The more I read and learn about Huawei the more I realize that they pose a real and present danger to USA and the world. Mr. Friedman is a really brilliant journalist but on this issue - he was outsmarted - I could be wrong.
3
If you research the decline of American auto industry, International Harvester, the electronic industry, Motorola, and Xerox, you see a familiar pattern: Hubris, greed, missed opportunities, internal back-biting, the hiring of yes men, putting personal ambition ahead of the company well being, to finally creating toxic work environment.
The Chicago Tribune 2014 article, "What Happened to Motorola" gives a timeline on how and why Motorola ultimately lost it dominance in the telecom industry. Then chairman Bob Galvin agreed to teach the Chinese and its suppliers how to make parts for the global market, in leu of a piece of the Chinese market. The article also mentioned, Mr. Galvin was aware the Chinese would copy their technology and compete against them in the world market but Galvin concluded the potential profits, were too much to pass up.
The continuing lie that China became a world economic power by stealing US technology is false. China whooped and played US corporations like a fiddle. Oops
China can't be trust and yet, this nation elected a corrupt, lying thief to the Presidency, rich. The United States will either retool, invest in educating all of its citizens, compete, or perish. Knowing the history of US, she won't do that so, oh well.
Tom Fiedman cuts thru the hype regarding Huawei and proposes a common sense next step after his discussion with Huawei leader.
Huawei would license its technology to American tech providers with the ability to change their software. US could negotiate all issues with - proposed by Huawei - with appropriate US govt agencies.
As US tech co’s today have a very small slice of the core 5G market this could be an exceptional win-win and potential for significant growth of jobs HERE.
1
"Huawei, Ren said, is “open to sharing our 5G technologies and techniques"....
An interesting offer from a company with a reputation for so often and quietly "sharing" the technology of other companies with itself.
"Depending on whom you believe, Huawei is either a scrappy telecom..."
This binary proposal may better be replaced by "both".
The narrative of the mothership in the ongoing Wangzhou case is particularly informative and should not leave the table.
Tom Friedman’s discussion actually corroborates the U.S. intelligence stance. There’s no show of good faith in Ren’s flexibility. I see no reason to see Ren’s stance as anything more than predatory public relations.
Why would we presume that U.S. intelligence is making stuff up? Or that the arrest of Ren’s daughter under a slew of charges is fake?
If indeed Huawei is a “bad actor,” then of course they would want to talk and do whatever it takes to get back into the U.S. market. Fact is, predatory business dresses casual just as easily as admirable business.
Ren wants to license Huawei’s technology because it doesn’t want the U.S. to implement its own 5G technology, which the U.S. is quite capable of doing!! The U.S. has the capability to produce the technology—and has the Windows, Android, and Intel chips that Huawei depends on.
I wouldn't worry about a "Berlin Wall." The Internet technology standards and global communications are not dependent on any given generation of technology. It's the converse: Generations of technology depend on the given communications protocols. No "Berlin Wall" would happen.
24
"Microsoft President Brad Smith told Bloomberg Businessweek on Monday that when his company presses regulators to explain their Huawei ban, “oftentimes, what we get in response is, ‘Well, if you knew what we knew, you would agree with us.’ "
This is the same vague language Trump used in the depths of his birtherism. That was his proof, "if you knew what I've seen..."
China will blacklist Boeing, and now they've got a good reason, the 737 Max 8 is inferior to its Airbus counterpart.
2
I look at the US and think, " Why should I be worried about Chinese hardware when the US has already proven that it will compromise systems."
Anyone remember Stuxnet?
1
Mr Ren Zhengfei could never read this article in China because NY Times is blocked there. So is Youtube, Facebook, Google and any other number of American companies. They have been for a long time. Why should Chinese companies be allowed to operate in the US if American companies can't operate in China. It is not right and it is not fair. So thank you Mr Trump for being the first American president in a long time to have a bit of common sense.
16
The most concerning information in this article is ---"the United States — which has no indigenous 5G networking manufacturer ". How can we possibly compete as a nation in this century. We used to manufacture most of the worlds electronics. How far we have fallen.
22
@RRC How can we compete? Coal!!
2
I think Friedman is wrong. Let's get real. Ren does not run his company. Xi and the Chinese leadership do.
And their "poster child" retaliation, of taking prisoners in China, in return for Ren's daughter, who has been indicted here, is no poster child either.
We already have the Russians interloping with their espionage here, impinging upon our elections.
And what happens five or ten years from now, if we purchase Huawei equipment and they Xi uses our back door to destroy our country! The Chinese have a communist viewpoint, take no prisoners, to do whatever is necessary to prevail.
It's about time we started to protect ourselves first!
1
Nobody is asking “Why are there no domestic developers of 5G technology. Nobody in silicon valley seems to be interested in what promises to be a lucrative cash cow. Why is this being left to Huawei? That is so un-American and makes zero sense.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-the-race-to-dominate-5g-china-has-an-edge-11567828888
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was a colossal blunder that backfired badly. Not only did it result in less competition in the telecoms market leading to high rates, but it resulted in world class domestic telecoms developers (Motorola, Lucent, Bell Labs) being acquired by foreign companies (Nokia).
Qualcomm makes some 5G chips, but Huawei is doing the lion’s share of the innovating in 5G technology, generating most of the important patents, establishing standards, and manufacturing the requisite chips. Huawei is so far ahead of everyone else that others will be forced to license Huawei’s technology. That means that Huawei effectively controls 5G infrastructure even if it doesn’t own it.
The US is now dependent on Nokia (Finland) and Ericsson (Sweden) for 5G infrastructure. That is unforgivably stupid.
1
Technology is now everywhere you live, work or play. It can no longer be one sided. A native in the darkest parts of Africa can now have a solar panel on their mud roof and conduct business or play without any wires, just their cell phone.
Wake up America! We’re no longer the only choice when it comes to technology. Huawei is the new Giant in the room, and in many ways, the smartest.
So–Who do we have a the helm making decisions that can and will change the world? The Flim-Flam-Man himself!
YOU! The American Public had better wake up NOW!!!
You want to know the definition of insanity? Approximately 40% of the American Voting Public still think Trump is good.
2
The simple truth is that China is about to become the largest and most interesting market in the world, way larger than the US. If the US wants to stay outside that market it will be filled by other actors and the loser will be the US. The fact is that the US cannot afford to stay outside the China market. All this talk about that China has "raped" the US is nonsense. Our president and his daughter had their clothes made in China. Were they "raped". Userely not. They benfited from the cheap production in China.
I recently spent a year in Vietnam, where many people say that China also insists on being the winner and will often go out of its way to humiliate its smaller neighbors.
And “win-win?”
Really?
I almost thought I was reading Global Times!
But seriously, isn’t it time to end the incessant cheerleading for so-called “free trade?” I care not one jot for Mr. Trump, but I wouldn’t mind seeing his tariffs on China continue into perpetuity, or until China undertakes social, political and economic reform. Whichever comes first. In the meantime, we should align our trade policies with countries that share our values.
32
@Paul Argodale
Not just continue his tariffs, but have them increased 5-10 times, or as much as needed, to balance off the trade deficit.
4
@Paul Argodale Win win in Mandarin means China wins twice.
2
Huawi is a state run company backed by the Chinese communist
party. Mr. Zhengfei is in essence a voice and enabler of the
party and his company represents the goals of the party which is World technological domination among other things. Mr. Friedman do you seriously trust this man?
All of us who are frequently in China know that this digital divided is already a stark reality. China has no open internet. It is not possible for westerners to work there without VPN software, designed to trick the Chinese authorities that you are not really in China but elsewhere. The Chinese are always one step away from blocking new VPN work-arounds.
The situation is particularly severe for users of anything Google. I use a chromebook. In China there is no way for me to gain access even to my own files!! These are in the cloud on my Google drive. As a scholar there is no way to access Google scholar or Google books.
World news is very hard to come by. The NYT and WaPo and most Western media are blocked. Young Chinese university students, even the brightest, are largely in the dark about world affairs.
I would be the last person to tell the Chinese government how to govern their society. But my sense is that a broad thaw on the digital front would be a win-win for everyone. Sensible leaders can appreciate the special political situations that prevail, and work out arrangements which work for everyone. While aggressive behavior of Chinese leaders will only stoke the anti-Chinese sentiments that have been aroused in the US, attempts to bully and humiliate the Chinese will get absolutely nowhere, as any student of Chinese history could inform our leaders.
10
I am a bit amazed at your comment.
What do you expect if you choose to live and work under a totalitarian regime infected with extreme paranoia? Pity the Chinese people. Their talents can only find full expression in exile.
I've spent my life in technology, both software and hardware. A matter as serious as this demands intense research and careful analysis of the data to ascertain if Huawei represents a threat to national security or can their products be deployed safely.
Unfortunately, Trump has shown little interest in research and careful analysis. Rather, Trump prides himself on his "gut feel" and has the temerity to believe his "gas pains" are more predictive than science, and that temerity extends into Climate Change.
I submit that America should not allow a misanthropic, narcissist to control our national interests. Even worse, Trump's anti environmental policies are exacerbating the probability that millions will die and thousands of species will succumb.
Trump needs to be removed from power immediately.
1
Mr Friedman's op-ed is insightful, as usual. Our country badly needs competent, knowledgable, honest negotiators at this time. No one in the Trump circle is any of those things. How much time do we have? Surely, if Trump does remain past 2020, then America will never recover.
1
"Depending on whom you believe, Huawei is either a scrappy telecom that fought its way to the top since its founding in 1987 with over $100 billion in sales today, a cowboy capitalist that made its way up by stealing the technology of others, or a giant worldwide listening device for Chinese intelligence that needs to be blocked from ever installing equipment in the United States and uprooted from our allies."
The problem is that Huawei is probably all of those things at once. But then again, everything said about Huawei can also be said about US high tech companies, including their sometimes too close relationship with America's intelligence agenices. A relationship that often comes at the expense of their international customers.
1
Anthony Sampson, in his book The Sovereign State Of IT&T, thought they had installed listening devices in multiple nations phone devices. I have no idea what the “Truth” is, but maybe there’s historical precedent for the concern. One in which a multi-National corporation is not innocent.
1
I imagine Nokia and Ericsson treats its employees far better than Huawei for. Good reason to have one of those companies install 5G in the U.S.
The offer being made by the head of Huawei is very impressive. I am a technical person and it appears to me to provide a means for the US to fully protect its security using Huawei designed gear. That's great for the US and I hope the US administration has the wit to go for it. AS for the rest of the world, I think any government that doesn't have the ability to technically oversee their domestic commincations gear especially if it is remotely updated from outside of the country is a sitting duck for for remote spying. And there remains the potential problem of spying on international communications. Beyond that, there remains the law in China that allows to government to force Huawei to do whatever the government wants. Still, the deal offered by the head of Huawei would still protect the US domestically against any potential abuse. But there remains a major international problem of security the only solution for which is international cooperation and agreement on design standards which facilitate security oversight built right into all designs. And that is the opposite of building in back doors.
1
Pass a law that disallows intellectual property rights to companies headquartered in countries that do not recognize or defend intellectual property rights statues.
Render Huawei's patents useless until and unless China starts recognizing and defending IP rights in China.
If we had the TPP, we'd be in a better position.
1
Let’s keep this simple. Students and others in HK are protesting non stop to prevent further China encroachment. Those are people that are obviously best placed by language, culture and history to understand China and its intentions. And, as Soros wrote recently, any system that can employ social credit via a surveillance state, is clearly one with values very different than the west. For those that think US/West should not throw stones, check your history on authoritarian states and murders inflicted. Let’s please have the moral clarity to know the difference between cameras used to ensure safety, resolve crimes/disputable, and those used to enforce the dogma of a brutal regime.
"On the pure trade battlefront, I left China feeling that there’s a decent chance a limited deal — rolling back some American tariffs in exchange for a resumption of certain Chinese purchases, particularly of agricultural products, from the United States — can be reached in the near term. Both sides could use such a deal."
This has already been tried multiple times and it didn't work. Not sure this would be politically feasible anyway for Trump in an election year - this would be essentially a reversion to the status quo before the trade war started and Trump's opponents would pounce on his failure to secure a strong deal.
As for Huawei, the US's issue isn't just security, but also that China is having a lead in a "deep technology" as Mr. Friedman calls it. If China is able to master more "deep technologies" in the future, reaching the technological sophistication of say Japan, then it would like be the world's dominant economic power. The US, being the world's current dominant power, is unlikely to accept such a threat to its position.
In the 1990's I was the CTO of a company that pioneered digital rights management. Part of what we did was obfuscate code so that someone looking at the binary could not tell what it did. This is what the crypto folks call "security through obscurity." That was 25 years ago.
No matter how diligent a licensee would be, it would be relatively easy for a state actor include a vulnerability. This is in fact what the NSA did for a suggested encryption algorithm.
Moreover, the vulnerability could be designed with plausible deniability built in. For example: a buffer overrun. Buffer overruns are what hackers used to break into early iPhones, called Jailbreaking. I was one of those hackers. For Huawei, such a vulnerability could be plausibly denied as a bug. Just like the early iPhones.
Soon, 5G will be a critical part of US infrastructure. I would strongly suggest that we don't license critical communications infrastructure from a state sponsored actor.
It seems to me that these days a lot of people are simply paranoid about a lot of things, and this is just one of them.
I suspect that a lot of other countries are going to go ahead with 5G. If we develop an incompatible platform, consumers will simply have to buy 2 different types of phone for travel.
The reason for distrust: NSA has been spying other countries since forever, and it is only natural that other people would want to do the same. Heck, if we spy on our allies like Germany, shouldn't we expect Chinese spy on us? Unless we are to isolate ourselves, the best way forward is to at least talk to Huawei. If we are worry about Huawei, don't we want the opportunity to look at their technology so at least the US can discovery some ways to infiltrate the equipment already deployed in many countries?
I agree with Trump on just about nothing. The one exception is my fundamental distrust of China.
Most significant Chinese companies are either state-owned, state-controlled or heavily state-influenced. Huawei is no exception. If you have any doubt that China's government would use Huawei to spy. just look at how it manhandles Apple and Google, two U.S. companies, into doing what it wants in the areas of censorship and providing information to the Chinese government on its citizens.
