EML, a company owned by some relatives of US Ambassador to China Gary Locke, is currently the subject of a lawsuit from Ningbo-based Geosun Electronics Lighting (GEL) over an unpaid $11 million debt. The reason why the incident has drawn so much attention is not just that EML is owned by Locke's father-in-law, Larry Lee, and brother-in-law, Wade Peter Lee. Locke himself doesn't own shares in EML, nor does his wife, and they have no hand in the business. Geosun isn't leveling accusations at Locke.

But the problem is that EML has taken advantage of Locke's reputation when dealing with Geosun. And when Locke was governor of Washington State, he frequently mentioned Geosun by name in front of government leaders.

So both the US public and the Chinese public might have reason to believe that Locke hasn't drawn a clear distinction between his official business as a US government official and the commercial interests of his relatives. There will be growing pressure on him to prove his innocence.

But what lessons can China draw from this for our own diplomatic staff? Most importantly, the staff of Chinese embassies and consulates, as well as those at official or quasi-official agencies, have to avoid giving special attention to particular enterprises because of private interests.

As the world's largest exporter, we need diplomatic officials and others to protect our economic and political rights. They have to take care of the rights of Chinese enterprises and individuals overseas. And it's natural, given the orientation of our national policies and laws, for them to devote more time and attention to businesses which involve national strategic interests.

But are there cases of staff overseas abusing public power for their own private interests? Of course. Take the case of one staff member at an official Chinese agency. He solicited favors for his girlfriend's business, helped her solve administrative disputes, and made sure her goods passed smoothly through customs. His bosses disapproved of his behavior and transferred him back to China. But are there worse cases out there, not yet exposed or punished?

The inappropriate values and behavior of some entrepreneurs worsen the risk of the abuse of public power. They don't bother improving their own management or technology, but instead just look to cultivate interpersonal relationships. Some of them even support young officials financially, figuring the return on their investment could be huge. The Party's Central Committee once issued a document forbidding officials from relying on the support of wealthy individuals, showing that this is a phenomenon that can't be ignored.

Some private entrepreneurs struggle to squeeze their children into Party and government bodies. They don't value civil servants' official salaries, which are paltry compared to their own wealth, but want the power they can wield. Their behavior has not only resulted in a distorted market order and a brewing corruption crisis in China, but also harmed our diplomatic strategies overseas. Allowing private entrepreneurs to join the Party is a sign of moving with the times but we could not definitely ignore the potential risks.

As for Locke's particular case, there's a certain history here. In the past, the US regularly relied on "merchant-consuls" to conduct its diplomatic business in China. They became used to serving their own interests with US diplomatic resources.

This practice was banned by the US Congress in 1856, but US consular positions were still treated as private resources by merchant families for some time after. And many diplomatic posts today are still given out as political rewards by the US President to his campaign donators, rather than being professional posts.

China has used professional diplomats since 1949, and so avoided these difficulties. But today, under the impact of the market economy, we need to continuously renew our management system to prevent diplomacy being twisted by private interests.

The author is an associate researcher at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation under the Ministry of Commerce. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn