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

[solarz]

The next step is that they will ban the delivery of critical components to Huawei to stop or slow it's 5G-expansion. I hope Huawei is a different story then the almost death story of ZTE last May after the ban of critical components. China is still dependent on important technology from the West. This should change and fast!

Huawei is not as vulnerable as ZTE.

 

[Appix]

Huawei is not as vulnerable as ZTE.

I hope you are right.

 

[taxiya]

The next step is that they will ban the delivery of critical components to Huawei to stop or slow it's 5G-expansion. I hope Huawei is a different story then the almost death story of ZTE last May after the ban of critical components. China is still dependent on important technology from the West. This should change and fast!

Huawei is a different story, that is sure thing.

ZTE has two businesses, the system and the phone. Its phone is based on Qualcomm chip which was blocked last year. It's system uses American supplied components (electrical-optical converter for transportation network) which were blocked last year. All these blockade were openly reported. So it is a proven fact.

Huawei also has the two businesses. It's phone is immune as we know. Huawei is very strong in system equipment, its router business is as strong as Cisco. I highly suspect that they don't use American components like the critical electrical-optical converter and more. Besides, the American companies in ZTE's case are far from the only choice from the west. There are European and Japanese suppliers besides Chinese vendors. If Trump is able to do the same damage to Huawei like he did to ZTE, he would not be hesitate to do so. At the end, US could only resort to hostage taking to put pressure on Huawei, that is a clear evidence that US has no industrial supply-chain leverage over Huawei.

Another reason that US took on ZTE but not Huawei is that ZTE is inside US market, Huawei is not (never allowed in). ZTE's US business was probably (my guess) on a condition of using American component to smooth the relationship. Trump's intention is to push out any Chinese vendor from US market. So is the ban. ZTE except its phone business is not as vulnerable as it may look. The damage of 2018 can not be avoided because the using of American components was part of the entrance condition. But after the ban and initial pain of switching suppliers, I would expect ZTE to recover pretty well in the market of system unless ZTE is still (too greedy) holding on Qualcomm. I would prefer ZTE to give up its phone business for a full independent from US.

 

[solarz]

Huawei is a different story, that is sure thing.

ZTE has two businesses, the system and the phone. Its phone is based on Qualcomm chip which was blocked last year. It's system uses American supplied components (electrical-optical converter for transportation network) which were blocked last year. All these blockade were openly reported. So it is a proven fact.

Huawei also has the two businesses. It's phone is immune as we know. Huawei is very strong in system equipment, its router business is as strong as Cisco. I highly suspect that they don't use American components like the critical electrical-optical converter and more. Besides, the American companies in ZTE's case are far from the only choice from the west. There are European and Japanese suppliers besides Chinese vendors. If Trump is able to do the same damage to Huawei like he did to ZTE, he would not be hesitate to do so. At the end, US could only resort to hostage taking to put pressure on Huawei, that is a clear evidence that US has no industrial supply-chain leverage over Huawei.

Another reason that US took on ZTE but not Huawei is that ZTE is inside US market, Huawei is not (never allowed in). ZTE's US business was probably (my guess) on a condition of using American component to smooth the relationship. Trump's intention is to push out any Chinese vendor from US market. So is the ban. ZTE except its phone business is not as vulnerable as it may look. The damage of 2018 can not be avoided because the using of American components was part of the entrance condition. But after the ban and initial pain of switching suppliers, I would expect ZTE to recover pretty well in the market of system unless ZTE is still (too greedy) holding on Qualcomm. I would prefer ZTE to give up its phone business for a full independent from US.

It's survival of the fittest, really. ZTE made some wrong business decisions and paid for it.

 

[gelgoog]

ZTE could easily make their own processor with enough capital. All it would take would be an ARM license for the CPU and GPU.
The 5G modem AFAIK is more about software than hardware.

 

[Jura The idiot]

now I read
Lawyers for Huawei’s Meng Wanzhou blast ‘unlawful’ arrest and ‘corrosive’ remarks by Donald Trump as they say US extradition case should be thrown out

• Meng was arrested in Canada at US request on suspicion of defrauding bankers by falsely depicting Huawei’s alleged operations in Iran, breaching US sanctions
• Her lawyers say that she was deprived of her Canadian Charter rights and that Trump’s remarks on the case have made a trial impossible

Updated: 6:20am, 9 May, 2019

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Lawyers for Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou blasted Canadian authorities and US President Donald Trump on Wednesday, saying they would seek to have her US extradition case thrown out because her arrest was “unlawful” and Trump’s “corrosive” remarks about her case had prejudiced any trial.

Her team also said at an administrative hearing in British Columbia’s Supreme Court that they would fight extradition on the grounds that the US fraud charges against her failed to satisfy the requirement of criminality in Canada.

Lawyer Scott Fenton said Meng’s detention at Vancouver’s airport on December 1 lasted three hours and deprived her of her Canadian Charter rights, when she was questioned about the US charges and her electronic devices seized before she was formally arrested.

“Ms Meng will apply to this court … for an order staying proceedings as an abuse of process,” he said. Her “unlawful search, detention, interrogation and delayed arrest” represented a “pattern of serious charter violations” by Canadian and US authorities, he said.

“Her rights were placed in total suspension,” he said.