Trump's mistakes on China are his tragically incompetent tactics. Once you decide that China has to be brought to heel, you need to get your allies--the EU, Eastern Europe, Canada, South America, the rest of Asia--to stand with you in whatever actions you're taking. Instead, Trump decided to belittle, insult, demean and tariff our allies to the point where they hate him and distrust us. So now it is the U.S. alone against China in this trade war. China is waiting Trump out until the 2020 election, and working to pick off our allies one by one to ensure that they don't join the Huawei ban and other trade actions being taken by the U.S.
This will all end badly, of course, which is how almost everything Trump touches ends. Ask his former business partners,former lenders, former employees and former White House advisors.
1
Republicans and Libertarians are going to have to wake up and smell the coffee if they don't want China to take America's place as the world's hyperpower.
The limited/useless government mantra worked when the US was the unchallenged leader of the market economy.
But the Chinese government has shown how much baloney the mantra really is. Not only has it steered the most remarkable economic transformation the world has ever seen; they will continue to fund innovation and take risks that the private sector wouldn't, continue to invest in better infrastructure and new technology to make the Chinese economy more competitive.
Meanwhile, Republicans continue their all out assault on the US government's effectiveness.
These parallel courses can only lead to one outcome....the decay of the US and the future preminence of China.
1
The trade war has more to do with a weaning power is trying to stall a rising power in the great game of becoming next hegemony. Half-baked democracy and military power with continuing wars around the world are the weapons of choice employed by the US against One Belt one road world trade of an Asia regional military power in the game of chickens where the US thinks democracy will weight down the centralized dictatorship whereas China thinks the US- a divided so-called democratic country is on her path to self-destruction by electing a demonic Trump.
The conflicts and talks between 2 powers will continue on without an end in sight and Friedman should not be fooled by an interview in writing this more favorable view on China despite his more critical and hawkish tone.
Since China has been engaging in rampant hacking and theft of our intellectual property, I see no reason why our government shouldn't hack into Huawei's systems and steal its 5G technology. We know they do it to us. Why not fight back?
As for being able to trust Huawei with anything, I'll say this: if anyone in a Western country advocates trusting Huawei for anything, there's a good chance he's been bribed to say so--this is something the Chinese government has no problem with doing.
Chinese citizens are REQUIRED BY LAW to cooperate with their government's intelligence agencies anytime, anywhere. This means Chinese Huawei employees literally would not have a choice but to work with the Chinese government. If they say no, the Chinese government can threaten to execute or imprison both the employee AND the employee's family. Again, China has no problem with punishing entire families due to the actions of one member.
I think we may be missing the point.The US wants a 5G system developed by the Chinese.That's a switch.Sure they stole some of the technology. And this is something US businesses never do? Why haven't companies in the US developed a 5G technology to compete with Huawei? Whining about how corrupt and unscrupulous China has been isn't going to make it.This is not just a China-US issue.It is a global issue.China is on the move and Trump is playing right into their hands.While he complains about who is going to make doormats for Walmart or buy our soybeans,China is starting to sell it's technology to the rest of the world.Do we really want to act like the helpless victim or do we want to compete?
Friedman ought to read "The Future Is Asian" by Parag Khanna.He recounts 3000 years of Asian history leading up to the present....including their trading strategies.It's a big world and the Chinese are expanding everywhere while Trump fiddles with tariffs.We are not the only country in this world.We cannot go it alone with the great negotiator leading the charge.We have to get rid of Trump in 2020 and get smart.
6
Concerns about Huawei predate Trump. They were a main contractor for Iran's "walled garden" internet, which allows total government control, and there are plenty of good reasons to worry about Huawei leaving backdoors in its infrastructure to allow spying on anyone using their network.
Meanwhile, Thomas Friedman's freewheeling assessments of the world situation often seem to be heavily influenced by personal contacts.
3
You understand this issue. But the problem is how can we work with China to achieve a superior global communications system?
I don't like the "grey" propaganda that the U.S. must prepare for eventual U.S. and China hostilities and China is a threat to U.S. national security. This is the wrong rabbit hole for humanity to jump down.
It may be on something as important as communications is and the obvious case can be easily made that the global communications is a "natural" monopoly and the interests of humankind would be better served if there were an international standard.
I think we have learned from the various railroad track gauges that life would be much better if all countries conformed to the same gauge. Similarly, international travel would be better served if our electric power distribution systems conformed to the same frequency standard and connection systems. It is vexing to carry adapters and transformers to protect and use our electric appliances. It is a failing of our international standards community to allow these systems to persist.
NSF/Cisco's packet switching is a necessary standard and it does not make much since to create the two world's and new Berlin wall that you suggest.
No one with a grain of sense believes it would benefit homo sapiens to make an enemy out of China or any country for that matter. The goal for the future is for the genius of China and others in the World to figure out how we will solve this global warming/climate problem.
4
@james jordan
correction: "NSF/Cisco's packet switching is a necessary standard and it does not make much sense to create the two world's and new Berlin wall that you suggest."
It does make sense for an international cooperative effort to develop very cheap electricity and with that a very efficient means of capturing carbon dioxide and burying it in rock formations. We might be able to develop very efficient solar cells and we also may be able to launch solar generators to geosynchronous orbit to beam low energy microwave to receiving antennae fields on Earth. It has been reported in the China Daily that they are already working the problem.
The late scientist Dr. James Powell believes that using Maglev in a vacuum tunnel to launch satellites from high altitude mountains, very reliably to GEO, at 1% of conventional rocket launch and could produce this alternate energy source for about 2 cents per kwhr. This would be very competitive with existing energy prices. Powell describes the system in 2 books "Spaceship Earth" and in an earlier book "Silent Earth".
"Can’t it be used by China to spy on us or turn off our electricity in a war?"
Maybe. But they can also probably do it in other ways that are in place now. And I'm sure the US can turn off their electricity, too any time they want.
What I don't understand is that if there is a security issue with Huawei products, where is the US technological prowess to avoid or defeat it? If the Chinese actually stole US technology, as so many allege, don't US companies already *know* what Huawei has?? If not, the joke's on them. So much for global leadership.
1
Mr. Friedman, I always look forward to your columns. You have an interesting and somewhat unique understanding about the current problems of the world.
I sometimes agree, but often have a split response to your positions.
I think you missed the mark badly on this issue. I attribute that to a lack of full understanding on your part about our ability to modify the Chinese product to offer real security. It all sounds so great, how the U.S. can somehow mitigate the threat potential.
It also seems that you were overly eager to believe the story you were told. As we’ve learned over the last two hundred years, freedom isn’t free, or cheap for that matter. Better that we embark on a new Manhattan project to develop a robust 5G system in the US, than to allow the proverbial fox into every henhouse.
I am willing to pay more, and when the consequences are considered, I think most Americans would feel the same way.
Mr Friedman we do not have to " Imagine China telling Apple that it can never make or sell another phone in China ".
Ask Google. Ask Amazon. Ask the owners of the trillions of dollars of US developed IP that bandits in China stole and are using to great profit within the Great Firewall.
US Policy towards China must be founded on empowering the people of China and ending the dictatorship of the CCP. Imagine that.
4
"The only other 5G major suppliers are Nokia and Ericsson, European companies whose products are far more expensive than Huawei’s."
Perhaps you haven't noticed: Spyware is always cheap. The legit stuff you have to pay for. But it almost always works out to be the better deal.
6
Thia article points out the downside of walling off Huawei. The response is to damage Intel, Apple, Qualcomm, and other US companies by denying them access to China. And for what? Allegedly, Huawei could be a tool of the Chinese government and invade our privacy. But other network providers could do so as well. We can't build our secure networks on trust alone. The networks have to have built-in controls to thwart attacks and eavesdroppers, be they Huawei or anyone else. But there is also Huawei's alleged theft of US technology. There are courts that handle such allegations, and if the courts find infringement or theft of secrets, then the products in question cannot be imported. This is the appropriate way to handle theft, not by fiat from Trump without evidence. In short, the Huawei matter has been a political matter raised to foster Trump's vendetta against China. The Huawei matter does not belong in politics. It needs to be addressed through technology and the courts.
6
When discussing major companies in China,it is equivalent to discussing the Chinese government itself given the realities of Chinese governmental influence on the ground. It is also certain that IF China could deeply embed secret undetectable spy software into the worlds 5G network it absolutely would. The article is well reasoned but perhaps begs the question that just because we cannot find a hidden trojan horse now, does that mean its not there? Or perhaps it IS there but will not be DEPLOYED until the Chinese so choose. Where indeed does trust begin and end in a digital world that so very few can fathom at its deepest levels. Yet the question is whether to build potentially invasive Chinese technology into our very American Digital Soul. Given China's history, its present encroachment in the South China Sea Islands, its brutality in Hong Kong, its internment of hundreds of thousands of Moslems et al, trust in such an absolutely critical matter of national defense would appear naive if not suicidal.
3
Why would we ever trust Huawei? They would never have to spend another yuan again. Just turn off the system and we are kaput. There is absolutely no assurance they could give us worth doing it and they would give us the system cheap. Of course they would/
3
It just feels awkward to see people discussing and sharing their ideas about another group of people, who they never met in person nor studied based on fact checked data. I used to believe politics should and would evolve more rationally and data-oriented (scientifically). Now it just looks like an old fight, which provides an easy outlet for people to spew their "ideas" without second thought and holding zero responsibility. Sometimes and on some occasions, we deal problems with the professionals and we trust the rational people. If you really want to count on your own judgement, fine! Firstly, read more books and dig on the real data. If all your judgement are based one news or a twitter, then probably it is just a puppet show business, entertaining and inciting the populism.
2
Justice should sit down with Huawei discuss the full range of issues. No one losses by listening and learning. Or voicing concerns seeking concrete answers. We have nothing to fear but fear itself applies here.
2
A simple truth: every country had better look for a back-up or alternatives , in case someday they annoy America or there comes an unstable U.S president.
What Trump do now is to ruin the America in the long term.
i will tell you why
after War II, America became global leader in the field of trade, finance...etc. Which is a result of America's advantage and devotion to the world, but also a result of other countries's support and recognition.
Nowadays, American politicians like Trump and Pompe more and more abuse America's power, so many sanction on other countries,companies , individuals without rationality and proof.
I just wanted to ask, what Singapore ,India,Brazil....all other countries feel when they saw the trouble Huawei and so many Chinese company met? Even on Iran issue, North Korea...
7
China need only adhere to the "norms" they agreed to when joining the WTO.
They refuse to do so. Everyone agrees to that fact.
Yet too many Republicans and Democrats are willing to sell out American interests in pursuit of short term gain. Enough!
Just as it took Nixon going to China so it takes Trump to demand correction.
3
USA must implement 5G ASAP to every little farm, town and big city.
We will lose the tech battle if we don’t.
Teach our children well on tech in every school.
The computing AI Genie is already out of the bottle.
Head in the sand never worked.
Unless we prefer WWIII NOW!
Which sets us back 1000’s of years in a new Dark Age.
Smart wins
Be smart
3
While we should try to reach an accommodation with Huawei, it appears that a major point has been missed. Agreeing to license Huawei technology, built on the US originated platforms noted, would in effect codify the theft of US and western innovations of years past. This is the equivalent of putting a padlock on the barn door after the prized race horse has escaped or has been stolen.
This genie cannot be put back in the bottle. What China has got to understand is that since it is producing items of such high technological value, there needs to "a sea change" in adhering to internationally developed norms of behavior. There can be "no deal" without China acting in good faith.
3
I wouldn't buy a Chinese tech product, or Russian, but making a deal with Trump? Has Trump ever actually stuck to a deal? and paid his bills in full? I wouldn't trust Trump for a minute but then again same for China and Russia.
1
This quote just sums up international perception of the U.S. persona. I guess winning isn't all it's cracked up to be.
"...Chinese officials to conclude that Trump is an unstable character who always has to be seen to “win” and humiliate the other side, and therefore can’t be counted on for a big win-win deal — or even to stick to it if one were agreed on."
8
Please press US regulators to share their views with you with the explicit intent of providing your readership with "our" side of the story. I am curious to learn what they "know" that we can't or shouldn't know...
1
Simple questions to those who mindlessly repeat the trope about IP theft, especially the accusation that Huawei stole from Motorola: How does one steal and yet become the foremost tech leader? Why isn't Motorola in 5G at all? How do you steal advanced tech from a company that doesn't have it?
Has rational thinking gone out of fashion? Or simple stubborn blindness to acknowledge truths that you don't like? Will endless repetitions of falsehood make them truth?
You may think you have the freedom of thought. But balanced, unbiased, independent and rational?
4
@Andrew Ton They ripped off Motorola a couple decades ago along with Cisco. That's how they got their start. Since then they've both stole and developed their own tech. Huawei wouldn't have had anything to sell anyone to start with without ripping off Cisco and Motorola. They copied Cisco to the extent of having the same misspelled words in their plagiarized owners manuals that Cisco had in theirs.
6
It seems if we went in, we would forever be beholden to them and they would control everything.
2
Does anyone really think that Trump knows what 5G is? He probably doesn't know anything about Huawei either. Does Trump care whether the Chinese mistreat their citizens?
Who is Trump's point man on this and does he know what 5G is?
4
The crackdown on Huawei was a sham from the beginning. Edward Snowden revealed in 2015 that the U.S. government was attempting to hack into Huawei's servers and steal their IPs. His reward for telling the truth? Charged and forced into exile. The Trump administration's sanctimony about IP theft and human rights is purely hypocritical.
9
China knows how to play trump and their winning. China bails out the farmers but first trump has to agree to let Huawei in the country. Now trump gets rid of Bolton, the one guy who sees the commies for what they are not,genuine. Its not just politics its treason.
1
Mr Friedman
Superb work.
But will the Trump Administration listen?
Or, to be fair, the Democrats? Senator Schumer?
4
Within posts within various publications I have seen Huawei offers to share the Intellectual Property rights with the countries' educational or other research bodies Huawei have partnered with.
Licensing the Huawei 5G technology for local manufacture is an idea that Ren has offered within this article? This addresses a second critically important commercial and security issue.
Next would be contracting which permits the manufacture of the technology, occluding control of the tech by Chinese government policy. Only Nokia and Ericcsson have the requisite manufacturing facilities today.
Huawei's 5G technology advancements can be duplicated with third party components assisted by the knowledge contained within their patents. It can be duplicated without risk of phoning home.
