"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
The fallacy of your proposition is assuming China is a US adversary.
Prove China isn't a threat, otherwise The West should assume that "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" isn't just cosplay, nor is a massive military buildup in China, a sign of friendship.
The fallacy is using the word threat. Because this is a two sided word. You should first prove that US is not a threat to China before you can apply this word to China.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
The fallacy of your proposition is assuming China is a US adversary.
Prove China isn't a threat, otherwise The West should assume that "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" isn't just cosplay, nor is a massive military buildup in China, a sign of friendship.
The fallacy is using the word threat. Because this is a two sided word. You should first prove that US is not a threat to China before you can apply this word to China.
Freedom is always a threat to authoritarians, hence why they spend so much time, effort and money keeping it from the people.
You are obviously using the West's freedom's to post here, yes?
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
The fallacy of your proposition is assuming China is a US adversary.
Prove China isn't a threat, otherwise The West should assume that "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" isn't just cosplay, nor is a massive military buildup in China, a sign of friendship.
The fallacy is using the word threat. Because this is a two sided word. You should first prove that US is not a threat to China before you can apply this word to China.
Freedom is always a threat to authoritarians, hence why they spend so much time, effort and money keeping it from the people.
You are obviously using the West's freedom's to post here, yes?
Generalize the word freedom is also a fallacy. Freedom is a very relative word. In science the ability to move around is freedom. There is no denial the Western world has more freedom because western people has more ability to move around. They invented trains, autos, and airplanes. China did not. Chinese of course has much less freedom. There are so many Chinese students in US. If they don't have freedom, how can they come over here to study? Why CCP does not keep them from coming here, according to your fallacy? My observation is the opposite. China haters saw Chinese are getting more and more freedom. They are desperately trying all kinds ways to deprive Chinese from getting more freedom.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
You avoid the the fact that China is increasingly authoritarian, so investors have fled or are fleeing, and at the same time, supply chains are being reconstituted throughout the world in areas with lower labor costs than China, places like Vietnam and Mexico. As far as I can tell, there isn't any technical reason to have Huawei involved in Western telecom, inspite of your protestations.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
The fallacy of your proposition is assuming China is a US adversary.
Prove China isn't a threat, otherwise The West should assume that "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" isn't just cosplay, nor is a massive military buildup in China, a sign of friendship.
The fallacy is using the word threat. Because this is a two sided word. You should first prove that US is not a threat to China before you can apply this word to China.
Freedom is always a threat to authoritarians, hence why they spend so much time, effort and money keeping it from the people.
You are obviously using the West's freedom's to post here, yes?
Generalize the word freedom is also a fallacy. Freedom is a very relative word. In science the ability to move around is freedom. There is no denial the Western world has more freedom because western people has more ability to move around. They invented trains, autos, and airplanes. China did not. Chinese of course has much less freedom. There are so many Chinese students in US. If they don't have freedom, how can they come over here to study? Why CCP does not keep them from coming here, according to your fallacy? My observation is the opposite. China haters saw Chinese are getting more and more freedom. They are desperately trying all kinds ways to deprive Chinese from getting more freedom.
Yeah, the West saw how access to "more freedom" played out in Hong Kong, so you might want to remove the haters part.
As for students being educated overseas, of course, China needs these skills, and has plenty of snitches in place to make sure that students don't learn the wrong lessons.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
You avoid the the fact that China is increasingly authoritarian, so investors have fled or are fleeing, and at the same time, supply chains are being reconstituted throughout the world in areas with lower labor costs than China, places like Vietnam and Mexico. As far as I can tell, there isn't any technical reason to have Huawei involved in Western telecom, inspite of your protestations.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
A technical to reason to have Huawei?
Are you listening to yourself?
What if I said I saw no technical reason for Apple to operate in China? Ridiculous.
That doesn't mean China itself, as a tit-for-tat reaction, could not impose the same restrictions on Apple as the US imposes on Huawei. That has always been, and remains, a very real possibility. That would be understandable.
I am not enamored. LOL. I simply have pretty deep knowledge of the company and an open mind.
I am not a China hater or a US hater. I'm not a China or US lover either.