Fenton also condemned Trump for his “political abuse” of the process, saying his comments on the case were “intimidating and corrosive of the rule of law”.

“They should disentitle the requesting state [the US]” from seeking Meng’s extradition, he said, adding that no jury, properly instructed, could find Meng guilty of fraud.

But lead crown counsel John Gibb-Carsley fired back, saying that the crown was reviewing an audio recording of her arrest and that the timing of the extradition hearing “should not be held hostage” by Meng’s team of four lawyers.

Meng, who is the daughter of Huawei Technologies’ founder and CEO Ren Zhengfei, is accused by US authorities of defrauding HSBC bankers by falsely depicting Huawei’s alleged operations in Iran, in breach of US sanctions.

She was arrested at the request of American authorities as she changed planes on her way from Hong Kong to Mexico.

Some believe the accusations are linked to the US trade war with China. On December 11, Trump said he might intervene in Meng’s case if it would help win the trade war, something her lawyers had previously raised in court.

Much of Wednesday’s hearing was devoted to scheduling what promises to be a lengthy process.

A judge who oversaw Meng’s bail application in December said then that the extradition case could last months or even years.

Gibb-Carsley told Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes on Wednesday that the court should hear the extradition case “as early as possible”, while suggesting that Meng’s legal team’s schedule was a problem.

Richard Peck, another of Meng’s lawyers, objected to Gibb-Carsley’s remark, arguing that the extensive evidence involved in the case justified an October 15 start to the extradition hearing, instead of the August 19-30 time frame proposed by Gibb-Carsley.

“We are proceeding expeditiously,” Peck said, contrasting that claim with the five-year delay between Meng committing the alleged fraud on August 22, 2013, “at a teahouse in Hong Kong”, and her being arrested.

“There’s a little bit of temerity [by the US],” he said, adding: “We have done everything in our powers to move this process forwards.”

Holmes said Meng’s lawyers had made a strong case for delays. She scheduled disclosure applications for September 23-25 and September 30-October 4, ahead of any start of an actual extradition hearing.

Holmes did not set a date for the extradition case, but estimated it would be “some considerable time in the future”. She adjourned the hearing and asked Meng to return for the disclosure talks on September 23.

Meng is currently free under private guard on C$10 million (US$7.4 million) bail, living with her husband, Carlos Liu Xiaozong, in a C$5.6 million (US$4.1 million) home in the suburb of Dunbar.

But she could soon be on the move: Gibb-Carsley said during Wednesday’s hearing that the crown consented to Meng moving to the second of her Vancouver houses, a larger C$15million (US$11 million) mansion in the exclusive Shaughnessy neighbourhood. It is just a few doors away from the official residence of the US consul general.

Meng’s Shaughnessy home, which has large grounds and a fence, was better suited to her security than her Dunbar residence, which is open to the street at its front, said another of her lawyers, David Martin.

“Apparently, large numbers of people go there [to the Dunbar home] and approach the house,” Martin said.

Meng is allowed to travel throughout the city but must wear a GPS tracker and abide by an 11pm curfew. She pays for her own private jailers to prevent her from fleeing.

The case has drawn worldwide attention and a furious reaction from Beijing, which has repeatedly demanded Meng’s release. Two Canadians, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, have been detained by China on espionage charges, in a move widely seen as retaliation.

 

[Jura The idiot]

now noticed the tweet

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

·

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China on Thursday urged the US to immediately withdraw the arrest warrant and extradition request for Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou and asked Canada to release her and let her return to China safely: Chinese FM spokesperson

 

[Nutrient]

ZTE could easily make their own processor with enough capital. All it would take would be an ARM license for the CPU and GPU.
The 5G modem AFAIK is more about software than hardware.

You reminded me of the following.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"British chipmaker Arm Holdings, a SoftBank Group subsidiary, will cede control of its Chinese operations to a new joint venture involving itself and Chinese partners"

By purchasing a controlling stake in ARM China, China has made it much harder for the U.S. to cut off supplies of the ARM chip used in smartphones by Huawei, Xiaomi, Oppo, Vivo, etc. (Assuming that mainland Chinese foundries become capable of fabricating the chips, which will probably be true soon.)

Perhaps China learned from the MIPS experience. A few years ago, China seemed to have settled on using the MIPS architecture for future products, but this was cut off when an American company (Imagination Technologies, I think) bought all of MIPS's CPU patents. That won't happen with ARM.

 

[gelgoog]

With ARM you basically pay a license for the architecture, or for the processor designs. Once you have the license you are good to go. The prices are also well known and fairly public. With MIPS things were way less clear.

Another architecture which is gaining some traction on the data center is RISC-V. But the barrier to entry for someone like ZTE is a lot higher. You need to make your own chip design, probably software support too, only the ISA is readily available.

Imagination Technologies is also a UK company. In fact, they are mostly threading water, they lost Apple as a customer and they don't have any other large clients that I know of. MIPS is mostly dead too. AFAIK they are now owned by a Chinese venture fund.

Also, given most smartphones use ARM, using any other architecture is a real problem. Especially with Android. Where MIPS could be more easily used would be in backend applications.

 

[localizer]

Don’t forget China technically has access to AMD Zen designs via Hygon and THATIC so x86 might be secure unless they play on some technicality.