At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
I did. Right now he is far better than U.S. leadership. He has a good head on his shoulders, common sense, good judgement, and he is totally loyal to his country without being stupid about it. I hope that someday U.S. leadership can return to what it once was and surpass him -- but it is not this day.
At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
I did. Right now he is far better than U.S. leadership. He has a good head on his shoulders, common sense, good judgement, and he is totally loyal to his country without being stupid about it. I hope that someday U.S. leadership can return to what it once was and surpass him -- but it is not this day.
At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
I did. Right now he is far better than U.S. leadership. He has a good head on his shoulders, common sense, good judgement, and he is totally loyal to his country without being stupid about it. I hope that someday U.S. leadership can return to what it once was and surpass him -- but it is not this day.
You must have really liked Chairman Mao...
Nice job at the right wing crazy-man spin. It seems to be what you and they rely on: spin, half truths, propaganda and attacks on anybody who does not support your alternative reality.
At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
I did. Right now he is far better than U.S. leadership. He has a good head on his shoulders, common sense, good judgement, and he is totally loyal to his country without being stupid about it. I hope that someday U.S. leadership can return to what it once was and surpass him -- but it is not this day.
You must have really liked Chairman Mao...
Nice job at the right wing crazy-man spin. It seems to be what you and they rely on: spin, half truths, propaganda and attacks on anybody who does not support your alternative reality.
Who exactly do you think the Xi Jinping, Chairman for life is anyway?
"China has approved the removal of the two-term limit on the presidency, effectively allowing Xi Jinping to remain in power for life.
The constitutional changes were passed by the annual sitting of parliament, the National People's Congress.
The vote was widely regarded as a rubber-stamping exercise. Two delegates voted against the change and three abstained, out of 2,964 votes.
China had imposed a two-term limit on its president since the 1990s.
But Mr Xi, who would have been due to step down in 2023, defied the tradition of presenting a potential successor during October's Communist Party Congress.
Instead, he consolidated his political power as the party voted to enshrine his name and political ideology in the party's constitution - elevating his status to the level of its founder, Chairman Mao.
On paper, the congress is the most powerful legislative body in China - similar to the parliament in other nations. But it was widely believed that it would approve what it was told to. "
At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
I did. Right now he is far better than U.S. leadership. He has a good head on his shoulders, common sense, good judgement, and he is totally loyal to his country without being stupid about it. I hope that someday U.S. leadership can return to what it once was and surpass him -- but it is not this day.
You must have really liked Chairman Mao...
Nice job at the right wing crazy-man spin. It seems to be what you and they rely on: spin, half truths, propaganda and attacks on anybody who does not support your alternative reality.
Who exactly do you think the Xi Jinping, Chairman for life is anyway?
"China has approved the removal of the two-term limit on the presidency, effectively allowing Xi Jinping to remain in power for life.
The constitutional changes were passed by the annual sitting of parliament, the National People's Congress.
The vote was widely regarded as a rubber-stamping exercise. Two delegates voted against the change and three abstained, out of 2,964 votes.
China had imposed a two-term limit on its president since the 1990s.
But Mr Xi, who would have been due to step down in 2023, defied the tradition of presenting a potential successor during October's Communist Party Congress.
Instead, he consolidated his political power as the party voted to enshrine his name and political ideology in the party's constitution - elevating his status to the level of its founder, Chairman Mao.
On paper, the congress is the most powerful legislative body in China - similar to the parliament in other nations. But it was widely believed that it would approve what it was told to. "
At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
I did. Right now he is far better than U.S. leadership. He has a good head on his shoulders, common sense, good judgement, and he is totally loyal to his country without being stupid about it. I hope that someday U.S. leadership can return to what it once was and surpass him -- but it is not this day.
You must have really liked Chairman Mao...
Nice job at the right wing crazy-man spin. It seems to be what you and they rely on: spin, half truths, propaganda and attacks on anybody who does not support your alternative reality.
Who exactly do you think the Xi Jinping, Chairman for life is anyway?
"China has approved the removal of the two-term limit on the presidency, effectively allowing Xi Jinping to remain in power for life.
The constitutional changes were passed by the annual sitting of parliament, the National People's Congress.
The vote was widely regarded as a rubber-stamping exercise. Two delegates voted against the change and three abstained, out of 2,964 votes.
China had imposed a two-term limit on its president since the 1990s.
But Mr Xi, who would have been due to step down in 2023, defied the tradition of presenting a potential successor during October's Communist Party Congress.
Instead, he consolidated his political power as the party voted to enshrine his name and political ideology in the party's constitution - elevating his status to the level of its founder, Chairman Mao.
On paper, the congress is the most powerful legislative body in China - similar to the parliament in other nations. But it was widely believed that it would approve what it was told to. "
That's all true. What's your point?
The point is you have a fondness for dictators, especially those who have installed themselves for life.
So if all of this recent pushback against China is Xi Jinping's overreach, and it is, then why shouldn't the U.S. disengage from China and continue building our alliances with Democracies?
At last, a competent, non-biased analysis of Trump's war with China & Huawei. Here Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and Cyber Command says:
1) This is primarily an economic war.
2) Trump's effort using cold war tactics of containment are bound to failure. 3) The only way to fight the so called "threat" is by improving U.S. technology through government and industry partnerships to enable the U.S. to become competitive with China on a Global scale. Essentially he is saying that China is passing us by on a technological level and we can't stop them. Or rather, the only way to stop them is to become better at it than than they are -- technological leaders*.
The U.S. can’t use Cold War tactics to engage with China, says former NSA head Michael Rogers
(* Personally I find it remarkable that a country that espouses free markets whines and complains when it gets beat by those same free markets. But, I agree with Rogers that the only way to contain China is to be better at technology (and everything else) than they are. That's how free markets work and that's how the world works. And, that's a win for everybody -- everybody in the U.S. and throughout the world.)
LOL,
So, are you now agreeing with me that Huawei and China are threats to our National Security?
Admiral Michael Rogers, former head of the NSA and U.S. Cyber Command, is one of the early voices who described a national security threat from Chinese technology companies such as Huawei and ZTE.
Rogers discusses the reality of U.S. competitiveness with China, the threat it poses and how companies can do better to compete with China’s resources on cybersecurity podcast Task Force 7 on Tuesday.
"Rogers said that China’s sponsorship of its companies puts the country on an uneven playing field with its Western competitors, by centralizing funding and providing a cushion that doesn’t exist for U.S. firms."
"He said China’s main goal is to achieve 21st century technological dominance, and he explained some of the tactics that are hard to counter, such as IP theft, government subsidies of tech companies, and linking corporate interests to education and government research. He also offered some concrete suggestions on how to counter China’s efforts while maintaining an American business philosophy."
Basically, what Michael Rogers is stating is that we cannot contain China like we did during the Cold War, but that we can compete:
"But he also cautioned that competing with China tit-for-tat likely wouldn’t work for the U.S. Increased government intervention with technology companies simply wouldn’t fly in the U.S., and providing government support for taking competitors’ intellectual property or trade secrets would not be helpful, he said.
Still, the U.S. could vastly improve its public-private partnerships. “You saw the power of that partnership in the space race, the best of government and the best of the private sector.”
Do you even comprehend the link you posted?
Unlike others, including Rogers, I do not conflate economic competition with National Security. That's a pretty far reach if, for no other reason, than it implies a physical or military threat to the nation -- which is the misconception that Trump has been exploiting and why other nations are calling bull to his claims.
It is instead more appropriate to think of it as two business competitors -- such as how iPhones made Palm Pilots obsolete. Can China make us obsolete? Well, they are scheduled to pass us by as the world's number 1 economy in the near future. But, as Rogers points out: You aren't going to stop that with tariffs and other obstruction.
As I said, I agree with him that you cannot block or obstruct economic competition. The way to counter it is simply to do things better. That's how open markets work -- whether the competition is between football teams, corporations or nations.
China is beating us consistently on two fronts: Technology and (mostly) manufacturing. They are simply better at it than we are. And Rogers points to why: There industry is supported by government as a partnership -- they work together for the betterment of both. But here we have handicapped ourselves by saying only private, for profit corporations can compete and any government help is cheating. The trouble with that is: for-profit corporations can best compete by exploiting China's superiority in tech and manufacturing -- they aren't competing with China, they are using China to help their bottom lines.
A 100 years ago government and industry worked together -- for instance they built railroads and infrastructure together to the betterment of both. Instead of trying to block China with scare tactics and tariffs, we should be trying to make our own businesses more competitive in the world market. It's the only way to long term success.
So, on top of concerns of state supported industry, not to mention National Security concerns, we also have human rights issues with China;
Just today, Congress approved a bill calling for sanctions
"Huawei is facing a growing backlash on social media in China after new details came to light in the case of a former employee who was arrested and jailed for 251 days following an unproven accusation of blackmail from the company.
Prosecutors released the former employee, Li Hongyuan, for insufficient evidence earlier this year but his plight has turned into a PR nightmare for the Chinese tech giant at a time when the trade war means the company is having to lean more heavily on its domestic market.
Huawei had become a rallying point for patriotism in China as tensions with the United States mounted. Growth in its smartphone business has recently been propped up by Chinese shoppers as sales overseas slow."
"Huawei has lost a huge number of fans because these people now see a different Huawei: a strange monster that has no empathy and has turned into a bully," it added.
Even Meng's plight is now eliciting some negative reactions on the Chinese internet.
In a letter posted online Sunday, Meng detailed the support she had received during her "darkest hour" — including countless internet comments backing her and Huawei — and concluded that "such warmth is the lighthouse that will guide me forward."
"There is a man, similar to your age, also a Chinese citizen, working at the same company as you — he was put behind bars but there was no lighthouse for him," a user named Laonanchai wrote on popular social media platform Zhihu."
You linked to an article but I'm not sure if you actually read it.
First off. Are you telling me that someone was put in jail in China without trial but later saw his case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation!?
Are we talking about the same China, authoritarian China, evil China which, in your view, shows little or no respect for democracy?
Surely, in spite of the slowness involved in this particular case, things can't be as bad as you paint them.
If you dig you will find similar cases in the U.S and Spain too.
A backlash?
Don't you realise that every year Huawei faces a backlash for something or other? Apple too!
Facing a backlash is simply par for the course for big companies. Sometimes it is warranted and sometimes it isn't.
But, what does the article actually say?
An employee left Huawei. Huawei suspected illegal activity and reported it. The police picked up on the case The government held the ex-employee in prison. The government reviewed the case The government released the ex-employee The government gave him compensation. The ex-employee has stated he will not take the case further.
Do you agree with that summary?
Once again it looks like you are confusing China with Huawei but far more telling is that you threw it in here just for the sake of it. Nothing to do with 5G, T-Mobile or arguably even Huawei.
LOL!
Just pointing out the 251 days that the employee was incarcerated...before he saw the case revised, evaluated and then he was released with compensation.
The fact that he actually had supporters was likely why it was turned around. BTW
"Dec. 10 will mark the one-year anniversary since China unjustly imprisoned Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig and Canadian businessman Michael Spavor.
That was in retaliation for Canada nine days earlier honouring its extradition treaty with the United States by detaining Meng Wanzhou, CFO of the giant Chinese telecom company, Huawei Technologies, at Vancouver International Airport.
She’s wanted by the Americans on charges of conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud intended to violate American sanctions against Iran."
"They have reportedly been subjected to repeated interrogations in rooms where the lights are never turned off.
According to the Globe and Mail, Chinese authorities, apparently out of sheer pettiness and vindictiveness, even confiscated Kovrig’s reading glasses.
While Canadian consular officials are allowed to visit Kovrig and Spavor monthly for 30 minutes, they’ve been denied access to their families and lawyers.
In its escalating campaign to force Canada to free Wanzhou, Chinese officials have accused Canada of “white supremacy” in its diplomatic efforts to get Kovrig and Spavor released and imposed trade bans on key Canadian exports.
They have told Canada to shut up about China’s thuggery while it crushes democracy in Hong Kong, as it previously crushed the people of Tibet and the Muslim Uighurs of China’s Xinjiang province."
After that, there is the issue of Huawei working directly for the Chinese Government in the Xinjiang province providing surveillance technology;
"Now, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has followed up the leaked documents with a report on the main technology providers supporting the region. And Huawei is front and centre. “Huawei’s work in Xinjiang is extensive and includes working directly with the Chinese Government’s public security bureaus in the region,” the report says. “Huawei’s Xinjiang activities should be taken into consideration during debates about Huawei and 5G technologies.”
What you are seeing, is a backlash building up against China, and against Huawei...
There you go again, confusing China with Huawei.
Yes, Huawei is a supplier to the Chinese government. Does that surprise you? Huawei supplies many governments. I really wouldn't be surprised to learn that Huawei is even a supplier to the U.S government - and specifically in relation to surveillance. There is a real possibility of that given its dominance in the field. Perhaps not directly but I'm sure someone somewhere in the U.S government is auditing product components in search of the devil (HiSilicon in this case).
Let's not forget how some senators reacted when they realised that Huawei's smart inverters and three phase inverters were present in the U.S.
As a result, Huawei closed its U.S operations in that field. You will not be surprised learn that once again, not a single shred of evidence was ever presented.
So surveillance equipment? Yes. Huawei is a world leader in the field but 'surveillance' is an 'activity', not a product. Huawei can adapt products to cover many scenarios. The products are camera, networking, cloud and AI products. They can be used for all manner of tasks but it is the customer that decides that, not Huawei.
Actually, the U.S. has banned all Chinese surveillance cameras used at any government installation;
"WASHINGTON ― Amid news that thousands of banned Chinese-made surveillance devicesare in use across American government installations, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is asking the Pentagon to identify the Chinese gear in use at U.S. military facilities.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper made public Wednesday, Rubio said the Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy to address the threats posed by foreign-sourced components and subcomponents.
“The Department of Defense must act quickly to identify and remove this equipment as every day that passes only provides our adversaries additional time to infiltrate and exploit our national security networks as well as the ability to monitor U.S. military activities that may be of interest,” Rubio said."
So, Apple is deep in shit for bowing to Russia on maps of the Ukraine and the Crimea, but Huawei gets a pass when they are providing the infrastructure for mass surveillance in Xinjiang?
Of course Huawei should not be involved in that if they are actually concerned about maintaining a separation between them and the Chinese Government. The backlash against Hong Kong and Xinjiang is building rapidly, and Huawei's 5G will be evaluated with consideration of its surveillance business, not differently that Huawei was evaluated for its undersea cable business that they divested.
Huawei has a earned its reputation for spying for the Chinese Government, it isn't just some statement by a Western Government, and that doesn't help Huawei in evaluations of 5G equipment and infrastructure.
"The Chinese government's carefully constructed narrative around its Xinjiang detention centers appears to have been shattered by hundreds of pages of leaked documents published by Western media over the last two weeks.
Beijing has long insisted that its vast camps are voluntary "vocational training centers," where people learn job skills and are then free to leave.
Yet the leaks paint a grim picture of heavily fortified re-education centers, designed to turn Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities into good Chinese citizens who also speak Mandarin.
And the students can't leave until they have become just that."
Why should I trust Huawei?
You have more reason to trust Huawei than to trust anyone where the NSA could have its tentacles. Isn't that ironic!
Thanks to Snowden and wikileaks we know how AT&T played its part in surveillance. We know how government agencies interfered with supply chains. We know about Project Shotgiant. etc
While we (and you) know all that very well, nobody has ever put anything on the table that holds water on Huawei. Your posts are chock full of 'anonymous', 'alleged', 'unsubstantiated' etc That boils down to nothing from you but even at an official, judicial level, the U.S government has had to steep so low as to open old, settled court cases, just to have something. Anything! It's wearing thin and Trump is his own worst enemy. We know this isn't really about national security. We have always known this. It's about technological influence (power) and money. We know this because Trump tweeted it all in real time!
National Security Risk? Your president is the biggest national security risk and sadly I am not joking. I am deadly serious.
Do I also need to remind you again of what a German minister said recently on 'trust' and reasons for banning Huawei? After all, you had five opportunities to tackle his observation in another thread but failed to do so.
Trump has become increasingly frustrated by seeing his 'easy to win' trade war has been anything but easy and his attack on Huawei backfired with terrible results for U.S tech companies and U.S revenues. One the one hand he wants to correct a trade imbalance but on the other he is directly responsible for 11 billion dollars of foreign purchases not going to the U.S.
His government also seems utterly lost. This is the latest installment of evidence of that:
Perhaps, on the inside, Trump believes the 'sanctions' are U.N sanctions.
Now, ask yourself. Would T-Mobile's 5G offering be better and cheaper for them if they had access to Huawei equipment? Would users see faster speeds than they might if their handsets were connecting to Huawei base stations?