Increasingly authoritarian? And what if it is? The US has been just as, if not more, authoritarian in its foreign policy actions. If that's an issue don't do business with China. Don't buy iPhones from China. Don't use its manufacturing facilities. Don't trade with it.
It's not for you, or me, or anyone that isn't Chinese, to try and change.
But then, on the other hand, it's the US that has a long and very dark history of meddling DIRECTLY in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is the US that has manipulated dollar hegemony etc.
I won't go on because this isn't the place.
Leave your China hatred and politics out of it.
Yes, I understand that this particular article necessarily involves technology and geopolitics. Sometimes the two are interwoven to a degree but don't stray too far from the technological line.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
You avoid the the fact that China is increasingly authoritarian, so investors have fled or are fleeing, and at the same time, supply chains are being reconstituted throughout the world in areas with lower labor costs than China, places like Vietnam and Mexico. As far as I can tell, there isn't any technical reason to have Huawei involved in Western telecom, inspite of your protestations.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
A technical to reason to have Huawei?
Are you listening to yourself?
What if I said I saw no technical reason for Apple to operate in China? Ridiculous.
That doesn't mean China itself, as a tit-for-tat reaction, could not impose the same restrictions on Apple as the US imposes on Huawei. That has always been, and remains, a very real possibility. That would be understandable.
I am not enamored. LOL. I simply have pretty deep knowledge of the company and an open mind.
I am not a China hater or a US hater. I'm not a China or US lover either.
Increasingly authoritarian? And what if it is? The US has been just as, if not more, authoritarian in its foreign policy actions. If that's an issue don't do business with China. Don't buy iPhones from China. Don't use its manufacturing facilities. Don't trade with it.
It's not for you, or me, or anyone that isn't Chinese, to try and change.
But then, on the other hand, it's the US that has a long and very dark history of meddling DIRECTLY in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is the US that has manipulated dollar hegemony etc.
I won't go on because this isn't the place.
Leave your China hatred and politics out of it.
Yes, I understand that this particular article necessarily involves technology and geopolitics. Sometimes the two are interwoven to a degree but don't stray too far from the technological line.
So, bottom line is no Huawei for the West, and you are sad.
China knows that banning Apple in China would be the death of tens of millions of jobs in China, as you as well know.
Let me know when you actually understand what authoritarian means...
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
You avoid the the fact that China is increasingly authoritarian, so investors have fled or are fleeing, and at the same time, supply chains are being reconstituted throughout the world in areas with lower labor costs than China, places like Vietnam and Mexico. As far as I can tell, there isn't any technical reason to have Huawei involved in Western telecom, inspite of your protestations.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
A technical to reason to have Huawei?
Are you listening to yourself?
What if I said I saw no technical reason for Apple to operate in China? Ridiculous.
That doesn't mean China itself, as a tit-for-tat reaction, could not impose the same restrictions on Apple as the US imposes on Huawei. That has always been, and remains, a very real possibility. That would be understandable.
I am not enamored. LOL. I simply have pretty deep knowledge of the company and an open mind.
I am not a China hater or a US hater. I'm not a China or US lover either.
Increasingly authoritarian? And what if it is? The US has been just as, if not more, authoritarian in its foreign policy actions. If that's an issue don't do business with China. Don't buy iPhones from China. Don't use its manufacturing facilities. Don't trade with it.
It's not for you, or me, or anyone that isn't Chinese, to try and change.
But then, on the other hand, it's the US that has a long and very dark history of meddling DIRECTLY in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is the US that has manipulated dollar hegemony etc.
I won't go on because this isn't the place.
Leave your China hatred and politics out of it.
Yes, I understand that this particular article necessarily involves technology and geopolitics. Sometimes the two are interwoven to a degree but don't stray too far from the technological line.
So, bottom line is no Huawei for the West, and you are sad.
China knows that banning Apple in China would be the death of tens of millions of jobs in China, as you as well know.
Let me know when you actually understand what authoritarian means...
