Is the US shooting itself in the foot by banning Huawei?

[Nutrient]

If after 4 rounds of back and forth I can't even get you to reply to a basic starting point, I don't want to waste my time on you. It will be just a merry go round and round and round that gets no where.

I did reply, especially with regard to your Motorola and Cisco accusations against Huawei. Your assertion that I didn't is as hollow as your case against Huawei.

 

[PaxAmericana]

Working overtime for the CIA/Pentagon, Brumby?

African Union head calls China spying report 'lies'

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

BTW, we're all still waiting for the "evidence" of the Huawei "threat". Italy, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, Britain, etc are all still waiting. It would be real great if you could throw in some Iraqi WMD in there while you're at it.

Ohh, I almost forgot...

 

[localizer]

One should accept that Trump is always telling quarter-truths. He hears something from some advisor or fox news (who has their own agenda) and twist it like a used car salesman. Whatever Huawei did do, he has to edit the story to suit his rhetoric to sell the point.

When you got big ego like his and his supporters, you gotta defend your lies to the bitter end. Hence I am pessimistic about a deal.

I suppose the only thing that trumps further escalation is a recession which he cannot have if he wants a relection.

 

[Nutrient]

In January 2018, France’s Le Monde newspaper published an

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, based on multiple sources, which found that from January 2012 to January 2017 servers based inside the AU’s headquarters in Addis Ababa were transferring data between 12 midnight and 2 am—every single night—to unknown servers more than 8,000 kilometres away hosted in Shanghai.

So? Servers are automatons that can be ordered to make transfers from anywhere to anywhere else. Anyone can give such orders. For example, Microsoft Windows is famous for "phoning home". Also, that the transfers passed through Shanghai does not prove that the ultimate destination was Shanghai; the Internet is globally connected.

It's not wise to swallow every slander against China and Huawei; you could poison yourself. Worse, you could poison your country.

 

[plawolf]

Please stop wasting your time with closed minded parrots who are only interested in repeating what they read and see from the western MSM.

If it was China levelling nebulous accusations without a single shred of proof, the same western MSM endlessly repeating Washington’s talking points would feature it in the jokes section and endlessly mock it.

The west’s 5 eyes intelligence agencies have been going over Huawei tech and software with a fine tooth comb for years, and have found precisely zero evidence of any of the alleged spying.

At best this means all the hysterics being kicked up are just protectionist facades and/or trying to create bargaining chips to use against China in trade negotiations.

At worst, this would be a desperate attempt by the 5 eyes to maintain the status quo, because the western telecoms providers they are effectively championing are engaged in the precisely the kind of backdoor building activity that have allowed 5 eyes to operate so effectively. If the world switches to Huawei tech for next gen communications, their ability to insert backdoors and other security breaches at source will be compromised, along with their ability to effectively spy on the world.

 

[tidalwave]

The game plan is simple. Enemy of Huawei will be the enemy of China.
UK corrected itself after China taking retaliations against Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
With US, China engaging in TaiChi, denying it the thing it wants;structural changes in its economy. China is buying time.

 

[Equation]

ah, my friend, it does you little good to attempt to reason with the "unreasonable", but thanks for your honesty and loyalty! Freedom is a beautiful gift, but the "American Dream" is that every man, has an opportunity to "speak his mind" and voice his concerns... and either succeed or fail as opportunity and your own merits warrant... you should have stayed, the "American Dream" is alive and well, but it takes lots and lots of hard work, and more than a few blessings along the way

"In God we Trust", we have a great and merciful God, and he, and he alone is able to offer us "salvation" and "eternal life", so the greatest freedom of all is the God given right to seek and to serve Him, and Him alone, America has a profound history as a "Christian Nation".

We as a Nation of Patriots have not only God given rights? but responsibilities as well, and one of those responsibilities is to defend the defenseless, and to defend our Nation from those who would bring harm and a loss of freedom...

As one who came here in search of opportunity, you found great freedom, and that my friend is what continues to allow us great opportunity....

I give my God the Glory and Honor for all my Blessings! I welcome those who would wish to share this freedom and opportunity.....

theres no "Ellis Island" or "Statue of Liberty" anywhere else, give to us as a gift by our French Friends, who recognized that there were indeed special opportunities...

and to address Huawei, I believe President Trump is reaching out for a mutually beneficial trade deal, hopefully he will step in and bring a new peace and honor both sides, he does indeed like and respect President Xi, and together they will figure this out.... trust me....

Aaand, that's about it. We started at old man who traveled nowhere bragging about imaginary freedoms in a country known for racism, police brutality, government surveillance, and starting wars, and now we're at religious oral diarrhea. That's full circle; I wouldn't know how to up the ante from here.

No good way to respond because you're off in Narnia talking about imaginary freedoms and imaginary friends. Let's chat again when (or if) you get back to real world frequency... or not, whatever.

 

[Equation]

You are conflating two issues as if they are similar. The ban on Huawei is connected to 5G implementation and government sponsored phones. Consumers have freedom to choose whatever phones they want.



The most basic tenet in meaning of freedom is the inalienable right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" and are simply embodied as individual legal and constitutional protections from entities more powerful than an individual. The difference in the two world views are significant since you asked. In a society which enjoys freedom for example you have access to information not just censored information. If you were to complain such as in an oppressed state, you get hauled in by security officers and you may get limited access to outside counsel. If you are lucky you may get your day in court. The courts are owned and appointed by the state. If you are not so lucky you just disappear with no recourse. If you don't understand such a difference, maybe at best you are taking for granted the meaning of freedom or worst you are too indoctrinated to appreciate the difference.

Well, if you asked people what shape the earth is, you'd get an echo chamber too so I wouldn't use that as evidence, certainly not for something being wrong.
As I said, different countries have different freedoms. To have someone attempting to disrupt society (for self-hate, confusion, insanity or some various treacherous reason) be swiftly removed is a freedom for everyone else. Obviously, to the person attempting to incite chaos, that's a lack of freedom. I stand with those who love their nation and wish to raise society rather than raze it so it's clear which type of freedom I prefer. So once again, the US and China have different freedoms; Chinese freedoms are more beneficial to warm-blooded law-abiding supporters of unity with nothing to hide, and US law is more beneficial to those of deviant nature who wish to test the limits of his capabilities in inciting unrest/disrupting the system. We appreciate the difference and it would be as comical as it is ironic for someone who has never experienced much less understood China to call people who have lived in both China and the US/Europe, "indoctrinated."
It is common sense and necessity that every company follow the directives of the law enforcement agencies of the country that it is under. Huawei must do it. So must US companies. If I'm a client of a bank in the US and I commit fraud, the bank must surrender my financial information to the FBI instead of protecting me as a customer. If I text violent plans to my accomplice and the police demand my records from my service provider, the US company must give it instead of protect me. I understand that there was a case where the FBI needed to crack the phone of the San Bernardino shooter and Apple refused to cooperate under the pretense that it was being ordered to create something rather than provide what it already had and it resulted in a long and expensive legal battle with the FBI finally paying nearly a $1 million for a third party to hack the iphone. This tells me that firstly, Apple would have been required to cooperate had the software already existed and secondly, the US legal system is incredibly cumbersome to both the FBI and the companies that the FBI demands cooperation from. For China, the requirements are similar, though the process would not be so unwieldy.

 

[vesicles]

I cannot speak for other countries and in their decision making process but here in Australia I am somewhat familiar with the debate and arguments for banning Huawei in the 5G implementation. Huawei is considered a high security risk vendor for reasons I will outline below. As a preamble it is important to appreciate that 5G due to its complexity brings a new level of overall security risk not present in 4G. This is the technical advice provided by the chief of Australia’s Signals Directorate (ASD) and became a significant consideration in Australia’s decision to ban Huawei. Essentially with 5G, a firewall between the core technology and its edge cannot be reasonably assured unlike in 4G. As such, the choice of vendor to the technology implementation is critical in ensuring security integrity in the 5G technology chain. A 5G infrastructure under gird Australia’s economic and security future. The risk of a ‘trojan horse” that can potentially undermine privacy, liberty and security is an unacceptable risk for Australia.

