Trump gloats, telcos weep, and China is furious: How things stand following UK's decision to rip out Huawei The ink has scarcely dried on the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport's speech to the House of Commons that confirmed Huawei would be banned from the UK. The landmark ruling has drastic consequences for the Chinese comms giant. Its second-biggest business unit is carriers, and Huawei has long been involved with the …
Really is a sad day, when an overseas government, or indeed, one single person, can dictate to UK companies what technology they can deploy.
If this was a case of gov.uk asking the telcos to prefer/consider the use of home grown technology rather than imported technology I would fully support it. But it isn't about that as we all know. It's about Boris being Donalds finger puppet and his desperation for any trade shafting, sorry, trade deal. Not that there are any home grown offerings from the likes of Marconi, Plessey, Ferranti, GEC, Racal, etc, etc, as successive governments were quite happy to let them all go to the wall one by one....
Agree with every word. Short of actually bending over for Trump, ol' Bojo has toadied to him at every turn, instead of just telling him to **** off and mind his own business. This incompetent, impeached, paranoid and narcissistic USA president does NOT rule the rest of the world, although it's obvious he would like to, and I rather think that he has more pressing things that he should attend to, one of which being his gross mishandling of a certain virus. I'm not sure what is the most dangerous - Trump or the Coronavirus but I think Trump is probably the "winner" here. The man is a danger to all humanity, without a doubt. To think he is in charge of a nuclear arsenal makes me shudder.
"Really is a sad day, when an overseas government, or indeed, one single person, can dictate to UK companies what technology they can deploy."
From the article:
"The starkest words came from the China state-run Global Times. In an editorial, the English-language daily said it was "necessary" for China to retaliate against the UK, "otherwise wouldn't we be too easy to bully?"
"Such retaliation should be public and painful for the UK," it added."
I assume you mean this?
Look, Trump is an utter twat, and Boris is as useless as he is an utter twat. But China is threatening 'public and painful retaliation' for not buying products from one of their companies. Even the US doesn't do that if people buy Airbus rather than Boeing.
Also, you can always tell what China is up to, because it's usually what it accuses others of. In this case, it accuses the UK of 'bullying' China, by not buying some routers. This new use of the word bullying (I have apparently been bullying McDonalds for years now) means it's them who are simultaneously bullying and gaslighting. As usual.
Trump's statement shows that the ban is purely a political attack on China.
Of course it is but that doesn’t make it a bad thing. If you can prove that it’s entirely about US domestic politics and nothing at all about China’s reprehensible record in almost everything, their deceit over covid19 being only the latest, then you may have a point.
Trump banned, well put a 300% tariff on, Canada's competitor to the Boeing 737 - that sounds like bullying
He tried to, but the legal system stopped him doing so. That’s the difference between China and the US (and other democratic societies) right there.
"He tried to, but the legal system stopped him doing so. That’s the difference between China and the US (and other democratic societies) right there."
The threat of a 300% tarrif was enough trash Bombardier's order book and kill off their business. Mission accomplished for Boeing & Trump.
re: "Even the US doesn't [retaliate] if people buy Airbus rather than Boeing"
Maybe I'm misremembering, but wasn't there some kerfluffle a while back about U.K. (and/or E.U.) being threatened with some sort of trade hitback if U.K. forbade import of U.S. "frankenfood" (genetically modified), or bleached chickens, or something? I remember being incensed that Amurka would bully another country into lowering its standards on what its citizens eat (instead of raising our own) so that lowest-common-denominator "food" processors could pump their swill beyond 'Murka's borders, but there are likely key details I'm forgetting.
Another thought: If U.K. is offering citizenship (or at least the path thereto) to Hong Kongers (which I loudly applaud), is this going to further taint what remains of U.K./China relations?
"Another thought: If U.K. is offering citizenship (or at least the path thereto) to Hong Kongers (which I loudly applaud), is this going to further taint what remains of U.K./China relations?"
It already has. China are not happy about it. China have been pushing the boundaries for quite some while now and finally countries other than their immediate or nearby neighbours are starting to sit up and take notice.
I think it's more China's use of terminology and use of the English language - after all they're not native English speakers and if you look a lot of their other press releases (or whatever you call them), they're full of the same tone/rhetoric.