Another false dilemma again. If China bans Apple, AAPL market cap will be two trillion dollars smaller. This is why the fear this week cause AAPPL to drop $10 to 178.18.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
You avoid the the fact that China is increasingly authoritarian, so investors have fled or are fleeing, and at the same time, supply chains are being reconstituted throughout the world in areas with lower labor costs than China, places like Vietnam and Mexico. As far as I can tell, there isn't any technical reason to have Huawei involved in Western telecom, inspite of your protestations.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
A technical to reason to have Huawei?
Are you listening to yourself?
What if I said I saw no technical reason for Apple to operate in China? Ridiculous.
That doesn't mean China itself, as a tit-for-tat reaction, could not impose the same restrictions on Apple as the US imposes on Huawei. That has always been, and remains, a very real possibility. That would be understandable.
I am not enamored. LOL. I simply have pretty deep knowledge of the company and an open mind.
I am not a China hater or a US hater. I'm not a China or US lover either.
Increasingly authoritarian? And what if it is? The US has been just as, if not more, authoritarian in its foreign policy actions. If that's an issue don't do business with China. Don't buy iPhones from China. Don't use its manufacturing facilities. Don't trade with it.
It's not for you, or me, or anyone that isn't Chinese, to try and change.
But then, on the other hand, it's the US that has a long and very dark history of meddling DIRECTLY in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is the US that has manipulated dollar hegemony etc.
I won't go on because this isn't the place.
Leave your China hatred and politics out of it.
Yes, I understand that this particular article necessarily involves technology and geopolitics. Sometimes the two are interwoven to a degree but don't stray too far from the technological line.
So, bottom line is no Huawei for the West, and you are sad.
China knows that banning Apple in China would be the death of tens of millions of jobs in China, as you as well know.
Let me know when you actually understand what authoritarian means...
Erm. Surely those jobs would remain, as people would still buy phones. There would still be demand. How long do you think it would take Apple to build up capacity and logistics elsewhere? Years? And at what cost?
For starters, the Chinese population would have to switch from iPhones to other phones. Which company would be the candidate better suited to pick up those users? And if Apple took years to rebuild capacity and logistics, Samsung and other Chinese vendors would pick up a lot of the slack worldwide. Either way most production would still be based mostly in China.
Apple has been walking a difficult line (through no fault of its own). It's easy to get sucked into a geopolitical tug of war. Huawei has been there, and again, through no fault of its own.
The Mate 60 Pro and the possible iPhone restrictions wiped 200 billion dollars off Apple's stock value in just a couple of days. Today Huawei released the P60 Pro+ and the X5 phones. Estimates say they are selling in the millions already. The same Kirin9000s chip is also destined for tablet usage. It definitely doesn't look like 'yields' are a problem. And in just a few months the next P series phones will be here.
To me it looks like Huawei thinks it has enough capacity to not rely on QC. As a result QC is also hitting turbulence. There are rumours of a price cutting effort for as early as Q423! Wow!
Some say Apple only improved sales in China due to the sanctions on Huawei. If they have overcome the sanctions, it stands to reason that Huawei will pick up steam again if its supply chain can keep up.
To do that, completely new industries have been created:
No ERP. Do it yourself. No EDA. Do it yourself. No advanced packaging. Do it yourself. Etc
At every single semiconductor tool point, a US entity is losing out. That's across the board.
Billions upon billions in lost revenues.
Now the major difference is that the US semiconductor industry has been severely and permanently damaged in the longer term. That's the upshot.
It's the opposite in the case of China which will reach parity with the rest of the world and more than likely surpass it. Those industries I just mentioned are already up and running. That's why the P60 series has caused such a storm worldwide.
Can you name one major big tech CEO of a semiconductor business, over these years, that has said sanctions will actually benefit his/her business? Even the different semiconductor associations and organisations (SEMI/SIA etc) have warned against overstep the mark.
All we are seeing now is the arrival of the storm. The clouds have been there for a long time.
Now the world is waiting for the US reaction.
How? Revoke all licences for business with Huawei? Lose even more billions? Stop Intel from shipping processors to Huawei for laptops for example? At what price? There are already rumours of Huawei planning HarmonyOS for laptops and PCs. Running on Kirins or Kunpengs?
