Britain bans China's Huawei, handing US big win
 |
The logo of Chinese company Huawei is seen on the screen of a Huawei mobile phone in London on July 14, 2020. - Britain on Tuesday ordered its telecom providers to stop purchasing 5G equipment from China's Huawei giant from the start of next year, and to strip out all of its equipment by 2027 (Photo by DANIEL LEAL-OLIVAS / AFP) |
The policy reversal hands a major victory to US President Donald Trump's administration in its geopolitical and trade battle with China.
Digital minister Oliver Dowden's announcement followed a meeting chaired by Prime Minister Boris Johnson of his cabinet and National Security Council.
"From the end of this year, telecoms providers must not buy any 5G equipment from Huawei," Dowden told parliament.
He said the new guidelines also required all of Huawei's existing 5G gear to be stripped out "by 2027."
Huawei called the decision "disappointing" and motivated by politics.
"Regrettably our future in the UK has become politicised, this is about US trade policy and not security," Huawei UK spokesman Ed Brewster said.
"This disappointing decision is bad news for anyone in the UK with a mobile phone."
 |
Merkel: I'm forced to use Huawei because your CIA and NSC were spying on my phone |
The UK was then completing its tortuous departure from the European Union and looking to establish strong ties with powerful Asian economies that could fulfil Johnson's vision of a "Global Britain."
But the Trump administration told the UK government that its decision imperilled intelligence sharing and could even result in the relocation of some US fighter jets from England.
Washington believes the private Chinese company could either spy for Beijing or shut down rival countries' 5G networks in times of war.
Huawei has always denied this and pointed to two decades of cooperation with British security agencies that checked on the safety of its existing 3G and 4G networks.
The British review was triggered by new US sanctions in May that blocked Huawei's access to US chips and semi-conductors at the heart of 5G networks.
The restriction raised the possibility of Huawei having to switch from trusted US suppliers to alternatives whose safety could not be guaranteed by UK security agencies.
Johnson had come under growing political pressure to not only dump Huawei but also adopt a tough line with China for its treatment of Hong Kong and repression of ethnic Uighurs in the western Xinjiang region.
 |
WTF, 'herd immunity' didn't work for me |
British telecoms companies have warned that stripping out all existing Huawei equipment could cost them billions and take years to implement.
BT chief executive Philip Jansen even raised the possibility of Britain suffering service "outages."
Dowden conceded that Tuesday's announcement means more Britons will have to wait longer to get full access to the speedy new network.
"This means a cumulative delay to 5G roll-out of two to three years and costs of up to £2 billion," he said.
"This will have real consequences for the connections on which all our constituents rely."
Johnson has challenged the Trump administration to come up with a reliable and cost-effective alternative to the Chinese firm.
Britain is pushing for the creation of a 5G club of nations that can pool their resources and provide individual components for an alternative solution that could be applied across the world.
"Put simply, countries around the world – not just in the United Kingdom – have become dangerously reliant on too few vendors," Dowden said Tuesday.
Tuesday's announcement does not cover the older 3G and 4G networks because their equipment is not impacted by the US sanctions. - AFP
huawei can still do 5g in iran n north korea, not bad. n perhaps spratly island as well with najib/umno support. thief can work together, no problem one.
ReplyDelete5,000 year old Bully getting bullied by a 500 year old Bully.
ReplyDeleteI'm Lovin' It....!
The 500 year old Bully's Deputy Sheriff Down Under is also getting very upset with the 5,000 year old Bully.
ReplyDeleteQUOTE
Behind the charm, China is a bully - and we need to sell our wares elsewhere
The Herald's View
May 24, 2020
China has smiled and courted the world in its attempt to become an economic powerhouse and pull its 1.4 billion citizens out of poverty. Its economic growth is staggering and unrivalled – averaging 9.5 per cent a year since 1989 – and Australia has prospered too off China’s horn of plenty.
But behind the charm China remains a bully-boy regime that will brutally squash those who do not toe its line. It showed its true colours again when in the space of a week it turned its economic prowess against Australia and its political might against Hong Kong.
