Huawei Is Winning the Argument in Europe, as the U.S. Fumbles to Develop Alternatives

It's a little late to be talking about the U.S. telecom equipment business. Nortel and Lucent are gone, along with the various startups those two digested (or spat out). Fantasies about startups entering the telecom systems business and growing to national scale are so naive they're funny. We had two strong NA telecom businesses and a host of strong IP businesses. We not only let them die; we helped a few of them on their way. Game's over. China won.

We could only speculate why the Europeans want to commit suicidal act by letting China to win a superiority over them. They did it in the past with Hitler and Nazi Germany. However, China with their totalitarian regime and their critical mass is much more dangerous than Germany had ever been. Europeans have become already dependent on China by selling to them many high tech companies. For example sixty the biggest Swedish companies have Chinese owners or Chinese have more than fifty percent of the company ownership. Two hundred biggest French vineyards is in hands of Chinese. China's shipping firm purchased a majority stake in strategically important Piraeus port in Greece on Mediterranean sea. Clearly European are short of money as their social programs balloon, clean energy projects need subsidies and apparently they chose to give up their sovereignty in exchange for Chinese cash.

Hi David, I writing to suggest the NYT and other reputable newspaper , including Deep State Radio, boycott or at least NOT review tJohn Bolton’s new book. He has failed to live up to his oath of office and to his responsibilities as a citizen of the United States of America by not appearing before the House Committee on impeachment. To encourage the sale of his book is unconscionable. He is no better than Trump.

For someone who acts like a 10 year old, Trump apparently never heard the story "The Boy Who Cried Wolf." Now he's living it.

Europe has to choose who will spy on it. China or USA? A dictatorship or a dictatorship? Not that they don't do it already. Is this really a choice?

"introduced a bill in January that would allocate at least $750 million to research and development of such an open system. It also allocates $500 million to “accelerate the adoption of trusted and secure equipment globally.” USA will spend 1.2B for R&D of alternative 5G. LOL, Huawei past 10 years R&D spent average $5B+/year in 5G.

Well that's their choice. They can let the Chinese in, and the beachhead will get bigger until Chinese telecom runs all of Europes networks. Then China, knowing it has the leverage, will work it's way into contracts for dams, ports, airports, and other vital infrastructure. Eventually, Europe will become completely dependent on China to provide everything. Once that happens, free enterprise will be dead.

The whole situation reminds me of the heyday of the Cold War. At university I studied the macabre logic of deterrence and mutual assured destruction that came out of Washington’s paranoid politico-military complex to combat the existential threat posed by the Soviet Union . But at least then we had good success in projecting soft power as well. And the threat was arguably evidenced by the apparent military strength of our foe. As it turned out, they weren’t nearly as strong as advertised. Since we’re ruled by a corrupt regime at the moment, the soft power has faded fast. The shrill warnings with no evidence offered over the past eight or so years have become lame histrionics. And no proof has been put forward, no logical framework for how China is attempting to dominate the world and to what end. At least with the Soviets one could imagine their armies rolling across Europe. What exactly are we afraid of with China?

There was a time when pure research was encouraged in our country in industry and jointly with the Federal Government. With the focus on quarterly earnings our private sector no longer leads in research. The Federal government continuously cuts these investments and does not offer incentives for these long term strategic research projects which may not always lead to advances in our lifetimes. The break-up of AT&T many years ago is when we lost this network race. Bell Labs would have continued to be the world leader in communications technology. China have strategies and goals that extend ten, twenty years and more into the future. We do not plan beyond a year and even less with the recent government leadership. They subsidize Huawei to pursue their long term plans. We break up our dominant industries. Europe creates a monopoly by establishing Airbus and combining their governments commitment. This badly hurt every US plane manufacturer and left Boeing carrying the flag. We need to have big dreams and plans and insure these innovators are provided incentives to help regain our leadership position. Compensate those who build things not those who sit in the office and sell companies to one another while skimming billions in fees. The world no longer views us with the admiration it once did. Our allies and partners are working feverishly to have back-up plans to depending on the US. We are still the greatest nation the world has ever seen and need to act like it.

China is doing to U.S. high tech in this century what U.S. did to European heavy manufacturing in 19th century.

So why isn't the United States leading the world in developing this new technology? Could it be that the Trump administration is a collective of bumbling idiots that has no idea on how to do such a thing? Could it be that the "perfect" Trump is so enmeshed in old technology (coal power and internal combustion engines) that he scuttles any attempt to help US companies develop new ideas and sustainable resources? The answer is complicated but one can definitely say YES to those two questions. And that reality isn't helping.

Unfortunately, the automatic response from Europe now is if Trump (the USA) wants something, then we want the opposite. This is from no-knowledge Trump who has tried to bully the EU in so many ways, including idiotic tariffs, that work both ways to depress both EU and USA economies.

The perspective from Europe is that the US has missed the boat on 5G and that it is now trying to protect its own telecommunications industry by putting pressure on Europe not to do business with China. Most European 5G networks already include Huawei equipment and they see no sense in pulling it out to replace it with inferior equipment simply to protect US technology companies. Furthermore Europe considers US claims of Chinese spying to be utterly hypocritical. It assumed US and UK intelligence agencies already have access to our telecommunications networks. It recently came to light that the CIA was secretly behind a company selling encryption systems to 100 of the world's governments and that the US was able to read their most secret communications. Some friend!

Trump wants us to develops a radical new technology, something that reflects his genius and stability and would be powered by clean coal. Who needs 5G? People trust what their president says and their AG swears to. No one disagrees with Trump and they better not, because when he is reelected he will see that our allies toe the line or NATO will disappear.

It is telling that our allies do not take US positions seriously, and do not rely on them as sure to be enforced. US credibility worldwide has been undermined. .

Attorney General William P. Barr, Vice President Mike Pence and other officials have offered differing American strategies to build a credible competitor to Huawei. Yet at times, they have contradicted one another’s ideas, often in public. But the administration is deeply divided internally over whether the United States needs to invest in the technology or leave the market to sort it out. “we are focused more on putting everyone in the tent than putting U.S. taxpayer dollars in the midst.” That's right, that's right: we need our taxpayer dollars spent where they're most needed, on the great border wall with Mexico. If we want to know how walls work, we can ask the Chinese.

so Europe and other trusting souls are giving the fox a key to the henhouse: a good hacker can put more code in script, or embedded in an image, or even a few lines in the boot sequence of a smart device... and given the lack of trust between our international "partners" such tactics can even influence the programming of a chip guiding a weapon aimed at an airliner, or the temperature of your home's water heater if you are naive enough to put access to your home appliances online. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." China can only be trusted as far as they trust us and that is not at all.

I think there are problems and the US is right to restrain the malign influence of the CCP. Chinese businesses must be required to show that their boards and management are not informed by CCP international political objectives. Read Richard McGregor’s The Party: The Secret World of China's Communist Rulers.

Huawei is the lowest-cost provider and the only provider of end-to-end 5G solutions for national telecoms: from servers to cell towers to handsets, all designed to perform perfectly with each other. 5G's primary beneficiaries will be industry and commerce. End-user benefits, though welcome, were a secondary consideration when the standards were set. Literally unrivaled in enhanced mobile broadband, only Huawei produces every element of a 5G system and assembles turnkey networks–from antennas to the power stations to chips–at scale and cost, allowing one-stop shopping at a fraction of the cost of competitors. The kicker? Huawei gear uses half the power (5G networks are power-hungry) of its rivals–a major savings over its expected operating life. Unless it approves Huawei the US will be forced to integrate more costly, less functional, less compatible, less upgradeable components and pay twice as much, take twice as long and endure years of inferior service. My prediction? Our telcos will be forced to integrate more costly, less functional, less compatible, less upgradeable components and pay twice as much, take twice as long and deliver years of inferior service–and we will be less economically secure as a result.

I don´t want the US to be controlling Ericson. As we learned from Edvard Snowden The US is allready spying on everybody around the globe. In my country Sweden the government are preparing for the police to install malvare and trojans to secretly monitor computers and smartphones owned by people under suspicion. So what is happening to privacy. In the US you have at least in the constitution the right for privacy. But that didn´t help did it? That is something we don´t have here in Sweden. The attack on Huawei is just another part of the US tradewar against China. If the US have proof for it claims against Huawei present some evidence. So far I have not seen any. With that said I don´t trust either China or the US or my own government here in Sweden to respect privacy or any other form of spying whether it´s targeted against citizens or the country as a whole.

"Mr. Barr further confounded things with a speech this month where he called for American acquisition of Nokia and Ericsson.." Wow. It appears AG Barr's instincts to force the outcome he wants by using controlling and dictatorial methods clearly apply to all facets of government. Not a good guy and, as former Deputy AG Ayers said in an editorial in The Atlantic, distinctly un-American.

From the article: ". . . Huawei . . . offers low-cost telecom equipment partially subsidized by the Chinese government. . . . Nokia and Ericsson, two European firms that claim they have deployed more 5G networks than Huawei, but are clearly struggling to match its prices. That says it all. China continues to achieve economic dominance over technology areas by its funding of supposed "private" companies and so drive non-subsidized Western firms out of business. That government also engages in industrial espionage and stealing of our most valuable technology, violating patents, . . . I could go on. And once they have achieved total control of a technology vital to the West? We become vassal states of China, and a war that was never declared is won, bloodlessly. Europe has already surrendered, Only the USA, it seems, is ready to resist this takeover. It will not be easy -- or cheap -- to do so. But we must not lose. China's economic and technology war must be met head on. Losing that war will be devastating.

The Administration is "scrambling" to come up with alternatives. That says so much. Here is an issue of tremendous importance. The Administration's concerns are real. That the Chinese would, in effect, subsidize this development underscores that. But instead of working steadily on all aspects of the problem, they approach it unprepared. Furthermore, their "let's hit Europe for the hell of it" policies has made the US distinctly unpopular in many countries. Our incoherent strategy in the Middle East make us unreliable. Boris, Macron, et al have no incentive to work with the US on this. I think they are wrong, I think a western 5G system is worth a little patience, but without a reliable US to partner with, that is hard for them to do.

Lets get this straight. The US claims Huawei is an unmanageable security threat? It is a claim that rings rather hollow, given that the US--both the security apparatus and business--have been the greatest abusers of the internet, going so far as to laughably tap into Angela Merkel's private phone, a fact revealed several years ago. If China is a security threat, the US is a threat in spades. Washington's real aim here is to maintain its hegemony over the world wide net. For all its protestations, the US wants to control telecommunications worldwide. It does not want competitors. Unfortunately, the Chinese are able to provide better products at a cheaper price than is the US. What we are watching is another example of an imperial power in retreat.

"Are you offering an alternative?” asked Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Estonia’s former president. “Are you going to subsidize Nokia and Ericsson? I mean, what do we get? What is it that we should do other than not use Huawei?”" Good question Mr. Hendrik. May we interest you in products from a certain Crypto AG?

Thanks to trump's insults the U.S. has alienated the U.E. We lost a major ally to offset China's dominance. We are being destroyed by our stupidity and greed.

Wait. Barr is suggesting that the US government take over Nokia and Ericsson? Or that the government back a takeover by private US firms? That sounds like socialism to me, and not so much the “democratic” version, either. Yet the US government refuses to provide a shred of evidence that Huawei is some giant spy monster. (Yet, oh, by the way, for decades the US CIA secretly owned a cryptography company that sold its spying-infested wares to dozens of countries all over the world and then hacked into their communications.)

Why is AG Barr sticking his nose into this issue when it seems more in the wheelhouse of the Secretaries of Homeland Security, Defense, State, Commerce, and the D.N.I. Along with VP Pence, it seems a crowded field already, and is resulting in a muddled US position. Get it together!

With what face USA talks about back door, even a fictitious one! NSA bugged Chancellor Merkel’s phone.

China uses so-called "industrial policy" to guide and finance its future technological ventures (that is, governmental direction and backing of the economy). Yet our Republican leadership in the US has long resisted such an approach, calling instead for the "free market" to do the job with no input from the government (other than protection from, for example, competition...). This is one reason why we have an energy regime dominated by fossil fuels, a financial services industry dominated by essentially a few massive firms, an airline industry that is little more than a cartel, a lack of badly needed transportation infrastructural investments, and-- did I forget?-- no coherent communications industry policy for the future. The market alone doesn't work, except for those few already at the top.

The larger problem here is that being essentially state owned/controlled Huawei has license to conduct predatory pricing campaigns to eliminate existing competitors and prevent new ones from entering the market. They have no need to make a profit or even show positive cash flow. This is true of a significant part of Chinese trade. And, if considered from a military perspective it makes perfect sense to take over the central nervous system of the world. If a solution is not found in the West the future looks difficult for anyone not well placed in the CCP.