This is a problem that isn't going away. The genie is out of the bottle.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
You avoid the the fact that China is increasingly authoritarian, so investors have fled or are fleeing, and at the same time, supply chains are being reconstituted throughout the world in areas with lower labor costs than China, places like Vietnam and Mexico. As far as I can tell, there isn't any technical reason to have Huawei involved in Western telecom, inspite of your protestations.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
A technical to reason to have Huawei?
Are you listening to yourself?
What if I said I saw no technical reason for Apple to operate in China? Ridiculous.
That doesn't mean China itself, as a tit-for-tat reaction, could not impose the same restrictions on Apple as the US imposes on Huawei. That has always been, and remains, a very real possibility. That would be understandable.
I am not enamored. LOL. I simply have pretty deep knowledge of the company and an open mind.
I am not a China hater or a US hater. I'm not a China or US lover either.
Increasingly authoritarian? And what if it is? The US has been just as, if not more, authoritarian in its foreign policy actions. If that's an issue don't do business with China. Don't buy iPhones from China. Don't use its manufacturing facilities. Don't trade with it.
It's not for you, or me, or anyone that isn't Chinese, to try and change.
But then, on the other hand, it's the US that has a long and very dark history of meddling DIRECTLY in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is the US that has manipulated dollar hegemony etc.
I won't go on because this isn't the place.
Leave your China hatred and politics out of it.
Yes, I understand that this particular article necessarily involves technology and geopolitics. Sometimes the two are interwoven to a degree but don't stray too far from the technological line.
So, bottom line is no Huawei for the West, and you are sad.
China knows that banning Apple in China would be the death of tens of millions of jobs in China, as you as well know.
Let me know when you actually understand what authoritarian means...
Another false dilemma again. If China bans Apple, AAPL market cap will be two trillion dollars smaller. This is why the fear this week cause AAPPL to drop $10 to 178.18.
If China bans Apple sales, that's certainly going to lead to a trillion dollar drop in value, but banning Apple from manufacturing, would lead to a collapse in a massive number of supply chains in China, and might lead to 100's of millions of underemployed and unemployed workers in China alone. Bad for Xi, and it would also lead to a global crisis in trade.
It isn't hard to understand why Apple specifically, and many other foreign operations in China, would want to move at least some of their supply chains elsewhere.
China might as well invade Taiwan at that point and get it over with.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Let me just note that Chinese land investments in the U.S. have a location preference near U.S. military bases. Funny that.
Easy counter. I'm going to take a Spanish example and extend it to the US.
There is a publicly available online map of every single tower setup in Spain with a wealth of technical information.
I know a LOT about the tower that covers my area.
That tower required government approval for its installation. It didn't pop up like a mushroom overnight.
Are you telling me a Huawei technician strolled up to a pole near a military installation and stuck the equipment on it? And repeated the move in different areas.
No. Right?
Please get real.
If, and this is a big if, that equipment could have caused problems, I can guarantee you that ANY equipment performing the same task would have caused the same problems.
How can I know this? Because the radio frequency regulations are subject to, erm, strict regulation.
The problem here is simply that the name on the equipment was 'Huawei'.
"investigation revealed that Huawei had a pattern of installing equipment on cell towers near military bases in rural America – even if it wasn’t profitable to do so."
Yeah, nothing unusual about that...
The problem, is of course, that Huawei has very close links to the Chinese Government and the PLA. That should be enough of a security concern in itself to ban Huawei telecom in Western telecom infrastructure, and in fact, that is what is happening. But of course, there are always holdouts in the EU that will have to be dealt with, and the EU will.
Do you actually think that China would allow Western telecom installations anywhere near the PLA's military bases?
So, how long before the EU forces Spain, et al, to remove existing Huawei telecom equipment?
Ah! Let's follow the breadcrumbs...
... CNN EXCLUSIVE!
Oh well!
But let's put some of what you omitted into this...
From the CNN piece:
"Despite its tough talk, the US government’s refusal to provide evidence to back up its claims that Huawei tech poses a risk to US national security has led some critics to accuse it of xenophobic overreach. The lack of a smoking gun also raises questions of whether US officials can separate legitimate Chinese investment from espionage. "
“All of our products imported to the US have been tested and certified by the FCC before being deployed there,” Huawei said in its statement to CNN. “Our equipment only operates on the spectrum allocated by the FCC for commercial use. This means it cannot access any spectrum allocated to the DOD.”
