Initiated under President George W. Bush in 2001, the program collected phone and text messaging logs from carriers en masse, nominally with the goal of identifying links to terrorism suspects. At first companies like AT&T voluntarily complied with an order by Bush, but by 2006 the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court began issuing secret orders making that data mandatory under an interpretation of the Patriot Act. One of those orders, sent to Verizon, was the first of many documents exposed by Snowden and The Guardian.
Snowden and others attacked the program as a potential tool of mass surveillance, and possibly even more damaging than analyzing the actual contents of messages, since metadata can be collated to identify a person's location and habits.
Interestingly, as additional (actual) facts become known, the administration is shifting its Huawei story to say that somewhere in the future the Chinese government could do exactly what the U.S. government has been doing: Ordering private corporations to spy on people.
Huawei's suggestion that standardized, international guidelines on spying be established starts to make more and more sense.
Spying on private corporations is to obvious and detectable. If Huawei’s equipment ever gets used for a nefarious purpose, it will be a one time usage in cyber warfare (like WW3).
I agree, government sponsored IP theft is a huge problem with China. But, they’re not going to hinder their growth and reputation by using Huawei to do so. That would be shortsighted... and that’s one thing China isn’t.
Going after Huawei is more about maintaining technological dominance, and at the same time smacking down anyone that deals with Iran.
This administration has an Iran fixation, probably due to its ties to Saudi Arabia. I’m not saying Iran are “good guys” but they are far from the only country with nuclear aspirations. Pakistan (for example) already has nukes and we still maintain relations with them. Ideologically, we’re just as far apart...
Our problem with Iran should be about them sponsoring terrorist groups and instigating proxy wars. Isolating Iran haven’t been effective, economic ties are more effective in influencing Iran’s future...
/sorry got off topic ; )
Huawei has already been caught spying on client countries. Whether that is "shortsighted" or not is yet unknown.
"The AU’s grand and sprawling complex was the focus of intrigue and controversy earlier this year—controversy that sheds light on reported ‘national security concerns’ in Australia about which companies should be involved in our 5G network and other critical infrastructure projects.
In January 2018, France’s Le Monde newspaper published an investigation, based on multiple sources, which found that from January 2012 to January 2017 servers based inside the AU’s headquarters in Addis Ababa were transferring data between 12 midnight and 2 am—every single night—to unknown servers more than 8,000 kilometres away hosted in Shanghai. Following the discovery of what media referred to as ‘data theft’, it was also reported that microphones hidden in desks and walls were detected and removed during a sweep for bugs.
The Chinese government refuted Le Monde’s reporting. Chinese state media outlet CGTN (formerly CCTV) reported that China’s foreign ministry spokesperson called the Le Mondeinvestigation ‘utterly groundless and ridiculous’. China’s ambassador to the AU said it was ‘ridiculous and preposterous’. The BBC also quoted the ambassador as saying that the investigation ‘is not good for the image of the newspaper itself’.
One AU official told the Financial Times that there were ‘many issues with the building that are still being resolved with the Chinese. It’s not just cybersecurity’.
Huawei isn't in a position to deserve the trust of any Western country, whatever the mitigations that are in place to provide "security".
The discussion above is wrt the actual Chinese law that requires that companies comply. In reality, the Chinese Government has the ability to do whatever they want, and change the law ex post facto.
The LeMonde story had the usual 'anonymous' sources. Can you see a pattern here?
In other news...
Huawei has stated again and again that all data it manages in Europe never ever leaves Europe. All data from carriers that use Huawei gear in Europe is managed by the carriers. They run the networks.
There are Huawei security centres in the UK, Germany and Belgium where officials have access to Huawei source code. As a result of this access, governments can (and do) recommend changes. As a result of the recommendations, Huawei is investing billions into security.
Can you name any other company that finds itself open to that level of scrutiny?
All the while the US is touring the world (literally) telling foreign governments to not do deals with Huawei and not providing ANY evidence to support its claims.
