Tuesday, February 4, 2020

Huawei, 5G and the Department of State Pot Calling the Kettle Black

With Washington taking a strong anti-China stance on just about everything that comes out of the world's most populous nation and the greatest threat to its plans for global hegemony, a critique of China's plans for 5G on the Department of State website are most interesting.  This is particularly pertinent given that the United Kingdom has recently announced that it is allowing China's Huawei to help rollout the nation's next generation of super-fast wireless/mobile networks.

Let's start by looking at the decision to proceed with Huawei by the current United Kingdom government.  Here is an article from the Global Times, the mouthpiece for the Communist Party of China, regarding the diplomatic repercussions of the United Kingdom blocking Huawei from participating in the rollout of 5G:

Here is a key quote:

"A certain country is hyping up the so-called "Huawei threat", clamoring for a "technology cold war", mounting pressure on its allies, and attempting to build a "wall" that divides the global telecommunications sector, Liu said.

He suggested that "the British government would resist the pressure, ignore external interruptions and remain committed to independent decision-making."

China has reiterated its solemn position on many occasions regarding the participation of Huawei in Britain's 5G development, with the ambassador doubling down on the nation's stance that Huawei technology is safe, the company has made tremendous contribution to China-UK cooperation, and the harm of banning Huawei is obvious. 

"Economic globalization is an irreversible trend of our times. Countries should choose multilateralism over unilateralism and hegemony, choose win-win cooperation over putting one's own country first, and work to tear down walls instead of erecting them," read his emailed remarks.

Banning Huawei is a move against this trend, which could lead to serious losses in terms of time, expense and competitiveness, he stressed. 

Excluding Huawei from Britain's 5G network would mean that Britain's telecommunications system would be more expensive, and would be upgraded to 5G standards later than necessary without the participation of Huawei, analysts said."

A "certain country" is the United States, a nation that has spent significant energy trying to dissuade the Johnson government from making a decision in favour of Huawei given the alleged security risks.

Even with these protestations by Washington, Huawei will be allowed limited access to the United Kingdom's 5G network (much to Washington's chagrin) even though it fits the classification as a "high risk vendor.  Despite the United Kingdom's decision, they have put in place certain plans to safeguard the nation's telecoms network as shown here:

In case you were curious, here's what Huawei had to say about the U.K.'s decision:

...and here is what the had to say about Europe's decisions to allow Huawei to continue participating in the rollout of Europe's 5G network:

Now, let's look at the main subject of this posting, the United States Department of State's comments on Huawei.  Let's start with this video:

Here is the lead-in page from the Department of State's 5G website:

Here's what the Department of State has to say about 5G security and its inherent promise and  risks:

Here's what the Department of State has to say about the issue of trust in 5G technology in general:

Here's what the Department of State has to say about Huawei in specific:

Lastly, here's what Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had to say about China in general and Huawei in particular in Demceber 2019:

"With so much on the line, it’s urgent that trustworthy companies build these 21st-century information arteries. Specifically, it’s critical that European countries not give control of their critical infrastructure to Chinese tech giants like Huawei, or ZTE.

Just consider Huawei’s track record. The company, based in Shenzhen, maintains links to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. It is implicated in espionage in the Czech Republic, Poland and the Netherlands, has allegedly stolen intellectual property from foreign competitors in Germany, Israel, the United Kingdom and the United States, and is accused of bribery and corrupt practices in countries like Algeria, Belgium and Sierra Leone. Huawei receives massive state support that unfairly allows it to undercut prices offered by market-based rivals.

But securing 5G networks means more than preventing any one company from building them. China’s National Intelligence Law makes clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can force any 5G supplier headquartered in China to turn over data and take other actions in secret.

That’s troubling, because the CCP itself is behind a long list of malicious cyber activities. Just last year, the U.S. Department of Justice charged members of the Tianjin-based hacking group APT 10 — which acted in association with the Chinese Ministry for State Security — with attacking dozens of European and American firms to steal intellectual property and sensitive personal information.

With 5G capabilities, the CCP could use Huawei or ZTE's access to steal private or proprietary information, or use “kill switches” to disrupt critical future applications like electrical grids and telesurgery centers. And one only needs to look at the CCP’s extensive human rights abuses in Xinjiang — so clearly laid out in recently leaked documents — to see how it is using technology for mass repression." (my bolds)

Let's close with this thought.  Washington's primary concern with Huawei in specific and China in general is that China's leadership will use the implementation of 5G to steal both intellectual property and sensitive personal information.  This begs the question; what is it that Five Eyes (the intelligence alliance of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States) are doing with the massive volume of human intelligence, military intelligence and signals intelligence that they are collecting on all of us every day?  Thanks to Edward Snowden, we are well aware of the function of America's massive intelligence network and how it exists solely as a new millennium form of "Big Brother", watching and recording our every move.  How is this any better than what China and Huawei "might" do if they have inside access to the rollout of the global 5G network?  This is yet another prime example of the pot calling the kettle black and how Washington is using anti-China propaganda to force other nations to see things its way. 

No comments:

Post a Comment