7 ms·

The article mentions the 2012 US House Intel Committee report on Huawei and ZTE but says (incorrectly) it was never released. Here's the report: https://republi

The article mentions the 2012 US House Intel Committee report on Huawei and ZTE but says (incorrectly) it was never released. Here's the report: https://republicans-intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/huawei-zte%20investigative%20report%20(final).pdf https://republicans-intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligenc... This report is why the US government is taking action against Huawei. In it, Huawei refuses to answer some key questions about the structure of their company that strongly indicates they are controlled by the CCP. So what did Huawei think was going to happen after that?

yummypaint 7y ago
I think china views the concept of separation of companies, the government, and the military as a western notion. The ecosystem is fundamentally different from in the US, and western observers dont seem to be aware of this.
- catalogia 7y ago
  I don't see any confusion here. Huawei knows what's up, as does the US Government.
- rumanator 7y ago
  > The ecosystem is fundamentally different from in the US, and western observers dont seem to be aware of this. This comment misses the whole point entirely. Obviously this is not a simple issue about cultural differences. The key point is that a telecom company that is a major player in the telecom infrastructure busines and is desperately trying to control the world's telecom infrastructure is actually surreptitiously controlled by the Chinese government. This fact is not minor cultural nitpicking.
  - yummypaint 7y ago
    We're saying the same thing. My point is that looking at huawei through a western lens causes one to underestimate the threat.
    - rumanator 7y ago
      It is really not a lens issue. The world needs telecom infrastructure, and the dominant player in the next gen telecom infrastructure is actually a sockpuppet of an oppressive totalitarian nation with a worldwide imperialist agenda. How hard is it to miss the huge red flag?
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
    > is actually surreptitiously controlled by the Chinese government There's not evidence for that. It's a private company. It's not a state-owned enterprise, and doesn't function like one. > This fact is not minor cultural nitpicking. No, but it is part of a campaign to demonize China and Chinese companies. Many people in the US foreign policy establishment are worried about the existence of a peer-level competitor, and cannot accept that the US is no longer the sole superpower in the world. That's the fundamental issue here. It's why there's such a huge disconnect between all the fear about Huawei and the utter lack of evidence of backdoors in their equipment. This isn't about Huawei. It's about people in the US government trying to head off China as a competitor.
    - thoughtstheseus 7y ago
      The House Intel Committee report cited above is quite specific on evidence. Well worth the read.
      - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
        I've seen it before, but I couldn't find any specific evidence. The tenor of the report is generally characterized by the following passage: > Huawei’s failure to provide further detailed information explaining how it is formally regulated, controlled, or otherwise managed by the Chinese government undermines the company’s repeated assertions that it is not inappropriately influenced by the Chinese government. In my book, that translates roughly to, "We have no evidence that Huawei is controlled by the Chinese state, but we're going to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt." That's typical of the US government's approach towards Huawei so far. They refuse to provide evidence of backdoors, but keep insisting they're there.
        thoughtstheseus 7y ago
        Just go to any random page in the report for evidence.
        7y ago
  - 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
    As much as American government is in bed / interests aligned with its companies? Doesn't mean USA shouldn't try to fight against Chinese, but it's absurd to claim that the difference is anything else in America, there are just s bit different rules for the game and cultural rules.
- Ericson2314 7y ago
  China can organize its economy however it likes, but that's not a reason to expect other countries to be content with a lack of transparency.
- elfexec 7y ago
  > I think china views the concept of separation of companies, the government, and the military as a western notion. "China" views it that way. All 1.4 billion chinese do? > The ecosystem is fundamentally different from in the US This is simply not true. The history of US began as a government created to protect US business interests. The first major act of congress was a tariff to protect american companies. Every war we fought against the native americans, chinese, middle easterners, south americans, mexicans, etc were to further the interests of US companies. Whether you are talking about railroad companies in the 1800s or US oil companies in the 20th century. Maybe you might want to read up on where the term banana republics came from? > and western observers dont seem to be aware of this. Actually western observers are aware of it because it was the "west" which helped china industrialize. Do you want to know what country china modeled itself after to modernize its economy? The 1800s US. Which is the modeled followed by south korea, japan and taiwan as well. Pretty much every major world economy works the same exact way - collusion between state + companies + military. The only difference between US and china is that the US is the inheritor of the european colonial word order and hence is leading the "western/white" bloc. China has no bloc ( at least yet ) so is going alone at it. The separation of companies, government and military is a western notion - one that no western power practices. Which wasn't lost on the chinese, south koreans, japanese, taiwanese, etc.
  - zpallin 7y ago
    Great points all around but I've got a nitpick about the second to last paragraph. In fact, China is not going it alone. It is something like 9 unique nations that have within the last few hundred years gone through considerable change in political control. Only in approximately the last 70 years have most been forced to coalesce by the CCP. Alternatively, the primary difference between the USA and PRC is not that the US necessarily has more global influence, but that the PRC does not pretend to value the autonomy of its citizens.
agent00f 7y ago
It's so cute when Americans who parrot the party line sincerely believe it's everyone else in the world who do.
zaphirplane 7y ago
I wonder if this is a fair implication. Hypothetically let’s say huawei is controlled by the ccp what can they be made to do that an American company can’t be made to do by an American Congress and president (ccp is kind of both combined) I imagine is an American company can fight back in court thou we’ve seen stories about companies being unable to fight back or comply very willingly Serious question
- NicoJuicy 7y ago
  It makes dumping prices that kill entire industries more realistic. Eg. Solar power, steel, ... They used to take care for entire countries and they lost it all thanks to dumping prices.
- some_random 7y ago
  Chinese companies, by law, cannot refuse to assist the Chinese government in intelligence work, as per the Chinese National Intelligence Law of 2016.
  - zaphirplane 7y ago
    I am not saying 2 wrongs make a right. Can companies in other countries ?
- zaphirplane 7y ago
  I’m down voted for pointing out that basically all companies comply with the directives of the president/parliament/prime minister. Then we have an article about a NSA lotus notes back door

