COSCO Spy Claims Put Global Shipping Giant at Centre of New U.S. China Security Clash

Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

COSCO has been accused by senior U.S. officials of using concealed equipment aboard commercial vessels to collect military communications for Beijing, raising fresh security questions around one of the world’s largest shipping groups as U.S. China trade talks approach.

Two senior Trump administration officials said COSCO has maintained a decades long intelligence collection relationship with Beijing that allows China to gather communications signals from vessels and aircraft operating across North America, Europe and Asia.

The officials did not identify individual vessels carrying the equipment or release technical evidence supporting the allegations. No specific COSCO ship has therefore been publicly linked to the alleged intelligence programme.

China’s embassy in Washington rejected the accusations. COSCO had not publicly responded to requests for comment at the time of the initial report.

The officials described the alleged shipboard systems as sophisticated signals intelligence equipment rather than conventional communications hardware.

One official said the equipment was designed to gather information about military communications technology and developments in encryption. The intelligence operation could also give Beijing greater visibility over shipping lanes and maritime routes used for commercial and military movements, according to the U.S. assessment.

The allegations remain unsubstantiated by publicly released evidence. U.S. authorities have not disclosed photographs, equipment specifications, intercepted communications, vessel names or other material demonstrating the alleged installations.

The claims nevertheless deepen existing scrutiny of China’s commercial maritime sector.

A U.S. Naval War College report published in 2025 concluded that China’s military was likely drawing on the country’s commercial shipping and fishing fleets for intelligence and surveillance purposes. That assessment provides broader context but does not independently establish that concealed intelligence equipment is installed aboard COSCO vessels.

COSCO’s importance to international supply chains could make any attempt to restrict the carrier commercially difficult.

The Pentagon added COSCO to its Section 1260H list of companies considered to have links to China’s military in January 2025. The designation carries reputational consequences and U.S. government procurement restrictions but does not amount to formal economic sanctions.

COSCO nevertheless remains a major participant in container trades serving the United States and has interests in terminal service ventures supporting container operations at U.S. ports.

That commercial footprint creates a potential conflict between national security concerns and supply chain continuity if Washington considers further measures against the carrier.

The Trump administration previously proposed substantial port charges targeting Chinese owned, operated and built vessels as part of efforts to strengthen the U.S. maritime and shipbuilding sectors.

Those measures were paused following a U.S. China trade détente reached in October 2025. That arrangement is due to expire in November, putting maritime policy back into focus as President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping prepare for talks later this month.

No new COSCO specific sanctions, port entry prohibitions or operational restrictions have been announced as a result of the latest intelligence allegations.

That leaves the immediate commercial impact limited, but carriers, ports, cargo owners and terminal operators will be watching whether Washington converts the security claims into maritime trade measures.

Any restrictions affecting COSCO could have consequences extending beyond individual vessel calls because of the group’s position across container shipping, terminals and international logistics networks.

For now, the central allegation remains a U.S. intelligence assessment disputed by Beijing and unsupported by publicly disclosed evidence. The next question for the shipping industry is whether the dispute remains a security issue or becomes part of Washington’s wider trade and maritime policy toward China.