It is now widely accepted that the real reasons for this attitude towards Huawei are not security related at all but related to US protectionism and a fear of being overtaken technologically in this field.
Now Huawei has grown tired and the latest rumours point to Huawei taking legal action against the US government. It has also publicly called out the US government on its slur campaign and some industry watchers claim foreign governments may decide to ignore US warnings as it has not been able to back up its claims.
""The issue isn't whether this or that company will spy on you--it is whether *your technological infrastructure is provided by a source that is hostile to things you hold dear* or not."
Exactly. I find it odd whenever the defenders of an authoritarian regime show up, basically defending a state which murders and imprisons those who disagree with the single and only party, and its policies. I’ll take the democratic republic of elected representatives any day, thanks.
But 5G!!! My precious!
Nokia and Ericsson offer alternatives to the Huawei/ZTE narrative, and each is definitely not state sponsored, nor "hostile to the things we hold dear". Seems like a win/win for Europe, as well as any of the Five Eyes intelligence partners.
Huawei has managed to get where it currently is by offering better, cheaper hardware.
This is a reality and is applicable to 5G.
They are a fair way ahead of competitors and have focused not only on the tech side but the deployment side.
That's why, during the pre MWC briefing, Huawei demoed the installation of new equipment (worker in hard hat and yellow vest included) to show how one person could install equipment without needing cranes and other expensive and/or time consuming resources.
Carriers care about these things and users benefit from the situation. They don't consider the 'narrative' that keeps you awake at night because there is nothing to it. That should be becoming clear to you now.
Initiated under President George W. Bush in 2001, the program collected phone and text messaging logs from carriers en masse, nominally with the goal of identifying links to terrorism suspects. At first companies like AT&T voluntarily complied with an order by Bush, but by 2006 the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court began issuing secret orders making that data mandatory under an interpretation of the Patriot Act. One of those orders, sent to Verizon, was the first of many documents exposed by Snowden and The Guardian.
Snowden and others attacked the program as a potential tool of mass surveillance, and possibly even more damaging than analyzing the actual contents of messages, since metadata can be collated to identify a person's location and habits.
Interestingly, as additional (actual) facts become known, the administration is shifting its Huawei story to say that somewhere in the future the Chinese government could do exactly what the U.S. government has been doing: Ordering private corporations to spy on people.
Huawei's suggestion that standardized, international guidelines on spying be established starts to make more and more sense.
Spying on private corporations is to obvious and detectable. If Huawei’s equipment ever gets used for a nefarious purpose, it will be a one time usage in cyber warfare (like WW3).
I agree, government sponsored IP theft is a huge problem with China. But, they’re not going to hinder their growth and reputation by using Huawei to do so. That would be shortsighted... and that’s one thing China isn’t.
Going after Huawei is more about maintaining technological dominance, and at the same time smacking down anyone that deals with Iran.
This administration has an Iran fixation, probably due to its ties to Saudi Arabia. I’m not saying Iran are “good guys” but they are far from the only country with nuclear aspirations. Pakistan (for example) already has nukes and we still maintain relations with them. Ideologically, we’re just as far apart...
Our problem with Iran should be about them sponsoring terrorist groups and instigating proxy wars. Isolating Iran haven’t been effective, economic ties are more effective in influencing Iran’s future...
/sorry got off topic ; )
Huawei has already been caught spying on client countries. Whether that is "shortsighted" or not is yet unknown.
"The AU’s grand and sprawling complex was the focus of intrigue and controversy earlier this year—controversy that sheds light on reported ‘national security concerns’ in Australia about which companies should be involved in our 5G network and other critical infrastructure projects.
In January 2018, France’s Le Monde newspaper published an investigation, based on multiple sources, which found that from January 2012 to January 2017 servers based inside the AU’s headquarters in Addis Ababa were transferring data between 12 midnight and 2 am—every single night—to unknown servers more than 8,000 kilometres away hosted in Shanghai. Following the discovery of what media referred to as ‘data theft’, it was also reported that microphones hidden in desks and walls were detected and removed during a sweep for bugs.
