On February 19, GeoTrends was in Brussels at the European Parliament to attend the session of the Committee on Petitions (PETI), which examined complaints regarding COSCO’s operations at the Port of Piraeus. The discussion highlighted serious concerns about legal violations in port expansion projects, as well as environmental and social consequences of China’s presence in Piraeus. It also questioned the European Union’s role in funding COSCO’s developments.
In this context, we spoke with Maria Zacharia, MEP of Plefsi Eleftherias, who has taken initiatives to bring the issue to the forefront. In the following interview, she analyzes the geopolitical and economic impact of COSCO, the environmental violations, and the effects of the investment on the local community. She also emphasizes the importance of EU intervention and the potential for an alternative development model for Piraeus.
– Does COSCO pose a threat to national security, or is its presence in Piraeus inevitable given China’s global dominance in trade and logistics?
COSCO is not just a shipping company; it is a strategic tool of China’s global expansion policy, acquiring critical port infrastructure worldwide. Its presence in Piraeus has already led to a situation where one of Europe’s largest ports operates almost exclusively for Chinese interests. This is not just an economic issue; it is a matter of national sovereignty. What happens when a foreign state-controlled giant dominates vital infrastructure? The country cedes significant aspects of its autonomy.
– Given that other European countries, such as Germany, resist Chinese penetration into port infrastructure, why do you think Greece has not followed the same approach? Is it a matter of weakness, choice, or geopolitical compromise?
It is a combination of all three. Greece, after fifteen years of economic crisis and forced privatizations, lacked the leverage to negotiate hard. Moreover, COSCO’s entry into Piraeus was backed by successive governments, which saw the deal as an “investment” rather than a surrender of strategic assets. Additionally, Greece’s geopolitical position in the Eastern Mediterranean makes it a key gateway between China and Europe, serving Beijing’s long-term commercial expansion strategy.
– COSCO has proven its ability to maximize profitability at great social and environmental cost. Do you believe the EU can truly intervene, or are the economic interests of its most powerful member states an obstacle?
The EU has the legal tools to intervene, but so far, it has not shown the political will to do so decisively. Major European economies like Germany and France maintain economic ties with China, avoiding direct confrontation. This means that EU regulations and competition rules are applied selectively. However, the fact that the Piraeus issue has reached the European Parliament via the PETI Committee (Committee on Petitions) is a step toward EU intervention.
– How has COSCO’s expansion affected the city? Are there any aspects where its investment has genuinely benefited the local community?
COSCO has transformed Piraeus into one of Europe’s largest transshipment hubs, but this has not translated into benefits for the local community. The promised jobs were few and came with poor working conditions. Meanwhile, the city suffers from traffic congestion, pollution, and coastal degradation. Rather than integrating into the city, COSCO has turned Piraeus into its satellite, with no real returns for its residents.
– If COSCO were to withdraw from Piraeus tomorrow, what would this mean for Greece? Would it be an opportunity for a different development model, or would it cause severe economic instability?
COSCO’s departure would not mean economic collapse. On the contrary, it could pave the way for a new development model, with greater public participation and investments that consider both the environment and society. Piraeus has the potential to host a modern, sustainable port that serves Greece’s economy rather than functioning as a colonial outpost of a foreign power.
– Given the many environmental and legal violations reported—including Supreme Court rulings—how do you explain the continued EU funding of COSCO projects despite clear breaches of European directives?
This is highly problematic. The continued EU funding of COSCO projects, despite well-documented environmental and legal violations, highlights the conflict between economic interests and European law. Greek Council of State rulings have made it clear that COSCO is operating without required environmental impact assessments. Yet, the EU continues to fund the port’s expansion without demanding compliance.
This is precisely what we sought to challenge by bringing the issue to the PETI Committee.
– And this led to a positive development.
Exactly. On February 19, I participated in the PETI Committee session addressing the complaints regarding Piraeus Port. The issue was reexamined based on written and oral submissions from initiatives and stakeholders. After the discussion, the PETI Committee requested written information from the European Commission on various aspects of the case before proceeding with its review.
Committee Chair Bogdan Rzońca informed us that the petitions were deemed admissible, as the matter falls within the EU’s jurisdiction. As a result, the PETI Committee requested a preliminary investigation by the European Commission. Additionally, the petition was forwarded to the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) and the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) for further examination.
The process is now underway, and we are closely monitoring developments. Clearly, the pressure we are applying is yielding results, as the issue is now being investigated at the European level. We will continue to demand full compliance with EU law and transparency in COSCO project funding.
– Residents of Piraeus’ coastal municipalities report severe light and noise pollution around the clock due to port activities. How has this affected their quality of life?
COSCO’s expansion has caused massive environmental strain on coastal areas. Residents endure constant noise pollution from cargo operations and intensified traffic—which worsens during peak tourist seasons with cruise ship arrivals. Light pollution is not only from port floodlights but also from cruise infrastructure and ships that operate around the clock.
These conditions create an intolerable daily reality, impacting both quality of life and public health. Unfortunately, COSCO ignores local complaints, and the government has failed to impose meaningful restrictions to protect residents. I strongly advocate for the creation of a permanent environmental monitoring network, conducting regular assessments of noise and light pollution in the area.