other "in an attempt to thwart law enforcement detection of the group['s] criminal activities," as reported in the Post Millennial.

Law enforcement interviewed several cooperating witnesses who alleged that the incendiary devices were assembled at Jeffrey's residence.

Jeffrey live-streamed her arrest on Facebook, according to the report.

"She at first refused to exit her car until arresting officers explained what the federal warrant was for. The video ended when police confiscated her phone. She has since been released from police custody," the report said.

Jeffrey was previously arrested on July 12 for criminal trespassing at a Black Lives Matter protest at a frozen custard restaurant, where an employee had been fired for allegedly "making racist comments in the presence of a black co-worker."

Goddard was previously arrested and charged with obstructing governmental operations while violating curfew at a BLM protest on June 2.

Goddard is a far-left journalist from Little Rock, who has contributed to KUAR Public Radio, Arkansas Public Media, and Autostraddle, a "digital publication and real life community for multiple generations of LGBTQIA+ humans" that is "run by a team of progressively feminist queer and trans folks." Her bio states she "enjoys writing commentary on issues like mass incarceration, U.S militarism, and identity politics."

Espinosa-Villegas and Nowlin were also arrested at the June 2 protest.

For the Molotov cocktail attack, suspects have been charged with malicious destruction of property belonging to an entity receiving federal funding, conspiracy to commit those acts, and possession of a destructive device.

"Today's arrests send a message that violence targeted toward law enforcement will not be tolerated," U.S. Attorney Hiland said in a statement. "Breaking into a police compound and fire bombing a police vehicle with a homemade explosive device is clearly not a peaceful protest. Those who would target law enforcement with violent acts will not do so in the Eastern District of Arkansas without the full resources of the federal government being deployed to assist our state and local partners in bringing those responsible to justice. They will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law."

4 arrested in connection to fire bombing of Arkansas law enforcement vehicles www.youtube.com