Alibaba Denounces Report on Alleged PLA Ties as ‘False and Malicious’
Alibaba Group Holding has strongly refuted allegations made in a recent Financial Times report claiming that the company has links to the Chinese military. In a rare public statement, the tech giant called the report “completely false” and “malicious,” questioning its timing and intent, particularly in light of the recent trade negotiations between the United States and China.
The Financial Times article cited a declassified intelligence memo purportedly used by the White House. It alleged that Alibaba had been involved in providing unspecified support to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), posing what U.S. officials reportedly viewed as a threat to national security. The report did not specify the nature of the alleged support or provide independent corroboration.
Alibaba, one of China’s largest technology and cloud infrastructure companies, quickly moved to deny the claims. “The assertions and innuendos in the article are completely false,” an Alibaba spokesperson said on Saturday. “We question the motivation behind the publication of this report, especially as it comes on the heels of productive trade discussions between President Xi Jinping and President Donald Trump.”
The company’s response also implied that the report could be politically motivated, suggesting that it may have been aimed at undermining the progress made during the recent U.S.-China summit in South Korea. That high-level meeting concluded with a trade agreement that included provisions for technology cooperation and a temporary easing of some export controls.
Observers note that allegations involving ties between Chinese tech firms and the PLA are not new, but they remain highly sensitive. The U.S. government has, in recent years, imposed sanctions and trade restrictions on several Chinese companies accused of facilitating military or surveillance activities. Firms such as Huawei and Hikvision have faced export bans and have been added to the U.S. Entity List for similar reasons.
Alibaba, however, has thus far avoided such punitive measures, in part due to its international business relationships and its expansive cloud and e-commerce operations that extend far beyond China’s borders.
The company reiterated that it operates in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations across the jurisdictions where it does business. “We take national security concerns seriously,” the spokesperson added, “and we are committed to full transparency and regulatory compliance globally.”
Analysts suggest that the timing of the report, and its citation of declassified intelligence, may lead to renewed scrutiny of Chinese firms operating internationally, regardless of the outcome of current trade talks. “Even without concrete proof, reports like this can reshape diplomatic narratives and strain economic cooperation,” said a Hong Kong-based geopolitical analyst.
Whether the allegations will result in official U.S. action against Alibaba remains unclear. However, the firm’s strong public rebuttal indicates a desire to protect its international credibility and avoid becoming entangled in broader geopolitical disputes.