“For more than 30 years, Huawei has maintained a proven track record in cyber security and we have never been involved in any malicious cyber security incidents,” the statement said. "
Conclusión?...
" The federal government’s reticence across multiple administrations to detail what it knows has led some critics to accuse the government of chasing ghosts".
Investigated since at least 2017. Still no charges.
LOL!.
Please lay out for me why allowing critical infrastructure from an adversary, or even a neutral party, is good National Security policy, because there are so many counter examples of that just in today's news.
This would be a different situation if China was even a marginally democratic country; it isn't, and given that there is plentiful technology in the West to provide telecom infrastructure, why would we want to use Huawei?
Because it's a global economy with a global supply chain and evidence speaks for itself. Huawei has been handling communications for a third of the world's population for more than 30 years without issue.
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Your reality is different that mine, and my mileage varied. I see no benefit in building out Western telecom infrastructure with Huawei, and given that critical infrastructure is a national security concern, Huawei should expect that its connection to China is reason enough for an outright ban. The WTO allows this btw, as China argued for Huawei against a ban in Australia and failed.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
What is the 'West'? Think about it. The minority?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
You avoid the the fact that China is increasingly authoritarian, so investors have fled or are fleeing, and at the same time, supply chains are being reconstituted throughout the world in areas with lower labor costs than China, places like Vietnam and Mexico. As far as I can tell, there isn't any technical reason to have Huawei involved in Western telecom, inspite of your protestations.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
A technical to reason to have Huawei?
Are you listening to yourself?
What if I said I saw no technical reason for Apple to operate in China? Ridiculous.
That doesn't mean China itself, as a tit-for-tat reaction, could not impose the same restrictions on Apple as the US imposes on Huawei. That has always been, and remains, a very real possibility. That would be understandable.
I am not enamored. LOL. I simply have pretty deep knowledge of the company and an open mind.
I am not a China hater or a US hater. I'm not a China or US lover either.
Increasingly authoritarian? And what if it is? The US has been just as, if not more, authoritarian in its foreign policy actions. If that's an issue don't do business with China. Don't buy iPhones from China. Don't use its manufacturing facilities. Don't trade with it.
It's not for you, or me, or anyone that isn't Chinese, to try and change.
But then, on the other hand, it's the US that has a long and very dark history of meddling DIRECTLY in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is the US that has manipulated dollar hegemony etc.
I won't go on because this isn't the place.
Leave your China hatred and politics out of it.
Yes, I understand that this particular article necessarily involves technology and geopolitics. Sometimes the two are interwoven to a degree but don't stray too far from the technological line.
So, bottom line is no Huawei for the West, and you are sad.
China knows that banning Apple in China would be the death of tens of millions of jobs in China, as you as well know.
Let me know when you actually understand what authoritarian means...
Erm. Surely those jobs would remain, as people would still buy phones. There would still be demand. How long do you think it would take Apple to build up capacity and logistics elsewhere? Years? And at what cost?
For starters, the Chinese population would have to switch from iPhones to other phones. Which company would be the candidate better suited to pick up those users? And if Apple took years to rebuild capacity and logistics, Samsung and other Chinese vendors would pick up a lot of the slack worldwide. Either way most production would still be based mostly in China.
Apple has been walking a difficult line (through no fault of its own). It's easy to get sucked into a geopolitical tug of war. Huawei has been there, and again, through no fault of its own.
The Mate 60 Pro and the possible iPhone restrictions wiped 200 billion dollars off Apple's stock value in just a couple of days. Today Huawei released the P60 Pro+ and the X5 phones. Estimates say they are selling in the millions already. The same Kirin9000s chip is also destined for tablet usage. It definitely doesn't look like 'yields' are a problem. And in just a few months the next P series phones will be here.
To me it looks like Huawei thinks it has enough capacity to not rely on QC. As a result QC is also hitting turbulence. There are rumours of a price cutting effort for as early as Q423! Wow!