The Chinese government refuted Le Monde’s reporting. Chinese state media outlet CGTN (formerly CCTV) reported that China’s foreign ministry spokesperson called the Le Mondeinvestigation ‘utterly groundless and ridiculous’. China’s ambassador to the AU said it was ‘ridiculous and preposterous’. The BBC also quoted the ambassador as saying that the investigation ‘is not good for the image of the newspaper itself’.
One AU official told the Financial Times that there were ‘many issues with the building that are still being resolved with the Chinese. It’s not just cybersecurity’.
Huawei isn't in a position to deserve the trust of any Western country, whatever the mitigations that are in place to provide "security".
The discussion above is wrt the actual Chinese law that requires that companies comply. In reality, the Chinese Government has the ability to do whatever they want, and change the law ex post facto.
The LeMonde story had the usual 'anonymous' sources. Can you see a pattern here?
In other news...
Huawei has stated again and again that all data it manages in Europe never ever leaves Europe. All data from carriers that use Huawei gear in Europe is managed by the carriers. They run the networks.
There are Huawei security centres in the UK, Germany and Belgium where officials have access to Huawei source code. As a result of this access, governments can (and do) recommend changes. As a result of the recommendations, Huawei is investing billions into security.
Can you name any other company that finds itself open to that level of scrutiny?
All the while the US is touring the world (literally) telling foreign governments to not do deals with Huawei and not providing ANY evidence to support its claims.
It is now widely accepted that the real reasons for this attitude towards Huawei are not security related at all but related to US protectionism and a fear of being overtaken technologically in this field.
Now Huawei has grown tired and the latest rumours point to Huawei taking legal action against the US government. It has also publicly called out the US government on its slur campaign and some industry watchers claim foreign governments may decide to ignore US warnings as it has not been able to back up its claims.
""The issue isn't whether this or that company will spy on you--it is whether *your technological infrastructure is provided by a source that is hostile to things you hold dear* or not."
Exactly. I find it odd whenever the defenders of an authoritarian regime show up, basically defending a state which murders and imprisons those who disagree with the single and only party, and its policies. I’ll take the democratic republic of elected representatives any day, thanks.
But 5G!!! My precious!
Nokia and Ericsson offer alternatives to the Huawei/ZTE narrative, and each is definitely not state sponsored, nor "hostile to the things we hold dear". Seems like a win/win for Europe, as well as any of the Five Eyes intelligence partners.
Huawei has managed to get where it currently is by offering better, cheaper hardware.
This is a reality and is applicable to 5G.
They are a fair way ahead of competitors and have focused not only on the tech side but the deployment side.
That's why, during the pre MWC briefing, Huawei demoed the installation of new equipment (worker in hard hat and yellow vest included) to show how one person could install equipment without needing cranes and other expensive and/or time consuming resources.
Carriers care about these things and users benefit from the situation. They don't consider the 'narrative' that keeps you awake at night because there is nothing to it. That should be becoming clear to you now.
And yet, many countries still undecided about Huawei 5G security, and with the coincidental economic pressure brought by the Chinese Government with regard to Huawei bans, and a couple of convenient Canadian "spies" wrt to a DOJ finding, it's quite possible that there will be yet more backlash to Huawei in the West.
Initiated under President George W. Bush in 2001, the program collected phone and text messaging logs from carriers en masse, nominally with the goal of identifying links to terrorism suspects. At first companies like AT&T voluntarily complied with an order by Bush, but by 2006 the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court began issuing secret orders making that data mandatory under an interpretation of the Patriot Act. One of those orders, sent to Verizon, was the first of many documents exposed by Snowden and The Guardian.
