Another sign of the relative decline of US imperialism. The fact that it was unable for force the UK, its heretofore lapdog, to join in the trade war on China is telling. This far only two countries out of the more than 60 the US demanded ban Huawei have done so. Of course the whole "security" threat was simply a subterfuge to whip up more anti-Chinese sentiment. Now the problem is worse for the US because the tariffs and bans have put China on a total war footing. It doesn't matter what the US says or does now, China will bend every fiber in its being to free itself from US domination. Protectionism is always the refuge of weaker economies. Dominate nations always champion "free trade" as it serves their interests to crush weaker rivals. The growing protectionism of the US is both indicative of its weakness, and tariff wars are always preludes to shooting wars. The working people of China, the US and the world will be sacrificed on the altar of profits, in this turf war between rival gangs of billionaires. Workers in China and the US have more in common with each other than we do with "our own" ruling rich. We mustn't fall for their siren call of jingoism into wars against each other. Our enemies are at home.
5
The Trump administration has demonstrated its incompetence in addressing the issue of 5G security. Sure, the Chinese government could lean on Huawei to program malware in its network products, but the Chinese could also bribe software engineers working for competitors do do the same thing. Or they could hack installed network devices and modify the software or firmware to do the spying. Good security practice would require that all 5G hardware, regardless of manufacturer, be shown to be free of any malware.
The proper way to address 5G security would be for the US government to develop security standards for all 5G equipment. This might include requiring the hardware vendors to demonstrate that there is no malware in their products. Since network devices are usually monitored and maintained remotely, they are vulnerable to hacking. This fact suggests that the US government either require that all 5G equipment to be continually monitored and audited to ensure that there are no security breaches in the 5G network. Alternatively the US government could take on the monitoring task.
The Trump administration's effort to ban Huawei's 5G products provides absolutely no meaningful 5G security and leaves the 5G networks in the US at the mercy of any bad actor on this planet.
3
Now that UK rejected Trump's propaganda to ban Huawei while providing zero supporting evidence, Canada should rethink whether it should remain USA's lapdog, or return to Mama Queen Elizabeth. If Justin Trudeau has any self-respect at all, after being called two-face by Donald Trump, he must show some spine. Release the kidnapped Huawei executive and get the release of two Canadians held in China. The sooner the better. And sign a deal to allow Huawei 5G equipment in Canada, which is supported by Canadian telecom companies across the board.
5
Btw, our own DoD's decision to buck Commerce Dept's attempt to 'throttle' Huawei was more momentous than UK's decision to 'defy' us in this instance.
DoD must have US chip companies alive to stay on the road map of its next-gen 'networked' warfare planning (i.e. mil. 5G). Companies like Qualcomm derived 50-60% of its revenue from the greater China region. If Huawei dies, Q will go down with it, along with DoD's future plan.
Irony indeed. DoD comes to the rescue of Huawei.
2
Interesting. The trade press (for example, Light Reading) called this a UK clampdown, tough limits, and a slap in the face for Huawei. Nowadays, you need to read multiple sources to get anywhere near the truth.
2
Canada will have to make a similar decision pretty soon and a factor this article doesn't mention is the lack of trust the Trump admin (read USA) have lost from its "allies" in the last three years in making our decision.
Some of the very legitimate questions we're asking ourselves:
- Why should we trust the Trump admin/USA?
- Are the Trump admin arguments are simply to weaken Huawei and give an edge to American technology?
- Can we trust the American companies NOT to incorporate backdoors of their own in their systems...
After all Canada was declared a national security threat to the USA...
BTW, The same questions apply on our acquisition of the F-35... Could the US built in the aircraft systems that would allow it to disable the airplane? At least in part?
9
If we thought 5G was so important, we should have done something about it ourselves. We don’t have any products competitive with Huawei.
Government funding of preproduction research is a necessity. Our 5G issue is comes from the Republicans’ shutdown of government for six years starting in 2010. Federal funding of R & D took a dive starting in 2010. If we want to blame someone blame them.
84
@jerryg
Well, let's be clear.
"We" didn't cut back on education, research and the rest, Republicans did. And then they gave the money to pretend capitalists who couldn't move production (jobs) to China fast enough.
Others here seeking to lay blame on Clinton, Obama, >ugh< Bush have it wrong. These were business decisions and policy based on massive lobbying efforts.
If you're looking to waste your time blaming people look to Republicans and the masters of business.
16
@jerryg "If we thought 5G was so important, we should have done something about it ourselves. We don’t have any products competitive with Huawei."
Who is the "we" to whom you are referring in this statement? Of the three major telecom infrastructure vendors left standing, none of them is a U.S.-based company. The level of investment needed to develop 5G technology has left only a few companies able to compete in this space. While it would be naive to think that Huawei doesn't have ties to and financial support from the Chinese government, customers around the world have been left with few options. And let's not ignore the fact that the other two major competitors have long-established research and development operations in China as well. This is what happens when our country no longer actually makes things.
10
@jerryg Yes, I agree. I have been part of the government-funded R&D programs in energy in the past. The US government can afford to make risky early investments in technology. Look, for example, how much the NASA moon missions advanced technology in computers, materials and so much more. China has gotten behind many of its industries, and that has started to show impressive results. But our system of capitalism will soon leave this country severely lagging.
6
America didn’t “stumble” in its efforts. It lied. Plain and simple. It fabricated a whole canard about Huawei spying out of thin air. This myth continues to be recycled in American media today, even though the only spying found was done by the NSA hacking Huawei. See the NYT article.
