11 ms·
China's ambassador threatened Faroese prime minister to sign Huawei 5G deal
- bigpumpkin 7y ago"Berlingske has learnt that Ambassador Feng Tie made it clear in two meetings on 11 November - first with the Faroese foreign minister, Jenis av Rana, and later the same day with the Faroese finance minister, Jørgen Niclasen, and the islands' lagmand, or prime minister, Bárður Nielsen – that if the Faroese telecoms operator Føroya Tele agreed to let Huawei build the 5G network, all doors would be open to a free trade agreement between China and the Faroese Islands. He also stated that China would not enter into such a trade agreement if Huawei did not get the contract. According to Berlingske's information, the Chinese ambassador is said to have been »very forceful« in his statements to the Faroese top officials." So is there currently a Free Trade Agreement between China and the Faroes?
- Svip 7y agoThere is not currently a Free Trade Agreement between China and the Faroese Islands. But the Faroese Islands and Greenland have been hoping for a free trade agreement with China each, outside of one Denmark proper may have with China through the EU. (Note: Neither Greenland nor the Faroese Islands are part of the EU.) Although it is possible, that the Faroese and the Greenlandic may consider the value of the Kingdom of Denmark that they are part of more valuable in face of being pressured. China pressuring the Faroese, the US considering purchasing Greenland. Both partly the result of a Kingdom of Denmark being run on autopilot by successive Danish governments. I'd imagine both getting extra attention in Copenhagen the coming decade.
- GordonS 7y agoA little OT, but I'm surprised the Faroese Islands and Greenland economies would be big enough for China to care a jot - what am I missing?
- Svip 7y agoSomeone may be able to correct me on this, or fill in the details, but part of China's larger Belt and Road Initiative, which is presented as investments into smaller countries, is to ensure non-aligned countries (in a manner of speaking) are beholden to China. China builds you a new airport, and suddenly you are indebted to them for decades. As for the Faroese Islands, and in particular Greenland, they don't care so much about their economies. What they care about is their proximity to the Arctic ocean, and its potential riches. Having a foot in the door, would be a huge boon for China. Indeed, the notion of China building oil rigs and mines in Greenland has been a subject debated a lot in Denmark. Pressuring the Faroese may be a good way to make Greenland follow suit. But there I am merely speculating. Besides, the Faroese are the ones making overtures to China, so China can counter with demands like this at no expense to themselves.
- yorwba 7y ago> part of China's larger Belt and Road Initiative, which is presented as investments into smaller countries, is to ensure non-aligned countries (in a manner of speaking) are beholden to China. Not really. The most prominent case where that happened is a shiny new port they built in Sri Lanka, but which turned out to be impossible to run profitably, so the Sri Lankan government handed them the port for a 99-year lease instead of paying their debt. Now China has a port in Sri Lanka they can't run profitably either. What the BRI is is a great opportunity for Chinese officials to earn kickbacks from Chinese companies for helping them land government contracts abroad. I assume that's what happened here: someone working for Huawei really wanted to close this deal and receive a fat bonus, so they offered the ambassador a cut for intervening on his behalf.
- paperskull 7y agoWhile this is true from an economic perspective many argue that the true value of the Sri Lankan deep water port is that it allows the Chinese military (officially this is for hunting pirates) a foothold in the Indian ocean, similar to how the US can project its power far outside its border through the use of military bases around the world. Hence it isn't a major concern how profitable the port is, or so the thinking goes.
- threeseed 7y ago> US considering purchasing Greenland Trump considered this. US and Danish governments were not seriously engaged to look at the possibility of such a purchase.
- haecceity 7y agoThat's a pretty mild threat.
- mc32 7y agoI would accept that threat! There’s nothing good in a FTA with China for a small government. They’ll get eaten alive, economically speaking.
- microcolonel 7y agoWow, coverups like this are what the death penalty is for.
- dang 7y agoPlease stop posting unsubstantive comments and/or flamebait to HN. We've already told you at least three times that we don't want to have to ban you again, but if you keep breaking the guidelines we will. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- justicezyx 7y agoNow it seems everything is on the table to get huawei into other nations network. It becomes suspicious is this really just national pride mixed with business interest, or something else...
- pc2g4d 7y agoTotally unfounded but to me reasonable speculation: it's a means of building a global surveillance network anywhere Huawei does business.
- ShorsHammer 7y agoBetter time than any to start building the means to operate on compromised equipment. Hopefully the NSA is on board this time around rather than pushing cringeworthy-level compromised Cisco products on the world.
- threeseed 7y agoIt's not unfounded. It's a fact that (a) Chinese government is dictatorial and lacks any sort of independent oversight via judiciary or media, (b) Chinese governments are heavily intertwined with companies and (c) China has a recent history of unprecedented surveillance.
- iudqnolq 7y agoLimited evidence in support of that: The Polish government recently arrested a Polish government employee and a high-ranking Huawei employee on charges of espionage. https://www.npr.org/2019/01/11/684378595/polish-police-arrest-huawei-executive-accused-of-spying-for-china https://www.npr.org/2019/01/11/684378595/polish-police-arres...