Some say Apple only improved sales in China due to the sanctions on Huawei. If they have overcome the sanctions, it stands to reason that Huawei will pick up steam again if its supply chain can keep up.
To do that, completely new industries have been created:
No ERP. Do it yourself. No EDA. Do it yourself. No advanced packaging. Do it yourself. Etc
At every single semiconductor tool point, a US entity is losing out. That's across the board.
Billions upon billions in lost revenues.
Now the major difference is that the US semiconductor industry has been severely and permanently damaged in the longer term. That's the upshot.
It's the opposite in the case of China which will reach parity with the rest of the world and more than likely surpass it. Those industries I just mentioned are already up and running. That's why the P60 series has caused such a storm worldwide.
Can you name one major big tech CEO of a semiconductor business, over these years, that has said sanctions will actually benefit his/her business? Even the different semiconductor associations and organisations (SEMI/SIA etc) have warned against overstep the mark.
All we are seeing now is the arrival of the storm. The clouds have been there for a long time.
Now the world is waiting for the US reaction.
How? Revoke all licences for business with Huawei? Lose even more billions? Stop Intel from shipping processors to Huawei for laptops for example? At what price? There are already rumours of Huawei planning HarmonyOS for laptops and PCs. Running on Kirins or Kunpengs?
This is a problem that isn't going away. The genie is out of the bottle.
"This is textbook Chinese Communist Party (CCP) behavior - promote PRC (People's Republic of China) national champions in telecommunications, and slowly squeeze western companies' market access"
And what was the whole Huawei thing in the US about then?
Slightly more of a squeeze!
No way Apple would be complicit in allowing the NSA to install spyware on their iPhones for sale in China, the way the Chinese did on Huawei phones for sale here.
There was no mention of any of that in the quoted text. It amounted to protectionism, not spying.
Apple or Huawei wouldn't have to be complicit in anything when it comes to the NSA or Chinese equivalents.
We know a fair bit about the NSA's activities though thanks to Snowden.
As far a protectionism goes, the US had no cutting edge ICT infrastructure to protect but strong-arming Huawei out of the US (see the 2017 AT&T/Huawei situation) absolutely did protect Apple from Huawei on US soil.
That's why the quote is laughable.
It was spying. And what you don't know can definitely hurt you. An FBI investigation in 2017 determined Chinese-made Huawei equipment could disrupt US nuclear arsenal communications. The FBI uncovered Chinese-made Huawei equipment atop cell towers near US military bases in the rural Midwest. According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the FBI determined the equipment was capable of capturing and disrupting highly restricted Defense Department communications, including those used by US Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear weapons.
And you've obviously forgotten about the generous $100 million "Chinese Garden" Huawei was going to build on the highest spot in Washington, D.C., to be built 2 miles from the Capitol, using only parts delivered from China with "diplomatic pouch" designation, preventing inspection by US intelligence.
I don't know if you're a Chinese troll, but you sure sound like one.
That sounds like pure paranoia.
It's simple. Huawei would not install anything close to miltary infrastructure to spy on anyone.
Let's be clear, and this has been true for the last 30 years. Just ONE single piece of evidence of 'spying' would kill the company in an instant. Just one. Instant death for the company worldwide.
Why take that risk?
Why put scanning equipment up on a pole within site of military operations in plain sight where it can be confiscated, taken apart and used as evidence on national security grounds?
It would be literally suicide for the company.
Does that make sense to you?
If such a thing had existed, do you honestly think the US would have kept that evidence under the table and not paraded it around the world?
Is that so difficult to understand?
So, what's the story here?
The story is there is no story. It's as simple as that. The equipment was probably just what it was. Rural ICT infrastructure. End of story. It just happened to be near an installation because that installation was in a rural setting.
As for strategic command, in Afghanistan all of the US Command communication that travelled over local ICT infrastructure, travelled over Huawei equipment. There were no complaints.
Exactly! It is so sad American democracy has fallen so badly people cannot think without fallacy. My only explanation is St. Peter is deeply against the teachings of great Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates. How many Americans learned Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? They don't like to seek facts, talk facts! Wait! Maybe many of these China haters are not American? This is my only hope to America.