Ren's daughter's pending extradition to the US is for overseeing the sale of Huawei and other American sourced technologies into Iran...succor to the main enemy of peace in the middle east. This is an oft repeated script in International commerce but is unforgiven in this case.
While I don't agree with the disdain and arrogant criticisms that people who say 'no' to China receive, imprisonment of the Uighur, past and present trade sins, excessive coal burning, South China Sea territory grab, and general bullying, it has been done before by others in history.
We need to pursue removing Huawei from the critical path to trade and other global community issue resolution. We are running out of time.
1
Huawei ripped off Motorola and Cisco, that's how that company got its start in tech. Since then they've been stealing anything they can, even products in R & D phase -https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-02-04/huawei-sting-offers-rare-glimpse-of-u-s-targeting-chinese-giant
Beyond how completely fraudulent this company is, note the part about how a 100 Kilowatt later was shined on the glass they stole. Anybody got an explanation why a supposed telecom only company uses a 100 Kilowatt laser? That's a military grade laser Btw.
The US should bar this company from using all US tech including the machine tools used in foundries who produce their chips and the software programs used for design. If China is such a tech powerhouse now they can use their own tools, machinery to software they've developed themselves to make the tech they crow about.
Enough with these thieves using what we came up with and turning it against us.
5
What is most shocking to me is to realize that Motorola, the US communications equipment provider was so poorly managed, that they aren't even a player in 5G. Motorola really invented portable communications in WW2, but after the .com bubble fell apart.
2
@Tom Stoltz
Motorola made a deal with Huawei years ago. Huawei of course stole the tech Motorola shared with Huawei. Not the only reason Motorola faded but one more example of Huawei stealing their way up the ladder.
6
Huawei has long practiced theft of its competitors intellectual property (I was personally involved in some of the resulting litigation and have seen the irrefutable evidence) and is the tip of the PLA’s intelligence spear. Anyone who accepts its protestations of being a normal business is a dupe or a fool,
9
The bottom line is that for the first time in its history American dominance in technology and worldwide influence is being challenged by a great power like no other. All the lies, fear mongering and arm twisting of allies will not and cannot reverse the inevitable!
6
@kay hong China is no challenge. They rely on tooling and software produced in the US for all "their" tech. The foundries in Taiwan that make chips for Huawei use equipment make in the US. The chip design software is produced in the us.
The US bars all software and tooling produced here and China is stuck back in the late 80's early 90's tech which is really where they are at if they had to use what they developed themselves.
The real bottom line is China has no cutting edge tech without US equipment and software. We cut them off they have 20-30 year old tech, look at ZTE.
4
Let’s face it, Tom and many other China “experts” thought that country would be well on its way to democracy by now through trade and commercial “engagement.”
Now that Xi has disabused them of that notion, they’re grasping at straws rather than admit a HUGE blunder.
14
First of all, how did our vaunted Silicon Valley “job creators” not see to it that 5G products and services were also made in the USA?
Did they, like Mr. Friedman, have so much faith in “engagement” that they thought we could trust ANY Chinese company to provide the backbone of our future communications, commerce, utilities, medical etc infrastructure?!
How about writing a book about how that doozy of a decision was made, Tom?
8
My gut feeling is not to trust the Chinese - period. Trump is a charlatan - but on this issue he is-IMHO- right.
4
Seems Trump is the stumbling block of this crisis, the unreasonable person who won't admit Huawei's advanced expertise in communications, won't allow his ego to regress. Trump wants it all. Ren's offer to liclense 5G to U.S. companies shows the reasonableness of Huawei. No one company can own the world. You have to share to be a player. The loser will be the U.S. All other nations are not going to follow Trump, no matter what he says or does because Trump can not be trusted. He is a liar.
3
@Me Too "No one company can own the world. You have to share to be a player."
Just as Internet and related network and communications use "standards" shared by everyone, 5G should evolve into a standard that companies should license. They then can build their systems and application for anyone willing to license them.
Perhaps Huawei understands this. It is certainly clear that many in the US don't understand it.
The much larger issue is AI. Assuming China goes full bore on developing this technology they are already ahead or soon will be.
Think about the development of Android. What would it be if only the US had this technology. Basic core technology in the IT world is best shared.
Think about Google. The rest of the world thinks Google's advertising practices are unfair. When I seek a link to a specific product Google lists all the products competitors products first when it is obvious what I am seeking. Core enabling technology should be fair. In this case Huawei technology is clearly ahead. If the US companies steal Huawei leading technology (as we know they will), will we be stealing IP just like we acuse everyone else of doing.
@Chuck Drinnan
It's propaganda China's ahead in AI, they're not even close. There are some narrow areas where they are somewhat close to matching what the US has but all things considered it's not even close. Why do you think the best R&D China's companies do tech wise is done at facilities located in the US.
Best thing for the United States is no deal, as Trump will bloviate any deal and use it to hold on to the reigns of power in the US by bloody fingernails. And that's why I actually think China will sign a deal with Trump. As long as he is President the US is a declining world power. The Chinese know this.
1
No mention of the surveillance state perfected by Huawei against the Uighur?
2
As a Canadian, I'd like to remind all that China took two Canadians hostage in retribution for Canada simply doing the judicial thing of detaining the Princess Daughter (in a Vancouver mansion) on what might well be quite legitimate charges from the US.
How do you "do business" with organizations that are nasty on that scale of viciousness. Shame on China.
10
@Ben
The evidence is overwhelming that nobody can trust the Communists running China to do the right, just, decent and proper thing. The evidence is that they are to be held at bay and not trusted on any subject. I will pray for all that are in harm’s way in China, Tibet and Taiwan.
3
No proof!
We are just supposed to believe the US?
The US lied about Vietnam, Iraq, the weather, crowd sizes, about everything.
The US has no 5G. China didn't steal 5G, it out competed the US.
Yes, it stole in the past. So has America, France, Britain and Australia.
This is all about stopping China from getting ahead of the US.
Any American that falls for the Governments, ‘Well, if you knew what we knew, you would agree with us’ deserves Donald Trump.
Like the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on me, fool me a hundred times and you must be an American."
8
@JMC
"Fool me once, shame on me, fool me a hundred times and you must be an American."
To quote a true, heroic, American patriot (Donald Trump Jr.), "I love it."
3
@JMC
"No proof" - of what? "Believe the US" - about what? This seems like a rant. As I'm sure you're aware, 5G involves a lot of parts -- from infrastructure to chips -- and the US does indeed develop some of this technology. As Friedman pointed out, Europe and China have developed other parts of this technology. The development, therefore, has been distributed globally. Your unsubstantiated claim that China "outcompeted" anybody simply isn't persuasive. Industrial espionage is a diffuse problem, and should be condemned wherever it is intercepted. However, because the Chinese government and its corporate collaborators continue to pursue a policy of espionage, it continues to be met with justifiable global condemnation. Having a tantrum won't change this. Simply refrain from espionage and your ethos will improve. In fact, one wonders if the strength and momentum of the Chinese economy have largely been based on a combination of (1) the implementation of ideas and technologies obtained through successful industrial espionage and (2) what amounts to the indentured servitude of its people. Could this be why the Chinese government and its corporate collaborators are adamant about a single tech standard: without fresh infusions of innovation from other countries, the Chinese economy would flounder? If the espionage is disrupted, if the Chinese people rise up against their oppressors, the only fools around will be you, the Chinese government and their corporate collaborators.
2
Donald Trump managing a sophisticated, win-win geopolitical and technological negotiation with a powerful and sensitive adversary?
It is to laugh, and then to weep.
3
I don't know about all the spying stuff, all of its ramifications but I do know that my previous phone before my present Pixel 3XL a flagship phone I had a medium-low price Huawei 5g4x & I loved it especially its camera, a jewel! & I've read reviews of its current flagship model the P30 Pro, which say it absolutely blows away Samsung's & Apple's flagship offerings, so I think there's a good chance this is an "eliminate the competition" deal... especially as the Europeans don't seem to have any problems whatsoever with Huawei phones...on the other hand implementation of 5G is very worrying, especially with reports of birds falling dead out of trees where it's been tried & reports that it will finish off all insect life...but here, 5G is only spoken of as a desirable technology, the only problem being how fast & how economically it can be implemented!
2
"Ren told me: If the U.S. reaches out to us in good faith and promises to change their irrational approach to Huawei..."
Note to Ren: The US under Donald Trump does not understand the meaning of "good faith" or respect the notion of "promises"; In fact, expecting anything other than "irrational" from Donald Trump is beyond foolish.
Note to Trump: Chinese companies and their government have been stealing our technology for decades, and cannot be stopped or trusted simply because you think (sadly, without cause) that you know how to negotiate a "deal".
Note to Friedman: Expecting anything like a coherent and honest trade policy while Trump is in office is like expecting the good fairy to make everything right again.
2
Come on Tom, you're smarter than this. or at least not this disingenuous. This reads like a Xi press release.
Huawei is one issue of many. Did you forget about:
Forced Technology Transfers,
Forced Partnership with Chinese Companies,
Lack of Open Markets,
Corporate Espionage,
Continual Counterfeiting and IP Theft
Harassment/Surveillance of Western Employees
Any agreement to move forward has to address most, if not all, of these issues as well. Then, maybe, we can have something that looks like a fair playing field that benefits Huawei as well as Qualcomm or Ericsson or Siemens. It's amazing that the euros just sit without a peep since their technology has been/is being stolen at the same rate as American products.
7
@Andrew
You left out flooding the U.S. market with fentanyl and refusing to arrest the Chinese responsible. Saying that addiction is America’s problem.
2
@China Charlie Well I have to admit that addiction is America's problem. If we did have the demand there wouldn't be a problem.
Revenge for the Opium Wars?
1
There are three major issues in the US
1. Climate Change...well Trump is crazy on this
2. Immigration...yes they are illegal, Trump is dead right
3. By focussing ONLY on economics and not on geopolitics we have ceded power to China. Trump is brave and dead right. He is just not smart enough to target tariffs.
So if you think it is OK to have Chinese government spying on Americans then go ahead. Its a phone we can all live without. The choice is Techno push with totalitarian China running the world...or standing up to them with TARGETTED tariffs.
2
How ironic it would be if Huawei licensed back to US companies code descended from earlier code stolen from US companies.
2
China is going to "win" this one, though it is hard to see how any of this is 'winning'.
China has trump boxed in - there is great pressure on trump to end this trade war prior to the 2020 election, and China knows this. They have little to lose.
3
Talk is cheap. Just show us the proof that Huawei stole our trade secrets to build its 5G technology. May be we can pinpoint the stolen patents that Huawei used in its 5G network technology or in its latest Mate30 cell phones.
It's been over more than one year. I am still waiting for the naysayer to show the proof. In the meantime, several European countries has decided to use Huawei equipment for their latest 5G network. Either we move forward or sit still doing nothing, and let other people passing us.
8
Sooner rather than later, accommodation on some products will be agreed on, and trade will resume out of necessity. Though the “new silk roads” are much trickier to navigate since these are paved with traps, mines and deceit. That we know. A WTO recalibration will be required down the the “road”, as it were.
On Huawei’s G5 technology, the world knows what a “Trojan Horse” the company and its technology are. Nothing good will come if embraced. The late Nancy Reagan’s “sage” advise comes to mind at a time like this: “Just say NO!”
20
@Ted How does the world know? How do you know? I haven't heard an engineer or scientist say they know anything about Huawei's supposed trojan tech, despite the fact that teardowns are posted all over the internet. Republican politicians "know," but then again, the world is learning what it means for a Republican to "know" something...
21
@Ted
For twenty years the Washington foreign affairs elites have been telling us that we have to "engage" China and that that "engagement" would result in China moving steadily toward becoming a liberal democracy.
They were wrong. The result has been the build up of a China which now sees itself as a coming great power and Asia's hegemon. We are in a Cold War with China and will be for the foreseeable future.
It's time we stop allowing our companies to hand over their intellectual property; stop allowing our telecommunications companies to sacrifice our security for their profits by way of cheaper Chinese equipment; stop welcoming their scientists into our defense labs.
Our "engagement" should be solely with the periphery. The sooner we're out of China the better!
3
@Ted The UK has been studying Huawei's 5G technology for a couple of years in it's bid for the UK market. Every line of code has been examined and no spyware has been found. So as far as I know there is no evidence of of Huawei doing anything nefarious. If it can proved otherwise, then fine, ban their products. Otherwise it is just hysteria. OT Funny how it's okay for US companies (Google, Apple, Facebook, Uber, etc.) to spy on us in the name of capitalism. Or if they are fined it is just chump change.
6
IMHO USA government agencies are paranoid about the kind of espionage that they have carried over for many years over every country in the world would be replicated by Chinese.
Processor firmware issues could have been exploited by agencies in USA to collect and leverage data from around the world.
4
IMHO USA government agencies are paranoid about the kind of espionage that they have carried over for many years over every country in the world would be replicated by Chinese.
Processor firmware issues could have been exploited by agencies in USA to collect and leverage data from around the world.
1
Didnt you recently observe, correctly, that Trump is the US President that China deserves ?
Chinese Confucian thought famously abhors chaos, and Trump is all about chaos. It is unlikely the twain shall meet.
1
The world is becoming an overtly Darwinian, Mercantilism & merely transactional place.
The Meng Wanzhou/Huawei saga is a case in point from its beginning; a blatant example of how the US & China each use smaller countries like Canada as scenes on which to act in an aggressive but indirect way against each other with small risk to themselves.
Not only Canada, but many other middle powers are becoming tired & increasingly annoyed as they experience collateral damage in this manner. This compounds our anger at being casually bullied for concessions by one or other of these superpowers, often for domestic political purposes.
This breakdown of stable, rule-based & equitable ways of conducting international affairs can only make the world a more unpredictable & risky place. This breakdown & its potential consequences currently may be more evident to nations other than the US & China, but all are at risk.
4
I don't know why the Times thinks that interviews with Ren are "rare". He was all over Yahoo and CNBC a few weeks ago, He's clearly on a propaganda campaign.