We should have never allowed ourselves to become so seduced by China’s growth. Australia willingly offered up our natural resources, our food and our wine, even our universities, to the Chinese state. We stood by and watched as trade with China grew to account for 36 per cent of our national exports, worth $153 billion a year. But it is now a matter of urgency that we unravel ourselves from this dependency and find more ports at which we can sell our wares.
In the past fortnight, China has banned beef imports from four Australian abattoirs, directed Chinese power stations to bypass Australian coal and imposed an 80 per cent tariff on Australian barley. While disquiet in China about barley prices predates coronavirus, it is hard to separate the action from the timing. Our exporters appear to be bearing the brunt of the regime’s fury at the Morrison government’s call for an independent review into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic.
The Chinese ambassador has also thrown threats at our wine, tourism and education sectors, all of which would be hit hard by a loss of Chinese trade. The ambassador’s comments in April appear to have been directed at bullying those sectors into lobbying the Australian government to do as China wished – and drop the call for an inquiry.
Meanwhile, with international critics distracted by a pandemic that the evidence suggests began on Chinese turf, China announced its intentions to introduce ‘national security’ laws in Hong Kong that will stymie the region’s pro-democracy movement and likely harm the city’s economy and its standing as a global financial capital.
China is willing to absorb any economic hit from this move. It was humiliated by pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong last year and it is determined to impose its will on the region, regardless of a treaty signed with Britain in 1984 that is meant to preserve Hong Kong’s capitalist system and the rights and freedoms of its people until 2047.
And the timing of this latest move is in Beijing’s favour – adverse publicity and strong retaliation from Western nations are far less likely when those nations are focused on a health emergency that is overwhelming their hospitals and killing thousands of their countrymen every day. Even still, Australia, Canada and Britain managed to turn outwards from their own problems on Saturday and issue a joint statement condemning China's move and declaring it in contradiction of the 1984 agreement.
As Kevin Rudd pointed out on Saturday, Australia did not show much nous in the way it put forward its proposal for an inquiry into the pandemic, posturing before it had international support and leaving Australian exporters open to retaliation. But it is appropriate to ask questions about how China handled the pandemic in its early stages, and whether its public health policies allowed the virus to infect humans.
The government is right to stand up to bully tactics. It is also right to defend and promote Australia’s national interests. That is what it is elected to do. But while it was once in our national interest to eat from China’s horn of plenty, that is no longer the case. It is time to wean ourselves off it. As a nation, we must seek nourishment elsewhere.
UNQUOTE
Retired UK Intelligence and Security chiefs have been publicly stating for years that allowing Huawei to run the core UK telecomunications system would be a severe security risk.
ReplyDeleteCurrent serving Intelligence officials are not allowed to speak to the press, and certainly not openly take positions criticising a government decision.
However, retired senior officers certainly can , as long as they do not reveal any secret information.
Going through retired colleagues is a known and frequently used conduit for raising such concerns in the UK Civil Service.
The earlier UK Government decision accepting Huawei was an economic and political compromise, protecting UK Commercial links to China as well as avoiding revenge from the CCP.
The calculations have changed since then, especially after the Covid-19 crisis.
So, now the China bashers have a field day!
ReplyDeleteBut do they know it's early day?
Wakakakakaka…
1st, 犬养 mfer, indeed China can work with many others besides the current US, UK, Oz & Taiwan. Japan & SKorea can be arm-twisted to join the pack later.
How many r there?
What's the percentage of users covered under this pack?
How far back they have to wait to use their 5G network/equipment while others r zooming years ahead in app/business developments?
If yr uncle Sam is forcing his way through then there will be two different 5G groupings in the world.
Remember, Betamax & NTSC video formats?
Who won?
Why & how?
Just to give u, well dwelling kataks, some hints - popularity, coverage & cost!
AGAIN - who's the thieves?
Blurred mfer, Oz is NEVER anything but a well-trained cur of uncle Sam. Every time Sam shouts, it jumps - reward or no reward is irrelevant bcoz it can't help to just follow the sound!
The reality for Oz's continue survival as a 'developed' nation lies with how he plays her ties with the Asia nations, especially China.
Uncle Sam won't & couldn't lift a hand to help Oz economically when the troubles, especially economic one, hit Oz.