The UK simply did the rational thing, sat back and asked the US to provide evidence to back their claims. They received absolutely nothing. Nada. Zero. So they concluded that the US was lying to them and correctly deduced that Huawei is more trustworthy than America is.
141
@George
"It lied". I'm not sure that's the correct explanation. Johnson has stated that the potential threats from Huawei can be contained - by only using the 5g in 'non-core' and 'non-critical' telecoms infrastructure. The only counter to that is the 'Brts too dumb to know what they're doing' argument.
There's little dispute about the competition. European 5g offerings from Nokia and Ericsson are significantly more expensive and, in any case, Europe is no longer viewed as an unconditional ally. The same two issues apply to US 5g tech which sadly, is also the most technically inferior rival.
It's true that the US was given all opportunities over 12 months to make a convincing 'spyware' argument. Further more, Cisco (US) was given the chance to improve either on price or system performance. Nothing was forthcoming. Argument lost.
21
@nolongeradoc
Cisco doesn't make what Huawei, Ericsson, and Nokia make, so you've got an apples to oranges thing going there.
.
And Huawei is so cheap because they're massively subsidized. They're effectively buying market share. One ought to ask why.
14
To say that Huawei is more trustworthy than America is a bit of a stretch - all Chinese companies and citizens are mandated to work with their government by law. The Chinese government challenges the current world order not just economically but by attacking rights and freedoms also (has no regard for human rights, actively developing technology systems to control and oppress).
To leave any part of critical technology infrastructure in Huawei’s hands is playing with fire, especially when it will touch areas of transportation and and communication. Why provide any leverage at all to a company that must yield to a government that is attempting to erode basic human rights/freedom and hasn’t even tried to make it a secret that they are looking to cease hegemonic power.
It’s a shame that this current US administration has really damaged our relationship with allies looking for short sighted economic gain, hopefully the Europeans can manage being more strategic.
8
Every European knows that it is far more likely to be spied on by the US government than by the Chinese.
Of course, there is no reason to trust the Chinese government but warnings coming from the USA are a bit rich.
201
@Ronald Grünebaum
Since you are spied on regardless of who it is, pick the better side whose values are aligned with yours. In this case it happens to be the Chinese government if I am getting it right.
10
@Ronald Grünebaum yes, yes and let’s not forget all those Chinese citizens that died storming the beaches at Normandy.
6
@John
Wrong, you pick the side which is less likely to spy on you. Which is Huawei. End of story.
8
"Britain defies Trump plea"...uh, you do know Britain is a sovereign nation with global influence. People in America may be hostage to the egregious, corrupt whims and paranoia of Mr. Trump but the British are not.
I suspect most allied countries would do the same. Mr. Trump and his complicit administrations excuses, conspiracy theories and criminal bent have no credibility outside the borders of the United states! Allies will give nothing but lip service and bide their time until November.
These countries have watched as Mr. Trump ordered assassinations, betrayed the Kurds, the invasion of Syria by Turkey, with holding aide to Ukraine and the refusal to extradite Ms. Scoola for a crime she would have been prosecuted for in the US. Not to mention Mr. Trumps rhetoric about NATO.
What's not to love? Honestly, I am quite happy when anyone defies Trump. It's too bad the Republican Senate can't find the courage to do the same!
4
The need to avoid Huawei products in the interests of national security by all countries is so obvious that no lobbying by the US should be necessary. Further, no blame for the decision lies with anyone other than the British. Understandable contempt for the US fool of a president and his administration Should play no role in such a decision.
3
Britain is as good as the USA on information security. the gchq has a good reputation.
if they say it's ok, it's ok. it means all of this is a Trump creation to put pressure on Huawei.
not that we didn't already know but it's good Britain says it also.
5
Excellent news! A loss for Benedict Donald is a win for our stumbling Republic
1
I have no knowledge of the technical/espionage abilities of all this but any defeat that shows Trump he's not the emperor of the earth is good for the earth.
1
The better winning strategy for the US is to come up with better products and win over Haiwei at the market place. The dark alley vilification by CIA disseminated by mainstream media will only put the US further behind. technology. The US -the strongest l superpower who had put a man on the moon should able to defeat Huawei in a market place easily without using the sinister low-blow with half-baked disinformation.
Instead of taking a high road based on merits, the sinister plot initiated by the US has backfired and the US is surrounded by Haiwei technology from Mexico, South America, Mid-east, Asia and Europe.
2
all of this is irrelevant. the world will never recover from Trump. RIP Earth.
3
better use Huawei than Google or Facebook
3
A few comments here:
It is inconceivable that Huwaei, a private & very successful company, would ever allow the CCP to interfere in its business. Just one instance, detected by other countries' strong protection systems, & its business would be finished.
Canada has been working on pilot projects across its very big country using Huwaei, Erickson & Nokia. Huwaei is highly regarded & well liked. It sells a lot of phones here. But Canada won't put all its eggs in one basket.
Canada made it plain a while ago that it would work with Huwaei based on the technical merits of the matter. Just like the UK, it stressed that it had the systems to detect & manage any exposures.
IMO Canada & the UK ignore US threats about disrupting intelligence sharing. Canada & the UK are vitally important to US Intelligence. Especially Canada, where the cross border intelligence sharing & cooperation is amazing. All the way from the top level agencies thru the levels of law enforcement to local police depts & Border Protection on both sides. Both countries benefit enormously from this close cooperation.