Snowden and others attacked the program as a potential tool of mass surveillance, and possibly even more damaging than analyzing the actual contents of messages, since metadata can be collated to identify a person's location and habits.
Interestingly, as additional (actual) facts become known, the administration is shifting its Huawei story to say that somewhere in the future the Chinese government could do exactly what the U.S. government has been doing: Ordering private corporations to spy on people.
Huawei's suggestion that standardized, international guidelines on spying be established starts to make more and more sense.
Spying on private corporations is to obvious and detectable. If Huawei’s equipment ever gets used for a nefarious purpose, it will be a one time usage in cyber warfare (like WW3).
I agree, government sponsored IP theft is a huge problem with China. But, they’re not going to hinder their growth and reputation by using Huawei to do so. That would be shortsighted... and that’s one thing China isn’t.
Going after Huawei is more about maintaining technological dominance, and at the same time smacking down anyone that deals with Iran.
This administration has an Iran fixation, probably due to its ties to Saudi Arabia. I’m not saying Iran are “good guys” but they are far from the only country with nuclear aspirations. Pakistan (for example) already has nukes and we still maintain relations with them. Ideologically, we’re just as far apart...
Our problem with Iran should be about them sponsoring terrorist groups and instigating proxy wars. Isolating Iran haven’t been effective, economic ties are more effective in influencing Iran’s future...
/sorry got off topic ; )
Huawei has already been caught spying on client countries. Whether that is "shortsighted" or not is yet unknown.
"The AU’s grand and sprawling complex was the focus of intrigue and controversy earlier this year—controversy that sheds light on reported ‘national security concerns’ in Australia about which companies should be involved in our 5G network and other critical infrastructure projects.
In January 2018, France’s Le Monde newspaper published an investigation, based on multiple sources, which found that from January 2012 to January 2017 servers based inside the AU’s headquarters in Addis Ababa were transferring data between 12 midnight and 2 am—every single night—to unknown servers more than 8,000 kilometres away hosted in Shanghai. Following the discovery of what media referred to as ‘data theft’, it was also reported that microphones hidden in desks and walls were detected and removed during a sweep for bugs.
The Chinese government refuted Le Monde’s reporting. Chinese state media outlet CGTN (formerly CCTV) reported that China’s foreign ministry spokesperson called the Le Mondeinvestigation ‘utterly groundless and ridiculous’. China’s ambassador to the AU said it was ‘ridiculous and preposterous’. The BBC also quoted the ambassador as saying that the investigation ‘is not good for the image of the newspaper itself’.
One AU official told the Financial Times that there were ‘many issues with the building that are still being resolved with the Chinese. It’s not just cybersecurity’.
Huawei isn't in a position to deserve the trust of any Western country, whatever the mitigations that are in place to provide "security".
The discussion above is wrt the actual Chinese law that requires that companies comply. In reality, the Chinese Government has the ability to do whatever they want, and change the law ex post facto.
The LeMonde story had the usual 'anonymous' sources. Can you see a pattern here?
In other news...
Huawei has stated again and again that all data it manages in Europe never ever leaves Europe. All data from carriers that use Huawei gear in Europe is managed by the carriers. They run the networks.
There are Huawei security centres in the UK, Germany and Belgium where officials have access to Huawei source code. As a result of this access, governments can (and do) recommend changes. As a result of the recommendations, Huawei is investing billions into security.
Can you name any other company that finds itself open to that level of scrutiny?
All the while the US is touring the world (literally) telling foreign governments to not do deals with Huawei and not providing ANY evidence to support its claims.
It is now widely accepted that the real reasons for this attitude towards Huawei are not security related at all but related to US protectionism and a fear of being overtaken technologically in this field.
Now Huawei has grown tired and the latest rumours point to Huawei taking legal action against the US government. It has also publicly called out the US government on its slur campaign and some industry watchers claim foreign governments may decide to ignore US warnings as it has not been able to back up its claims.