5
In the mindset of the CCP, no Win Win. They only think of Win Or Loss. I won't trust those related to the PLA background. A country with the scandals of fake eggs , fake vaccine and infant formula, I can not get a reason to give credit in its advance technology manufactured in mainland China. Even meng Wanzhou has two apple cell phones. I wonder if still many Americans are influenced by the book " Red Star Over China "
3
"United States ***has no indigenous 5G networking manufacturer * * *tThe only other 5G major suppliers are Nokia and Ericsson "
"Google * * * Android operating system sits on every Huawei phone; Microsoft * * *Windows operating system sits on every Huawei computer; Intel * * * chips run Huawei’s 5G networks"
Why doesn't the US manufacture 5G networking equipment? How is that Huawei is dependent on American software and processors, but we cannot make 5G networking equipment? The trade war, particularly the Huawei part, will be unintelligible to readers (certainly me) until someone answers this question.
3
@MKR The campaign of fear of unknown is spread systematically, but not without reason.
Huawei and many other Chinese companies have been building alternative operating systems and have plans to replace every product that you have cited.
It's all about whose software will world rely upon.
Until now many parts of the world relied on US designed software and hardware.
After security vulnerabilities exposed by Wikileaks and other public websites, governments across the world are growing suspicious.
Chinese have their own software/hardware stack now, at obviously much cheaper prices than American products.
So companies in USA are pushing vehemently to prevent these products from becoming prevalent.
US government is trying to prevent the inevitable.
2
@MKR The campaign of fear of unknown is spread systematically, but not without reason.
Huawei and many other Chinese companies have been building alternative operating systems and have plans to replace every product that you have cited.
It's all about whose software will world rely upon.
Until now many parts of the world relied on US designed software and hardware.
After security vulnerabilities exposed by Wikileaks and other public websites, governments across the world are growing suspicious.
Chinese have their own software/hardware stack now, at obviously much cheaper prices than American products.
So companies in USA are pushing vehemently to prevent these products from becoming prevalent.
US government is trying to prevent the inevitable.
Friedman's interview makes Ren sound like the adult in the room. China isn't perfect, the US isn't perfect, Huawei isn't perfect, Amazon, Microsoft, and Facebook aren't perfect. Ren is suggesting that we move past the blame game and negotiate some agreements.
The claim that Huawei puts spyware into its code is baseless. The claim that Huawei, in the past, infringed patents is certainly true. They settled with Cisco on this, paid a large settlement, and were not allowed to sell most equipment in the US for many years. The claim that the NSA broke into Huawei's data center in Shenzhen is certainly true as reported by the NYTimes: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/world/asia/nsa-breached-chinese-servers-seen-as-spy-peril.html . The funny part is that the NSA was searching for evidence of Huawei espionage activities, which it didn't find. It is most likely true that Huawei was trying to circumvent the Iran sanction by dealing through third party countries. It's also undeniable that the US government supports American companies financially when they get into trouble (AIG, Chrysler, GM, etc.).
So, Ren's got the right idea. An abundance of blame to go around. So let's stop bickering, sit down, and work out solutions. And, PLEASE don't tell me that the Chinese can't be trusted to keep their agreements! Need I cite the Iran agreement and the Paris Climate Accords?
Nice article Mr. Friedman!!!
8
I was just on We chat with a friend. I live in China. We both stayed up late to watch the unveiling of the new Apple products. I have an Iphone, she has an older Iphone. We were disappointed there were no 5g phones. The city I live in will have 5g soon. But Apple products still have many people in China who want to buy them. If we continue this trade war and Huawei takes over the Chinese market, I don't think it will be good for China or America. You need competition.
But Trump is so toxic, I think the Chinese, and really, the rest of the world, we have to wait until we get rid of this jerk.
7
I presume Ren Zhengfei is sincere when he claims he doesn't intend to build spy tools into his product, but no matter. Huawei is bound by law to comply with all of the CCP's demands, and the CCP is not to be trusted. Ren Zhengfei's proposed compromise might be necessary at the moment, but it's not an acceptable long game strategy.
3
Boy, Ren Zhengfei is a great negotiator!
And he's wealthier than Donald Trump, too.
4
The problem here is that Trump has zero credibility... he lies constantly for the most inane reasons. The man can't even be trusted to not alter hurricane maps. You can't possibly trust him over something this important. What's more, he corrupts everything he touches so, there are no independent third parties that we can turn to for validation. In the case of Huawei, the U.S. government, presumably can't show what it has on the company since doing so would almost certainly reveal sources and methods. We have no choice but to wait for a better president to come along to either validate Trump or dismiss his claims as an unfortunate side gambit in his ill-conceived trade war.
I, for one, refuse to give either Trump or Huawei the benefit of the doubt.
163
@Jasonmiami
Excellent comment.
8
@Jasonmiami
Agreed.
I don't trust Huawei to tell us the truth about their interlocking connections with the Chinese government and how those might potentially be used strategically.
But I also don't trust Trump to tell us the truth about . . .well, anything.
Radical disclosure into the sunlight is the only thing that will work here, but that means each side has to give up strategic info and advantages, and apparently at least at this moment the negatives of doing so are thought to outweigh the positives.
11
@Jasonmiami
Trump is right; the sooner we break the U.S.-China supply chain and induce our companies to move their operations to the peripheral nations, the more secure we'll be.
Tariffs are the way to do that, but Trump -- with his eye on the 2020 economy and the election -- can't maintain consistency. Hopefully, the next President will take her first two years -- that is, before reelection concerns become dominant -- and do Trump's policy the right way.
1
Tom, I have a naive but obvious question that I have never seen addressed: with all our technological prowess, why are no US companies manufacuturing 5G equipment? I expect that you know the answer - please write a column about it.
4
Ask China to accept foreign immigration to their country and then we'll talk.
1
Wasn’t it Nixion who was trying to embarrass Deng Xiao Ping by asking him why he won’t let people out of the country so easily. Deng asked him back something like, “how many millions of peasants would you like? 100 million will go tomorrow if you agree.”
1
Huawei is neither a capitalist success story nor a giant espionage scheme for China. It is simply the product of a plutocracy that spans investment houses all over the world - profits guaranteed by the Chinese government.
I think Mr. Friedman simply got enamored with the beautiful Chinese hospitality and forgot to notice the guards with semi-automatic rifles in front of the engineering building in Shenzhen, the prison like cafes, and the dorms that look like the factories of the past.
143
@Linus
Actually guns are outlawed in China. Even for security staff of large state owned companies.
15
@Detective Pikachu He's referring to Red Army soldiers, not security guards.
7
@Detective Pikachu I've lived in China, and saw more guns than I see in the U.S.. Cops, bank security, government buildings, etc, etc... And these guns were typically not hand guns. More like machine guns.
7
There are two related issues here: (1) the narrow question of whether Huawei equipment can be manufactured in a way that ensures definitively that it cannot be used to spy or be weaponized; and (2) the broader question of whether America (and the West) should make any effort to assist the business development of Huawei.
On (1), I will assume that there is some package of technology licencing and coding transparency that would allow the west to de-fang Hwawei.
But (2) remains. We would not buy Chinese missiles, for example, to give support to the Chinese missile industry. Why would we buy Chinese high tech communications products to give support to that industry? Why would we not support Nokia and other companies from societies whose values we share? China has already weaponized communications against its own people, and especially against ethnic minorities (eg., Uighurs). Chinese will weaponize telecommunications against the rest of the world as soon as it can.
Make no mistake. The Chinese communists are implacable foes of the entire Western way of life. If they obtain the power to dominate by force, they will do so just as they have their own people. As one example, no civilized nation in the 21st century would take hostages and torture them, as the Chinese have done to two Canadians in retaliation for the arrest of Ms. Meng, who resides in a series of multi-million dollar mansions notwithstanding her arrest.
Buy Chinese T-shirts. Boycott Chinese high tech.
4
Um..... Abu Grabe?.... Guantanamo Bay?.... CIA Black sites?.. Rendition?
I seem to remember a Canadian Citizen rendered to Jordan I think?
I seem to recall that the US has 2.2 million of its own citizens incarcerated, a greater percentage of its population than almost any other country, including China...
A quick glance in the mirror might reframe your hubris.
US companies moved their manufacturing to China voluntarily, motivated by greed. There was no compulsion. They offshore their profits and avoid tax. Their choices.
To say that the Chinese subsidise their industries and that’s somehow cheating, then what is the US defence budget, heading toward 1Trillion dollars, larger than the next 8 nations combined, other than a gigantic tech and employment subsidy?
Oh yes! I nearly forgot.... You elected Trump! You break your democracy, you own it. Unfortunately, we in the rest of world have to deal with your collateral damage, and frankly, we don’t trust you anymore.
The Dr.
Trump is, first and foremost, a political animal.
Anyone paying attention for the last twenty years realizes that the Chinese have repeatedly made apparently fair trade deals with western companies...then played by their own rules in a variety of ways. Some adjustment in the trade relationship has probably been long overdue.
And this fits right into Trump’s playbook. He can make a big fuss over the unfair Chinese (which is a sure winner) and hold out until the time is politically ripe for a deal...a HUGE new deal...probably as the November drop-dead date with Huawei approaches or later in 2020 when the economic bounce resulting from the deal will boost his chances for reelection.
The irony is that as long as the securities markets hold up fairly well, the more time Trump has to pick his moment. It’s not about economics...its about politics.
1
I guess we're going to have to read Ren Zhengfei's book "The Zen of the Deal". And re-read your insightful book "The Earth is Flat". The corollary to that insight is that China will be bigger than us and could call the shots in the future, so the strategic thing to do is to keep pushing China toward our cultural ethic, which truth be told also includes stealing tech, but with speed limits. I am sure that the propaganda has distorted our concept of China, and we need that in order to wage war, but waging war, even trade war is stupid in the 21st Century.
how does one negotiate with a Trojan horse?
3
China and Huawei cannot be trusted, period. The Chinese government has, for decades, funded a state and private sector global intellectual property heist the likes of which we've never seen before. Their goal is dominance on a global scale. In this one and only instance, I support Trump's hard line and hope that others wake up to the danger of giving another inch to the Chinese side.
66
@John as Mr Cohen has pointed out recently in these pages, Trump was bound to get something right and his hardline stance against China and Huawei is the correct position to take.
3
"Imagine China telling Apple that it can never make or sell another phone in China or in any of China’s Asian trading partners, which is the rough equivalent of what Trump has told Huawei in America."
As Huawei currently does not market any phones in the US, I feel this is an inapt metaphor.
@e pluribus unum
Huawei had deals with the mainstream carriers to sell its flagship device in early 2018, but they were abruptly cut off just before release due to political pressure.
https://www.cnet.com/news/why-some-of-the-flashiest-huawei-android-p20-p20-pro-mate-10-pro-phones-arent-in-the-us/
"...then he {Ren} is also ready, for the first time, to license the entire Huawei 5G platform to any American company that wants to manufacturer it and install it and operate it, completely independent of Huawei." Do it, analyze the platform, modify it if necessary, and sell....What else?
On another level, who cares? More speed, more information, more 'tyranny of the urgent,' more "disimagination machines," and more ego-stroking competition that pales in comparison to
infrastructure that needs to be repaired, a retooling of the fossil-fuel industry to at least ATTEMPT to slow-down anthropocentric climate-change, taking the FICA, over-$132K cap off to fund universal healthcare and other needs in the U.S. etc. etc. etc. The bigger, better, faster, more-more-more, growth-for-growth-sake metastatic-cancer capitalist exercise has about run its course, no?
Doesn't matter if the digital or physical "walls" go up Tom, for they all ARE going, and will, go up anyway in the 'race for what's left" (Michael Klare). If it's the 'china-white' addiction of the Internet and information-highway and its speedy bandwidth that are all so important, well, then stick a fork in 'em...we're done.
1
Why would we want a brutal dictatorship bent on our destruction to spy on us...?
How is this even a question?
3
There is no such thing as independent commerce in China, every company is just a tool of the CPC or PLA end of story. The Renminbi is basically monopoly money ten years after the supposed liberalization of the currency. If you really want to understand what they are doing read On Practice and On Contradiction by Mao.
2
Sure Huawei has a plan to end the battle with Trump...pay him as much as he can count. That's always worked before, with everyone and everything else. Simple. Huawei will now become the preferred restock and servicing supplier for the U.S. Military and Government.
And then put all that money in a big safe in Trump Tower Beijing, Trump Tower Hong Kong, Trump Tower Taiwain, Trump Tower Shanghai, Trump Tower Shenzhen, Trump Tower Guanzhou...you get the general idea. Huawei will now become the sole supplier of tele, data, electronic, and internet services, replacing Google, Apple, etc. Simple, effective, immediate. Works every time.
3
The fight for supremacy of adversarial technology titans is on. And we the people in the middle, squeezed by our information appetites and the need to at least simulate some privacy. Are we doomed? Or is this just a trial to see how far we must compete with A.I. to survive?
Huawei phones and networking equipment is sold in Germany, among other European countries. I'm sure they have fully vetted the equipment and the Germans are just as technically sophisticated (if not more so than us).
If Huawei offers us the source code and allows us to modify it, it would essentially be technology transfer (what we accuse China of). Imo, it seems like this is purely a politically motivated move, as we have not offered any shred of evidence besides talking points.
4
This article manages to omit the fact that there is absolutely zero evidence that Huawei spies on anyone. On the other hand, there is conclusive evidence that the US government spies on Huawei. Perhaps it is the US who should be offering Huawei reparations.
5
American government's infiltration of AMERICAN tech behind American companies' backs is well documented, thanks to Snowden. Only recently a NSA malware has been hijacked by hackers to use against governments of the world when NSA exploited it and intentionally withheld the information from Microsoft. These are hard evidence.
Show us the same kind of evidence with Huawei, please.
6
A great piece of reporting! Balanced and well-informed
7
Trade wars hurt both sides, and they can lead to shooting wars. Remember that the path to Pearl Harbor and American entry into WWII began in 1939 when the United States terminated its 1911 commercial treaty with Japan. On July 2, 1940, FDR signed the Export Control Act, authorizing the President to license or prohibit the export of essential defense materials. This led to embargoes on U.S. exports of aviation motor fuels and lubricants and iron and steel scrap. Finally, on July 26, 1941, Roosevelt froze Japanese assets in the United States, bringing commercial relations between the nations to an effective end.
Maybe Huawei's overtures, along with Bolton's departure, are hopeful omens, and the worst can be averted. But how can any negotiating partner trust Trump and the U.S. Congress to follow through?
6
"... Nokia and Ericsson, European companies whose products are far more expensive than Huawei’s."