Huawei do not have a history of ethical behaviour by western standards especially with its theft and violation of proprietary data. For example, there are documented history of Huawei’s disregard for the intellectual property rights of other companies in the United States. This include the 2010 Motorola case over the misappropriation of proprietary wireless switching technology and in the 2003 Cisco case of stealing proprietary network router technology. This eventuated the US House Intelligence Committee in 2012 to issue a public report that Huawei posed a potential threat to national security. The most recent indictment regarding T-Mobile filed on 16th January 2019 in the US District court of Seattle Washington outlined in detail not only Huawei’s attempt at stealing proprietary information but in its subsequent cover up. Details revealed including Huawei’s official policy of not only actively encouraging its employees to steal confidential information from competitor but reward them for their effort. It is therefore not surprising that an executive of Huawei was caught for spying in Poland. The second indictment against Huawei issued on 24th January 2019 in the US District court of New York further outlines how it structures entity and operate it to bypass US regulations.

More importantly, the opaque relationship between Huawei and Beijing and its willingness or lack of freedom to do anything other than Beijing’s bidding is a serious consideration. This is amplified by China’s National Intelligence Law, passed in 2017 that compels “all organisations and citizens” to help the country’s intelligence work. Article 38 of China’s cyber security law compels a telecommunications firm such as Huawei to do its bidding. Anxiety about Huawei equipment is not theoretical. Beijing for five years, from 2012 to 2017,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

using “backdoors” in Huawei equipment installed in the new African Union headquarters, which China donated to the organization. In 2018, the USTR issued a 215 page report which contained about a thousand cases outlining China’s attempt at “forced” technology transfers through various means and China’s official response was simply to brush it off.

Australia as a sovereign nation takes its security concerns seriously and China’s past behavior and recent posture does not suggest it will modify its future behavior. Australia will need to do what it considers necessary to protect itself and its own interest. Just last week, a “state actor’ conducted cyber hacks on both of Australia’s political parties and it is obvious who was the “state actor”.

First of all, in my opinion, it is totally fine for the western nations to defend their positions in the world. Like any sports game, it is absolutely fine to attack opponent’s weaknesses and defend themselves. Finding mismatches and attack them with all you’ve got. Both sides can do that. The US has found a major weakness with China, which is Huawei, and attacks it. That’s a part of the game. Totally legit. It’s up to China to find their mismatches with the US and exploit them. If they can’t, they lose the battle and submit. Simple as that. It’s a competition.

Now, just don’t use the moral high ground arguments. Whatever the western nations are accusing China of doing, they have been doing it for much longer. Practically, the entire modern western society has been built on the blood and sweat of the slaves and the native people in their colonies. Just go to any museum in a western country and check out the wealth that they have accumulated from their colonies and throughout the centuries of colonization. I wouldn’t consider slavery and colonization a western standard. Yet the west has been doing these for centuries.

When needed, the west did not shy away from stealing Chinese technologies. A British gentleman, Robert Fortune, pretended to be a Chinese and stole the trade secrets of the Chinese tea industry. He has been considered as a national hero who “changed the course of history”.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I guess we have to blame the gullibility of the Chinese people who believed he was a Chinese, as well as the ingenuity of Mr. Fortune.

 

[Equation]

First of all, in my opinion, it is totally fine for the western nations to defend their positions in the world. Like any sports game, it is absolutely fine to attack opponent’s weaknesses and defend themselves. Finding mismatches and attack them with all you’ve got. Both sides can do that. The US has found a major weakness with China, which is Huawei, and attacks it. That’s a part of the game. Totally legit. It’s up to China to find their mismatches with the US and exploit them. If they can’t, they lose the battle and submit. Simple as that. It’s a competition.

Now, just don’t use the moral high ground arguments. Whatever the western nations are accusing China of doing, they have been doing it for much longer. Practically, the entire modern western society has been built on the blood and sweat of the slaves and the native people in their colonies. Just go to any museum in a western country and check out the wealth that they have accumulated from their colonies and throughout the centuries of colonization. I wouldn’t consider slavery and colonization a western standard. Yet the west has been doing these for centuries.

When needed, the west did not shy away from stealing Chinese technologies. A British gentleman, Robert Fortune, pretended to be a Chinese and stole the trade secrets of the Chinese tea industry. He has been considered as a national hero who “changed the course of history”.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I guess we have to blame the gullibility of the Chinese people who believed he was a Chinese, as well as the ingenuity of Mr. Fortune.

I would agree except for the part that Huawei is China's weakness. Actually, Huawei is China's major strength and the US is doing its best to defend against it. If it didn't and Huawei were to enter the US market without prejudice, it would absolutely decimate the competition. The US is totally in a defensive position against Huawei's market prowess.