A recent Politico report highlighted that the US government "is now targeting China's state presence in the port of Piraeus."
The article cited statements by the US Ambassador to Greece, who said that "it is unfortunate, but I think there are ways to overcome it, something can be found, either through strengthening activity in other areas or perhaps by putting Piraeus up for sale. I consider it very important to have American infrastructure here to support the region. To strengthen, for example, the activity of other ports and regions so that there is a balance against Chinese influence in Piraeus."
Although the statements were framed as a concern for Greece's economic security and its regional strategic interests, they reveal a central element of the American strategy toward China: treating other countries, even European allies, as tools of geopolitical competition rather than independent economic actors. In reality, Washington's goal is not Greek prosperity but the displacement of China through the "replacement" of Chinese investments and the imposition of an "us or them" dilemma.
International cooperation
The story of Piraeus could serve as a model case of successful international cooperation. When Greece sank into a deep debt crisis and was in urgent need of foreign capital, the Chinese shipping company COSCO invested in the port and acquired management rights. Since then, cargo traffic and revenues have increased dramatically, and Piraeus has evolved into a crucial European port within the framework of China's Belt and Road Initiative.
For Greece, the Chinese investment upgraded infrastructure, created jobs and tax revenues, and rearranged critical logistics chains. Although the cooperation is not without problems, it has undoubtedly strengthened the country's economic position and regional role.
Today, however, an American diplomat seeks to undermine this cooperation and replace the Chinese investment with American capital. It is clear that such a logic does not serve Greek interests. Economic development presupposes diversified and open investment flows, not unilateral exclusions.
US vs. China
US policy toward China is increasingly guided by a philosophy of "exclusive competition." From technology to supply chains and infrastructure, Washington views China as the number one strategic rival and is attempting to impose a global "de-Sinicization."
The problem with this approach is that the global economy does not function as a zero-sum game. Investments and trade can strengthen local economies and broaden markets, without necessarily harming other countries. If the US genuinely wants to strengthen its economic footprint internationally, it must compete with China within a framework of cooperation and mutual benefit, not through suppression or replacement. Efforts to "expel" China rarely make America stronger.
Greece's position
Greece is at a strategic crossroads of Europe and Asia, serving as a critical hub for shipping, energy, and trade in the Mediterranean. Its national interest lies not in choosing between China and the US, but in leveraging diversified investments and a balance of external factors for the benefit of its own development. If Washington truly wants to contribute to the upgrade of Greek infrastructure, it must do so through an open and cooperative framework, not by making the weakening of Chinese influence a prerequisite.
The statements of the American Ambassador suggest something deeper: an entrenched "replacement logic" in American strategic thinking, which views global development as a race for resources rather than a field for cooperation. This disposition may mobilize domestic audiences, but in the long term, it weakens American appeal in emerging markets. The US cannot, and does not need to, cover every sector. Moreover, in certain strategic sectors, it is unable to compete with the size and stable, operational presence of Chinese companies.
Kimberly Guilfoyle's mistake
Instead of a strategy to "expel China," a smarter approach would be to "make cooperation more effective and transparent," investing in governance and institutions, not in exclusion.
Kimberly Guilfoyle's statements are wrong not only because they violate diplomatic subtlety but also because they reflect an outdated perception of power. In the interdependent 21st century, real leadership means inclusive creation.
For stability and prosperity to be achieved in international relations, the world must transcend the zero-sum logic and move toward models of co-construction and co-sharing. This is not just about the perspective on Chinese investments, it is a deeper understanding of globalization itself: competition within cooperation, the only competition that aligns with the spirit of the age.
What bankingnews.gr reported on November 16, 2025:
Former Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis's response to Kimberly-Trump over Cosco is coming
It is well known that the American factor never quite accepted former Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis. From the NO in Bucharest on the issue of Skopje to his relations regarding V. Putin and energy matters. That is why the open and secret war that the US had launched was known to those around the Maximos Mansion during that period, and beyond.
I hear that Kostas Karamanlis listened to what the US Ambassador to Greece, Kimberly Guilfoyle, said, as well as the Americans, about the sale of the port of Piraeus to COSCO and is preparing his response. Naturally, it will be done in the manner the former Prime Minister prefers. Thus, information suggests that Kostas Karamanlis will be present at an event organized by the Hellenic-Chinese Chamber for its 30th anniversary on the coming Thursday. The Chinese Ambassador will also be there to honor Kostas Karamanlis. I will await with interest to see if there will also be a greeting with messages from the former Prime Minister regarding the recent claims made by the Americans.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών