Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
Uh, no.
I'm self employed. I had some stuff to do.
Yeah, Germany's Economy Minister is concerned of the backlash that will occur with the "banning" of Huawei, and as Germany has significant trade with China, that's a problem. On the other hand, Merkel's Christian Democrat Party, along with Germany's Military, and Intelligence operators, are all for the banning of Huawei. Given that the German Parliament is voting on this, it looks very bad for Merkel and Huawei.
Even for that, there enough that's come out about the brutality of the Chinese Authorities in the Xinjiang providence, and as well how Mainland China handled the protests in Hong Kong, and its elections yesterday, and of all things, organ harvesting, that the growing backlash is leading to some countries in the West as a minimum boycotting the next Winter Olympics. China's Authoritarianism, as well as its United Front operations in other countries, are absolutely fueling the West's disengaging with China, and at best, there will be a minor Trade Deal with the U.S.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
Now I could link to all of that, but you two are so imbedded in your views that it would be a waste of time.
You still didn't respond to what he said (and what I speculated with).
He has a very valid point independently of what others may think on the subject and he put it forward in a very clear way. He isn't referring to China. He is referring to Huawei and comparing proven U.S activities, with what the U.S is accusing Huawei of (but without proof of course).
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
Uh, no.
I'm self employed. I had some stuff to do.
Yeah, Germany's Economy Minister is concerned of the backlash that will occur with the "banning" of Huawei, and as Germany has significant trade with China, that's a problem. On the other hand, Merkel's Christian Democrat Party, along with Germany's Military, and Intelligence operators, are all for the banning of Huawei. Given that the German Parliament is voting on this, it looks very bad for Merkel and Huawei.
Even for that, there enough that's come out about the brutality of the Chinese Authorities in the Xinjiang providence, and as well how Mainland China handled the protests in Hong Kong, and its elections yesterday, and of all things, organ harvesting, that the growing backlash is leading to some countries in the West as a minimum boycotting the next Winter Olympics. China's Authoritarianism, as well as its United Front operations in other countries, are absolutely fueling the West's disengaging with China, and at best, there will be a minor Trade Deal with the U.S.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
Now I could link to all of that, but you two are so imbedded in your views that it would be a waste of time.
You still didn't respond to what he said (and what I speculated with).
He has a very valid point independently of what others may think on the subject and he put it forward in a very clear way. He isn't referring to China. He is referring to Huawei and comparing proven U.S activities, with what the U.S is accusing Huawei of (but without proof of course).
Huawei is Huawei.
China is China.
His point was so irrelevant that Merkel's own party ignored it. Sad.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
Uh, no.
I'm self employed. I had some stuff to do.
Yeah, Germany's Economy Minister is concerned of the backlash that will occur with the "banning" of Huawei, and as Germany has significant trade with China, that's a problem. On the other hand, Merkel's Christian Democrat Party, along with Germany's Military, and Intelligence operators, are all for the banning of Huawei. Given that the German Parliament is voting on this, it looks very bad for Merkel and Huawei.
Even for that, there enough that's come out about the brutality of the Chinese Authorities in the Xinjiang providence, and as well how Mainland China handled the protests in Hong Kong, and its elections yesterday, and of all things, organ harvesting, that the growing backlash is leading to some countries in the West as a minimum boycotting the next Winter Olympics. China's Authoritarianism, as well as its United Front operations in other countries, are absolutely fueling the West's disengaging with China, and at best, there will be a minor Trade Deal with the U.S.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
Now I could link to all of that, but you two are so imbedded in your views that it would be a waste of time.
You still didn't respond to what he said (and what I speculated with).
He has a very valid point independently of what others may think on the subject and he put it forward in a very clear way. He isn't referring to China. He is referring to Huawei and comparing proven U.S activities, with what the U.S is accusing Huawei of (but without proof of course).
Huawei is Huawei.
China is China.
His point was so irrelevant that Merkel's own party ignored it. Sad.
Revelance (or not) is irrelevant. ;-)
What he said was so spot on and to the point that you have no response to it.
You simply skirt the whole point - again and again. That is clear.
Forget Merkel, China and Huawei and focus on what he said. He is absolutely right.
That said, coming from a high ranking minister does make it very relevant indeed.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
Uh, no.
I'm self employed. I had some stuff to do.
Yeah, Germany's Economy Minister is concerned of the backlash that will occur with the "banning" of Huawei, and as Germany has significant trade with China, that's a problem. On the other hand, Merkel's Christian Democrat Party, along with Germany's Military, and Intelligence operators, are all for the banning of Huawei. Given that the German Parliament is voting on this, it looks very bad for Merkel and Huawei.
Even for that, there enough that's come out about the brutality of the Chinese Authorities in the Xinjiang providence, and as well how Mainland China handled the protests in Hong Kong, and its elections yesterday, and of all things, organ harvesting, that the growing backlash is leading to some countries in the West as a minimum boycotting the next Winter Olympics. China's Authoritarianism, as well as its United Front operations in other countries, are absolutely fueling the West's disengaging with China, and at best, there will be a minor Trade Deal with the U.S.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
Now I could link to all of that, but you two are so imbedded in your views that it would be a waste of time.
You still didn't respond to what he said (and what I speculated with).
He has a very valid point independently of what others may think on the subject and he put it forward in a very clear way. He isn't referring to China. He is referring to Huawei and comparing proven U.S activities, with what the U.S is accusing Huawei of (but without proof of course).
Huawei is Huawei.
China is China.
His point was so irrelevant that Merkel's own party ignored it. Sad.
Revelance (or not) is irrelevant. ;-)
What he said was so spot on and to the point that you have no response to it.
You simply skirt the whole point - again and again. That is clear.
Forget Merkel, China and Huawei and focus on what he said. He is absolutely right.
That said, coming from a high ranking minister does make it very relevant indeed.
Um, so by your logic, anything that Trump states is "very relevant indeed" being as though he is "the most powerful leader in the world"?
If it makes you feel good, keep on thinking that, but the reality is that the Parliament will decide based on National Security issues vs trade backlash.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
Uh, no.
I'm self employed. I had some stuff to do.
Yeah, Germany's Economy Minister is concerned of the backlash that will occur with the "banning" of Huawei, and as Germany has significant trade with China, that's a problem. On the other hand, Merkel's Christian Democrat Party, along with Germany's Military, and Intelligence operators, are all for the banning of Huawei. Given that the German Parliament is voting on this, it looks very bad for Merkel and Huawei.
Even for that, there enough that's come out about the brutality of the Chinese Authorities in the Xinjiang providence, and as well how Mainland China handled the protests in Hong Kong, and its elections yesterday, and of all things, organ harvesting, that the growing backlash is leading to some countries in the West as a minimum boycotting the next Winter Olympics. China's Authoritarianism, as well as its United Front operations in other countries, are absolutely fueling the West's disengaging with China, and at best, there will be a minor Trade Deal with the U.S.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
Now I could link to all of that, but you two are so imbedded in your views that it would be a waste of time.
You still didn't respond to what he said (and what I speculated with).
He has a very valid point independently of what others may think on the subject and he put it forward in a very clear way. He isn't referring to China. He is referring to Huawei and comparing proven U.S activities, with what the U.S is accusing Huawei of (but without proof of course).
Huawei is Huawei.
China is China.
His point was so irrelevant that Merkel's own party ignored it. Sad.
Revelance (or not) is irrelevant. ;-)
What he said was so spot on and to the point that you have no response to it.
You simply skirt the whole point - again and again. That is clear.
Forget Merkel, China and Huawei and focus on what he said. He is absolutely right.
That said, coming from a high ranking minister does make it very relevant indeed.
Um, so by your logic, anything that Trump states is "very relevant indeed" being as though he is "the most powerful leader in the world"?
If it makes you feel good, keep on thinking that, but the reality is that the Parliament will decide based on National Security issues vs trade backlash.
Sadly, yes, it's relevant.
We have seen the impact that a single tweet from Trump can have. There is no getting away from that.
Like there is no getting away from the fact that you still haven't responded to what the minister said.
I'm not counting but I think you've had five opportunities now. I obviously won't hold my breath.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies PAWNS in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
...
Fixed that for you!
You obviously don't give a shit about the War in the Pacific that was fought by those same allies, especially the Australians and New Zealanders, with us, in a long grueling and costly battle.
Huh?
So those "allies" of ours are "pawns", even as a Chinese Agent has applied for asylum, giving a huge payload of counterintelligence to Australia:
It was the Australians that blew the whistle on Huawei, not the U.S., but since the U.S., Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are all partners in Five Eyes, the intelligence gathering organization formed in 1941, then that information is shared.
Your statement was: "US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan."
Thanks for letting me know that both Australia and Japan were our allies in WW-II. I didn't know that.
Actually though, it sounds like it is your brain may be "some kind of fucked up"
And sorry, but raising a concern is not "blowing the whistle" and then raising that concern to ridiculous levels in order to further a personal agenda as Trump is doing despite having no facts to back up his claims is, as you say, "some kind of fucked up".
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
It's damned rare to find Trump opponents who are apologists for the Chinese government. In reality Trump has done more to benefit China at US expense than any US president, even more so that Clinton who prematurely let them into the WTO. Killing the TPP was a disaster because it prevented the formation of a new 'inner club" of nations around the United States that would partly reverse the WTO mistake; the frolicking with North Korea in practice plays right into Chinese hands, and so does the trade war which the Trump administration has foolishly fought out mostly over raw materials rather than finished goods, playing right to China's strength. Even if you accept that a trade war is good policy -- which it rarely is for the country that's in a trade deficit as opposed to surplus, and therefore rarely good for a country like the US -- this one still flunks because it couldn't have been designed better for China by the Chinese themselves.
And back to regular programming. 5G won't be useful to most people unless and until carriers use the bandwidth to increase data limits. There may be minor benefits for IOT services in areas that are built up enough to support a 5G network given the very sparse wireless network we have in the US by global standards.
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
It's damned rare to find Trump opponents who are apologists for the Chinese government. In reality Trump has done more to benefit China at US expense than any US president, even more so that Clinton who prematurely let them into the WTO. Killing the TPP was a disaster because it prevented the formation of a new 'inner club" of nations around the United States that would partly reverse the WTO mistake; the frolicking with North Korea in practice plays right into Chinese hands, and so does the trade war which the Trump administration has foolishly fought out mostly over raw materials rather than finished goods, playing right to China's strength. Even if you accept that a trade war is good policy -- which it rarely is for the country that's in a trade deficit as opposed to surplus, and therefore rarely good for a country like the US -- this one still flunks because it couldn't have been designed better for China by the Chinese themselves.
Good comments, and complete agreement about TPP which is actually more like Version 2 today. We need to increase trade opportunities for our allies, who are considerably reliant on us for security even as China rapidly expands into the South Pacific.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
Yeh, KellyAnne taught us several years ago that anything can be explained away using Alternative Facts.
Am I an apologist for China? No, just a realist. Unlike yourself, I prefer reality to fear and hate. The quesiton is: Why are you such an apologist for our wanna be king?
And back to regular programming. 5G won't be useful to most people unless and until carriers use the bandwidth to increase data limits. There may be minor benefits for IOT services in areas that are built up enough to support a 5G network given the very sparse wireless network we have in the US by global standards.
Currently the major problem is (aside from political interference) the chicken or the egg: Did the locomotive come before the tracks or did the tracks come before the locomotive? Without both, each are worthless scrap. 5G is facing the same problem today: Why should American carriers roll it out if there are no phones to use it -- and pay for it? (and, of course, vice-versa).
This however does not seem to be a problem for China and others: They are rolling out both phones and transmitters.
... Socialism and dictatorships, done right, have some advantages over the for-profit model because they can put doing the right thing for the country ahead of stockholder profit.
(And, no, I am neither a socialist nor an advocate for dictatorships -- I simply recognize that sometimes they have advantages).
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
Yeh, KellyAnne taught us several years ago that anything can be explained away using Alternative Facts.
Am I an apologist for China? No, just a realist. Unlike yourself, I prefer reality to fear and hate. The quesiton is: Why are you such an apologist for our wanna be king?
LOL.
"This however does not seem to be a problem for China and others: They are rolling out both phones and transmitters.
... Socialism and dictatorships, done right, have some advantages over the for-profit model because they can put doing the right thing for the country ahead of stockholder profit."
"Dictatorships done right" sounds just like Trump.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
Yeh, KellyAnne taught us several years ago that anything can be explained away using Alternative Facts.
Am I an apologist for China? No, just a realist. Unlike yourself, I prefer reality to fear and hate. The quesiton is: Why are you such an apologist for our wanna be king?
LOL.
"This however does not seem to be a problem for China and others: They are rolling out both phones and transmitters.
... Socialism and dictatorships, done right, have some advantages over the for-profit model because they can put doing the right thing for the country ahead of stockholder profit."
"Dictatorships done right" sounds just like Trump.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
Yeh, KellyAnne taught us several years ago that anything can be explained away using Alternative Facts.
Am I an apologist for China? No, just a realist. Unlike yourself, I prefer reality to fear and hate. The quesiton is: Why are you such an apologist for our wanna be king?
LOL.
"This however does not seem to be a problem for China and others: They are rolling out both phones and transmitters.
... Socialism and dictatorships, done right, have some advantages over the for-profit model because they can put doing the right thing for the country ahead of stockholder profit."
"Dictatorships done right" sounds just like Trump.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
Yeh, KellyAnne taught us several years ago that anything can be explained away using Alternative Facts.
Am I an apologist for China? No, just a realist. Unlike yourself, I prefer reality to fear and hate. The quesiton is: Why are you such an apologist for our wanna be king?
LOL.
"This however does not seem to be a problem for China and others: They are rolling out both phones and transmitters.
... Socialism and dictatorships, done right, have some advantages over the for-profit model because they can put doing the right thing for the country ahead of stockholder profit."
"Dictatorships done right" sounds just like Trump.
Much of the debate over 5G is sourced from the Trump administration's fact free strong arming of U.S. allies to boycot the leading supplier of 5G technology simply because it is Chinese. Their latest attempt is to both frighten and extort Canada by threatening to spurn them if they decide to roll out their 5G using Huawei technology.
According to U.S. national security advisor Robert O'brien: “When they (the Chinese) get Huawei into Canada or into other Western
countries, they’re going to know every health record, every banking
record, every social media post, they’re going to know everything about
every single Canadian,” And that using Huawei technology: "would put in jeopardy intelligence sharing with the United States"
That puts Canada in a hard place: Do they delay their 5G rollout and accept second rate technology simply to keep the Trump administration happy even though their claims have been revealed to have no basis in reality? Or, should they do what is right for the Canadian people?
Here in the U.S. AT&T has had to deal with same level of nonsense -- which is delaying and degrading the U.S. roll out of 5G simply to support Trump's foolish and failing trade war. Or, as Gernany has reported: "All of the telecom operators [have] close trading ties
with China, are customers of Huawei and have warned that banning the
company would add years of delays and billions of dollars in costs to
the launch of 5G networks.
...
There you go again with the unsupported bullshit.
For the record, there is no "second rate technology" when using alternates to Huawei, which includes Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung. Post a link that states otherwise, and I'll be happy to reconsider, but of course, you will only find Huawei stating that, not any Western sources.
...
You have to be the dimmest bulb in these posts if you can't understand what the threat that China poses to the West.
Time to reconsider:
A perfect example of someone who knows what he is talking and and someone else who is completely lost.
Your last bolded comment has nothing to do with Huawei or 5G but does play into to what U.S politicians clearly fear: China overtaking the U.S as a world tech reference.
It's protectionism, pure and simple.
It isn't protectionism simply because the U.S. isn't a player in 5G, mostly due to mergers and acquisitions of U.S. companies by European Companies, as explained in the link.
It is strickly National Security, both from protecting existing companies in the West from Huawei's predatory pricing and Government support, as well as security of the core 5G networks.
Here's a much more comprehensive article that lays out what is at stake for the West, and given that it is from April of this year, doesn't take into account all of the backlash that China is getting from Hong Kong, Xin Jinping prisons, and recent spying charges in Australia;
Due to the outright banning of Huawei in many Western Countries, Ericsson and Nokia, plus Samsung, are all increasing R&D investments in 5G. It is expected that Huawei's so called technical lead, won't last more than a year or so, but even if it lasts longer, these Western Companies will be able to provide leading edge 5G.
The truth is that China's recent authoritarian behavior is a better predictor of future Huawei banning than anything else.
So, I take that as being your way of reconsidering.
Huawei's technical lead (as stated by the person who knows what he is talking about in the video) is not 'so called'. It is very real. Similar comments have been made by other ICT specialists.
The Commerce Secretary's very poor attempts to swing away from the protectionism angle are just that - very poor.
The President isn't much better and seems just as lost as his Commerce Secretary:
The U.S president is using protectionism in the widest possible scope. To protect an entire industry from one company. To the point of extending action beyond the sovereign limits of the U.S and threatening allies. Perhaps you don't remember his "not on my watch" comments. He is flaying wildly, searching for a U.S company to step up to the mark but he is so lost that he thinks Apple can fill that role. Didn't anybody point him towards Qualcomm? In the meantime, there are rumours of the U.S considering investing in Nokia and Ericsson.
5G is being considered a new industrial revolution. The U.S not being part of it is something he can't cope with.
Please tell me again. if you ever have.
Which industry is Trump trying to protect, because what I see, is that Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung are the beneficiaries of his "protectionism, not any U.S. companies, and those all reside in countries with democracies.
You don't see any?
Then you aren't looking!
As I said above and will repeat, he is trying to protect an entire industry.
Apple (by making sure carriers can't carry Huawei products).
Cisco by giving them a guaranteed Huawei-competition-free market.
Qualcomm idem above
By keeping Huawei out of a major market (on unfounded grounds) he shelters autoctonous companies from fierce competition.
Competition for which U.S companies have failed to step up to the plate (for whatever reason). It is protectionism on an unprecedented scale in that its ultimate goal is to put the competitor (Huawei) literally out of business.
Ironically, the actions are backfiring massively as Huawei switches it purchasing to non-U.S suppliers, develops its own Google/Microsoft alternatives and sees staggering growth at home. There are even clouds over some of Apple's most fervent customers:
I think you may be confusing 5G with the broader networking market. Currently no US companies that I know of are making 5G equipment, but Huawei makes other, non 5G networking equipment.
I wasn't really focusing on any of that with my comments.
It was strictly in regard to the conspiracy theory that the U.S. Government was actively protecting U.S. companies. In reality, Huawei is a special case in that it is China's acknowledged "National Champion", so of course, would be an obvious target for leveraging over trade, more so due to the Intelligence that the Five Eyes have on Huawei worldwide. That said, the U.S. will never allow Huawei hardware into its networks, nor should it. That's an easy lesson to learn from centuries of conflict around the world; you can't survive if an enemy has control of your economy or your infrastructure. Hence why China is attempting to create analogs of all of the stuff it currently buys from the West.
The irony is that China's growth is slowing, and given Huawei's current share of the Chinese handset market, mostly from grabbing share from competitors not named Apple, it will ultimately end up with "flat sales" soon, which is one of Avon b7's constant talking points about Apple. In fact, were Huawei handsets to be allowed into the U.S. Market via carriers, they would end up consuming much of Samsung's share, and very little of Apple's. Huawei devices just aren't overall that great a product compared to Apple's.
I will add that The Chinese Government is creating a backlash in much of the West from its Authoritarian actions internal and external to China. Avon b7 fails to recognize how this is effecting Huawei 5G hopes, in for example Germany.
Frankly, he doesn't appear to give a fuck about China's repressive actions in Hong Kong or Xinjiang, but here in the U.S., there has been actual legislative action wrt Hong Kong's protests, and that is getting not too subtle responses from China to butt the fuck out, which of course, we won't do.
The only conspiracy theories out there are coming from Trump and some of his subordinates.
AT&T does business with Huawei in Mexico. If it had access to Huawei in the U.S it would use their gear and sell their phones. We know this because that was the plan as far back as 2017 when AT&T was tuning the Kirin 970 to its networks.
I said at the time, Apple would have had a nasty bite taken out of it if users could get easy, carrier access to Huawei phones.
Since then Huawei phones have been the trailblazers and Apple has had nothing to match them in the most important smartphone areas. Apple would have suffered a double whammy of competition on its home turf (far fiercer than anything Samsung could offer) and its already declining presence in China.
On 5G AT&T would have got cheaper, better equipment. Better in every sense.
The U.S government is actively holding Huawei back without providing a shred of evidence. Huawei has offered its software and patents to the U.S for a one time payment. It called the U.S bluff.
The U.S now has no credible option but to reveal its hand. The problem is that we now know it is empty.
Let's forget for a second that when the U.S says that countries doing business with Huawei will see their access to U.S intelligence reduced it means and includes access to intelligence garnered through the same sources it considers Huawei a risk for. The irony!
As for National Champions, Huawei is no more a national champion than Lockheed or Boeing in the U.S.
When the U.S interfered in Australia over an undersea fibre optic cable that Huawei was going to lay, the cable was eventually tendered and awarded to a company of U.S origin. That's how this particular form of protectionism extends its tentacles.
You say that the U.S will never allow Huawei gear into the U.S but you know full well that Huawei gear is already in the U.S. Just stripping it out will cost billions. Huawei is also present (massively present) in surveillance equipment all over the U.S. It is also a world leader in intelligent inverter panels that are widely used all over the U.S (something that is also keeping a lot of U.S politicians up at night.
The fears are all hogwash as Huawei gear has been present in ICT gear the world over for 30 years. 30 years without major incident.
You want to get into geopolitics and lose focus on Huawei as pretty much everything you have said about Huawei as a company hasn't been true.
You probably don't even realize that the first link completely supports what I have been stating all along:
"US concerns about China on such issues as unequal market access, forced technology transfer, human and cyber-enabled state-supported theft of intellectual property, currency manipulation and state subsidies—as well as China’s expansive conception of state security and its belief that individuals and organisations should support state espionage—are all legitimate. But Trump’s ban on Huawei doesn’t address these concerns effectively, nor has it been communicated sufficiently to other countries, such as those in Southeast Asia.
US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan. But while the debate has spread globally, the ban has also created a rift with other allies and partners, making the picture in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as Europe, more complicated."
Thanks to Trump, Huawei and China often get dunked into the same soup. That makes politics difficult to eradicate from the debate. However, you constantly veer into your pure anti China diatribes and forget why you are writing in this thread: 5G, and things associated with it. Huawei is not China.
That said, don't you think this German minister has a point?
"Economy Minister Peter Altmaier defended the government’s decision not to impose a ban on Huawei, saying it didn’t issue a “boycott” of U.S. companies in the wake of espionage accusations by the U.S. National Security Agency dating to 2013."
Expect an offensive along those lines from Huawei at MWC2020. Huawei feels so strongly that it has no connection (beyond regulatory issues) to the Chinese government that it is sueing some 'experts' who have insisted that there is a connection and appear on TV and radio on their capacity as experts, only to spread FUD. We'll see if they have anything to back their claims up in court. Of course, Huawei is already sueing the U.S government.
Too bad that the German Parliament will have a vote on banning Huawei, taking it out of Merkel's hands...
That won't alter the point, though, will it?
He is absolutely correct in what he said.
Uhm, the Parliament wants to ban Huawei entirely from Germany's telecom system.
"Only those suppliers can be trustworthy that are not under the influence of undemocratic states without a functioning rule of law,” reads the text approved during the party convention in Leipzig.
While the motion doesn’t specifically mention Huawei, the debate preceding its approval left no doubt.
“Big companies in China have by law to serve the interest of the Communist party in China and cooperate with Chinese intelligence,” said Norbert Roettgen, head of the parliamentary committee on foreign relations. “And therefore it must be clear -- we cannot entrust Germany’s 5G network to the Chinese state and its Communist leadership.”
Roettgen’s speech was met with strong applause. A previous proposal had called for an outright ban of Huawei, something the government said would not be tenable.
Urged by hawks in Germany’s intelligence service and the U.S. administration, the government recently agreed to ratchet up restrictions on Huawei that would block its components from the core network but allow them in less sensitive areas. Concerns in Washington and Berlin are over the risks of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government and 5G’s susceptibility to sabotage or espionage."
You didn't contest his point. I am not surprised, though.
Given that the NSA has already been caught spying on Merkal, and who knows what else, you would have no issue with the EU banning, let's say Cisco from all corners of the Bloc on the suspicion that they have close ties to the U.S government.
Let's not actually bother with the insignificant issue of providing evidence. After all, no smoking gun has ever been necessary, has it?
He spoke out. Went on record. All I'm asking you is if his point is valid. Surely you have a response?
You need to keep up on current events. The U.S. definitely has some fucked up shit, but nothing in comparison to China.
Odds are, what you are speaking of isn't even being considered by Parliament.
Ok. Let's leave it as you have no response to what he actually said.
On top of that, China is running out of dollars, so they are actually in a precarious position with their economy, and their growth has stalled, and is falling.
China's GDP is growing at 6.69% and holds over a Trillion dollars in U.S. loans while the U.S. is mired in the mud down at or below 2% despite being goosed with a Trillion dollar deficit. It doesn't sound like it is China who is failing. Like Bush before him, Trump has mortgaged our future to fight a needless and unwinnable war.
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
Yeh, KellyAnne taught us several years ago that anything can be explained away using Alternative Facts.
Am I an apologist for China? No, just a realist. Unlike yourself, I prefer reality to fear and hate. The quesiton is: Why are you such an apologist for our wanna be king?
LOL.
"This however does not seem to be a problem for China and others: They are rolling out both phones and transmitters.
... Socialism and dictatorships, done right, have some advantages over the for-profit model because they can put doing the right thing for the country ahead of stockholder profit."
"Dictatorships done right" sounds just like Trump.
Trump is leaving a trail of economic tech destruction in his wake but all the damage is to his favoured tech companies.
AT&T has been left with basically two options for 5G (Nokia or Ericsson). Vodafone specialists have gone on record as putting Ericsson far ahead of Nokia in terms of ability to satisfy their needs. The same people say Huawei is far ahead of both of them.
The Vodafone conclusion was that by eliminating Huawei as an option, the new option was really Ericsson or Ericsson. That is catastrophic for competition and was sure to lead to lesser but more expensive equipment (the cost of which is passed on to the consumer of course).
Huawei is already successfully cutting ties with U.S companies. Latest figures confirm thay over 10 billion dollars in component supply has gone to Japan. That is a massive loss fora almost 300 U.S companies (all of which have requested exemption licences from the commerce department).
Huawei claims that 40,000 U.S jobs are tied to its U.S supply chain. That is getting decimated.
In terms of tech influence, the winds are now blowing east. In a recent CNBC interview, Ren claimed that many products were in development for years but held back. When Trump began his cowboy politics, he released some of them. That's why such big announcements and roll outs came so quickly (Ascend, Kun Peng, Tai Shan, Atlas, HarmonyOS). Apparently there are more and may even include a completely new chipset/instruction set to cover problems with ARM.
Now Huawei is slowly cristalising its message to Trump and he won't like it because it has the potential to turn the tech industry on its head in terms of influence.
One thing is for sure, someone somewhere must have advised him things could backfire in a massive way. He may not be president for long enough to answer to the damage he is doing to U.S tech companies but the message from Huawei really couldn't be any clearer. For me, competition is the only thing that matters so having a third platform to choose from can only be a good thing.
Trump is leaving a trail of economic tech destruction in his wake but all the damage is to his favoured tech companies.
AT&T has been left with basically two options for 5G (Nokia or Ericsson). Vodafone specialists have gone on record as putting Ericsson far ahead of Nokia in terms of ability to satisfy their needs. The same people say Huawei is far ahead of both of them.
The Vodafone conclusion was that by eliminating Huawei as an option, the new option was really Ericsson or Ericsson. That is catastrophic for competition and was sure to lead to lesser but more expensive equipment (the cost of which is passed on to the consumer of course).
Huawei is already successfully cutting ties with U.S companies. Latest figures confirm thay over 10 billion dollars in component supply has gone to Japan. That is a massive loss fora almost 300 U.S companies (all of which have requested exemption licences from the commerce department).
Huawei claims that 40,000 U.S jobs are tied to its U.S supply chain. That is getting decimated.
In terms of tech influence, the winds are now blowing east. In a recent CNBC interview, Ren claimed that many products were in development for years but held back. When Trump began his cowboy politics, he released some of them. That's why such big announcements and roll outs came so quickly (Ascend, Kun Peng, Tai Shan, Atlas, HarmonyOS). Apparently there are more and may even include a completely new chipset/instruction set to cover problems with ARM.
Now Huawei is slowly cristalising its message to Trump and he won't like it because it has the potential to turn the tech industry on its head in terms of influence.
One thing is for sure, someone somewhere must have advised him things could backfire in a massive way. He may not be president for long enough to answer to the damage he is doing to U.S tech companies but the message from Huawei really couldn't be any clearer. For me, competition is the only thing that matters so having a third platform to choose from can only be a good thing.
Huawei might be doing well in China, but China's human rights issues are beginning to be linked to trade in the U.S., by Europeans, and by Western Allies.