America itself created the Chinese threat when we allowed first Republicans and then Democrats rushing to the right end of the political system to value big profits in offshore manufacturing over the workers, the communities where manufacturing was centered, and, ultimately, the industrial might and future of the US itself. For forty years America has been pouring technology and money into China. American Capitalism created this threat and now it’s time to pay the price.

Let me see if I have this right. The Chinese company COULD possibly hijack data and/or shut down systems, but there is apparently no evidence that that capability actually exists. If the Chinese could do it, then so could any other manufacturer - like an American company. Sounds like the Europeans are skeptical of the claims made by the Trump administration. Wonder why? We've destroyed our credibility abroad, so why should the Brits and the Germans pay higher prices for non-Chinese goods while the just-as-duplicitous Yanks are crying wolf? It sounds to me like the American government knows that we can't compete with the Chinese, so we're inventing this boogeyman to thwart a more nimble competitor. Any capability to externally control complex equipment like this could be found in the firmware that operates it. This is just computer code that could be reverse-engineered and examined. How hard could it be to demand that the Chinese (and others) make that code available for inspection? The only way to insure that new malevolent technology can't be implemented is to never install it in the first place. It's like hacking Bezos' phone: where there's a will, there's a way. Instead of picking fights with everyone on the planet, the US government should be looking for ways to create synergy globally. Like it or not, we're all interconnected, and that's not going to change. Maybe the next administration will have an outlook that is more conducive to progress in this complex world.

It is certainly possible that Huawei equipment might give the Chinese government the ability to interfere with critical communications networks. The problem is that the Trump regime has essentially zero credibility in Europe. Without strong evidence Britain and Germany are unwilling to simply accept the claim, and it's hard to blame them.

Without evidence that Hauwei is any worse than the alternatives, the administration’s argument is empty. It feels to me that the administration simply wants to interfere with Chinese companies, even if that has negative consequences for the users of such products. If we thought of communications as an necessary public utility, PUBLIC resources to develop, manufacture, deploy AND REGULATE necessary networks for the benefit of all would be a nobrainer. But that is a no-no to this administration.

The problem is not one of convincing the Europeans that Chinese phone systems are dangerous to their society. The real problem is that they are given the choice between onerous foreign power they buy from. The technologies exist today to make phone systems transparent to every buyer. The Europeans just have to demand them, in spite of the insatiable demand to surveil their own people.

There is a cold war against everything in China from technology to everything else. Huawei is just one example. Even Nancy Pelosi gets into the act. But the EU won't buy it. trump doesn't like China so he has instructed his cabinet of reactionary politicians to oppose Huawei. Trying to replicate the Huawei system which is already in place is foolish. Because the Chinese system supports to some extent largely privately held businesses this runs counter to the way capitalism does things. From a NYT report on Huawei: "Huawei, however, believes it has flourished because it does not face the short-term financial pressures that publicly held companies do. So the company has devised an ownership structure that allows it to use shares to motivate employees while still remaining closely held." trump and his administration are essentially blackmailing other countries in the EU and elsewhere to stop using Huawei technology, insisting that security issues are at stake, the Huawei will enable the Chinese to spy on everyone. "Yet European officials say Germany is likely to mirror Britain’s decision to use Huawei and engage in strict monitoring. Germany, like Britain, is expected to keep Huawei out of the most sensitive parts of the telecom network but allow the firm to provide equipment and software for the radio networks that control cell towers and base stations around the country. That decision will still be a huge loss for the United States."

How about aiming the Wall dollars at research and development that could actually enhance our security and give our tech companies something to sell?

I have no idea whether Huawei is a risk or not but I do have an opinion about the US. You government has lost all credibility. I do not trust it. We can start with Bush and weapons of mass destruction as an excuse to invade Iraq and then go to accusing Canada of being a security threat to justify tariffs on steel and aluminum and much more. If you wish to gain the trust and respect of other nations - you have to earn it. The constant bullying is offensive.

Why is it that when I see that the US is concerned that “it would give the Chinese government the ability to spy on — or, in times of conflict, turn off — those networks” I read it as “ the US is concerned that they won’t have the ability to spy on — or, in times of conflict, turn off — those networks” in foreign countries if those countries don’t use American technologies?