Friedman sets this out there without explaining why those companies are more expensive. But this is part and parcel of the problem. It is half of the administration's trade war with China. Between treating workers as automata at best, and slaves at worst; between state subsidies and intellectual property theft, Huawei continues to profit from a system that disadvantages the competition at every turn. These practices are too deeply rooted to be dispelled by a sit down with the DOJ. They are basic to China's business plan, as is subversion of the internet and supersession of the U.S. as the leader of the globe.
7
@Expat50
Exactly to the point. Friedman hides these differences because he either: 1- does not care; or 2- sell out to big corporations who value profits above everything else.
A combination of 1 and 2 is also possible
1
It seems there is already two systems of technology because China has corrupted the open concept of the internet. They have a huge apparatus to monitor and clamp down on the free exchange of information and ideas. It is the very same, "Berlin Wall," already in place! Isn't this two technologies? If this is how they treat their own people how can we trust them in any way?
8
The Executives said some nice things huh? Didn't Iran recently promise not to deliver the oil on the seized tanker to Syria? Did they keep their promise? Its easy to Promise to do anything.
5
That’s why American officials are asking: How can we let Huawei place its 5G technology in our cities and homes? Can’t it be used by China to spy on us or turn off our electricity in a war? And China asks the same about us.
Mr. Friedman misses a critical point -- Chinese state owned telecommunications companies (China Telecom and China Unicom) have access to the US domestic communications network. China's domestic communications network is essentially walled off from the world. Their isn't a single foreign carrier that operate within China. I wonder why?
I'm guessing China's ability to turn off electricity in the United States is a lot easier given their access to our network. In May, the FCC after eight years of negotiations denied China Mobile's application to interconnect with the United States. The FCC is currently investigating whether China Telecom and China Unicom's licenses should be rescinded in light of China Telecom hijacking vast amounts of internet traffic and routing it through China for over two and a half years.
The stakes are too high to trade off for short term economic gain. The risk is Trump sells our freedom for a trade deal.
6
The biggest by far question I have after reading this troubling article: Huawei is the largest 5G infrastructure provider in the world, followed by Nokia and Ericsson. How on Earth no US company is involved in this essential technology which will facilitate the internet of things, self-driving vehicles, etc.? In other words, whether we like it or not, our future?
This transcends Trump's character and cluelessness because it is going to be a major issue for many years to come (past 2020).
7
Nice picture of Shanghai! Featuring three fine examples of China's national bird, the crane.
3
Until Chinese communist party is dissolved, we should not let the country grow any bigger. The US invited China to the world so that it can become a normal country. But, it has been growing as a monster. It wants to become a superpower while maintaining its outrageous ideology and dictatorship. We should never allow them to be one. It's an absolute order from the people all around the world.
8
The bigger issue is 5G safe for the environment and humans? What testing has actually been done?
4
The US is a scaredy cat #1 economy in the world. Anyone who approaches this position, as in China's case by being # 2, will be defamed, attacked, stopped - by all means necessary.
6
We already know that Apple, Amazon, and Google all listen in on us, and save all recordings. Why would Huawei be different? Oh, except the Chinese government actually requires back doors, so need to wait for the scandal to break.
5
Let China hold multi-party, free elections at the regional and national level. And free the Uighurs. And renounce violence in resolving the future status of Hong Kong and Taiwan. And, of course, withdraw from the artificial islands that they created and militarized in the South China Sea.
Then, we can discuss Huawei's networking products.
62
Excellent proposal. Forward it to the White House and Congress.
2
@NorthernVirginia Nice list of requirements! From the Chinese perspective, why would China accept all of those conditions? China already helps the USA by purchasing about 5% of our Debt. This isn't "Red China" of 30 years ago. China's major companies are gov't , public or privately-owned (Huawei). The major ones are already doing more infrastructure projects around the World than USA companies. Chinese businesses (eg. Huawei, Sinopec, Pacific Construction) are actively working in many African, Asian and South American countries on major infrastructure projects. China purchases raw materials, minerals, soy beans and other food from these countries.
6
This trade war is becoming a national security issue, or already is.
Decoupling in trade and technology might very likely be the future.
We can't stand their business practice and political ideology and they refuse to change. War is not an option. So we go our separate way.
Time will tell.
2
I'm sure Chinese have a plan, but can we trust them? After all, they've made plenty of promises in the past, but have kept none.
As much as I detest Trump, the trade war with China is the ONLY issue I completely agree with him, and I suspect that no matter who gets elected in 2020 (Biden, Warren, Harris, or someone else), he/she will continue the same policies vs China.
4
@OTT
Ask the Native American population if the US can be trusted with agreements?
Or, any of our allies, post-Trump.
9
@OTT I don't think it is the trade war that you are agreeing with, just the objectives. The trade war is an idiotic way of achieving the objectives based on an incompetent and outdated understanding of geopolitical issues.
I appreciate this piece because it attempts to think through the hard problem of dealing with China outside of the Trump framework. That said, there are points I disagree with. As a number of recent academic papers and media reports have suggested, Huawei appears to be a corporate extension of the Chinese government. This interdependence between a tech corporation whose products have the potential to undermine American national security and a government that sponsors intellectual property theft and other criminal behavior is sufficient cause for the American government to proceed with extreme caution. Trust is earned - not once but in each transaction; when it is repeatedly violated, it is rational and justifiable to curb it. So, a fundamental problem here is not as Ren suggested that "the US reach out to us in good faith," but that the Chinese government and its corporate extensions reach out to the US in good faith. Because of this lack of trust, Huawei's offer to license its 5G network to the US sounds like a Trojan horse. The offer would need to be examined thoroughly, including its potential to foster American technological dependence on China and to dampen American innovation, and the product compared in detail with European products. Finally, it may be the case that having two tech standards rather than one global tech standard is preferable; if handled properly, it could curtail intellectual property theft, keep more people employed, and protect national security.
10
@AG
I am all for two standards, and Berlin wall (and a sea) between us.
@VB
Yes, separate standards is an unpopular idea, not only because, as your sarcastic comment suggests, it may be erroneously connected to other forms of geopolitical separation, but because it undermines the common narratives of the necessity of a single standard. The attempts to adopt a single standard, however, strike me as problematic. Firstly, these attempts seem to constitute a proxy war; the US and Chinese governments/tech firms each seek to dominate this standard, and both are hoping the other side will blink. I'm betting neither will, because neither side believes it can afford to. And indeed they cannot. Secondly, if it's true that competition drives technological innovation, a single global standard will likely check innovation, as innovation will unfurl according to that single standard and not according to need or possibility. Finally, the problem of labor arbitrage may begin to be addressed more equitably.
2
"Otherwise we’re heading for a two-technology world, with a Chinese zone and an American zone, and a digital Berlin Wall running right down the middle."
No. We already have a digital Berlin Wall, and it is China that built it by banning all sorts of American companies that freely operate throughout the rest of the world, such as Google, FB, Twitter, etc.
Banning Huawei is simply a natural and long overdue reaction.
6
@Rahul Sharma, Well at least Chinese need not worry about their private information being collected and sold by likes of facebook to the highest bidder anywhere in the world.
However, Chinese government makes sure it uses the firewall to prevent any dissent against the communist regime from spreading. This includes fake news and political manipulation schemes.
Look at India, they are learning the hard way to not trust corporations with user data. They have recently enacted strict rules about storing user data within India. Obviously, the US companies weren't impressed.
China's Communist government is really a sort of Confucian fascist state. Trump is a blip on their 20 year plan. That he went after them solo, while at the same time pretty much going after everyone else simultaneously, assures them that he will be unable to seriously destabilize their regime, or even their program for global influence and power. The US is 20% of their exports; even if Trump succeeded in reducing that share by as much as 20% that is still only 4% of exports. In the meantime, China is not idle, they are countering in many different ways the effects of the tarifs. The prospects for Trump making the big deal with China is effectively between 0 and .05%. That's a slender thread to hang his re-election on. At best for him, the election will be close, and to lose even a few votes on a tariff war that persists until next November could be disastrous. I think he's going to effectively capitulate and declare victory on whatever evanescent or illusionary concession China makes. But that's not an election winning strategy either. So, I think he will make a deal on Huewei, and for that the Chicoms might give him something equivalent, like allowing Google, e.g., to offer uncensored search in a limited geographic area; that's just an off the top of my head example that is probably not germane, but something comparable to that, which requires a real change in policy, but very limited in scope. Then, he will have something "real" for which to claim his crown next November.
Indeed - if Friedman came out of these visits concluding that
"... months of impulsive Trump threats, tariffs, praises and then more threats have clearly led a lot of Chinese officials to conclude that Trump is an unstable character who always has to be seen to “win” and humiliate the other side, and therefore can’t be counted on for a big win-win deal — or even stick to it if one were agreed on. Better to let the talks drag on."
He's nailed it. China plays it safe rather than sorry and from what they've seen of Trump, they've decided to treat him like the unstable character he is. You can't agree to anything with someone who is so flaky. So just don't.
If America has no proof or evidence, why claim that Huawei can install “back doors” in its equipment that Chinese intelligence can exploit? No one has yet found any — or at least none has been publicly reported. Is it paranoia on the part of Trump or just an excuse to try to prevent Huawei 5G from taking over the world?
Surely American tech companies such as Microsoft, Google, and Apple would not do business with Huawei if there was any chance that "espionage" was possible on their products. American tech companies are smart!
3
Mr. Friedman is being, perhaps intentionally, naive, in his editorial focus on Huawei technology as an economic “choice” to be made in moving forward with American telecommunications. This is about China and America in an existential fight to the finish and at stake our Western democratic system. Huawei is only one small skirmish. At heart we need to ask ourselves if we want to live in a world of freedoms based on rule-of-law, or for the price of cheap phones will we sell out who we are to China?
6
The words plan and Trump do not belong in the same sentence. It’s an oxymoron. Emphasis on moron.
Seriously.
6
This leads to some interesting questions:
If the Huawei ban really was just about protecting western 5G manufacturers from the competition (versus security), then they are calling our bluff by allowing full system access.
If they do provide US companies with the source code, etc. then we are doing exactly what US companies are accusing China of doing: requiring they give us their intellectual property in order to do business with us.
It will be interesting to see how this moves forward.
11
"Otherwise we’re heading for a two-technology world, with a Chinese zone and an American zone, and a digital Berlin Wall running right down the middle."
Bearing in mind that the Berlin Wall was a Soviet structure intended to keep the citizens of East Germany and the Eastern Bloc from defecting westward, then it seems obvious to me that the digital Berlin Wall between China and the rest of the world already exists and has been built by the Chinese Communist Party to keep its citizenry uninformed and obedient. So it seems a poor rationale for negotiating with Huawei that we can avoid an already-existent digital divide.
10
"Otherwise we’re heading for a two-technology world, with a Chinese zone and an American zone, and a digital Berlin Wall running right down the middle."
From the Occidental perspective, we're already there, if only in very nebulous and still-porous ways (i.e. osmosis still takes place.) The "new cold war" pre-dates the unfortunate shambles that is Trump. As Mr. Friedman implies, at least the situation has now received real exposure; I cannot, however, buy into Huawei's good faith. Even if the offer of licensing is real, US and EU labour costs put any manufacturing efforts into the Nokia-Ericsson price range mentioned in the article. Furthermore, it would take a large team of very expensive engineers to find security weaknesses, inadvertent or baked-in. May as well buy Scandinavian and eat the cost; it may be hard to swallow the price tag, but we can afford it, at least for now.
6
@ennio galiani: British Telecom invested heavily in Huawei 3G/4G equipment. Before they did this, they worked with Cambridge University (with the cooperation of Huawei engineers) to thoroughly vet the equipment. No problems were found. Certainly there was some cost, but not a cost on the scale you suggest.
I suspect that when BT buys equipment from Cisco, they do exactly the same thing. Would you trust the NSA not to have Cisco to put back doors into its telecom equipment?
3
@ShenBowen you make good points. On the hand, many years ago, I remember it took DARPA several years to realize that their T-Mobile satellite network was German-owned.
@ShenBowen oops. on the OTHER hand
Tom Friedman downplays the central issue, and it isn't Huawei. U.S. trade negotiators are pressing China to change their entire economic model, which they view as key to their success. It's like the Chinese demanding the U.S. dump capitalism and adopt their communist system. Huawei is just a side show.
9
@Mark McIntyre
The Chinese economic model is to steal everything they can from the West. Of course, they don't want to change.
5
A decisive factor in both the First and Second World Wars was the Allied advantage in code breaking. It has been estimated that WW II was shortened by two years as a result of Turing's cracking of the German Enigma code.
Now, imagine what Huawei might do to American communications in the event of hostilities with China.
Xi is calling the shots at Huawei not Mr. Ren.
4
Ren knows that he can extend an olive branch because there is no hope for serious dialogue with the current US regime. Ren comes out looking good with an interview like this and he loses nothing.
56
Well, he has a daughter to lose...
The UK's GCHQ (their NSA equivalent) vets Huawei's 5G equipment and has yet to discover any backdoors. Their only criticism is about spaghetti code and sloppy code review, which also afflicts Nokia and Ericsson's tech. According to a DoD study and the consensus of industry analysts, Huawei's 5G tech is not only cheaper, but also superior to the only other offerings from Europe and Northeast Asia.
https://media.defense.gov/2019/Apr/03/2002109302/-1/-1/0/DIB_5G_STUDY_04.03.19.PDF
Many of our allies, including the UK (Vodafone), Germany, France, and South Korea (LG U+) remain unconvinced of US concerns about Huawei, continually imploring the US for solid evidence - while maintaining their relationships with Huawei. Either such concerns are legitimate, or they are not. Analysts (and also Huawei's CEO, for what it's worth) warn that excluding Huawei could cost the US dearly in the race to stay at the forefront of the 5G revolution.
49
@Jeff
How do you think backdoors are created...? I'll tell you... spaghetti code and sloppy code.
Whether Huawei's insufficient code is designed to look that way or not, I'd say we know who their master is and there is zero reason to believe them.