Trust me - any country/company who went through something like this would do the same thing - it's just they wouldn't publically say it. The way China engages and uses the press doesn't help progress their side of the argument.
I've had a long running opinion that essentially the West doesn't really get along with any country it first hasn't beaten in a war of some sort.
But the West has beaten China in a war - the Opium Wars.
Add also the Boxer Rebellion. China has plenty of reasons not to trust the West.
In terms of Britain, their entire empire is essentially based on domination of other countries - sorry - I mean bringing truth, freedom and democracy - my bad.
America is founded on insurrection - everyone apart from the indigenous people are immigrants - again domination.
New Zealand - again domination of the indigenous - oh yes the Maori may get along with the settlers, but I'm pretty certain we all have a fairly good idea of what would have happened to them if they had rebelled in the same way the native Americans had and to the same degree.
Australia - ex penal colony and again - domination of the indigenous people.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying other countries are perfect and without fault. My point being is that I am all for equal opportunities - I keep my distance from most people because I don't like people very much and I generally think at some point they're going to stab you in the back. Countries are just places where there are lots and lots of people - so you get an extension of that.
There is no "good" person or "good" country - we're all part of a quagmire of excrement.
Why is it a sad day to ban Chinese Communist Party kit from sensitive telco systems? Do you want your text messages copied to Chinese Intel centres? Do you want the Chinese Communist Party to be able to shut down your 5G network any time they choose? It is puerile to suggest this is Boris Johnson kow-towing to America, as the same ban is already in place in Canada, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. It is a matter of National Security rather than trade.
He kow-towing to Putin.
It's simple, Huawei were prepared to open their kit for the UK to ensure it wasn't backdoored. USA kit we *know* is backdoored because they just slipped a bill *requiring* it be backdoored.
We know where that Intel is going. Trump has been giving Intel to Putin on supposed terrorist, even as Putin has been ordering the killing of US troops by the same terrorists. If Trump'd kill his own troops for quid-pro-quo, do you imagine he would protect UK secrets? Everything is up for sale here.
https://www.justsecurity.org/71279/trump-pushed-cia-to-give-intelligence-to-kremlin-while-taking-no-action-against-russia-arming-taliban/
Can I remind you, that stupid politicians put their government comms systems "into the cloud"?
Nokia might be a good compromise but Cisco is a disaster.
I think a lot of people (Boris included) think Trump will be out this election but the GOP have gone full election suppression, they have shown they are perfectly capable of blocking voters and now they have motive. They know he's a puppet, but country be damned!
South China seas aren't the limits of Xi's empire building clearly, draw a circle around that island he built, extend it all the way out to land, and you can see he plans on controlling those countries.
Putin is also clearly empire-building an east-west control zone which will give him control of petroleum assets. I'm expecting Georgia or Iran to flip next. Georgia from invasion, Iran from the push-me-pull-you that Putin and Trump are doing.
The UK most imminent threat is Putin. By far.
EU's most imminent threat is Putin. By far.
Putin is running a biological warfare attack against USA. He may not have created the virus, but his guys are certainly helping to try to spread it and kill as many Americans as they can.
The most urgent threat is Putin & Trump.
Except they were already banned from the sensitive parts. The only 5G bits coming from Huawei were base stations and the traffic is all encrypted there. What the UK has just done is the equivalent of banning them from selling mail sorting machines because they might read your letters.
As a refugee, who worked for Plessey and GEC, with colleagues who joined us from Marconi, Ferranti and Racal, before we got sold off, yet again... Yep, I agree, the UK has done everything it can to marginalise itself in the world of technology and manufacturing over the last 5 decades or more.
OT:
Big_D, think you'll really enjoy these 2 books , the ICL Anthologies :
http://www.bitsandbytes.shedlandz.co.uk/hc_books.htm (free)
As will ANYONE who likes IT hands-on war-stories.
So why are telcos around the world not ripping out Cisco and Juniper kit?
*
Ah.....it's OK for the NSA and GCHQ to do their snooping with their chums at Cisco..........
*
...........but when those upstart Chinese might be doing the EXACT SAME THING....absolutely not OK.