Our government's approach to this problem will only insure that we will fall yet further behind the rest of the world in development of 5G in the US. In a few years we will wake up and realize that the Trump government's aggressive attempts to contain China have only impoverished us, in both wealth and influence in a number of domains. Historically, China builds walls and lives inside them and has rarely been an outside aggressor but we seem determined to make them into one. I am just recently returned from Tunisia and from Germany. In both, Huawei is ubiquitous and Apple is fading into the background. Trump's approach to technology is just another one of his dumb bullying ideas, only appealing to the naive.

The proper name for this article is "Unable to compete in a fair market, the US resorts to extortion tactics and threats to bully Huawei clients". Funny how every single other nation has pointed out that the United States as produced ZERO evidence of any spying by Huawei on anyone. Essentially the only argument the US offers to ban Huawei is an appeal to racism and anti-Sino hatred. Meanwhile, there has been confirmed hacking by the NSA against Huawei (see NYT article). As well as Angela Merkel's phone. Oh, and it turns out that the CIA had secretly seized control of a Swiss "cryptography" company Crypto AG for decades to install backdoors so it could spy on all of its "friends". Long story short, Huawei is universally held to be more trustworthy than the United States. You reap what you sow.

Given the general incompetence of the current administration, why would the Europeans, or for that matter, any of our former trusted allies, give any credence to the dictates that these non-tech-savvy mouthpieces deliver? Much like the cloud-based health-care plan that they regularly promise, it's all hot air.

Not surprising that our allies have zero faith in this administration's assertions. It's a natural consequence of Trump's fact free universe. Odds are, on what ever topic, Team Trump is spinning a lie for their own gain. They are truly pathological. A pathology cluster? Yup. Maybe we just need to threaten our allies some more. That should win them over.

Imagine the time needed to develop a new common. robust and hacker-free architecture for all 5G network ! But the surest way to put Western allies in line with US conviction would be the release of hard facts and proof of malignant hard- or software elements in the Huawei equipment. "None has been declassified" even to "trusted" allies nor any proof of the famous "backdoor" has been shewn. Without any credible alternative, how do you want foreign government blocking the development of what is thought to be a decisive competitive advantage ?

And yet 2 Canadians have been languishing in some Chinese prison for doing Trump`s dirty work in arresting the head of Huawei for over a year now in Vancouver. I am sure the families of those 2 men are thrilled that 2 innocent men have become innocent pawns in this ridiculous international game of chicken between Trump and the Chinese. One wonders what the cost is in being "friends" of the U.S. in the age of Trump. Not worth it if this is any example.

To build out a country's 5G infrastructure and then "engage in strict monitoring" can be a very dangerous solution. What if the network was deemed compromised? How could that possibly be rectified if the infrastructure is already in-place -- Do you fall back to your 4G networks or restrict use of your 5G one? Alarmist or not, there does not appear to be a plan if communications become compromised. Having worked at one of the 3 largest bidders for 5G infrastructure, building a Huawei network in Europe is beyond acceptable risk to both a country's national and civilian privacy in my opinion. It's clear that DE and the UK are aware of these risks, and are continuing for either fiscal or political reasons, even with Nokia and Ericsson in their backyard. 5G does not just disappear once 6G becomes available, just as 2/3/4G networks exist in some capacity today. The decision of which company to partner with needs to be considered outside of cost alone -- Especially since it is unclear if Huawei is receiving subsidies from its government (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/technology/who-owns-huawei.html), make a bid with them artificially difficult to match. Europe should consider this very, very carefully.

Who, today, of our allies, trusts our government?

" The group is pressing for a common architecture for the software and hardware that run 5G networks". Even if that were to happen, it would take years to achieve any concrete tangible results. As an IT professional I know very well how long it does to agree on a working solution, formalize it and then put it into practice. No country is going to wait for that. Also, to support efforts to use software to undercut Huawei, that won't work either. Software workarounds are never as fast as hardware based solutions. Sorry, no respectable network engineer would recommend that except if nothing else available.

US tech companies trading away their proprietary technology for the short term profits generated by doing business in China, and an administration that Europe doesn't trust as far as it can throw it. Why wouldn't Europe hedge its bets at this point.