13
@Jeff
Hi Jeff, I haven't read the report you referred to but the annual oversight report prepared by the UK government reaches a very different conclusion than complaints about sloppy code. From the report's summary:
4 iv. Further significant technical issues have been identified in Huawei’s engineering processes, leading to new risks in the UK telecommunications networks;
4 v. No material progress has been made by Huawei in the remediation of the issues reported last year, making it inappropriate to change the level of assurance from last year or to make any comment on potential future levels of assurance.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/790270/HCSEC_OversightBoardReport-2019.pdf
14
@Mark
The reference to the UK's report in the report I cited:
"While DoD security typically focuses on vendor-installed backdoors that could be used to remotely control a system or exfiltrate information, a wide variety of security issues could also be introduced through poor software development practices both during and after the rollout of 5G. Many of these risks were mentioned in a UK report on the joint effort with Huawei
and the UK government to manage security issues with Huawei deployments in the UK. Security issues from poor software development issues are a universal problem, and are not restricted to only Chinese vendors."
Huawei's official response claims that it is "transforming" its software practices while purporting to maintain transparency. https://www.huawei.com/en/facts/news-opinions/guo-ping-responds-hcsec-oversight-board-report
British telecoms cite Huawei's record of promptly fixing uncovered vulnerabilities.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-huawei-security-vodafone/vodafone-found-security-flaws-in-huawei-equipment-in-2011-2012-idUKKCN1S60NA
"Vodafone, the world’s second-biggest mobile operator, said it had found security vulnerabilities in two products and that both incidents, first reported by Bloomberg, had been resolved quickly."
"BT, Britain's biggest fixed and mobile operator, said that over the course of more than 10 years of working with Huawei it had not identified any security breaches or evidence of unsolicited communications."
4
Who owns Huawei? No one can answer this question. Who are we negotiating with, a corporation or the Chinese government? Who are we allowing to build out infrastructure?
Huawei says it is owned by its employees, but if millions of employees can produce no annual statement documenting what they own and what it's worth than it's a meaningless answer. Is there a board of directors? By-laws? Crickets
How can Huawei tender contract bids for an entire communications system for less than its closest size competitor, Ericsson, charges for the equipment? Why would a company make an offer and be guaranteed to lose money?
Absent an answer that makes sense, it only makes sense to assume Huawei is not just "owned" by the Chinese government-Huawei is the Chinese government. It makes bids cheaply because it is in China's national interest to be building its national competitors communications networks.
This is the definition of a national security threat and any administration, indeed any nation interested in maintaining its sovereignty, would be foolish to negotiate with Huawei and agree to any contract with them.
Either there is transparency amongst Chinese companies; their actions, financial interests, and their treatment of intellectual property or business should not be conducted.
Trump is right this time. If you disagree then tell me who owns Huawei. Otherwise give credit where it is due.
125
@jkemp
I agree. Huawei seems like a total Trojan Horse.
12
@jkemp
Who owns the Trump Organization?
We don't know that either. Are they selling condos to launder money from the proceeds of international bribery and crime? Are they getting hundreds of millions of dollars from Ukrainian, Russian, and Saudi government front men to influence Trump's "executive orders"?
When Trump releases his tax returns, then come back and ask those questions.
I'd believe Ren Zhengfei over Donald Trump.
33
@jkemp
This is an excellent comment.
12
I thought the Chinese said Ms. Meng's detention in Canada was unlawful and arbitrary. Now, there's talk of negotiations! Think tariffs are working and the Chinese have much to hide.
6
The US negotiating with Huawei on the spying issues is like the British negotiating the retention of democracy in Hong Kong before the 1997 handoff to China.
3
This will be difficult as Huawei is a quasi China government enterprise.
4
JS
Given I am currently in France where Huawei phones are sold, I find it something of a stretch to describe France as a “ruthless regime.” Really!
11
Mr. Freidman:
The following story from the NY Times from 2010 tells you everything you need to know about China using its industrial power to coerce foreign governments:
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/business/global/23rare.html
In 2010, a Chinese fishing boat was fishing in the Sea of Japan without permission. The Japanese Coast Guard (JCG) asked the Chinese ship to leave Japanese waters. The Chinese Captain refused. After further discussion, his boat rammed the JCG ship and sped away. A week later, the same thing happened. This time, the JCG was ready and seized the Chinese fishing boat and arrested the Chinese Captain. The ship and crew were released, but the Captain was held for trial for ramming the JCG boat.
About a month later, all 32 Chinese suppliers of rare earth metals (REM) , without comment or warning, ceased shipping REM to Japan.
REM are essential and critical to high tech manufacturing (electric car motors, wind turbines, cell phones, etc.) and China controls 93% of the REM supply. Even REM not mined in China are shipped to China for processing because purifying these metals involves extremely toxic methods that are outlawed in most countries.
All Japanese manufacturing involving the use of REM came to a screeching halt. China demanded that the Chinese Captain be released. Eventually, the Japanese capitulated and REM shipments to Japan resumed.
China would exert the same type of pressure on the US if Huawei 5G equipment were used in the US.
30
@JTS
100% air tight proof against having anything to do with Huawei.
1
@JTS It is their freedom to control their industrial output. If a certain country does not like that, there's a simple solution: find a non-sino alternative.
Can't? Too bad. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
@Tek The solution is not so simple. This is how global war starts.
It's not often I disagree with Tom Friedman, but on this one, he's swallowed the Huawei kool-aid and totally buried the lead.
Over half way into his column, in parentheses no less, he mentions that two Canadians are being held hostage by the Chinese government in brutal conditions because of the daughter of the subject of Mr. Friedman's not-so-rare interview (he was all over the Toronto Globe and Mail in June).
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-huaweis-ceo-has-a-message-for-canada-join-us-and-prosper-in-the-5g/
In that Canadian interview, he is quoted as saying he wants our Minister of Justice to ignore the rule of law and intervene to free his daughter. And, "If Canada is prepared to initiate an exchange – freeing Ms. Meng – “we will start our part of the work,” Mr. Ren said, suggesting Huawei might then advocate for the release of the two Canadians.
Funny how those are the same lines the Chinese government has been pushing at us, along with 'reflecting on our mistakes'. I think Mr. Friedman should reflect further on this column. As we like to say in Canada, he got 'snowed.' Big time.
17
The US position against Huawei is particularly intriguing. Just as the European empires of old rely on military might to force open foreign markets or to seize land and resources outright, the US is using all tools available in its arsenal to stop Huawei, even when it has no domestic producers of 5 g technology. Huawei already has little to no foot print in the US because US has "banned" sale of its cell phone by major carriers, and government agencies also are forbidden to purchase its equipment. Now it wants other countries to not buy Huawei's equipment, and for US suppliers to stop providing parts or software adds on to Huawei's phone.
May be the truth of Huawei's built in back door is closer to Trump's claim that Hurricane Dorian will or have hit Alabama, and Alabama will qualify for disaster aid. The refugees from Jamaica, on the other hand, will have to get a visa to come into the US if they cannot afford to fly and have to come by boats.
4
The problem with allowing Huawei to build telecommunications infrastructure isn't limited to the factors listed by Mr. Friedman such as backdoors, which have been elucidated elsewhere.
A key unmentioned problem is allowing the Chinese Communist Party to have a string upon which to pull if a country does not toe the Party line. What if 10 years from now, a Canadian journalist writes an article detailing how Xi Jin Ping's daughter is now engaging in corrupt practices? Instead of detaining Canadians in China, why not just withhold critical telecommunications infrastructure that would have been supplied by Huawei to Canada?
The Chinese Communist Party likes to promote "win-win" deals with countries. But, making the Chinese Communist Party lose face, challenging them as the true embodiment of the Chinese people, or simply disagreeing with them on something unrelated to a deal makes them feel justified to them unilateral action. I wouldn't let our telecommunications infrastructure be subject to the glass heart of the Chinese Communist Party.
5
Underlying much of the 5G discussion is... why is there no US manufacturer of this nex gen equipment, but China is the leader and Europe has two (but expensive)? Is it because the Chinese are so much smarter? Is it because Huawei gets almost free money from the government but our almost free money is not quite as cheap, and Europe “burdens” businesses with living wages, taxes, environmental rules, and other impediments the Chinese don’t bother to worry about? Forget the high tech and Econ jargon; what’s the grift? Do the Chinese count on a supply chain of items that fell off a truck and an army of slaves kept in their place by the government... or are America’s businesses just too short sighted and risk averse to compete these days?
5
@Norman
Then go live there. I would rather stay in the US and wait a little longer for a 5G technology, developed, produced and distributed by a US company. I am quite happy with my current 4G.
@Norman it's always easier to get things done in a dictatorship, if that's how you want to live
@Pottree
Yes, it's because they're smarter than us. Their colleges only charge $2,000 a year. They are competing with us for the fastest computer in the world; sometimes we're ahead, sometimes they're ahead.
For your information every industrial country subsidizes business and technology. The US government created the internet. All the big technology companies have big government contracts, often the biggest, most profitable contracts they have. Many scientists and engineers, particularly in aerospace, served in the military. And of course the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health fund most of our university-based basic research.
Maybe Chinese communism is just a better system for developing a modern economy.
4
Huawei is under the control of the totalitarian communist party of China, and that is how the US, and other countries, should view it. Why do Friedman and so many other opinion writers continue to make it sound like Huawei might plausibly be what it wants us to believe, an independent company? It is owned by a union that is under the direct control of the communist party. The company follows the orders of the party, and of course, Xi Jinping. Period. Pretending otherwise is foolish, and plays right into the hands of the Chinese dictatorship.
5
Huawei is simply an arm of the Chinese Communist Party. Like everything else in China it must do what the Party says. Thus any deal with it is meaningless. That can be cancelled at any time a the whim of Mr Xi.
4
@Grace
A deal with Google can be cancelled at any time at the whim of Mr. Trump.
1
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/technology/who-owns-huawei.html
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3372669
I don't trust any plans Huawei may have.
3
You might read this opinion piece in your newspaper of record, it suggests that any infrastructure (i.e. telecommunications) dealings with Chines companies puts U.S. cybersecurity at grave risk. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/10/opinion/nsa-privacy.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
4
I think Huawei is desperate to sign a deal. Let America and Trump follow US agenda, not the Chinese one. USA should outright ban Google and all major US applications like Facebook, Linkedin, Youtube, Instagram etc on all Huawei smartphones. Every such device is a spying tool of every's world citizen that is using such a device
3
The Justice Department is Trump's personal law firm headed by his Trump's own private lawyer, William Barr. The interests of the American people do not enter into their actions.
7
All they have to do is hold their next Board of Directors meeting at Doral and they will get everything they want from the Donald.
6
The premise of this article, that Huawei *might* not be a apparatus of the repressive communist government, is a nonstarter.
There exists so much corroborated evidence in domestic and foreign news reporting that Americans should simply accept it as fact that Huawei is almost *certainly* an espionage arm for China and on that basis should be permanently excluded from present negotiations on trade with China.
3
This is a very intractable problem because neither Trump nor China is good friends with the truth.
1
The Chinese government has bullied many companies during the Hong Kong protests and expects public expression of allegiance and submission from CEOs or their firing if otherwise as seen for Cathay Pacific. To even assume that Huawei is not acting on behalf of the Chinese government is ludicrous. In the meantime the communications of the Chinese Diaspora is closely monitored by censors on WeChat while agitators rail against HK protesters on Twitter and Facebook, all banned in China like Google. Banning Huawei makes sense as long as these policies continue.
4
If China allows Trump full unfiltered access to Trump real estate empire , Huawei will be off the black list. No exaggeration
3
Clearly the Huawei case now calls for a meeting of those who can negotiate commerce, diplomacy, intellectual property rights and a respect for justice. Justice comes to the forefront for those Canadian citizens who have witnessed Canadian border security take orders to restrain and hold now for legal proceedings related to US charges. The result is that two Canadian citizens, innocent of any wrongdoing, are played as chips in the present stranglehold they are held (a parenthesis in this column, but primary for Canadians who care sorely.) So far the Canadian Liberal government has seen agricultural products also punished by China policy. Time for a change in leadership, at the very least.
@Soleil
Yes, Xi must go!
1
According to this article:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-qualcomm-m-a-broadcom-5g-idUSKCN1GR1IN
"The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which vets acquisitions of U.S. corporations by foreign companies, said the Broadcom takeover risked weakening Qualcomm, which would boost China over the United States in the 5G race.
...
Qualcomm (QCOM.O) is the dominant player in smartphone communications chips, making half of all core baseband radio chips in smartphones. It is one of the last big U.S. technology companies with a major role in mobile communications hardware"
So sanctioning Huawei makes sense unless, as Mr Friedman suggested, they license their technology to US manufacturers.
1
The reason that "the United States...has no indigenous 5G networking manufacturer" is because of people like Friedman, who have been telling us for the past twenty-five years that manufacturing wasn't important, so we should just offshore all those millions and millions of jobs that paid enough to support a middle-class lifestyle.
And, they said, while we were at it, we may as well export the innovation and world-leading technology that America created along with them. In fact, we may as well just give them away for free, in many cases.
Shareholder value would increase, and all that.
Globalization would lift all boats!
And those awesome innovators out there in that magical place called Silicon Valley would "make the world a better place"!
What's not to like?
Well, there is now abundant empirical data that irrefutably shows that globalization failed.
And we traded those manufacturing jobs for jobs stacking shelves at Big Box retailers and driving for Uber.
And we've only just begun to confront the dark side of technology, which is already enough to make you wish the Internet was never invented.
But the society-destabilizing effects of technology are about to go exponential.
And now the two pillars of Friedman's disastrous worldview over the past decades--technology and globalization--are intersecting in an extraordinarily dangerous way.
And so the CEO of Huawei invites him to resolve what is a legitimate crisis.
You can't make this stuff up.
4
@TB As I mentioned in an earlier comment, US companies are leaders in most of the technologies that compose the 5G ecosystem. The one subsystem that is not made by any US-based companies is base stations, and I'm aware of two startups that will negate that.
Motorola and Lucent were once leading base station vendors. Both fell not to globalization, but to mismanagement. Both were ultimately acquired by Nokia, and their former R&D facilities in Illinois and New Jersey are critical to Nokia's 5G network solution.
Instead of discussing the merits of Huawei's modest proposal, relayed by Mr. Friedman, most commenters are repeating the same tropes about China that have circulated for decades.
It really speaks to the fact that China represents not one thing, but rather a constellation of things, to different Americans at different times. Businesses want access to the huge Chinese market. The military wants to contain or control China's regional influence. American consumers want cheap goods but not at the expense of manufacturing jobs. And of course, politicians are too happy to scapegoat China instead of taking hard, substantive steps to prepare our economy for the future.