*
Can Boris and Donald spell "hypocricy"?? Clearly not!
"...........but when those upstart Chinese might be doing the EXACT SAME THING....absolutely not OK."
Sounds like you get it. Welcome to being involved with America. Show up with a sore arsehole so that it's not as much of a shock to the system once you're done.
What idiotic moronic statements you come out with, really...
China is a Communist suppressive nation.
It is persecuting both Christians and Uighurs alike.
It is persecuting its own people.
They have taken control of the South China sea (illegally) and provoked many countries in that area while building new island for weaponry.
Huawei itself was selling (smuggling) banned components to North Korea and Iran.
They have plotted and achieved the purchase of massive amounts of land and resources (businesses) in foreign countries, clearly with an ulterior motive.
China is also building a large number of aircraft carriers and destroyers in shipyard scattered around China. Why is that do you think ?
.. and there is more ...
Perhaps it is not so much an arse licking party like you say, but actually the West finally waking up and growing some kahunas realizing they need to do something to curb China's growing aggression.
Grow up and read a bit more before you rabbit off about Trump and Johnson.
And by the way to the author of this article, perhaps you too should do a bit more research before throwing out your liberal views.
Ever heard of the phrase "One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist?"
Every country has done something bad - either now or in the past - why is Britain selling weapons overseas now? In large companies you have to undergo training courses that tell you that although something may not be illegal, you have a moral obligation to do the right thing and any disciplinary will look at whether you did so and the reasons for doing so. Can Britain say it is/was morally correct to sell arms?
Don't get me wrong - there's always a way you can justify something - but morally if person a sold a gun to person x who then used it to kill person y - surely person a has a legal part to play in any repercussions that follow from this?
Let's not talk about Tony Blair and 45 minutes ... a country was invaded off the back of that decision and nothing was found. (On a side note, given the Allies have got access to the country, I don't know why they don't just build a base on the sly, and turn around and say "FOUND IT") - justtification complete - absolute vindication!
Why is America's military budget so big - I can't remember the stats, but I think it is larger than the combination of the next 3 countries underneath it - it's ok when America's on your side, but what if they're not?
I could go on ... but essentially my point is this - all humans have an element of evil in them - and countries are collections of people.
China *is* a dictatorship and all we have been doing is lining their pockets while they publicly silence democracy. The sad part is that Britain no longer has the people & companies that could develop this technology (or nuclear technology) and have become dependent on the Chinese dictatorship to provide these.
I for one welcome this!
Me too but, like Iraq, it's for the wrong reasons.
There was a time when we could have fully justified an Iraq invasion, on humanitarian grounds, and we did nothing. And we should have been putting economic pressure on the PRC for decades, rather than turning a blind eye to, not just lack of democracy, but human rights abuses. What we did, instead, was allow them to weaponize global capitalism against us when, with a bit more international co-operation, we should have been using global capitalism to encourage China to move in the direction of becoming a modern, democratic state.
I would agree with you John on some aspects.
We as a capitalistic world put China in the place they are today, by using that one country to manufacture every damn thing from pharmaceuticals to nuts and bolts. We have built their wealth while they sat back, got rich off our greed for more profit, and lost jobs.
Now they control the supply lines, which they can shut off whenever they want to in order to cripple us, as has been seen already, which leaves the West in a real hole.
Along with your thinking yes, the democratic leaders should have poured effort into local manufacturing and resourcing for self sustainability and started to wind back the dollars flowing to China. Thus moving the control from China to the West.
But unfortunately we do not have very smart politicians generally speaking nor are we as a community willing to pay a bit more for locally made products. Corporate greed for a better bottom line, community desire for cheaper and cheaper products. A.K.A - China superiority.
We need to change that.
They can't do that, once committed patents cannot be withdrawn from a pool. That would defeat the whole purpose by allowing companies to contribute patents, get their patents used in building a standard, then once the standard was final pull the patents. They could say "we demand 10x what you would have been paying us previously" and you'd have no choice if you wanted to use the 5G standard.
According to another site, this has already happened.
>They can't do that, once committed patents cannot be withdrawn from a pool.
Well... What is a FRAND Patent?