Now you both sound like Chinese trolls. And yes, I've read Aristotle's viewpoint on sophistrym in addition to Plato (Socrates put nothing in writing, so we only have Plato's word for his teaching), and The Republic is certainly part treatise on sophistry, and very well defended! On the face of it, so is Aristotle's. But Aristotle not only hammers his ideas with tedious repetition and outright contradicts himself almost as much in his Nicomachean Ethics and Eudemian Ethics. I'd characterize his idea of sophistical refutation to be more solipsism than sophistry. Can't beat the Jesuit fathers for that early education in ancient western philosophy!
LOL Did you really read Aristotle Sophistical Refutations? Do you know what it is? Aristotle listed 13 fallacies in it. Did any philosopher proved any fallacy of the 13 fallacies? No! What is amazing is after twenty five hundred years many Americans still commit the fallacies. For example, the question cause in which a cause is incorrectly identified which @Tmay loves to use. For example: "Every time I go to sleep, the sun goes down. Therefore, my going to sleep causes the sun to set." The two events may coincide, but have no causal connection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionable_cause
Yes, I know the difference between causation and correlation. I also know the difference between "found not guilty," and "did it." Recent impeachment efforts (going back to say, 1974) by both political parties are a perfect example. None were found guilty. They all did it.
BTW, "Did any philosopher proved any fallacy of the 13 fallacies?" is some tortured and barely intelligible syntax.
LOL You forgot your own words. "I'd characterize his idea of sophistical refutation to be more solipsism than sophistry. Can't beat the Jesuit fathers for that early education in ancient western philosophy!" You failed the question cause in which a cause is incorrectly identified.
"You failed the question cause in which a cause is incorrectly identified." Can't fight that reasoning. Because I can't understand it!
I can't speak to China/Huawei intelligence gathering goals (other than the obvious intrusive and pervasive nature of them), but after 30 years in Telecommunications, I can recount just how much IP theft I witnessed in their engineering samples. Sometimes the copycat item would be so identical, that circuit board and part placement were entirely interchangeable. The west needn't finance Chinese expansion, by buying our own technology back from subsidized forgerers. It is my hope that Apple continues to divest itself from manufacturing in China, as witnessed by recent moves to India and Vietnam.
Comments
That is reality.
The minute China (with Huawei at the forefront) started to challenge US technological dominance, the US decided it couldn't compete and tried to flick a kill switch.
The threat and plan was explained to Washington on 6th February 2020 by William Barr. I gave you a link to the whole speech!
I went easy on you. There are a lot of comments to choose from that are far worse. Comments that speak directly of destroying, choking and strangling Huawei.
What a way to compete! What a model!
I have no problem with restricting communications in proximity with highly sensitive installations. I've already touched on that. No Huawei gear was installed without a record, approval and regulatory compliance.
Don't blame Huawei or its customers for that situation - blame local and federal authorities.
Oh, and for the record, the global economy was shred by COVID, as was the global supply chain that is fleeing China. That is certainly one of the reasons for China's slowing economy, but mismanagement by Xi is the primary reason.
You post a lot in support of your position, but the reality is that Huawei is almost finished in the West.
You are obviously using the West's freedom's to post here, yes?
The world economy remains global in nature.
Isn't Apple representative of that? Huawei too?
Are hundreds of container ships still criss crossing the oceans? Are raw materials suddenly now magically available everywhere? Can everyone process and refine everything on their own turf? Despite living in one the best wine regions on the planet, the Aldi in the town still has wines from Chile, Argentina, Australia and California. Apples from New Zealand. And of course tons of stuff from China. Including iPhones!
Huawei makes its source code and ICT infrastructure open for inspection.
Other suppliers don't.
The CEO of Vodafone once commented that eliminating Huawei from the pool of options would basically kill competition and push prices up. It would also slow down the level of technological advancement.
In a way that is what the US did with restrictions on Huawei handsets the country. This reported measure by China pales into comparison with that and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be allowed to respond in kind.
Add to that the collapse of the housing market from overbuilding, and very high youth unemployment, and it's obvious that China's economy is slowing and may even be in decline.
