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

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
AndrewS said:
For discussion

If Huawei is the world's only 5G supplier in the world, is the US shooting itself in the foot by trying to ban Huawei?



The Canadian telecom companies also estimate that the presence of Huawei has reduced equipment prices by 15%. Otherwise they'd be stuck only with Ericsson, Nokia, Cisco.

1. So the USA will face higher costs for its 5G network when compared to China.
2. The deployment of that 5G network and 5G devices will also be delayed.

Previously the USA could rely on the sheer scale of its domestic market, in order to create companies that could buy or bankrupt their smaller foreign competitors, even if they were more advanced.

But the Chinese market is now bigger than the USA in most respects eg. telecoms, autos, online, etc

In fact, the overall market for Chinese consumer retail goods is projected to be worth $5.8 Trillion in 2018, which is would be larger than the US figure. Note that Chinese retail growth is a lot higher as well.

1. So domestic Chinese companies should have a cost and time advantage in terms of 5G availability.
2. At the same time, Chinese companies will have a larger domestic market for the next generation of businesses based around 5G connectivity. Think self-driving cars, VR, AR, telemedicine, internet of things, retail, etc

That sets the stage for Chinese companies to be first to build new 5G businesses to scale, and then to expand globally. And the value of these businesses should be much greater than Huawei being shut out of the 5G infrastructure rollout in the USA.

Comments?
Click to expand...


They already shot their foot a long time ago not allowing Huawei and ZTE on 4G networks. So there is no foot left to shoot again.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Let me add another things.

Telecom technology --- from the networks, the base stations, to the smartphones --- represent the highest level of technological achievement by humankind, from its sheer breadth of patents to the resources of all the technology companies poured into it. This represents the transition of national level technologies --- where one country can create and dominate that technology alone --- to a true global level technology --- where no country can develop and dominate that technology alone, where such technology needed to be developed with partners across the globe, and then need markets across the world to sustain it.

However, there are factions in the US, and maybe around the world, that see these global technologies that tie our world increasingly together, as tools serving the agenda of globalists and globalism. For them, they would rather shoot the foot off than see this world happen.

Let me add another thing too if the EU reacts to Huawei paranoia. They can risk a tit for tat response. Right now, Nokia Siemens and Ericsson are allowed to bid and even win a fraction of the Chinese telecom market. They can lose that fraction and get kicked out of the country altogether. And that is just the beginning.
 
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
Here is another irony I want to point out.

Huawei does have wireless networking equipment in the US, just not with the big carriers. It does however, with small regional carriers.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Look at the regions being serviced by these small carriers --- red states.

United TelCom counts around 20,000 wireless customers across 17 southwest Kansas counties, and has said that Huawei supplies nearly all of its wireless network.

And United TelCom isn’t alone. The company is one of roughly half a dozen rural wireless network operators
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(PDF). More importantly, these carriers are unapologetically current Huawei customers:

  • SI Wireless counts 20,000 mobile customers across the western portions of Kentucky and Tennessee, and said the majority of its network has been constructed with Huawei equipment.
  • Viaero counts 110,000 mobile customers across Eastern Colorado, Western Kansas, Nebraska and parts of Wyoming and South Dakota. It said roughly 80% of its network equipment, including core, wireless, microwave and fiber, was manufactured by Huawei.
  • James Valley Telecommunications (JVT) counts nearly 10,000 customers in South Dakota and said that all of its wireless core and wireless radios were manufactured by Huawei.
  • NE Colorado Cellular said 80% of its equipment in its network comes from Huawei.
  • United Telephone Association said that its wireless network consists primarily of Huawei equipment.
  • Nemont Telephone Cooperative, which counts nearly 12,000 mobile customers across Montana and Northwest Dakota through its Sagebrush Cellular subsidiary, said that over 70% of its core and RAN network comes from Huawei.
  • Union Telephone Company, which offers mobile services to nearly 40,000 customers across Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and Idaho, said around 75% of its network equipment comes from Huawei.
Click to expand...
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Tam said:
However, there are factions in the US, and maybe around the world, that see these global technologies that tie our world increasingly together, as tools serving the agenda of globalists and globalism. For them, they would rather shoot the foot off than see this world happen.
Click to expand...
I call BS on this as Ericsson (Swedish) and Nokia (Finnish), Samsung (Korean) are not American companies.
ZTE and Huawei get in trouble with the U.S. especially respective if international sanctions against the DPRK and Iran.
ZTE also has a count against it as its parent is a State owned.
 
D

Dolcevita

Major
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Mace brought up this one. I was referencing this one.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

You are mistaken.

The 2 cases you reference are under China jurisdiction. Mace's case is a crime committed in China and China has full jurisdiction. Not even sure why you are bringing this up unless if you mistakenly think American citizenship automatically confers immunity.

The second case you referenced are Chinese citizen and subject to China's jurisdiction. Again you mistakenly think American citizenship automatically grants immunity.

Both cases are legal according to law.

Not the same case here.
 
Last edited:
T

Tam

Brigadier
Registered Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
I call BS on this as Ericsson (Swedish) and Nokia (Finnish), Samsung (Korean) are not American companies.
ZTE and Huawei get in trouble with the U.S. especially respective if international sanctions against the DPRK and Iran.
ZTE also has a count against it as its parent is a State owned.
Click to expand...

Banning Huawei from networks is not about because they allegedly sold telecom equipment to Iran, in fact these two issues are not connected at all.
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
Dolcevita said:
Wrong again,
Click to expand...
The charges have been brought, it's your interpretation that they are not valid. We will have to see what happens but warrant was issued and upheld she is in extradition hearing. Two nations legal systems will get a crack. First Canada to decide if the U.S claims have a base. If so then the U.S..
 
D

Dolcevita

Major
TerraN_EmpirE said:
The charges have been brought, it's your interpretation that they are not valid. We will have to see what happens but warrant was issued and upheld she is in extradition hearing. Two nations legal systems will get a crack. First Canada to decide if the U.S claims have a base. If so then the U.S..
Click to expand...

Note that US has set the precedence. US persons travelling to China, HK and Macau will be fair game and this can serve as the justification.

No formal charges has been made. Only allegations that she faces charges. BIGLY SAD
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top