I suggest Huawei's patents can be argued to be "IP products and services" which would seem to make them fall under the generic "goods and services" covered by the US government's trade restriction regulatons...
Their usage (to build products as opposed to contribution to Standards development) certainly does not fall under the exception "work with China’s Huawei to develop standards for 5G and other cutting-edge technologies". So looks like another exception is going to have to be put in place - like yesterday - otherwise Huawei can contribute patents to a FRAND pool, but US companies will be left jerking around in the wind when it comes to using them...
My detailed analysis is as follows:
[Human rights]
America: Poor
China: Very Poor
Russia: Very Poor
[Criminal]
America: Yes
China: Yes
Russia: Yes
So if my privacy and security is going to be ripped away from me regardless as I get digitally raped from every angle... Then America might as well be the one doing it (by an admittedly very small margin).
From the point of view of today's technical assessment this is the wrong decision. This assumes a benign China - us techies don't like to think that people are nasty (with a few exceptions).
From a much longer political decision of international geopolitics you might get a different answer: depending on how you value human liberties and your view of Chinese political ambitions.
If our UK politicians have taken a long view I am very pleased at this rare event - irrespective of them being right or wrong. If they are just bending over for Trump - I am not pleased.
This is what we voted for. If you voted for Brexit, if you voted for the Tories, even if you didn’t vote Tory but you failed to vote tactically at the last election, this is on you.
It isn’t just the UK that is populated by pig turd thick doofuses either - if only it was - you can tell a low IQ country by how far to the extremes it votes - although right wing extremism is the particular problem at the moment, and there’s nothing centrist about the Tories.
I’d apologise for the rant, but I’m bloody furious - and I will be for a while yet. And this isn’t about whether or not ditching Huawei is right or wrong - at this point I hardly care. What matters is our motivation - and that’s demonstrably on the cock.
Your naivety is touching.
Why do you think intercept evidence can't be used in UK courts?
https://fullfact.org/law/intercepted-evidence-cant-be-used-court/
The Global Times has no independence from the official position of the Chinese government, and provides English-language official news distribution outside of the PRC. Sadly, very few news sources in mainland China are independent from the government, so take what they say with a grain of salt.
In Blighty you can find government is controlled by offshoots of a news agency which many believe to be hell-bent on rewarding itself with/as a dynasty.
It is though a mighty fraught enterprise with all manner of twists and turns to negotiate and appease, methinks. Definitely not an exercise for either the fickle and faint hearted or the intellectually deficient.
I’m quite sure that I’ll get downvoted into oblivion for saying this, but I’m going to do it anyway.
This probably is geopolitical rather than being anything to do with security, but with what the CCP has been doing to its citizens over the last few years, they can get fucked. We have all the justifications we need to hit them hard in the wallet.
We have all the justifications we need to hit them hard in the wallet.
Well, Cinia, in the guise of CGN do have us over a barrel with respect to the new nuclear power stations - Hinkley Point C, Sizewell C and Bradwell B. In the case of the latter, the agreement being to deploy CGN's HPR1000 design. As it is, IIRC, the Sizewell C deal gives a premium on the generation tariff.
And does the UKGBNI support it? Or are they going to denounce it or just try to ignore it and remain deaf, dumb and blind to it and pretend it is not happening on their watch?
Over to you, BoJo. Something you can ask Mad Mike when he call on you next week ......... https://www.state.gov/secretary-pompeos-travel-to-the-uk-and-denmark/
And if you want to know why Pompeo is calling on tiny Denmark [population 5,790,721] .....
The most recent action against the Nord Stream 2 pipeline was taken by Washington in December, when it disrupted the construction of the project in Danish waters when it was only some 90 miles short of completion. This month, however, Denmark approved a petition that gives the company building the pipeline a technical workaround to the US sanctions, and the works might restart as early as next month. ...... https://www.rt.com/news/494854-nord-stream-unfair-competition/
China is a one-party communist state with an awful record on human rights (Uighurs, Tianamen Square), not to mention a long history of IP theft. It's also in an expansionist mode (South China Sea, Belt & Road) that is likely, sooner or later, to have it butting up against the US and other friendly nations. Having a Chinese-owned company run strategic national infrastructure always seemed like a very risky choice. Some folks claim Huawei is not controlled in any way by the Chinese government, but given the requirements of the National Intelligence Law, that seems like wishful thinking, even if the company wanted to remain impartial. The risk is not just spying, but the ability to disrupt national infrastructure.