For the past 10yrs, Oz has been well covered economically by his favuorable trades with China. Practically, w/o the China trades, Oz would be in the same diabolical economic situation like Taiwan!
Is that why this mongrel behaved just like that 白眼狼， forgetting who has been keeping it stands & well-feeds!
Maybe, both of them find their true original family tree & revert back to that animalistic nature before domestication!
Old moneyed mfer, which retired UK Intelligence and Security chiefs have been publicly stating for years that allowing Huawei to run the core UK telecomunications system would be a severe security risk?
Named some names lah!
Since u like to quote western conspiracies, let me helps u out.
1) why this piece of shit by a junior minister? Boris suddenly losing his ball?
"From the end of this year, telecoms providers must not buy any 5G equipment from Huawei," Dowden told parliament.
He said the new guidelines also required all of Huawei's existing 5G gear to be stripped out "by 2027.""
Let me helps u out - not allowing to buy any Huawei 5G equipment from the END of 2020. Why not IMMEDIATELY?
If the UK telcos can still buy now till end of the yr then they have to stripe them all off buy 2027!
What logic?
The real oxymoron kind from a minister who has been told to read what he doesn't know anything about?
2) "The British review was triggered by new US sanctions in May that blocked Huawei's access to US chips and semi-conductors at the heart of 5G networks.
The restriction raised the possibility of Huawei having to switch from trusted US suppliers to alternatives whose safety could not be guaranteed by UK security agencies"
How ironic a reply!
Do read back to my early debunk about yr risk assessment fart!
The restriction triggered by new US sanctions in May that blocked Huawei's access to US chips and semi-conductors at the heart of 5G networks!
What a bunch of baloneys, used to con illiterate non-techies.
The May US sanction covering semiconductor manufacturing using ≧ 5% US technologies. & many of the 5G networks DON'T use that kind of chipset/CPU.
There r also multiple channels of suppliers for these electronic components that DON'T fall within that band of restriction!
In short, the national security issue has been sidelined in this junior minister's clarification. Instead, a 'new' excuse of limited suppliers were used as the chief punch!
Well, only morons, western propaganda minions & blurred demoNcractic dickheads would buy this UK fart, lock, stock & barrel.
Go on - keep helping to spread this piece of shit. Bcoz it's already sticking in yr shameless face!
Huawei is 99% owned by a holding company that is wholly owned by a mysterious entity called "trade union committee" and the remaining 1% by its founder Ren Zhengfei, a former military officer.
ReplyDeleteIf the ownership stake claimed by this "trade union committee" is genuine, and if the trade union and its committee function as trade unions generally function in China, then Huawei may be deemed effectively state-owned.
If this is not a Red Light Flashing I wonder what is.
Blurred mfer, if u have read how Huawei distributes her profit, u would have had a better idea of "trade union committee" !
DeleteDon't use yr f*cked understanding of trade union, as trademarked by yr auntie pommie, to judge "trade union committee".
It's not that trade union that caused untold misery to yr auntie pommie prior to maggie Thatcher's industrial big bang that finally put an end to those endless strikes!
Didn't I say u r blurred?
anyone with even very little historical knowledge of how communist work know they make use of union to conceal their identity.
Deletetell us how huawei distribute profit could demonstrate that they r not under communist control? n y huawei not listed, a similar question many msian ask wrt petronas.
犬养 mfer, just a reminder - this isn't for yr petrified mental consumption!
DeleteJust an apt paraphrase to debunk that urban legend of communists make use of union to conceal their identity.
Anyone with even very little historical knowledge of how capitalists work, know they make use of free market mechanism to conceal their evil rapacious profit grabbing intention.
Unionism is just a manifestation of a core concept of communism - a congregation of the working class to safeguard their common interests.
So, every communists worth their embraced idealism wouldn't conceal their identity about union workability.
There is NOTHING to hide!
This isn't the same as those irrational/illogical union movements as so shamefully played out by those pommie militant 'unionists'. These people ain't no true unionists as detailed by communism. They r demands grabbers as exhibited in so many of the demoNcratic 'unionists' in the current West.
While superficially crying JUST demands for the rights/benefits of their union members, they drafted their members into militant conflicts that caused bloods & miserys that resulted in worst situations than those they opposed initially.
