The Shadow Negotiator: Michel Cojot and the Entebbe Rescue
A new documentary excavates the overlooked role of a Holocaust survivor who became a pivotal intelligence asset during the 1976 Entebbe hostage crisis.

In a geopolitical theatre where high-stakes economic leverage often masquerades as national security, China has once again underscored the intricate, often paradoxical, nature of its relationship with the United States.
Just weeks after a tentative agreement aimed at smoothing the flow of critical rare earth minerals to American firms, Beijing’s Ministry of State Security (MSS) has unveiled a dramatic crackdown on what it terms illicit exports, painting a picture of shadowy foreign espionage and domestic criminal complicity.
This isn’t merely a customs enforcement action; it’s a pointed reminder of who holds the keys to the kingdom of essential high-tech materials.
The details emerging from the state-run Global Times read like a spy thriller, albeit one where the contraband is hidden in the mundane.
Foreign “espionage and intelligence agencies,” the MSS claims, are colluding to pilfer rare earths by repackaging and relabeling them, falsely declaring them as “solder paste,” mixing them into ceramic tiles, or even stashing them inside plastic mannequins and bottled water.
The target of this alleged subterfuge is an unnamed “certain country” — a thinly veiled reference to the United States, which, despite its technological prowess, remains heavily reliant on China for the processing and refinement of these indispensable elements.
The absurdity of rare earths being smuggled in bottled water belies the profound strategic implications of the trade war currently unfolding between the world’s two largest economies.
This latest move comes hot on the heels of a Reuters report detailing how rare earths were being transshipped to the U.S. via Thailand and Mexico, illustrating the lengths to which demand will drive supply, even through clandestine channels.
But the deeper narrative here isn’t just about smuggling; it’s about control, leverage, and the strategic weaponization of supply chains.
China, the undisputed global leader in rare earth production and processing, has historically demonstrated its willingness to tighten the spigot in response to trade grievances.
The current crackdown, then, feels less like a sudden discovery of malfeasance and more like a carefully orchestrated performance.
It serves multiple purposes: to project an an image of vigilance against foreign encroachment, to reassert control over a vital strategic resource, and perhaps, to add another layer of complexity to ongoing trade negotiations with Washington.
The timing, so soon after an agreement to ease rare earth access, suggests a deliberate flexing of muscle, a reminder that while concessions might be offered, the underlying power dynamic remains firmly in Beijing’s favour.
The history of this economic friction is well-trodden.
President Donald Trump’s initial tariffs on Chinese goods ignited a trade war that saw Beijing retaliate with restrictions on exports of materials like gallium, germanium, antimony, and tungsten under the Biden administration.
Last April, China imposed permitting requirements on seven rare earth elements, a move that paused shipments for 45 days and sent jitters through global manufacturing sectors dependent on these materials for everything from electric vehicles to wind turbines and advanced robotics.
Meanwhile, the U.S. has simultaneously tightened its own export controls on advanced technologies destined for China, creating a reciprocal cycle of restrictions.
Rare earths, along with cutting-edge semiconductors, remain at the core of the delicate dance between Beijing and Washington.
Negotiations are underway to avert further tariff increases, with an August 12 deadline looming for a broader trade agreement.
The June agreement on rare earths offered a glimmer of hope, with Beijing agreeing to “flexibility” in the approval process, but crucially, not removing the permitting requirement itself.
This “flexibility” now seems to be interpreted through the lens of heightened security and enforcement.
The semiconductor arena presents another critical battleground.
The Chinese Commerce Ministry, through spokesman Wang Wentao, acknowledged the recent decision by the Trump administration to lift restrictions on exports of key AI chips made by Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD).
This rollback of an April restriction on Nvidia’s H20 and AMD’s MI308 chips to China was a welcome development for Beijing.
Yet, Wang’s subsequent remarks were a clear call for more.
He pointed to continued U.S. export controls on Huawei Technologies’ Ascend chips as an ongoing grievance, asserting that such measures “hurt the interests of Chinese companies.”
Wang’s plea for the U.S. and China to “meet each other halfway” through “equal consultation” and “create a good environment for mutually beneficial cooperation” to “jointly maintain the stability of the global semiconductor production and supply chain” sounds reasonable on the surface.
But in the context of the rare earth crackdown and the ongoing tit-for-tat, it rings with the familiar tone of strategic diplomacy.
It’s an appeal for collaboration, but one that subtly demands a rebalancing of power, particularly where China feels disadvantaged by U.S. technological superiority.
Ultimately, the rare earth crackdown is more than just an anti-smuggling operation; it’s a potent symbol of the enduring tension and strategic maneuvering that defines the U.S.-China relationship.
It underscores the fragility of global supply chains and the constant threat of disruption in a world where economic interdependence is increasingly overshadowed by geopolitical rivalry.
The dance continues, with each step a calculated move, and the stakes, for the global economy and technological future, couldn’t be higher.
A new documentary excavates the overlooked role of a Holocaust survivor who became a pivotal intelligence asset during the 1976 Entebbe hostage crisis.
The BusinessDay technology lead joins a cohort of West African journalists to refine investigative reporting on science and innovation.
The removal of the offline-capable messaging application highlights a growing tension between decentralized communication protocols and national regulatory mandates.