USA is a two-party capitalist state with an awful record on human rights (BLM, Capital Punishment, Border Control, Drone Strikes), not to mention a long history of IP theft. It's also in an expansionist mode (Iraq , NATO, Safe Harbor) that is likely, sooner or later, to have it butting up against China and other friendly nations. Having a USA-owned company run strategic national infrastructure always seemed like a very risky choice. Some folks claim CISCO is not controlled in any way by the USA government, but given the requirements of the Patriot Act, that seems like wishful thinking, even if the company wanted to remain impartial. The risk is not just spying, but the ability to disrupt national infrastructure.
That's all it boils down to. I don't believe for a moment Huawei would be a threat. However, free trade is good; always consensual; never owed. It is up to China now to decide what China is. On its current path, China is looking like a nation that will mostly sell its tech into Africa and a bunch of allied (mostly poorer) nations, while it continues to pursue its local territorial ambitions and the mass internment (and alleged mass sterilisation) of a section of its population, all under the banner of a socialism with Chinese characteristics that increasingly looks like national socialism. If you disagree with what China is doing, you have two tools available: All out war or the levers of trade and sanctions. I prefer the latter; I worry we'll end up with the former.
The reason for banning them are their suspected ties to the PLA.
Instead of doubling down on threats like a Mexican drug cartel does, the CCP could have taken steps to take away doubts about the ties between them and Huawei.
Instead they do nothing in in this sense, threat the rest of the world like they are children, threatening them with a beating if they are not obedient.
If China wants to be successful in selling tech, they could change their laws, freeing firms of the obligation to cooperate with what the CCP defines as "Chinese security needs", be more transparent and not behave like it is Germany embittered by the Versailles treaty.
This is like Aesops fable.
Whatever Huawei or China does to dissuade would never be enough. Do you want China to turn round and say "If Huawei finds any crimes being committed against any parties then we allow them not to have to inform us". Do Western companies operate with the same parameters ?
In the UK, if you go into hospital with a gunshot wound the medics are obligated to inform the police - on the face of it there's no real need for this - but we understand it's because a serious crime has taken place - are you saying because you believe China to be a totalitarian state then subversion is Ok ? Does this mean if someone doesn't believe the Western system is ok then they can do the same thing ?
Just so that you're aware - in your last paragraph if you replaced all references to China to America the statement would be equally as valid.
Also - for the record - I don't think one country is better than another - I hate everyone equally.
Oh do come on amFM, the narrators of the program are literally tugging on the chain like rabid dogs to turn the program against the East, throwing a niblet to both blue corners followed up by yet another Salisbury pantomime to herd the immunity.
Heck, I was even asked many years ago if I could write better, then suggestions on a postcard.
I’m shuffling my deck of illuminati playing cards as we speak, and with both outbreak and pandemic cards clearly on the table, the answer to the question asked nearly a decade ago “where do we go from here” seems to have raised the stakes in the great game quite substantially does it not?
Interesting alliances, and twists and turns galore to come, yet the corporations still have the sights set at the eastern alliances sipping replica starbucks on replica rolexes, wearing naughty nike’s on their great walled fake iphones, and the salavation of the vast markets untapped with little room to progress beyond their already stretched skins do they not? ...
After dithering for long the UK has finally booted Huawei from its telecom network. A bold political decision with huge economic and geopolitical impact. The CCP has inveigled itself into influencing most nations decision making process while itself remaining closed to the world, zealously guarding its authoritarian interests and hegemonic designs.
At some future date China would have grown into a all-knowing grotesque monster with information about the whole world for its manipulation to achieving global hegemony. The UK would be so deeply compromised that it would not know right from wrong and be forced to toe the Communist line.
Consider yourselves saved from the Commie-trap.
"After dithering for long the UK will eventually boot Huawei from its telecom network in several years time".
"Already, the US has grown into an all-knowing grotesque monster with information about the whole world for its manipulation to achieving global hegemony."
TFTFY
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