The profit orientated capitalists squeeze the time/work of their workers to extract more money for the elite management & investing shareholders. As been showcased in the current picture of wall street listed companies.
In short, workers get crumbs while the selected capitalists get the lumpy meat. A 20/80 Pareto principle of the economic proportion.
Now, this is how Huawei distributing company profit. A reverse of that 20/80 Pareto principle in favour of the working class!
What do u call this kind of employer?
Huawei functions within a communist state. Like every company in the world, he is subject to the governing rules of the state. Nothing wrong in that except demoNcratic indoctrinated katak would cry father mother about authoritarian state conspiracies while ignoring the same about that demoNcratic malfeasances!
There r many companies in the world that make tons of money & yet remain unlisted.
Heard of Koch Industries? Norwegian sovereign wealth fund? SHEN-LI Holding Pte Ltd? These r multibillions unlisted companies!
Huawei isn't public listed for a very simple reason. It's already commonly owned - by majority of its workers.
Besides, it's hugely profitable & doesn't need public money. Thus, Huawei doesn't need to cater to the relentless profiteerings of the public investors while still able to attract highly capable/skill personnel into its company profile.
Pertronas has a ketuanan agenda that China DOESN'T need. It's a 犬养 mfer, like u, that choose to distort that melayu initiative to fart!
Good one, CK. These farking parroting blind mice will keep on proudly parading their ignorance and just one timely pin prick will deflate their swollen rotten balloon, hehehe
DeleteFollowing is Huawei's comical "explanation" on its ownership....from big blue books that are locked up, to phantom shares, an employees union to a basketball, badminton and table-tennis club to God Knows What.
ReplyDeleteQUOTE
Who Owns Huawei? The Company Tried to Explain. It Got Complicated.
By Raymond Zhong
April 25, 2019
SHENZHEN, China: As the Chinese smartphone and telecommunications equipment giant battles the United States government over whether it should be allowed to build the world’s mobile networks, the company has been going to great lengths to present itself as open, transparent and trustworthy.
It has not always worked out. One reason is that certain simple questions about Huawei do not have simple answers.
The chief secretary of Huawei’s board of directors, Jiang Xisheng, spoke for more than 90 minutes to a small group of reporters on Thursday. The goal was to help explain the company’s ownership after two American researchers wrote a report accusing Huawei of being misleading about the issue.
Mr. Jiang’s explanation boiled down to this: On paper, he said, Huawei is owned by a labor union that solicits donations from employees when their colleagues have health problems and the like. The union also supervises the company basketball club, Mr. Jiang said. Naturally, it is a little more complicated than that.
Huawei’s ownership is a murky matter because the company has never, in more than three decades of existence, sold shares to the public. The firm says that it is entirely owned by its employees, and that no outside organizations, including any affiliated with the Chinese government, own shares.
But these assurances have never quite dispelled American officials’ suspicions that Beijing and the Communist Party are somehow pulling the strings. Top American officials have also been alarmed by new Chinese laws that require companies to assist in national intelligence work.
Huawei showed reporters on Thursday what it described as evidence of its independence: a big blue book, kept behind glass and under lock and key in a drab white room at the company’s headquarters in Shenzhen, a southern Chinese city.
Within its 10 volumes are said to be the names of all the Huawei employees who hold “restricted phantom shares” in the company — proof, the company says, that no piece of Huawei is owned by the Chinese government.
Huawei and its chief financial officer, Meng Wanzhou, are facing criminal charges in the United States related to theft of trade secrets and violations of sanctions on Iran. American officials have urged other governments to bar mobile carriers from using Huawei’s gear in their next-generation wireless networks, arguing that oceans of sensitive data could be exposed to Chinese intelligence-gathering.
China’s government exerts control over the country’s private businesses.
According to Chinese corporate records, Huawei Technologies is wholly owned by a holding company called Huawei Investment & Holding.
That holding company has two shareholders, corporate records say. Mr. Ren, Huawei’s chief executive, owns a little more than 1 percent of shares. The rest are owned by an entity called the Union of Huawei Investment & Holding.
This is Huawei’s labor union, Mr. Jiang said on Thursday, and it owns most of the company purely out of legal convenience. Under Chinese law, only certain kinds of entities can be the registered owners of a closely held company, and a labor union is one of them.