IMO Huwaei will get a big piece of the 5G market in Canada.
BTW the ongoing Meng Wanzhou case will have no effect whatsoever in these matters.
1
America under Trump has touted Country First. That is, if we can be America First and put down our perennial allies, then Britain can be Britain First and do a deal that is financially better, it seems, than what any American company floated, regardless of any prior friendship or alliance.
Everything is transactional, right?
2
It's Britain's business period. The U.S. sure wouldn't like the idea of another country trying to tell us what to do.
6
Britain's decision is the result of
Mr. Trump's treatment of allies. It
is only way traffic, do what USA
wants and forget what you want.
Recently USA rejected request to
extradite Ms Scoola wanted in
Britain for killing a teen ager. She
fled Britain after the accident. Now
USA expects Britain to comply with
with its demand. Britain has
been using Huawei equipment for 15 years and found no evidence of
espionage. USA has given no evidence
to support its case except suspicion.
NSA itself has hacked into other
countries' system including Huawei's
and hacked the phones of Angela
Merkle of Germany and Dilma Roussef,
former president of Brazil. Pot calling
the kettle black.
7
The UK is the new China, complete with new AI-powered cameras everywhere. Somehow, CCTV everywhere didn't solve their problems, so now they are doubling down with Brexit plus mass AI surveillance. I guess any country that pretends to have a royal family as head of state never actually got rid of tyranny and authoritarianism.
2
@David I get all that but you must agree that it's none of our business, right?
1
@David First and foremost, when you use the word authoritarianism, currently our own president is the person (and family) that should strike long, loud and large warning notes. His associations, his lack of condemnations and his outright acceptance and approval of some of the world's most authoritarian leaders is stark evidence of his true nature. Now, whether or not CCTV in the UK is similar to the monitoring of Chinese citizens - and assignment of their "social scores" is certainly debatable in my view. As with many, many things that can be used for good as well as evil, the choice is with the user(s). The Brits have clearly chosen a foolish path of following their own buffoon in Boris but we here in America can hardly say anything given the ultimate buffoon we now have as our president.
2
We should remember that under both Labour and Tory governments, Britain has encouraged Russian oligarchs to invest in London, in the process making it much more difficult for ordinary Britons to live there, and despite the hostility to Britain shown by the Putin government. Why would a political class with such a track record worry about Huawei merely because Chinese law requires Chinese companies to cooperate with the security services? Nothing must be allowed to get in the way of developing "Singapore on the Thames", as the expression goes.
2
Question: I am not a computer person, but if I interact through my iPhone or laptop with somebody using Chinese equipment and does that put my equipment at risk?
2
@Harriet Katz no.
@Harriet Katz no. Not the type of equipment that Haewei is being limited to in the U.K. I think you’ll find Facebook much more of a threat to your data
2
@Harriet Katz
Your iPhone or laptop are already made-in-China.
Joke aside, all data transmission, including unauthorized ones ending up in China, must go thru either the undersea fiber optic cables or via SAT, both of which are monitored by your service provider & our own government.
1
The point to banning Huawei from providing 5G or any other sensitive infrastructure isn't that Huawei is or is not currently spying -- maybe they aren't.
It's because China can easily force Huawei to do so in the future. And yes, we are guilty of that, too, as Snowden revealed.
But China, being a dictatorial authoritarian power, can *much more easily* force the hand of its native companies than the US can its own native companies.
Witness the epic encryption fights we are having in the US. In China, there are no such fights. If Xi Jinping, who granted himself a president-for-life upgrade, wants spy-tech in Huawei's telecom gear, he'll have it. No muss, no fuss. And there's a good chance we'd never know.
Even more reason why rock-solid end-to-end encryption is so important.
2
The British are the masters of pragmatism and diplomatic weaving. Trump is the master of chaos. I suspect if he had been a bit more thoughtful we'd have sided with his view, but you need to see the US from European eyes. His utterings on trade and allies make him more unpopular than Putin and Winnie the Pooh put together. Will he, won't he, can he can't he? Well europe isn't waiting and is moving forward with its own agendas.
9
@Richard
When it comes to intelligence sharing under the Five Eyes agreement, I'm afraid your good points aren't nearly good enough.
1
@Richard Pragmatic Brexit? Pragmatic royalty? The UK is barely united, and it's kingdom is long gone, nearly irrelevant.
1
It's almost as if there were people out there who would benefit from China and Russia owning the West.
1
It's almost as if there were people out there who would benefit from America owning the West.
4
This is right decision. It's ridiculous to ban a company that have proven track record 15 years on primary reason is on country of origin and on potential possible threat that China can force Huawei's hand in future? If that's the logic, might as well ban all tech products or tech parts with origin from China as they all could potentially be future threat. Also what's with this labeling China as evil just because they have different ideology from us?
8
America would be against China even if they were a democracy. It is about your preoccupation with being top dog. Other countries realize this. Their press says so quite openly. That and perceived extortion (sanctions) does not go down well.
12
@Andreas
You're partly right. America is preoccupied with being top dog. (What the press says about this is irrelevant, however.)
But until recently, at least, we were also preoccupied with our own security. Now that we've got a president who's working with other world leaders for his own personal benefit ... not so much.
As for sanctions being "extortion" ... still stewing from Apartheid sanctions, are we? They're certainly not extortion. They're how civilized countries attempt to get countries that are behaving in an uncivilized manner to change their ways. They're how wars are avoided.
2
It was not China who spied on German Chancellor Merkel. The fuzz about Huawei has never been potential backdoors to China, instead, no backdoors to NSA. Europe knows that by mixing Huawei gears in their 5G network, they are literally worry-free of being spied on. This threats of cutting off intelligence sharing just doesn’t sell, since no ones want a powerful binocular in exchange of leaving their bedroom windows ajar so someone can keep peeping in.
6
How about stealing their technology and then replacing it with European or American copycats?
It's what they do to us.
3
If only we had developed and started marketing 5G technologies before the Chinese, we wouldn't even be in such a situation. The whole 5G push in the US was started by the government's alarm at China's progress in the technology. American Telecom Giants are more than happy to sit on their behinds and suck up profits.
3
Good. Now the Germans can ignore the Americans too.
The Chinese were threatening to give the German car companies a rough time in China.
2
This is exactly what DJT vigorously promotes on the world's stages. Do what's best for you! How can he object to "UK first"?
5
Oh, it an't over until the fat lady sings. Britain is using this as a chip in the upcoming free trade negotiations.
1
Trumps objections are predicated on jealousy.
2
Good for them.
4
Next generation may not matter-- LEO internet satellites blanketing the earth may make a lot of the terrestrial infrastructure less important. The primary advantage of 5G is low latency and QoS, not watching cat videos more easily; this is rarely understood as far as I can tell. Still out on whether satellites can match the QoS characteristics.
As for 5G and the Americans, well Americans failed to invest the engineering power ("people are a cost center" attitude in corporations, thanks McKinsey and ok.Wallstreeters, Boeing as a poster child) and now the Americans are looking from the outside in. It is hard to be sympathetic when a giant tax break is handed out, and the net effect is a giant round stock buybacks not investment in the future. Now it is the future. Try not to saw off your foot for a quick euro the next time.
5
Thanks,
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
1
The Times got their title wrong. It should read "Britain ignores Donald Trump's Lunatic Ravings."
7
Yet another sign that the US cannot go it alone, especially under Trump. Why would any country come begging to him? The world can survive without the US, and that is becoming increasingly obvious in today's world. Trump has shown to be an unreliable ally with his withdrawal from the Paris accords, the Iran nuclear pact, and threatening NATO.
3
Seems like a reasonable compromise. The issue was never one of spying, because any intelligence data would be highly encrypted before being sent over any communications network. However, it’s entirely possible that a company beholden to a hostile foreign government could shut the network down during times of conflict so limiting the max percentage of the network that would potentially be at risk makes sense. Hopefully, care will be taken when creating the network that it will still function if attacked in this way. Also, the added cost of protecting against and dealing with this issue should be added to the cost of goods being provided by potentially hostile suppliers.
3
Even the US Military is using Huawei, how much one can only speculate. However as to the UK, I would say "don't share secure information with them (UK) as they will no longer be safe", and how about a US Company developing a 5G Network?
3
@JHM
It was Trump who released UK 5Eye data to the world, endangering the relationship, not China and it is the US deeply embedded in commercial China, not the UK
6
US Telecom companies have little to no incentive to improve or innovate. They keep merging with one another, forming these massive conglomerates while still keeping the brands separate, maintaining an illusion of choice. Any time a foreign competitor comes in, all they need to do is pressure the government to exclude them for one reason or another.
2
Trump is going to take this personally. He has been very supportive of Boris all through the Brexit turmoil. Wonder how this is going to play out in its post-brexit trade deals with the US.
2
@techangelist I agree, so the U.K. government didn’t take this decision lightly.
1
@techangelist
USA trade agreement isn't a priority to British. Negotiating and signing it with the EU is and publicly has been stated so if care to look it up and confirm about these facts by their government on the record.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-22/u-k-s-javid-snubs-trump-trade-offer-saying-eu-deal-comes-first
The encryption can be done at higher, application, levels. At the lower transport, hardware levels ... it will just be transporting encrypted data.
2
I am fairly certain the US understands this, don't let Trump fool you into believing this is actually about security.
2
The merits, or lack thereof, of Huawei, is a separate point for debate. What is more interesting to me is you (Trump) berate, alienate and torment your allies and then act surprised when they don't want to listen to the things you tell them. This is one small domino, but this is also a sample of what is to come in other world issues. The United States (Trump) abandoned the chairman's seat at the world table. Now you live with the consequences when someone else asserts themselves and sits there.
25
So the 5 eyes intelligence organizations share their information unencrypted over public networks? Who knew.
4
As the saying goes, ‘You Reap What You Sow’. The US emerged from WWII as the world’s leading economic and military power. This began to change in the mid- 1970’s as US corporate profits began to stagnate/decline, a consequence of increased competition from rebuilt economies in Europe- mainly Germany (Marshall Plan), Japan/Korea (Korean and Vietnam wars) and more recently China. In response, large corporations and their functionaries in government: 1) enacted multiple tax cuts for the wealthy, 2) attacked labor and outsourced manufacturing jobs to Mexico, China and other low-wage platforms, 3) de-regulated finance, 4) reduced spending on infrastructure and capital investments, and 5) spent $ trillions on the Pentagon and war. Since the 2008 financial implosion, the FED has provided >$5 Trillion of ultra-cheap money, which along with Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, have been used by Wall St. for share buybacks, purchasing stock futures and to sustain [still] insolvent banks. The poster child for this is Boeing, which since 2013 has spent ca. $43 billion on share buybacks rather than investing in development and manufacturing of new aircraft that are competitive with Airbus. Huawei builds the best and most cost effective 5G hardware. US tech companies have not made the necessary investments to be competitive in 5G. No amount of jingoistic rhetoric, tariffs, trade wars, etc. changes this reality.
14
I look forward to all of Britain panicking when they realize that all of those phones have seriously compromised their national security. As if it wasn't abundantly clear that they would be used as weapons against people who value a cheaper price at all costs. China has proven itself again and again to be untrustworthy, with it's largest manufacturers being directly run and led and influenced by the government and used for national security purposes. Who in their right mind would think those phones would be sold in good faith?!
5
@Caroline for starters, Huawei have been operating in the U.K. for the last 15 years. They are not allowed anywhere near sensitive areas or equipment, and are monitored by our security authorities.
Our government has been accessing the risks of allowing them access to the new 5g rollout for the last year. This has not been a hasty decision
Our security experts have stated that all risks can be managed
The U.S. on the other hand, has been unable to provide any proof of the risks they are warning us about
So it all comes down to how much we trust Trump. Enough said
3
@Caroline I dont think we’ll be panicking any time soon, the American government has over the last 20 or so years farmed the personal data of it citizens on scale far beyond any other country. All your telephone companies were complicit in the gathering of data to the point when they were foind out the government had to introduce legislation to ensure they would not be sued, check out your patriot law and the access it has given your intelligence agencies full access to your information (not just identified person’s of hi threat)
Amazon supplies a significant amount of cloud to your defense sytems and the last i checked they had almost everyone on the planets information whicj will be freely available via an intelligence back door
In summary’s Caroline its already to late for me or you to panic they’ve got what they need
3
@Caroline
Except of course that this about network eq rather than ‘phones!
2
Now every time China does something else to shock the senses of the free world, the UK will have to assertively protest, or else appear to be kowtowing.
1
China is going to defeat us not using their military but by planting spyware in each and every product we voraciously consume from them, then exacting revenge by shutting down our access to our precious devices and data. It’s brilliant on their part, and sad that we so willingly let them do so.
2
@CP How do you the CIA hasn't already done it to US tech we all buy? Alexa listens to us and facebook monitors us as closely as China CCTV's its own people
2
@CP : China is not going to "defeat" The US. Trump is doing it better than the Chinese could.
1
What could Huawei possibly bring to the table that the US hasn't already started and implemented? Spy on Americans....we're already helping with that. Spy on Intel Communities...already doing that. Secure the net...a few ways to get that done I imagine, ie use a secured network.
I know it's a brave new world and who knows what comes next. As a group, I'm hoping America has the smartest IT folks in the world, why stop at Huawei?
2
"Penny wise and pound foolish" - something which the British should well understand.
Saving a bit upfront and making their national security, intellectual property, business communications, every bit of telecommunications passing through the network, vulnerable to skimming by the Chinese government, is more than foolish. It's playing with fire.
The history of Chinese hacking, stealing technology, stealing military hardware designs, etc., should be enough to justify buying all new internet/telecom equipment from western companies - which closely monitor if the Chinese have hacked their hardware/firmware during equipment production.
30
@WRH
The Chinese build a variety of "American" cars in China with minimal inspection of their hardware and electronics. How difficult is it to include an extra few lines of code in the electronic systems or an extra "stamp" on an engine or body part that listens for certain "items" and transmits them periodically to ......
In these times there is electronic information flowing throughout the world. Try and stop it ??????
@WRH
Yes, agree wholeheartedly. On top of all you've said is the icing on the 5G cake, ie, that with the stunning speeds, they can now download your whole server farm before you can even reach for the plug. A bit of an exaggeration, but not much.
.
It's insane, with all that evidence just staring them in the face for decades, to let this company continue to build in their national infrastructure.
2
@WRH Forgive the rest of the world for not buying into MAGA. There are other options out there and the fact that other countries are kicking the tires of these options proves what a disaster this adminstration is. Never thought I'd see this day.
8
Trump thinks he can make other countries cower. There are countries which get a lot of money in "foreign aid" from the US and Trump holds it over them. Countries like Britain need to stand up and tell Trump to get lost. China is waiting to fill in but the WH is too incompetent to understand that. Many countries are finding that Trump and his stooges are too unreliable for business.
30
@pb Trump has nothing to do with it. At most, he will be gone in 5 years.
The threat of China will be there for much longer. Especially when you look at the past and think of the future.
China is not unreliable. They consistently violate intellectual property rights as well as use companies to further their country's ambitions.
The argument of Trump is used improperly here as this is a much larger problem.
10
Check!
1
If Trump had better relations with our NATO allies, he might have a few foreign affairs victories, rather than the string of defeats our country has incurred since we elected a president who told us he believed allies were an unnecessary burden.
38
Is the sun is setting on the British Empire and rising on the Chinese Empire?
Will the sun never set on the British Empire nor rise on the Chinese Empire on Masterpiece Theater on PBS?
3
@Blackmamba
Glad to see you're still posting, was worried you might be the original Kobe.
.
Guessing you're a fan of his. If so, I'm sorry for your loss.
.
PS - Sun set on the Brits 75 years ago.
3
Why doesn't the US built its own 5 G technology. After all US has put a man on moon 50 years ago, something NO country has been able to do till now.
2
@2Pat
Interestingly, 5G technology was invented in the US. Its just that the chinese built on it and ran with it.