We're at the point where even holding a dialogue is dismissed out of hand. Why shouldn't we have a talk?
14
@SS
Good questions, Lets look to history for guidance.
We had an oppressive regime in Germany under Hitler and countries in Europe employed a policy of appeasement instead of trying to contain and limit him.
On the other hand, we had a oppressive regime in the USSR which we actively contained and challenged and made it difficult for them in every part of the world.
Which approach are you suggesting we take with the oppressive regime in China?
3
And what is their plan for ending their war with Canada? All they did was follow their treaty obligations with the US, but China in return arrested Canadians and ended agricultural imports. And Canada was one of the consumer markets that actually likes Huawei!
3
The saddest part about all of this is that the issue of trust extends from Huawei to our White House. How do we know who is telling the truth here? Even if the Trump administration were to show us something that would support its position, I'm not sure anyone would, or should, believe it. This is what happens when the President takes a Sharpie to a weather map and politicizes the weather forecast. Government succeeds when the citizens trust that it tells the truth and does the right thing. All of that trust is gone, and will take a long time, if ever, to return.
12
@MPS
Perfect logic, by that measure I agree with every oppressive regime out there that Trump might be against.
Random question: can the people of China even read this article behind their "Great Firewall"?
Didn't their Communist Party deliberately create two Geopolitical // Telecommunication spheres by imposing an Information Iron Curtain?
For that matter, is it wrong to worry about inviting the creators of that Firewall to set up shop inside our network // homes // government agencies?
Maybe the US should have invited the Soviets to bid on critical national infrastructure. Perhaps that would that have made for a more prosperous and peaceful world.
14
@Diogenes
Hear, hear!
@Diogenes
As far as I understand, most people in China who are interested in this topic are able to read this article. "Great Firewall" is not nearly as omnipotent as you imagine.
2
@FreedomFair
A cursory search online reveals that the vast majority of Western websites are unavailable in China. These include the NYT, CNN, Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, as well as Google. Not sure how to reconcile that with your comment but those are not the kind of restrictions that suggest that we’re dealing with an open, transparent, trustworthy government.
"While she has been awaiting extradition to the United States in a Vancouver mansion, though, Beijing has detained two Canadians in China, in solitary accommodations and under brutal conditions, so as to force an exchange..."
The paragraph above says it all. That's what this trade war is about. What world will you want to live in, in the future? A world dominated by China in which there are no rules of laws or a world dominates by the US despite its imperfection. Nobody should trust anything coming from Communist China. Their stated goal is to rule the world in the next future and it would be foolish for the US to help China in its effort.
There was an excellent piece in this paper today by an N.S.A official about future threats to the US. And technology was high on that list.
No, Mr trump should not entertain any truce with Huawei. The company is just a tool that Beijing will use any time it sees fit. Why take that risk?
As for the US companies complaining about losing market share in China, just maybe, for once they have to learn that even capitalists can be patriotic. I know the only thing that matters to them is the almighty dollar. But my freedom and those of future generations trump their greed.
Unless China opens up, let it be two Internets, one for those who want an open Internet and one for those like Russia or China that while closing up their Internets to the outside world, use the openness of our Internet for their own advantage.
18
@Chaks
Who made the first arrest? China should not have retaliated against innocent Canadians, but we started it by arresting a Chinese businessperson for trading with Iran, which is none of our business.
A US empire and a Chinese empire are not the only alternatives. We can make a world where both governments mind their own business and don’t interfere with the citizens of the other.
5
@HO
By that logic, Huawei started it first by breaking multiple laws in the US, which are definitely our business.
Here's where there is a true difference, in Canada and the US we have a true independent judiciary and laws that produce equal treatment (for the most part). In China, people are jailed for saying (or thinking) something against the a political party and those people can be held in tortuous conditions for the rest of their lives. People are jailed simply for retribution against other countries. That's called hostage taking and I'm shocked that you don't think that's a problem.
5
I think the best position from which to negotiate with China would be one where the US is truly export competitive with China in markets outside China and the US. Unfortunately the current US strategy has resulted in a skyrocketing dollar, about 10% higher against the basket of currencies, and even more against the Chinese Yuan. Mathematically that is equivalent to imposing a 10% tariff on our own exports - including farm products. Very self - defeating.
Yet, 10% overall cheaper imports (which actually outweigh the tariffs) has pushed consumer spending up and helped some manufacturers with domestic consumption.
A competitive dollar exchange rate is a vital leg of the stool to prevent further erosion of US mfg and hopefully even expand it. Unfortunately even this paper ran an opinion piece "The factory jobs aren't coming back ..." just a few days ago - a short sighted and defeatist attitude. Like we can get by with a service economy of investment fund subsidized taxi rides forever.
2
Currently, there are only four major global telecom network equipment manufacturers: Ericsson (Sweden), Nokia (Finland), Samsung (S. Korea) and Huawei (China). Aside from China, the United States is the largest market for telecom networking equipment in the World. Twenty years ago, it was rumored in the industry that Huawei was "copying" key components of Ericsson & Nokia equipment, incorporating similar versions in Huawei equipment, thus jump-starting their market penetration around the World.
Now, at the dawn of 5G, one can argue that Huawei is now more advanced in the rollout of 5G than any of the other manufacturers. Huawei offers very aggressive pricing, and they are at the cutting edge of of the latest technology. The other manufacturers are seeking to protect their marketshare by encouraging restrictions on Huawei's power.
7
@Silvio M
Probably allowing stock buybacks killed our chances at 5G. Why take the risk, when there is no risk to sending up stock price by boosting per share earnings so the best and the brightest can time stock options to maximize their booty. Besides, I b gone by the time, something hits the fan. Ah capitalism!
1
Any negotiating conditions with China, should include they get more concessions if they become a Democracy. Lets not forget their hatred of democratic rule as is shown by their attitude to the crackdown on Tiananmen Square and how Tank Man just "disappeared". Same could be said for Hong Kong and the arrests of teachers, lawyers, public servants, students etc etc for protesting.
Just imagine how wealthy ALL Chinese citizens could become if China was a democracy instead of a communist nation like North Korea.
No become a Democracy - NO NEGOTIATIONS
4
For a few decades there was a calculated risk that if global markets opened to China, China would evolve to become a responsible member of a global order with values of open markets and societies. Tien An Men and the sidelining of more open minded leaders like Zhao Ziyang was a warning, but China was given a 2nd chance and thanks to the hard work of former Premier Zhu Rongji, China gained entry into the WTO. With the rise of Xi Jinping and the renewed authoritarianism at home and assertiveness globally to change the very system that allowed China to prosper (most ungrateful), the calculated risk to lay a global welcome mat is over. Under Xi China is ideologically committed to a course that is anathema to free world values. As long as he or someone of his ilk is at the Chinese helm we must unfortunately change course to constrain China's technological advances that also offer military, and espionage advantages abroad, and political repression powers at home. The question is not whether Huawei is currently engaging in espionage but the fact that they are obligated to the CCP to use their networks for espionage if requested in the future. A selective decoupling from China is needed to prevent advancement in dual use technologies. China has crowded out other developing countries from opportunities for export led growth. This could be rectified by moving supply chains. Xi has created a backlash to China's rise. Hopefully his aspirations for lifetime rule will be curtailed.
6
How would the world be worse off with a 'Digital Firewall' between Chinese 5G and The-Rest-Of-The-World 5G?
If China presents a digital espionage problem, would containment be for the best?
3
China has to reverse course in several major ways, starting with the law requiring all companies in China to be extensions of the government if and when asked, requiring foreign companies to turn over their technologies, and limiting foreign participation in many sectors of their economy. Don’t hold your breath.
At the same time, the US does some of the same things, let’s be honest. I think many have lost the plot on who and what instigated the House investigation of Huawei to begin with.
Finally, while China may have hegemonic dreams, perhaps they only want a real seat at the table, and the US has to accept the fact that there’s another great power after their own decades of hegemony replete with a litany of bad actions any reasonably aware person could ramble off.
Huawei is an exceptionally capable company but their laundry is dirty too. Maybe that’s in their past.
People change, so can companies.
So Ren’s proposal is worth some consideration IF China (Xi) can agree to some meaningful changes to their current position.
8
Huawei is clearly an arm of the Chinese government. When Meng was detained in Vancouver at the behest of the U.S. justice department the Chinese government (not Huawei) retaliated against Canada. Two Canadians are still held in the conditions described here, and China has blocked import of Canadian beef, pork and canola.
Friedman notes that Canada has stood with the U.S. despite the above actions by China. However, the U.S. doesn't return the support: see Saudi Arabia actions against Canada and U.S administration's "they're both our friends", Trump's rants against the Canadian prime minister, bullying tariffs against a neighbor and long-time ally, etc.!
34
@Juno16
The last paragraph of your post illustrates why many Canadians have lost trust in the US and are boycotting US products in our stores or online.
5
@Juno16
The US put trade sanctions on Turkey after Turkey arrested the American pastor Andrew Brunson, but that doesn’t make Brunson’s church an arm of the US government. Meng should never have been arrested for doing business with Iran as it is no business of the US who Huawei does business with.
3
@HO If they use US products in their equipment then it is US business who they do business with. If you don't like it, make your own tech from what China has developed organically, then it's none of US's business. Thats the problem now isn't it, China doesn't have a modern tech industry without us machine tooling, OS, and software design tools. Go ahead and make chips without US machinery, oops, those foundries in Taiwan use US produced lithography machines and software, good luck!
1
It's not a stretch to assume Huawei does surveillance in China of Chinese citizens for the CCP, and that this is on demand and routine. Further, it's probably true, that the core technology to do this through embedded software in chips came from the NSA, stolen, but another point being the NSA was doing this here, in spite of Congress specifically voting it down in 1996. That is was secret and done in the Bush administration meant that their motives were entirely suspect, the same for any government program to spy on their citizens. (Google also does this. Recently I did a search for the phone # of the UCSF orthopedic clinic; the next day i had two feeds for home remedy knee braces. Fb cooperates in this; does the New York Times? Another point here: Google and other monopoly internet companies would still be rich from advertising without tracking. The basic intent of tracking is theft, what fascists do all the time. Even a little is not good.)
That Huawei wants to negotiate in good faith (the right phrase) to make this go away is understandable. They are the embodiment of Chinese economic progress--jobs, infrastructure, and accumulated wealth. But they have no choice but to obey their government, which is political repression at every turn (Trump and the GOP are trying to do that here). That they would export this through backdoor communications is highly likely.
I attended a class with student presentations on Huawei while in China. Like AT&T in the 1950s.
1
The key is to dis-entangle several distinct issues: 1. National security: if Huawei is willing to have the guts of its network gear torn apart and analyzed by other engineers, that addresses the concerns over “backdoors to Beijing.” 2. Anxiety over “technology leadership”: Huawei has an end to end 5G architecture but many western companies are quite advanced in components for 5G systems. Industry standards, component supply arrangements, IP licensing etc. will all contribute to the reality of de facto collaboration. And again skilled engineers can tell right away if there are any state security-friendly features on 5G designs and products. There is no need for paranoia here, either about security issues or “falling behind in the tech arms race.” 3. A political settlement in the Canadian extradition case would be standard operating procedure but the US should never go along with the narrative that seizing the Huawei CFO was politically motivated. It wasn’t I don’t think. There were sales of Huawei products to companies on the US black list and there’s is evidence that the CFO knew of the plan to skirt the sanctions. And our broad extradition treaty with Canada is quite reasonable in light of our huge shared border and mutual economic intermingling. It’s important to highlight the difference between detaining suspected criminals under the rule of law and rounding up dissidents or state enemies for purely political reasons.
7
@Cal Prof
2. There are plenty of skilled engineers at Apple,Google, Microsoft. Oracle, Cisco. etc. But how often do the release software updates because of security concerns that in most cases were discovered by outsiders? Can expect these skilled engineers to review Huawei code and find back doors?
In an argument, listen to who protests the most. Trump may be on to something. Huawei's 5G plans is the tombstone of American industry. We will go the say of Russia if we allow it. Huawei has made no effort to conceal their theft of American technology. Chinese hardliners want to win this fight. So, why let them? This is a cold war whether anyone says so or not. Let's fight it!
8
As a person who has a long history in telecommunications I can say unequvocally that Huawei got its start by stealing technology and selling products below cost. I also believe they will violate UN sanctions and do business with the most ruthless regimes on the planet like North Korea. All Chinese corporations are ultimately under the control of the government and will spy on anyone if asked to do so. We may not have a domestic manufacturer of 5G technology but is well within the U.S. interest to nurture one. Finally the real problem with having our 5G technology controlled by the Chinese government is not that they can spy on us. We can implement end to end encryption that would prevent spying. As long as you do not buy a phone or end device (security camera etc.) made by a Chinese company you would probably be safe from eavesdropping.. What people have not grasped is that Huawei could install a remotely controlled shut down system in their 5G equipment that would bring the entire 5G network down all at once. It could be built into the custom hardware chips that no one could possibly detect. The only way to restart the network would be with the help of the Chinese government. The entire U.S economy could be brought to a stand still in seconds with no recourse. That is why we should not allow the use of Huawei equipment in our 5G network. Assurances of technology sharing or other promises from Huawei will not make us any less vulnerable.
94
@JS I don't understand why the US and Silicon Valley have not been able to develop and implement 5G technology. Huawei certainly didn't steal that technology from the US since the US doesn't have the technology.
The current "American" technology is certainly not free of people getting into our existing networks and doing bad things.
Apparently Huawei products use Microsoft systems which are constantly breached by serious hackers and bad people. Huawei probably considers security problems are more likely to seep into their products through US systems on their systems.
The best we can hope for is surveillance of both China and non China products and quick updates to fix the leaks through shared processes somewhat similar to what we do today.
The US needs to develop good (perhaps better) 5G technology on a a very rapid process. This will require US government investment.
We need one solution with competitors working together to produce a great maintainable system.
If we have multiple companies producing competing products with inconsistencies from product to product we will never catch up with Huawei.
3
"Otherwise we’re heading for a two-technology world, with a Chinese zone and an American zone, and a digital Berlin Wall running right down the middle."