The union has no influence over the company’s business operations, Mr. Jiang said. It does, however, supervise after-work activities for employees.
That basketball club, for instance. The badminton and table tennis clubs, too, Mr. Jiang said.
UNQUOTE
That's like saying a company FOUR TIMES the size of Petronas is 1% owned by its CEO and 99% by their employees via their Badminton Social Club. Don't be TIPU-ED by Bully.
DeleteAs u have been tipu-ed by yr biasness & indoctrinated demoNcratic farts!
DeleteBully like to boast, they have 194,000 employees and they spend US$15 billion annually on R&D, by far the most compared to other companies. But they also say they are privately owned, not government. 99% owned by their Employees Badminton club, meaning each employee contributes US$ 77,000 just for R&D alone. What is their salary I wonder.
DeleteWhat Bully-shit.
That's WHY u r not a Huawei employee!
DeleteThat's WHY Huawei can be a multibillion company with cutting edge technologies!
Enough said!
do a buy british last, no more enrol anglo uni, go tehran n pyongyang u instead. its not abt betamax vs vhs or windows vs mac, its democracy n librrty vs authoritarian plus fascism plus dictatorship plus nazi plus emperor.
ReplyDeleteWakakakakaka…
DeleteU want to promote demoNcracy?
Tough luck!
Yrs only work under a fart filled well, modelled after the failed 台毒 heaven.
Ooop… have u realised that u r showcasing yr one-liner statement with yr 南魔萬 England again?
so pray tell ccp leader child want to go oxford or tehran u? now is the best time to show the chinese n muslim hv a much much superior model. bila carrie lam mahu throw her cambridge cert into dustbin? or else how to show patriotic?
Deletecannot be the colonial master refuse to buy better n cheaper ccp made n ccp kids still insist to go whiteman u mah, so thick face one meh, tehran no china dream is it?
one liner is to let u stick to topic not doing merry go round n shifting goal post.
WTF, 5,000 year old civilization choose to study at 500 year old civilization University.
DeleteQUOTE
China: Xi Jinping's Harvard-educated daughter Xi Mingze
February 14, 2015
Beijing: Chinese President Xi Jinping's Harvard-educated daughter has made her first public appearance since her father took power in 2013 as she joined her parents in visiting a remote village where Xi began his political career.
UNQUOTE
犬养 mfer, AGAIN, who r u to dictate to where the children of CCP leader want to go?
DeleteIt's the personal choice of those children!
Remember personal choice & freedom u so choose to champion?
Unless u r exercising doubling standard like forcing yr daughter to go to Formosa to be indoctrinated like u. Tough luck, now that she has seen the lights & reject yr despot insistence!
Wakakakakaka…
Another showing of that 南魔萬 England as in this oxymoron one-liner!
"one liner is to let u stick to topic not doing merry go round n shifting goal post."
Read AGAIN yr farts.
Huawei tech security threats to CCP leaders' children to patriotism!
Who is shifting goal post in a merry-go-round?
Actually whose interests are being protected by the UK's ban on Huawei ?
ReplyDeleteCertainly it wasn't made in the interest of the ordinary citizens of UK who will suffer long stretches of outages and cost billions more to complete, not to mention the late roll out of 5G.
The only interests that this decision serves are those of the US boot-licking conservatives who will personally profit from US investment in the replacement network.
So the ordinary Joe and Jane will have to empty their wallets to support the privileged Tory elite and enjoy the CIA and every one of the 5 eyes intelligence group listening to and reading everything about you via your brand new but hellishly expensive and rather late arriving 5G but soon after, Huawei would have roll out 6G.
Huawei is the only provider that sells the whole package, software and hardware, and on top of that, Huawei's hardware is much more compact than either Nokia or Ericsson...meaning that towers and racking are incompatible such that major engineering and infrastructure changes are needed. Make no mistake, this whole lie is going to make Cisco systems and many politicians rich while integrating the US intelligence into the world's 5G networks.
This security concern is sheer bullshit. As the ex prime minister of Australia said, it's all lies and bullshit to insure access for the 5 eyes intelligence group. They never had hard evidence against Huawei.