China's economy, has peaked, growth is slowing, and even China's population is expected to peak by 2025. Throw in the problems with China's United Front influence campaigns in various Western countries, and the pattern of China attempting to drive its brand of Authoritarianism into the rest of the world becomes apparent, and the West is beginning to resist this.
Huawei's close links to China's Government, which you deny, will drive Western countries to also enhance competing Telecom technology, aka, Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, with massive investments as these companies marketshare grow.
and of course, a response by the U.S. to the German Economics Ministry;
"China is Germany's biggest trading partner. Yet German intelligence officials have also advised Mrs Merkel's government to bar Huawei from Germany's 5G roll-out.
Ambassador Grenell said equating US government action with that of the Chinese Communist Party was "an insult to the thousands of American troops who help ensure Germany's security and the millions of Americans committed to a strong Western alliance".
"These claims are likewise an insult to the millions of Chinese citizens denied basic freedoms and unjustly imprisoned by the CCP," he added"
Huawei's attempt to end run around Android OS and Western Services likely isn't going to play well outside of China. There's already too many questions about China origin services controlling content and data on users in the West, and both of the competing mobile OS's are currently fully formed and well developed.
Huawei's early lead and advantage in 5G, that you argue, isn't going to last as the West invests in Huawei alternatives.
It's China's fault, ultimately, that they can't deliver a fair trade deal with the U.S, nor restrain their Authoritarian expansion.
Comments
He has a very valid point independently of what others may think on the subject and he put it forward in a very clear way. He isn't referring to China. He is referring to Huawei and comparing proven U.S activities, with what the U.S is accusing Huawei of (but without proof of course).
Huawei is Huawei.
China is China.
What he said was so spot on and to the point that you have no response to it.
You simply skirt the whole point - again and again. That is clear.
Forget Merkel, China and Huawei and focus on what he said. He is absolutely right.
That said, coming from a high ranking minister does make it very relevant indeed.
If it makes you feel good, keep on thinking that, but the reality is that the Parliament will decide based on National Security issues vs trade backlash.
We have seen the impact that a single tweet from Trump can have. There is no getting away from that.
Like there is no getting away from the fact that you still haven't responded to what the minister said.
I'm not counting but I think you've had five opportunities now. I obviously won't hold my breath.
"US security concerns about Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese technology companies are shared by its closest allies in Asia—Australia and Japan."
I happen to agree that Chinese growth is consistently overvalued, and is indeed trending down. I would also note that China is short on dollars for trade.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/27/business/china-yuan.html
"Allowing the currency to weaken helps China offset the impact of American tariffs on its products. When the renminbi crossed 7 per dollar this month — a symbolic level that the Chinese authorities had long kept it from crossing — the move was seen as a deliberate effort by Beijing to blunt the Trump administration’s stated goal of cutting the United States’ trade deficit with China.
But the drop also reflects uncertainty about what China’s economy faces, as the global trading system it depends on is thrown into chaos by the trade war. And there’s evidence that Beijing has been trying to prop the currency up, rather than weaken it drastically.
"“The trading relationship of China and the rest of the world is changing,” said Ben Emons, managing director of global macro strategy for Medley Global Advisors. “There’s less demand for Chinese goods and less demand for the Chinese currency.”
As for my faux pax wrt Japan, I was specifically speaking of Australia and New Zealand, that you would note as "PAWNS" as they were at risk of invasion by the Japanese early in the war. Were China to gain the same foothold in the South Pacific in the future, which they are certainly attempting to do, Australia and New Zealand would again be at risk.
"https://www.insideover.com/politics/the-united-states-will-have-a-new-base-in-australia-to-oppose-china.html
"Chinese military activity, however, is nonetheless understood as a threat and Australia has not loosened ties with the US at all, carrying out various military drills together (the “Talisman Sabre” is taking place at the moment) to demonstrate to China that it has no intention of overlooking its rearmament and desire to expand its power in the Indo-Pacific area."
I you will note that I have posted a number of links wrt the Chinese influence campaigns in Australia.
Here's the link to Australia's intelligence agency that found that Huawei was a risk to telecom infrastructure;
https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/how-australia-led-the-us-in-its-global-war-against-huawei-20190522-p51pv8.html
"Canberra: In early 2018, in a complex of low-rise buildings in the Australian capital, a team of government hackers was engaging in a destructive digital war game.
The operatives – agents of the Australian Signals Directorate, the nation's top-secret eavesdropping agency – had been given a challenge.
With all the offensive cyber tools at their disposal, what harm could they inflict if they had access to equipment installed in the 5G network, the next-generation mobile communications technology, of a target nation?
What the team found, say current and former government officials, was sobering for Australian security and political leaders: the offensive potential of 5G was so great that if Australia were on the receiving end of such attacks, the country could be seriously exposed.
Mike Burgess, the head of the signals directorate, recently explained why the security of fifth generation, or 5G, technology was so important. It will be integral to the communications at the heart of a country's critical infrastructure - everything from electric power to water supplies to sewage, he said in a March speech at a Sydney research institute.