- president 7y agoIt's also a potential weapon. Imagine the havoc you can create by shutting down another nation's critical network infrastructure, especially one that is supposed to power the next generation of technology platforms and fleets of internet-connected devices.
- dirtyid 7y agoRemoved because interpreted as nationalistic arguments. But really comment on poor media reporting.
- Bizarro 7y agoYou consider yourself an operative or something. All you do is talk about Huawei or defend the CCP.
- dang 7y agoThis breaks the site guidelines badly, and we ban accounts that do that. Please read them and follow them when posting here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- yorwba 7y agoI agree that the headline is sensationalized; something like "Chinese ambassador conditions trade agreement on Huawei contract" would be more descriptive. That doesn't mean this kind of influence is acceptable; rigging the contractor selection process for a government project is classic corruption. If that's part of the job description of diplomats then I don't think it should be.
- dirtyid 7y agoIt's more classic quid-pro-quo than corruption, which the impeachment hearings should reveal, is completely normal diplomatic behavior, and only problematic when wield for personal again at the expense of national interest. Which pushing Huawei or Boeing is not, which is why this headline reads as wildly sensationalized.
- yorwba 7y ago
- leke 7y agoA peek inside the cutthroat world of politics, only brought to you by an accidental recording of a private conversation. I feel this information really shouldn't be hidden from the public as it's the public that is supposed to a part of a democratic system. How can we elect our officials and voice our opinions, if we are not informed of hostilities from foreign governments? Do you think China would have even said that if they knew that each conversation is public record.
- Svip 7y agoDiplomacy wouldn't really work if you couldn't be candid. And if you knew everything you said in diplomatic conversations would be public, you'd be less candid. Or you'd only work with those, who would provide you with secrecy. For the record, we don't know whether the Faroese government let itself submit to the pressure, or whether they are now actively pursuing other avenues. But I would imagine with the leak, that it's not the former any more. The question is whether it would have been had it not been for the leak.
- echaozh 7y agoDo you think everything the US diplomats and presidents said can be open to the public? When US is negotiating with other countries for "the greatness of America", Trump only says pleasant words which is completely legal in both countries?
- augstein 7y agoSo can we all finally agree, that Huawei stating it has no ties to the Chinese government, was a lie after all? This false claim by Huawei, is one of the most important reasons why Huawei isn‘t already banned here in Germany.[1] And while we are at it, we should also ban US companies from providing critical infrastructure like this in Germany (and Europe). After Snowden, its clear that hardware from US vendors like Cisco should be seen as potentially compromised.[2] 1) https://www.businessinsider.de/trumps-huawei-verbot-ist-reine-heuchelei-2019-5 https://www.businessinsider.de/trumps-huawei-verbot-ist-rein... 2) https://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/snowden--the-nsa-planted-backdoors-in-cisco-products.html https://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/snowden--the-nsa-p...
- xfs 7y agoBased on news reports in other countries it's a pretty consistent stance for Chinese diplomats to make the claim that if Huawei is allowed to compete in a free market manner it will be beneficial to trade relationship or if Huawei is banned for security reason it will damage trade relationship with China. The article did provide a background for such security concern from Danish defense ministry. It's still entirely in the realm of possibility that the Chinese diplomat in question asked for unfair non-market advantage, but I find it quite unnecessary because Huawei's technology is already competitive on its own, why spend political capital for such minute economic gains? A more probable story, as has already happened in many other countries, is that local ISP chooses Huawei based on price and competitiveness and is blocked by government on security grounds, then Chinese diplomats step in to remove that block based on other stick and carrots.
- Retric 7y agoFor China Huawei’s trade with any country is meaningless from an economic standpoint. It’s in no way worth the kind of political capital their spending on it’s defense. They either care for intelligence gathering or political reasons. Politically it could be anything from ideology to corruption and backroom politics. But, again the economic angle is hardly worth the effort when their risking a major backlash.
- mcguire 7y ago"The Faroese government had asked the court to put an injunction in place on the basis that publication of this information might damage the relationship between the Danish Commonwealth and China. On Monday this week the government then submitted a request to have the injunction remain in force." Hm.
- jariel 7y agoOnce again 100% validation that 5G and Huawei are part of the CCP's imperial designs. We can't blame China for playing hardball, but this is proof-positive that the government is acting in concert with Huawei and that is enough to put major tariffs, bans or at least heavy scrutiny.
- Bendingo 7y agoIt's not a threat -- it's an offer. Take it or leave it.
- cmonnow 7y agoYou don't really NEED food. You could choose to eat or you could choose to die. It's up to you. Take it or leave it. No point in playing with semantics. Fear is subjective. It is caused by ignorance of whether you might lose a wanted thing, or obtain an unwanted thing. By your logic, we can completely rid the dictionary of the word 'threat'. Name any 'threat' today, I can convert it into an 'offer'.
- cozzyd 7y agoInterestingly, in Greenland, we are forbidden from deploying Huawei equipment according to the terms of our LTE license.