""The issue isn't whether this or that company will spy on you--it is whether *your technological infrastructure is provided by a source that is hostile to things you hold dear* or not."
Exactly. I find it odd whenever the defenders of an authoritarian regime show up, basically defending a state which murders and imprisons those who disagree with the single and only party, and its policies. I’ll take the democratic republic of elected representatives any day, thanks.
But 5G!!! My precious!
Nokia and Ericsson offer alternatives to the Huawei/ZTE narrative, and each is definitely not state sponsored, nor "hostile to the things we hold dear". Seems like a win/win for Europe, as well as any of the Five Eyes intelligence partners.
Huawei has managed to get where it currently is by offering better, cheaper hardware.
This is a reality and is applicable to 5G.
They are a fair way ahead of competitors and have focused not only on the tech side but the deployment side.
That's why, during the pre MWC briefing, Huawei demoed the installation of new equipment (worker in hard hat and yellow vest included) to show how one person could install equipment without needing cranes and other expensive and/or time consuming resources.
Carriers care about these things and users benefit from the situation. They don't consider the 'narrative' that keeps you awake at night because there is nothing to it. That should be becoming clear to you now.
And yet, many countries still undecided about Huawei 5G security, and with the coincidental economic pressure brought by the Chinese Government with regard to Huawei bans, and a couple of convenient Canadian "spies" wrt to a DOJ finding, it's quite possible that there will be yet more backlash to Huawei in the West.
There you go again, mixing things up.
Countries don't buy Huawei gear. Carriers do.
Carriers understand security better than countries and I don't know of any carriers that currently use Huawei who wouldn't continue their normal trade relations if it were not for political issues.
Even AT&T works with Huawei (but in Mexico) and would have readily distributed Huawei phones in the US it hadn't been strong-armed to backtrack on a signed deal mere days before the formal announcement.
Remember, for as much as you want it to be, Huawei isn't China and China isn't Huawei.
The whole security thing fell flat on its face. The US blew its chance to put something on the table - and it was asked to do so. It had nothing and Huawei didn't waste the opportunity to make that known all over Europe while reminding Europeans that while the US made threats and accusations, it was the US (oh, the irony!) that got caught with its fingers in the pie.
We now see things for what most people suspected from the beginning. US Protectionism and a fear of losing influence on the world stage.
Both the EU and China have big plans to become self sufficient in key technologies in short order. The EU wants to have a home grown HPC chipset ready in the next couple of years. China has already reached that point.
Initiated under President George W. Bush in 2001, the program collected phone and text messaging logs from carriers en masse, nominally with the goal of identifying links to terrorism suspects. At first companies like AT&T voluntarily complied with an order by Bush, but by 2006 the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court began issuing secret orders making that data mandatory under an interpretation of the Patriot Act. One of those orders, sent to Verizon, was the first of many documents exposed by Snowden and The Guardian.
Snowden and others attacked the program as a potential tool of mass surveillance, and possibly even more damaging than analyzing the actual contents of messages, since metadata can be collated to identify a person's location and habits.
Interestingly, as additional (actual) facts become known, the administration is shifting its Huawei story to say that somewhere in the future the Chinese government could do exactly what the U.S. government has been doing: Ordering private corporations to spy on people.
Huawei's suggestion that standardized, international guidelines on spying be established starts to make more and more sense.
Spying on private corporations is to obvious and detectable. If Huawei’s equipment ever gets used for a nefarious purpose, it will be a one time usage in cyber warfare (like WW3).
I agree, government sponsored IP theft is a huge problem with China. But, they’re not going to hinder their growth and reputation by using Huawei to do so. That would be shortsighted... and that’s one thing China isn’t.
Going after Huawei is more about maintaining technological dominance, and at the same time smacking down anyone that deals with Iran.
This administration has an Iran fixation, probably due to its ties to Saudi Arabia. I’m not saying Iran are “good guys” but they are far from the only country with nuclear aspirations. Pakistan (for example) already has nukes and we still maintain relations with them. Ideologically, we’re just as far apart...