That is exactly the goal of the Americans who seek to decouple from China. It may help things that today Bolton is gone, but Pompeo seems to be of the same mind.
"Huawei, China’s enormous telecom networking company that Beijing sees as a crown jewel of national innovation and the Trump team sees as a giant global espionage device."
It is both. The national security concerns fear the one as much as the other. They want to limit China's "rise" to keep a step back from "peer competitor" status. They also know how much this could be used for spying, because the Americans are already doing that with their own.
Too many American exceptionalists want to do unto others what they wouldn't allow others to do to us. 5G tech is just the latest front in that. We can't really get an agreement on 5G spying controls until we are willing to do the same.
This is not really a trade dispute. It is a struggle for tech supremacy, about not allowing a peer competitor, and a struggle to decouple for the purpose of making a new cold war possible.
The trade concerns are real. They are also being used as an excuse for real motives. These same people did not do this despite the same trade issues, for decades, and are still willing to allow the same trade issues with other countries, only now it is Vietnam and Bangladesh instead of China.
3
The element that has not been discussed here is just what 5G is. The concern that China may "spy" into America's core is probably quite real--because of what 5G is. Americans and the rest of the world will be hooked up and locked into networks so comprehensive as a result of 5G that the average citizen can't imagine it today. But, 10, 15 years from today it will be so.
That should be the issue. Obviously we don't want a Chinese company to hold the key to that future. But, will be be OK with an American company knowing absolutely everything about our private lives?
11
What set this all off was the Chinese passing a law that made it mandatory -- with heavy criminal penalties for noncompliance -- for Chinese companies to cooperate with the Chinese military if requested.
If they want to repeal that law, we can work with Huawei and anyone else. If they will not repeal that law, it is inevitable that the telecommunications equipment we buy from the Chinese will be used for espionage. It is that simple.
The Chinese have very different assumptions about privacy and the primacy of the state when it comes to information about their own citizens, which is no doubt even more severe with foreigners. They are not worth the risk to partner with.
Sometimes, Mr. Friedman, I wonder who and what is influencing your choice of topics.
43
@Brian Prioleau And the US has similar laws that force companies to open up cell phone communication to our government. The US doesn't have a good reputation for developing secure communications.
The US deploying wireless data infrastructure designed and manufactured by a rival state sponsored company is absurd and I cant believe even the possibility of such a thing was not shelved years ago.
Even if we check every box and virus scan all the software, its not a good look. China specializes in mass internet surveillance and IP theft.
Would you buy meat from a cannibal?
Lets get real and come up with realistic solutions and try not to further alienate ourselves from our trade partners.
28
As a telecom tech professional, I support the banning of Huawei 5G basestations in the US and allied countries telecom networks. This might be the only decision the Trump administration has made that I agree with. I do think this article underplays the US role in wireless technology development - for example, in my view, Qualcomm is the most important 5G wireless technology supplier in the world. Other US companies, such as Qorvo, Skyworks, Intel, Marvell, and several others also play vital roles in the 5G ecosystem. Ericsson and Lucent purchase their vital semiconductor technologies from them and other giants such as Broadcom. So by no means has the US fallen behind in 5G technology - indeed, the RF and digital semiconductor companies in the US lead the world in this technology by a mile.
61
@Maury Wait a minute - The Trump Administration prevented Broadcom from buying Qualcom because (although the company is based in Singapore) its CEO is Chinese. is Broadcom also "hostile"? And Huawei was such a large customer for Qualcomm that Qualcomm lobbied against the trade ban. Are you saying that American companies have to be protected against their own decisions to do business with Hauwei, both as vendors and customers?
4
@Dan Woodard MD My experience (I worked at Broadcom, Cypress, Analog Devices, NXP) is suggests these companies feel enormous stakeholder pressure to sell to whomever they can, short of breaking the law, so, yes, I guess I do feel it is important for US national security interests to be imposed on them by the federal government. Corporations are typically not known for thinking first about how their IP might be used to the detriment of the common good...
3
This economic entanglement was a mistake from the start, drawn from the foolish wellspring of thought that China could be liberalized, if only they made cheap goods for us and provided a huge market and pool of labor for our greedy megacorporations to do what greedy megacorporations do. Thus emboldened, the wide-eyed political triumphalists ("End of History!") and the self-interested market forces got together to promulgate their joint China policy. We went along with it, too - the public - not like we had a choice, but it is clear to all that what we traded for is not a liberalizing China but a massive and highly-competent autocratic surveillance state that is now ready to export not just "shallow" goods but its ideology and approach to statehood. And why not? With the dysfunction wracking the democratic world?
We can't just cut this gordian knot, but it is probably well past time to undo more and more of the binding, strangling threads.
49
@JB
You see it. I do too. It is a clear and epic choice to support evil or to reject and stop it. I wish someone at the Times had the intellectual integrity to publish a list of bad actions the Chinese Communist government has done internally and externally, not only to America. That list would sober everyone up. I see it as if we were on the eve of WWII and American companies were selling barbwire to Nazi Germany for its concentration camps. How can we in good conscience have any commerce with China? This is not a singular isolated question about One company, it is an overarching policy against a brutal authoritarian government we indirectly underwrite. ‘Remember, there are no private companies in China. All things belong to the State. Just ask Jack Ma.
5
@JB Only because the US subverted and destroyed the hated Communist system that ruled China and replaced it with raw capitalism that has allowed China to function much more efficiently. Why did we do it? Facepalm!
@Dan Woodard MD
That is so revisionist I don’t even know where to start!
I’m pretty sure Mao & Co. knew from the start that they didn’t have a friend in the US.
Their benefactor was the USSR.
trump, our genius leader may think that Huawei presents a security threat threat but here in France where I currently staying the apparently don’t think so as I just visited the Orange mobile phone store where they sell all of their models.
2
This article is referring to basestations not smartphones - the other side of the network.
Why should the US end the Trade War ?
China is depressing Democracy in Hong Kong,
More brutally every day
Until that ends, no end to the Trade War
9
@LarsThe trade war was never about human rights. Just like the war in Afghanistan was never about women's rights. Both will be thrown under the bus for commerce and money.
2
@Lars We should end the trade war because we are losing the trade war and will help really hurt ours and the world economy.
Like everything Trump does there is no strategic plan that is thought out. Trump is just a big bully and like all bullies will come to an unpleasant end.
He has no possibility of "winning the trade war" until we all understand what the objectives are.
Maybe we need to ask, what is so wrong with American capitalism that we have no one in serious contention to provide global leadership on 5G?
39
@Bradley Bleck By what criterion? Qualcomm, Intel, Quorvo, and Skyworks are global leaders in semiconductors. 5G must be built atop a dense fiber backbone. Maryland-based Ciena is a global leader in optical networking equipment, Acacia Communications is a global leader in optical subsystems, and Corning is a global leader in optical fibers and cables.There are at least a dozen US startups developing innovations that could disrupt the wireless market model. And finally, Verizon and AT&T each have defensible claims to being "first" with 5G.
3
@Telecom Industry Analyst Hopefully none of those companies were foolish enough to move manufacturing to China.
@Telecom Industry Analyst Chinas government was clever and made 5G a national priority. The US as usual just let the market decide but the market doesn't do long term strategy.
As a computer engineer with expertise in hardware and software (and networking), I have a simple solution to the Huawei problem: Escrow.
Let Huawei and the US Govt select a mutually trusted third party. Let said 3rd party have full access to the hardware design and software source code. Let the third party check the code, compile the code and then publish the checksum.
All incoming hardware must have comparable checksums or the hardware is held/returned.
In addition, Huawei must modify the hardware to make it easy for the software checksum to be confirmed.
As a side question: Why is it that no US manufacturer can make this equipment? Have we become that bad?
24
@Kahman
Software and firmware are constantly being updated, and for good (security) reasons. It's not as simple as having a hard checksum for the rest of 5G's life cycle, and even if it was finding every backdoor is virtually impossible; look at how often we're still finding accidental ones in Windows softare and Intel firmware.
It isn't being manufactured in the US because it isn't economically viable yet. When people are willing to pay extra (or subsidize the construction enough) for 5G to manufacture the equipment with the fair wages and environmental policies we have in the US, they'll get built. China has an advantage in a highly exploitable labor force but also a centrally controlled government that pushes advancements in leaps and bounds regardless of economic viability, with 5G as with maglev and bullet trains as with massive ghost towns.
8
This approach would only work if all the microchips in the 5G basestations were designed using Verilog or VHDL (logic synthesis). At the very least, both digital memories and radio frequency (analog) microchips do not use logic synthesis design methods. There is no “checksum” for these vital components.
3
@Kahman The US lacks focus and worships the 'market'. We aren't bad at all, China just focused on 5G as a way to elbow out the US and dumped resources into making end to end equipment solutions. The market may allocate resources more efficiently but it doesn't do strategy especially geopolitical strategy.
1
The CCP owns and has control over Huawei in a way no other country does over their companies in our globalized economy. How is them installing the entirety of our next generation of communications networks not an existential threat? Mr. Friedman acts like this a singular opinion of the Trump administration, but my colleagues in cyber security (many liberal) that I've talked to applauded the move.
Ren's offer of technology transfer and allowing us to add security should be followed up, but taking this "olive branch" at face value just because Mr. Friedman had a nice interview could be disastrous. You don't plug a USB drive a friendly Chinese national gave you into a classified system just because "well you haven't proved it has a virus on it yet."
58
The first question that comes out of this is - What needs to be done to create an indigenous 5G networking manufacturer in the U.S., outside of depending on Huawei offering to share their 5G technology?
Secondly, why should we trust a company that is in reality beholden to the Chinese Government, who, if we're honest here, and based on their track record, cannot be trusted?
29
@CC
We don't need Huawei to share their tech. We just need to invest heavily in research. The US government should launch a big initiative to work with US companies to create 5G tech.
1
@Keith We already have 5G tech. The US just didn't organize companies to provide an entire end to end system like the CCP did. Here it's a bunch of individual companies with pieces of the puzzle. Huawei just put together the whole puzzle under one roof.
Ah... we live in a complicated world.
There is no doubt Huawei is a bad actor stealing technology when they can - a practice many other Chinese companies share in.
But they also have cheap, good products with huge global market share. Common business thinking says US companies can maximize profits by working with Huawei.
A couple of interesting factoids on Huawei and security.
1. Looking to Europe (Britian) ... they use Huawei but have a facility where they have complete access to source code of Huawei's products. Essentially, they can take the stuff apart to see what's in it.
2. Ironically, the NSA had completely hacked all Huawei equipment as revealed by Snowden. Must be annoying to them this was revealed.
8
It is well known that Huawei has stolen and re-sold Cisco code, down to the bugs and spelling errors in technical manuals. People say that is old news and Huawei doesn't need to steal anymore. But culture - national and corporate - doesn't change overnight.
This is not a court of law where the burden of proof is on the accuser. It is a commercial and geopolitical arena where no proof is required. Only trust is required. Huawei and China must earn - not demand - trust of their counter parties. To earn trust, they must change their behavior.
Second problem is that of state owned enterprises. They simply can not be treated as normal private sector firms. They must be treated as part of the state.
I am afraid that Trump only cares about himself - to project his image as dealmaker and to get reelected. He will capitulate on national interest just to help himself. The Chinese know that. Hence the olive branch. Be wary.
130
@Global Citizen
The Huawei/Cisco dispute was resolved in court with Huawei paying damages to Cisco. Tech companies steal IP from each other all the time, and we have a civil court system to deal with it. There’s no reason for the government’s to single out Huawei for this.
And when the government uses state authority to wreck a business, it absolutely should bear the burden of proof. That’s what due process is. This isn’t a consumer or a business partner deciding to sever relations for commercial reasons.
33
@Global Citizen
"To earn trust, they must change their behavior."
Such bravado. Yes, the authoritarian government of China and the 1.5 billion Chinese people and the $110 billion Huawei company will change their behavior because you demand it.
Do you get the point of Tom Friedman's conclusions that
"... months of impulsive Trump threats, tariffs, praises and then more threats have clearly led a lot of Chinese officials to conclude that Trump is an unstable character who always has to be seen to “win” and humiliate the other side, and therefore can’t be counted on for a big win-win deal — or even stick to it if one were agreed on. Better to let the talks drag on."
Sounds like China doesn't trust Trump! Who needs to change their behavior?
12
@HO
Nice of you to defend Huawei because they paid their fine after being taken to court. But the real question is "Did they blush (like being ashamed of bad behaviour)?" and I don't think they did.
9
Let consumers decide for themselves if they want to buy Huawei stuff (and assume the risk of spying) or not. It’s quite an overreach for our government to tell consumers, including consumers in other countries, what brand of electronics they can buy.
4
@HO Consumers cannot choose when it comes to the networking equipment, only their terminal. Obviously Huawei provides both, terminals and Networks, but the big issue here is about network suppliers.
1
@Emmanuel Toledo
Much of Huawei’s business is consumer products like cell phones and the government is targeting this too.
Regarding network suppliers, you could have some providers use Huawei and others not and see which providers consumers pick.
1
This article is referring to Huawei basestations not consumer smartphones.
Let consumers decide for themselves if they want to buy Huawei stuff (and assume the risk of spying) or not. It’s quite an overreach for our government to tell consumers, including consumers in other countries, what brand of electronics they can buy.
1
This trade dispute was started, inflamed and continued by one man, whose overarching concern is, always, to appear to be winning. Instead of spending time with nuanced responses, tactical business moves and geo-political considerations maybe they should try to figure out a way to make Trump look like a winner and then proceed with their original plans. Until then they have to put up with a trade partner whose position is always "My way or the Huawei."
3
@Rick Gage
I probably think of him as even more of an egghead than you do :)
But specifically wrt China I love him.. There's no one in the world less trustworthy than Chinese govt.
In the same vein I'd be happy if I were Chinese citizen because I expect my country to maintain technological, military and research superiority
1
"going forward every purchase of telecommunications equipment will be transformed “from a business decision into a geopolitical one — a test of national allegiances to Washington or to Beijing.”
We are already there, Tom Friedman.
China is a rising power, with the demographics, savings, and manufacturing capacity to challenge the Pax Americana we have established not only in western Europe, but throughout much of Asia. The last thing the US needs is our telecommunications and data being intercepted and manipulated by an adversary that poses a far greater threat than the Soviets ever posed at any time during the Cold War.
62