I've posted enough counterpoints to your support of Huawei. I can't do anything about what will actually happen, nor can you, but as I stated multiple times, Huawei's connection to China has always, and will always, be the primary issue. That China keeps making it worse for Huawei with their actions is obvious.
Maybe Huawei should move offshore?
How about Taiwan or Viet Nam!
The belief that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese military is only an issue for those who choose to believe the US. led propaganda effort against Huawei. The rest of the world, living in the real world, thinks its nonsense.
Even those who made the claim have backed off of that claim (after being destroyed) and now simply claim "Well, they might in the future. You never know!"
.... Why, that would have to be Authoritarianism, which you have stated that you are so fond of.
No, that's Trump. I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things.
"I just want good, honest government focused on doing the right things", so you picked China as an example of that...
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
I did. Right now he is far better than U.S. leadership. He has a good head on his shoulders, common sense, good judgement, and he is totally loyal to his country without being stupid about it. I hope that someday U.S. leadership can return to what it once was and surpass him -- but it is not this day.
You must have really liked Chairman Mao...
Nice job at the right wing crazy-man spin. It seems to be what you and they rely on: spin, half truths, propaganda and attacks on anybody who does not support your alternative reality.
Who exactly do you think the Xi Jinping, Chairman for life is anyway?
"China has approved the removal of the two-term limit on the presidency, effectively allowing Xi Jinping to remain in power for life.
The constitutional changes were passed by the annual sitting of parliament, the National People's Congress.
The vote was widely regarded as a rubber-stamping exercise. Two delegates voted against the change and three abstained, out of 2,964 votes.
China had imposed a two-term limit on its president since the 1990s.
But Mr Xi, who would have been due to step down in 2023, defied the tradition of presenting a potential successor during October's Communist Party Congress.
Instead, he consolidated his political power as the party voted to enshrine his name and political ideology in the party's constitution - elevating his status to the level of its founder, Chairman Mao.
On paper, the congress is the most powerful legislative body in China - similar to the parliament in other nations. But it was widely believed that it would approve what it was told to. "
That's all true. What's your point?
The point is you have a fondness for dictators, especially those who have installed themselves for life.
So if all of this recent pushback against China is Xi Jinping's overreach, and it is, then why shouldn't the U.S. disengage from China and continue building our alliances with Democracies?
LOL.. As I've explained to you previously, I have a "fondness" for good, honest, competent, dedicated leaders and government. Right now China has it. The U.S. does not. The form is less important than the people and their values. A good leader can make a bad system good. While a bad person can make a good system bad.
The primary strength of democracy is that mistakes like Trump can be corrected (assuming that elections are not meddled with!). If China had Trump, they'd be screwed. He wouldn't even have to bribe a foreign government to subvert the upcoming election -- he'd already have it all sewed up.
Comments
Here's some Huawei news;
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-deutsche-telekom-germany-exclusive-idUSKBN1Y81MI
"Deutsche Telekom has put all deals to buy 5G network equipment on hold, it said on Wednesday, as it awaits the resolution of a debate in Germany over whether to bar Chinese vendor Huawei on security grounds."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-43361276
"China has approved the removal of the two-term limit on the presidency, effectively allowing Xi Jinping to remain in power for life.
The constitutional changes were passed by the annual sitting of parliament, the National People's Congress.
The vote was widely regarded as a rubber-stamping exercise. Two delegates voted against the change and three abstained, out of 2,964 votes.
China had imposed a two-term limit on its president since the 1990s.
But Mr Xi, who would have been due to step down in 2023, defied the tradition of presenting a potential successor during October's Communist Party Congress.
Instead, he consolidated his political power as the party voted to enshrine his name and political ideology in the party's constitution - elevating his status to the level of its founder, Chairman Mao.
On paper, the congress is the most powerful legislative body in China - similar to the parliament in other nations. But it was widely believed that it would approve what it was told to. "
So if all of this recent pushback against China is Xi Jinping's overreach, and it is, then why shouldn't the U.S. disengage from China and continue building our alliances with Democracies?
The primary strength of democracy is that mistakes like Trump can be corrected (assuming that elections are not meddled with!). If China had Trump, they'd be screwed. He wouldn't even have to bribe a foreign government to subvert the upcoming election -- he'd already have it all sewed up.