From the West's standpoint, this is a very dangerous time, as China's narrow window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is closing. This is in fact the primary concern of the West.
I have difficulty understanding why you are so enamored with Huawei, but, the facts are that Huawei's connection to China is bidirectional, and they will go down together.
As for students being educated overseas, of course, China needs these skills, and has plenty of snitches in place to make sure that students don't learn the wrong lessons.
Are you listening to yourself?
What if I said I saw no technical reason for Apple to operate in China? Ridiculous.
That doesn't mean China itself, as a tit-for-tat reaction, could not impose the same restrictions on Apple as the US imposes on Huawei. That has always been, and remains, a very real possibility. That would be understandable.
I am not enamored. LOL. I simply have pretty deep knowledge of the company and an open mind.
I am not a China hater or a US hater. I'm not a China or US lover either.
Increasingly authoritarian? And what if it is? The US has been just as, if not more, authoritarian in its foreign policy actions. If that's an issue don't do business with China. Don't buy iPhones from China. Don't use its manufacturing facilities. Don't trade with it.
It's not for you, or me, or anyone that isn't Chinese, to try and change.
But then, on the other hand, it's the US that has a long and very dark history of meddling DIRECTLY in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is the US that has manipulated dollar hegemony etc.
I won't go on because this isn't the place.
Leave your China hatred and politics out of it.
Yes, I understand that this particular article necessarily involves technology and geopolitics. Sometimes the two are interwoven to a degree but don't stray too far from the technological line.
China knows that banning Apple in China would be the death of tens of millions of jobs in China, as you as well know.
Let me know when you actually understand what authoritarian means...
For starters, the Chinese population would have to switch from iPhones to other phones. Which company would be the candidate better suited to pick up those users? And if Apple took years to rebuild capacity and logistics, Samsung and other Chinese vendors would pick up a lot of the slack worldwide. Either way most production would still be based mostly in China.
Apple has been walking a difficult line (through no fault of its own). It's easy to get sucked into a geopolitical tug of war. Huawei has been there, and again, through no fault of its own.
The Mate 60 Pro and the possible iPhone restrictions wiped 200 billion dollars off Apple's stock value in just a couple of days. Today Huawei released the P60 Pro+ and the X5 phones. Estimates say they are selling in the millions already. The same Kirin9000s chip is also destined for tablet usage. It definitely doesn't look like 'yields' are a problem. And in just a few months the next P series phones will be here.
To me it looks like Huawei thinks it has enough capacity to not rely on QC. As a result QC is also hitting turbulence. There are rumours of a price cutting effort for as early as Q423! Wow!
Some say Apple only improved sales in China due to the sanctions on Huawei. If they have overcome the sanctions, it stands to reason that Huawei will pick up steam again if its supply chain can keep up.
To do that, completely new industries have been created:
No ERP. Do it yourself.
No EDA. Do it yourself.
No advanced packaging. Do it yourself.
Etc
At every single semiconductor tool point, a US entity is losing out. That's
across the board.
Billions upon billions in lost revenues.
Now the major difference is that the US semiconductor industry has been severely and permanently damaged in the longer term. That's the upshot.
It's the opposite in the case of China which will reach parity with the rest of the world and more than likely surpass it. Those industries I just mentioned are already up and running. That's why the P60 series has caused such a storm worldwide.
Can you name one major big tech CEO of a semiconductor business, over these years, that has said sanctions will actually benefit his/her business? Even the different semiconductor associations and organisations (SEMI/SIA etc) have warned against overstep the mark.
All we are seeing now is the arrival of the storm. The clouds have been there for a long time.
Now the world is waiting for the US reaction.
How? Revoke all licences for business with Huawei? Lose even more billions? Stop Intel from shipping processors to Huawei for laptops for example? At what price? There are already rumours of Huawei planning HarmonyOS for laptops and PCs. Running on Kirins or Kunpengs?
This is a problem that isn't going away. The genie is out of the bottle.
The problem was entirely self made.
It isn't hard to understand why Apple specifically, and many other foreign operations in China, would want to move at least some of their supply chains elsewhere.
China might as well invade Taiwan at that point and get it over with.