5
@2Pat What we did 50 years ago was incredible and is still quite incredible today. What's also incredible is how China got from there to here in the same time period no matter how it was done, and yes the Chinese do have a mission which is a major impediment for America.
3
@2Pat Who is building the Chinese 5G network? The Communist Party of China. Who built the Chinese high speed rail system? The Communist Party of China. Who does every "private" business in China answer to? The Communist Party of China.
Are the American people willing to have taxes raised and benefits cut in order to have 5G networks (networks, not network) and coast-to-coast high speed rail by, let's say, the end of 2022?
No.
2
This will not please the stable genius. Look for him to start claining Huawei causes cancer.
24
@RNS
probably not aware of what Huawei is but doesn't like the name - a foreign name.
2
Sensible decision.
8
Ah, yes, Huawei. Reminds me of a quote from the Hobbit: One ring to rule them all. All tech should be democratized into a plethora of choices, not an only choice. This is why we are in the predicament we're in now--letting the Biggs decide what's good for us. Besides, didn't Britain decide to leave the EU? Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, eh? Well, there goes that "special" relationship between England and the U.S.--you know, the one that always made Obama chuckle.
4
What fool would invite the Chinese government into their home? Bad enough with the US government. We are being watched and tracked. Very scary times.
5
Yes, bad enough with the US government, a government that demands that our tech companies provide them backdoors to look at our private data. And that’s just what is reported publicly.
10
another humiliating defeat for Trump and his bullishness.
18
America first! What does that message send to the world? At this point in time, putting faith in the US is about on par with putting faith in China.
11
The Western world is so misguided. CHINA is a COMMUNIST country. They are our ENEMY. They are bent on damaging the WEST. WE will pay deeply for our greed and stupidity. Nokia and Ericsson are much safer.
4
@MSB I have no doubt there are risks associated with Huawei's equipment but on the other hand the US government's extradition request to Canada regarding Meng Wanzhou has the appearance of a political maneuver and negotiating ploy. There should be no doubt there are risks associated with aligning with the US government as well. If you do not believe this ask the two Canadians imprisoned by the Chinese government what they think.
The US government cares nothing about collateral damage caused to its friends and allies. Sad, isn't it MSB, how the line between Friend and Enemy keeps shifting.
6
re elect trump 3g is good enough for USA
10
@daniel r potter
I think EDGE 2G is all trump needs to send his twitters and lobotomize recipients that are conditioned to be mesmerized with a "dear leader" replica, gamed characters.
Yes, we know the dog bites, but it won't bite us because the Queen has declared that it may not do so.
1
Trump will of course blow this off since he really only cares about his 1980's half-baked opinion that trade imbalances are inherently detrimental to our economy.
The issues of national security and intellectual property only became prominent when they were needed as reasons for sacrificing farmers and manufacturers on the front lines of Trump's Trade War.
6
We really did this stupidly, the usual American approach, straightforward and loud. Countries like Britain, who are desperate for Chinese investment, can't afford to alienate Beijing. If they had said, "we're keeping Huawei out," they would have paid a big price when the Communists did their economic punishment thing. Also, with so many David Cameron types still in the UK government -- ie, sellouts -- they didn't have the national unanimity that countries like Australia and NZ have to just ban Huawei.
.
That said, let's wait and see how much Huawei kit actually makes it into the UK system. They still have to win bids and maybe they will win fewer than they think.
.
A much smarter way for the US would have been to do all this on the QT, not announce anything, just not award any contracts to Huawei. Quiet meetings with our allies, laying out the facts and getting quiet agreements. Unfortunately, we're not so subtle.
.
This is hardly the end of this story though. Beijing will whoop and holler about what a "win" this is, but it's not much in reality. The UK is keeping them out of their 5G core, and you can bet your bottom renminbi that anything they do install will be under constant surveillance.
17
@West Coaster Very well laid out. And I'm in total agreement with your assessment.
3
@West Coaster
It can easily go the other way. How do you quantify what is 'core' and how much market share a company really have?
Also, the Europeans together have plenty of leverage against the U.S. unlike Australia and New Zealand which are essentially client states. Both countries combined don't even add up to half the GDP of California. I wouldn't equate it 'unanimity', more like 'no choice'.
Finally It wasn't so long ago that Merkel's phone was tapped. Guess who did it...
7
@Sean "Core" and "Radio Access Network" are defined concepts in the technology. Multi-national armies of engineers drew up diagrams that carefully delineate what is and isn't core.
3
So much for Trump's powers of persuasion. Even Boris wasn't listening.
10
The UK thought it broke away from its master "Brussels" to now realize it has two new masters: the US and China. Except that it does not participate in their policy-making. Oh well.
6
Here is the thing about networking devices and servers in general-- you can have perfectly innocent hardware, and perfectly innocent software running on that hardware one day (when the system is audited), and then have a software update turn it into an intelligence-gathering device for the PRC the next (once there is no more scrutiny).
Governments couldn't even figure out the VW's "defeat device", and we expect them to continually monitor and audit their communications infrastructure? It's farcical.
Do the right thing Britain, buy European.
11
None of the telecom network operators that I know would ever allow software to auto-update: they would insist on running a rigorous audit and testing process first. This is because the consequences of rogue software taking the network down, together with their revenue and brand, are too high.
So I don’t see too much danger of what would effectively be malware being introduced after the equipment goes live and government focus shifts elsewhere.
11
@Andrew Since Huawei does not provide the source code for its updates, audits are meaningless-- an update may perform perfectly until some condition is met which could not be foreseen in advance-- like packets matching specific hashes flowing through in the correct sequence twice for example.
I can not imagine why any nation would choose this level of risk, when there are European telecommunications companies ready to do the build out.
3
@Andrew This was true in the past. Operators are moving toward agile development and DevOps as part of network transformation with Software Defined Networks and Network Function Virtualization.
3
seems China is leaving the us in the dust. what I fear is the world will embrace the Chinese technology while our country stands pretty much alone crowing about our version of Sony betamax
30
The US has only itself to blame for the dominance of Chinese companies like Huawei in emerging technologies like 5G. Past administrations have stood by and done nothing while Chinese state owned companies were protected by tariffs and non-tariff barriers as well as supported by IP theft and in some cases illegal subsidies. In addition, US companies have been there every step of the way transferring key technologies to Chinese companies. So now, here we are on the verge of implementing 5G, a technology that will revolutionize networks in both civilian and military infrastructure, and there is not a single US hardware supplier. Furthermore, this technology has tremendous national security ramifications. We all have the the pro-free trade economists as well as Bill Clinton, George Bush and Barack Obama to thank for this fiasco. The Communist Party of China could not have had better patsies to serve their interests. Their love of laissez faire economic policies made China great again.
14
@Aaron James Browne
Try another angle. Not necessary everybody is an enemy. Then human kind has a chance to progress together. If you think it is a zero sum game, it will likely be.
12
@Aaron James Browne
1. "Chinese state owned companies were protected by tariffs and non-tariff barriers ..." - if this is the case, I would assume that the US telecom equipment makers should be very successful in other markets not protected by tariff and other barriers, where there is no IP theft and illegal subsidies? So are the US telecom equipment makers successful in those markets? Who are those US companies in the first place?
2. "US companies have been there every step of the way transferring key technologies..." - For the US companies to transfer the technology and for their technology to be stolen, the technology must be there in the first place. And even if the US companies did transfer the technology and that their technology has been stolen, would they not have their technology still? Surely they cannot somehow just lose that technology completely all of a sudden? And if they still have that technology, why are they not able to make at least comparable products? Granted, their products would end up being more expensive, but surely they would still be able to make them?
8
The world is zero sum; it always has been and it always will be. The WTO and other trade agreements provide a veneer of fairness, but the reality is the opposite. The sooner we start acting based on reality, the better off we will be. Currently, to my knowledge, there are only three suppliers of 5G hardware and one of them is Huawei. When the successor to 5G comes along the list will likely be further pared down because of Chinese mercantilism. What do we do when there are only Chinese suppliers?
6
What’s largely lacking from this debate is any hard evidence of actual problems. The agenda is largely being pushed as an extension of the US trade dispute with China.
I note that plenty of US companies continue to work with Huawei, most recently after the intervention of the Pentagon! Presumably it would not have lobbied for this if there was a real problem?
Washington overplays the significance of Huawei in the network whilst simultaneously ignoring holes found in the cyber security of US network companies. Let’s take politics out of the debate and focus on facts backed by evidence, this might aid the US when it talks to its allies if it has genuine security concerns.
40
@Andrew Maybe looking at some articles in this paper would help.
There are plenty of examples of Chinese debt traps, intellectual property theft, influencing politics in foreign countries (Australia).
The evidence is there if you are willing to read it.
1
Some of the arguments being made in this comment section don't make sense to me. “The United States spies on the UK. Therefore, the UK should welcome China, an adversary, into its comm network.” The UK shouldn’t have needed any persuading. It should have done its own research.
Each university and corporation in China has a Party leader installed on its board. That’s just a fact. No security experts believe that the Chinese government and Huawei are separate entities. Furthermore, the concern isn’t that China will spy on the UK. Most of our information is highly encrypted. The concern is that with a single order, Huawei can shut down communication across Britain. That fact alone should be enough.
By making itself a undependable ally, the UK has effectively limited the amount of intelligence it can receive from the US. In return, it hopes for economic prosperity. Based on the predicted consequences of Brexit, I guess you can’t blame them.
21
@John
Done it's own research? A Commission of the top British telecoms scientists, cyber warfare specialists, intelligence operatives and the military have been studying the Huawei proposal here for 13 months. It's the paucity of facts from the US (well, the complete lack of evidence from Washington) which has guided Johnson's decision. Bluster didn't cut it.
53
@nolongeradoc Common sense should, but didn't.
As China just threatened Germany's auto industry if they made a similar decision about Huawei, the UK is worried about the needed trade with China.
Money drove this decision, nothing more.
1
@John
In reality, the “undependable ally” here is the US under Trump. He has repeatedly demonstrated that he and, by extension, the US cannot be relied upon in a time of need - remember the Kurds?
1
The US is a sore loser in the 5G technology market, and
Trump's willy-nilly trade sanctions, trade restrictions, and tariffs make the US an unreliable trade partner.
Foreign countries should not take seriously the US's disparagement of Huawei or US propaganda that portrays China as an adversary.
Why should Britain value US intelligence information when the President does not?
59
@AynRantForeign countries should not take seriously the US's disparagement of Huawei or US propaganda that portrays China as an adversary.
Agree with the first premise, but is it really just US propaganda to assert China is an adversary? Does it share the West's concern about human rights? or democratic values?
3
Britain, independent of EU is free to decide what it likes as long as it does not need any help from North America or EU to rescue it if things go wrong. Britain made a big blunder around the beginning of this century by supporting the Bush, Cheney, Bolton, Powell, Biden et al Iraq war and how did that turn out? Why should Britain support senseless campaign of other countries. Nothing personal but it all boils down to each country has to put its interests first especially in any democracy where the voters expect their interests to be served first.
16
@Girish Kotwal
The EU is specifically excludes itself from decisions relating to the national security of its member states. Consequently, all 28 members are - and always HAVE been - able to make their own national decisions about 5g and Huawei.
This 'dictated to by Brussels' schtick was heavily played by the pro-Brexit camp. It's false.
11
@nolongeradoc from London, UK. Get over it Brexit is done and over. The pro-Brexit camp won . Sorry it did not turn the way it went for the anti-Brexit camp but get on with life. Britain is still a stable democracy and dealing very well with Megxit.
2
@Girish Kotwal
You didn't tell me what I said that isn't true.
The Very Stable Genius' "strategy" of attacking allies and coddling dictators via tweet seems to be backfiring. I trust the UK to oversee its own 5G build out more than I trust the current administration to act in good faith toward our trading partners and allies.
59
America is losing its diplomatic influence because the State Department has been gutted, with professional, career diplomatics and highly trained civil servants leaving due to Trump's contempt for traditional American values such as smart diplomacy. Also, the "America First" doctrine might play well in Michigan or Wisconsin, but to most other people around the world, it's seen as a thin fig leaf covering his shameless corporate nationalism. Efforts to ban Huawei seem more about business than security, like Trump's imposition of tariffs on Canadian steel due to, ahem, 'national security'. Also, Trump can't cozy up to Russia as it actively tries to thwart Western democracies while pretending to take serious matters of security and intelligence. The biggest security breaches with global ramifications in recent years have been perpetrated by Americans, on American systems, so American allies are justifiably tired of the doublespeak.
Britain's decision is a sign that Trump's policies are detrimental to US interests, and an index of waning American influence around the world. Sad!
90
5G isn't nearly the technological wonder that the media seems to obsess about. I guess it makes sense, they're reporters, not highly educated tech workers but still.
16
@Monsp
So why are all first world (and many third world) countries scrambling to build advanced 5g networks?
If 5g isn't a telecoms wonder, what alternatives should be considered? All I've heard so far has been about some Elon Musk 'Skynet' type space system which will be 'ready in a few years'. Vaporware doesn't wait for the real world. And vice-versa.
5
@nolongeradoc
"...why are all first world (and many third world) countries scrambling to build advanced 5g networks"?
Because all first world (and many third world) countries have been more advanced in telecommunications for a decade or more.
For that we have only American business to blame.
@Monsp I agree. It's marginally better than current wifi, which is available almost everywhere.
3
The next question is what are the Canadians likely to do? They’re one of the 5 eyes! They’re also holding Meng Wanzhou, Huawei CFO and daughter of Huawei chairman, on a US extradition warrant. That case is in the Canadian courts right now. Most Canadians are against their government holding Meng, and want her released! Not delivered to the Americans. The American case against her is tenuous at best, and also because she was merely transiting through Vancouver enroute to Mexico. Not entering Canada! The Canadian press is also for her release.
So two decisions here that’ll upend & trump (!) the US case. My suspicion is that Canada is about to show the bird to the US! Either by giving in on the one, while going against the US on the other. Or, going against the US on both by releasing Meng, and also using Huawei, even if it’s only in part like the Brits have announced! Either way, it’s going to be an embarrassment for this US administration!
We should learn not to rush in headlong, where angels fear to tread! Where are our stable geniuses?
35
@Parth Trived
Good morning, as a Canadian who has travelled/worked/done a master’s degree in the US and keeps an eye on your political machinations, I find it increasingly worrying the hard right direction the republicans and evangelicals are taking your country.
Facts do not matter...at all anymore.
Trump lies. I really would like to know how his supporters chose what to believe and republicans who cult-like protect him, is it just as over tax cuts and appointments of conservative judges?
Not a country I view as a reliable partner especially after we were labelled a security threat as a weasily trade bargaining tactic.
Meng should be released, Trump let the cat out of the bag that it was a china trade power play, not a honest extradition request.
Sad how far our relationship has fallen and has not hit bottom yet.
10
There goes that trade deal! It’s probably for the best; the UK doesn’t need our Big Box stores and we certainly don’t need crumpets, clotted cream or easier access to shows featuring elderly detectives.
16
@Dudesworth
Dude, totally.
Except the clotted cream.
I luv crumpets.
1
Britain's economy is in a cross road leading to either diminish or prosper again. 5G is one of the methods to boost her economy and spur innovations. Not like US that we have choices, UK does not have and just doesn't want to be left behind in technology applications & innovation.
On the other hand, Huawei is a big company with many products that lead in competition. Based on the past records, she has done nothing wrong to our national security concern. Nor has Huawei shared our personal data with Chinese government. So far our government has shown nothing and proved nothing.
Other countries in the western developed economy have chosen Huawei. Not to mention that many other Asian and African countries did the same. If any of them finds fault with Huawei, they will say so. Britain surely will say so, too.
45
US is afraid of head to head competition and wants to be assured of always being first in tech. That is not a realistic expectation and is a recipe for resentment around the world. With Trump our backwardness is even more obvious. Americans are oblivious to how outrageous we are in our demands.
111
After all we've done recently to prove how trustworthy and reliable we are as a global partner - how dare they!
128
@David Roy Are you being sarcastic?
3