Washington is widely seen as having taken the initiative in the global campaign against Huawei Technologies, a tech juggernaut that in the three decades since its founding has become a pillar of Beijing's bid to expand its global influence.
Yet interviews with more than two dozen current and former Western officials show it was the Australians who led the way in pressing for action on 5G; that the United States was initially slow to act; and that Britain and other European countries are caught between security concerns and the competitive prices offered by Huawei.
The Australians had long harboured misgivings about Huawei in existing networks, but the 5G war game was a turning point.
About six months after the simulation began, the Australian government effectively banned Huawei, the world's largest maker of telecom networking gear, from any involvement in its 5G plans. An Australian government spokeswoman declined to comment on the war game.
After the Australians shared their findings with US leaders, other countries, including the United States, moved to restrict Huawei."
I get why you hate Trump, but what I can't comprehend is how you became such an apologist for the the Chinese Government. Seriously, are you not up on current events?
Am I an apologist for China? No, just a realist. Unlike yourself, I prefer reality to fear and hate.
The quesiton is: Why are you such an apologist for our wanna be king?
"This however does not seem to be a problem for China and others: They are rolling out both phones and transmitters.
"Dictatorships done right" sounds just like Trump.
https://www.businessinsider.com/china-organ-harvesting-medical-report-claims-falsified-donation-data-2019-11
Yeah, China is still doing that...
You should feel right at home.
You are one twisted individual.
You are the literally the least informed American that I've ever come across;
https://twitter.com/hashtag/Xinjiang?src=hash
https://www.businessinsider.com/china-harvesting-organs-of-uighur-muslims-china-tribunal-tells-un-2019-9
AT&T has been left with basically two options for 5G (Nokia or Ericsson). Vodafone specialists have gone on record as putting Ericsson far ahead of Nokia in terms of ability to satisfy their needs. The same people say Huawei is far ahead of both of them.
The Vodafone conclusion was that by eliminating Huawei as an option, the new option was really Ericsson or Ericsson. That is catastrophic for competition and was sure to lead to lesser but more expensive equipment (the cost of which is passed on to the consumer of course).
Huawei is already successfully cutting ties with U.S companies. Latest figures confirm thay over 10 billion dollars in component supply has gone to Japan. That is a massive loss fora almost 300 U.S companies (all of which have requested exemption licences from the commerce department).
Huawei claims that 40,000 U.S jobs are tied to its U.S supply chain. That is getting decimated.
In terms of tech influence, the winds are now blowing east. In a recent CNBC interview, Ren claimed that many products were in development for years but held back. When Trump began his cowboy politics, he released some of them. That's why such big announcements and roll outs came so quickly (Ascend, Kun Peng, Tai Shan, Atlas, HarmonyOS). Apparently there are more and may even include a completely new chipset/instruction set to cover problems with ARM.
Now Huawei is slowly cristalising its message to Trump and he won't like it because it has the potential to turn the tech industry on its head in terms of influence.
One thing is for sure, someone somewhere must have advised him things could backfire in a massive way. He may not be president for long enough to answer to the damage he is doing to U.S tech companies but the message from Huawei really couldn't be any clearer. For me, competition is the only thing that matters so having a third platform to choose from can only be a good thing.
It's up to Trump though.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/11/27/new-huawei-warning-for-trump-and-google-there-is-no-turning-back/
Huawei might be doing well in China, but China's human rights issues are beginning to be linked to trade in the U.S., by Europeans, and by Western Allies.
China's economy, has peaked, growth is slowing, and even China's population is expected to peak by 2025. Throw in the problems with China's United Front influence campaigns in various Western countries, and the pattern of China attempting to drive its brand of Authoritarianism into the rest of the world becomes apparent, and the West is beginning to resist this.
Huawei's close links to China's Government, which you deny, will drive Western countries to also enhance competing Telecom technology, aka, Ericsson, Nokia, and Samsung, with massive investments as these companies marketshare grow.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/06/huawei-ban-wont-make-the-us-fall-behind-in-5g-experts.html
and of course, a response by the U.S. to the German Economics Ministry;
"China is Germany's biggest trading partner. Yet German intelligence officials have also advised Mrs Merkel's government to bar Huawei from Germany's 5G roll-out.
Ambassador Grenell said equating US government action with that of the Chinese Communist Party was "an insult to the thousands of American troops who help ensure Germany's security and the millions of Americans committed to a strong Western alliance".
"These claims are likewise an insult to the millions of Chinese citizens denied basic freedoms and unjustly imprisoned by the CCP," he added"
Huawei's attempt to end run around Android OS and Western Services likely isn't going to play well outside of China. There's already too many questions about China origin services controlling content and data on users in the West, and both of the competing mobile OS's are currently fully formed and well developed.
Huawei's early lead and advantage in 5G, that you argue, isn't going to last as the West invests in Huawei alternatives.
It's China's fault, ultimately, that they can't deliver a fair trade deal with the U.S, nor restrain their Authoritarian expansion.