Our problem with Iran should be about them sponsoring terrorist groups and instigating proxy wars. Isolating Iran haven’t been effective, economic ties are more effective in influencing Iran’s future...
/sorry got off topic ; )
Huawei has already been caught spying on client countries. Whether that is "shortsighted" or not is yet unknown.
"The AU’s grand and sprawling complex was the focus of intrigue and controversy earlier this year—controversy that sheds light on reported ‘national security concerns’ in Australia about which companies should be involved in our 5G network and other critical infrastructure projects.
In January 2018, France’s Le Monde newspaper published an investigation, based on multiple sources, which found that from January 2012 to January 2017 servers based inside the AU’s headquarters in Addis Ababa were transferring data between 12 midnight and 2 am—every single night—to unknown servers more than 8,000 kilometres away hosted in Shanghai. Following the discovery of what media referred to as ‘data theft’, it was also reported that microphones hidden in desks and walls were detected and removed during a sweep for bugs.
The Chinese government refuted Le Monde’s reporting. Chinese state media outlet CGTN (formerly CCTV) reported that China’s foreign ministry spokesperson called the Le Mondeinvestigation ‘utterly groundless and ridiculous’. China’s ambassador to the AU said it was ‘ridiculous and preposterous’. The BBC also quoted the ambassador as saying that the investigation ‘is not good for the image of the newspaper itself’.
One AU official told the Financial Times that there were ‘many issues with the building that are still being resolved with the Chinese. It’s not just cybersecurity’.
Huawei isn't in a position to deserve the trust of any Western country, whatever the mitigations that are in place to provide "security".
The discussion above is wrt the actual Chinese law that requires that companies comply. In reality, the Chinese Government has the ability to do whatever they want, and change the law ex post facto.
The LeMonde story had the usual 'anonymous' sources. Can you see a pattern here?
In other news...
Huawei has stated again and again that all data it manages in Europe never ever leaves Europe. All data from carriers that use Huawei gear in Europe is managed by the carriers. They run the networks.
There are Huawei security centres in the UK, Germany and Belgium where officials have access to Huawei source code. As a result of this access, governments can (and do) recommend changes. As a result of the recommendations, Huawei is investing billions into security.
Can you name any other company that finds itself open to that level of scrutiny?
All the while the US is touring the world (literally) telling foreign governments to not do deals with Huawei and not providing ANY evidence to support its claims.
It is now widely accepted that the real reasons for this attitude towards Huawei are not security related at all but related to US protectionism and a fear of being overtaken technologically in this field.
Now Huawei has grown tired and the latest rumours point to Huawei taking legal action against the US government. It has also publicly called out the US government on its slur campaign and some industry watchers claim foreign governments may decide to ignore US warnings as it has not been able to back up its claims.
""The issue isn't whether this or that company will spy on you--it is whether *your technological infrastructure is provided by a source that is hostile to things you hold dear* or not."
Exactly. I find it odd whenever the defenders of an authoritarian regime show up, basically defending a state which murders and imprisons those who disagree with the single and only party, and its policies. I’ll take the democratic republic of elected representatives any day, thanks.
But 5G!!! My precious!
Nokia and Ericsson offer alternatives to the Huawei/ZTE narrative, and each is definitely not state sponsored, nor "hostile to the things we hold dear". Seems like a win/win for Europe, as well as any of the Five Eyes intelligence partners.
Huawei has managed to get where it currently is by offering better, cheaper hardware.
This is a reality and is applicable to 5G.
They are a fair way ahead of competitors and have focused not only on the tech side but the deployment side.
That's why, during the pre MWC briefing, Huawei demoed the installation of new equipment (worker in hard hat and yellow vest included) to show how one person could install equipment without needing cranes and other expensive and/or time consuming resources.
Carriers care about these things and users benefit from the situation. They don't consider the 'narrative' that keeps you awake at night because there is nothing to it. That should be becoming clear to you now.
And yet, many countries still undecided about Huawei 5G security, and with the coincidental economic pressure brought by the Chinese Government with regard to Huawei bans, and a couple of convenient Canadian "spies" wrt to a DOJ finding, it's quite possible that there will be yet more backlash to Huawei in the West.
There you go again, mixing things up.
Countries don't buy Huawei gear. Carriers do.
Carriers understand security better than countries and I don't know of any carriers that currently use Huawei who wouldn't continue their normal trade relations if it were not for political issues.
Even AT&T works with Huawei (but in Mexico) and would have readily distributed Huawei phones in the US it hadn't been strong-armed to backtrack on a signed deal mere days before the formal announcement.
Remember, for as much as you want it to be, Huawei isn't China and China isn't Huawei.
The whole security thing fell flat on its face. The US blew its chance to put something on the table - and it was asked to do so. It had nothing and Huawei didn't waste the opportunity to make that known all over Europe while reminding Europeans that while the US made threats and accusations, it was the US (oh, the irony!) that got caught with its fingers in the pie.
We now see things for what most people suspected from the beginning. US Protectionism and a fear of losing influence on the world stage.
Both the EU and China have big plans to become self sufficient in key technologies in short order. The EU wants to have a home grown HPC chipset ready in the next couple of years. China has already reached that point.
Now Japan and India working to eliminate Huawei from telecom business due to security, because Countries have sovereign power over telecom infrastructure within their borders, not Carriers.
Oh, and do you actually think that China doesn't spy on its citizens, and worse, it's minorities? It's a police state, but you probably have your head in the sand about that.
Comments
This is a reality and is applicable to 5G.
They are a fair way ahead of competitors and have focused not only on the tech side but the deployment side.
That's why, during the pre MWC briefing, Huawei demoed the installation of new equipment (worker in hard hat and yellow vest included) to show how one person could install equipment without needing cranes and other expensive and/or time consuming resources.
Carriers care about these things and users benefit from the situation. They don't consider the 'narrative' that keeps you awake at night because there is nothing to it. That should be becoming clear to you now.
https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/malcolm-turnbull-warns-brits-about-letting-huawei-build-5g-network-20190306-p5120s.html
Countries don't buy Huawei gear. Carriers do.
Carriers understand security better than countries and I don't know of any carriers that currently use Huawei who wouldn't continue their normal trade relations if it were not for political issues.
Even AT&T works with Huawei (but in Mexico) and would have readily distributed Huawei phones in the US it hadn't been strong-armed to backtrack on a signed deal mere days before the formal announcement.
Remember, for as much as you want it to be, Huawei isn't China and China isn't Huawei.
The whole security thing fell flat on its face. The US blew its chance to put something on the table - and it was asked to do so. It had nothing and Huawei didn't waste the opportunity to make that known all over Europe while reminding Europeans that while the US made threats and accusations, it was the US (oh, the irony!) that got caught with its fingers in the pie.
We now see things for what most people suspected from the beginning. US Protectionism and a fear of losing influence on the world stage.
Both the EU and China have big plans to become self sufficient in key technologies in short order. The EU wants to have a home grown HPC chipset ready in the next couple of years. China has already reached that point.
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/european-processor-initiative-consortium-develop-europes-microprocessors-future-supercomputers
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/technology/china-supercomputers.html
https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/japan-india-agree-to-join-forces-on-5g-technology-as-huawei-concerns-linger
Oh, and do you actually think that China doesn't spy on its citizens, and worse, it's minorities? It's a police state, but you probably have your head in the sand about that.
And how about those Chinese Hackers;
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/5/18251836/chinese-hackers-us-servers-universities-military-secrets-cybersecurity
Sure, we should allow our Carriers to buy Huawei, rewarding the Chinese Government for stealing from the West.