yummypaint 7y ago

I think china views the concept of separation of companies, the government, and the military as a western notion. The ecosystem is fundamentally different from in the US, and western observers dont seem to be aware of this.

catalogia 7y ago
I don't see any confusion here. Huawei knows what's up, as does the US Government.
rumanator 7y ago
> The ecosystem is fundamentally different from in the US, and western observers dont seem to be aware of this. This comment misses the whole point entirely. Obviously this is not a simple issue about cultural differences. The key point is that a telecom company that is a major player in the telecom infrastructure busines and is desperately trying to control the world's telecom infrastructure is actually surreptitiously controlled by the Chinese government. This fact is not minor cultural nitpicking.
- yummypaint 7y ago
  We're saying the same thing. My point is that looking at huawei through a western lens causes one to underestimate the threat.
  - rumanator 7y ago
    It is really not a lens issue. The world needs telecom infrastructure, and the dominant player in the next gen telecom infrastructure is actually a sockpuppet of an oppressive totalitarian nation with a worldwide imperialist agenda. How hard is it to miss the huge red flag?
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
  > is actually surreptitiously controlled by the Chinese government There's not evidence for that. It's a private company. It's not a state-owned enterprise, and doesn't function like one. > This fact is not minor cultural nitpicking. No, but it is part of a campaign to demonize China and Chinese companies. Many people in the US foreign policy establishment are worried about the existence of a peer-level competitor, and cannot accept that the US is no longer the sole superpower in the world. That's the fundamental issue here. It's why there's such a huge disconnect between all the fear about Huawei and the utter lack of evidence of backdoors in their equipment. This isn't about Huawei. It's about people in the US government trying to head off China as a competitor.
  - thoughtstheseus 7y ago
    The House Intel Committee report cited above is quite specific on evidence. Well worth the read.
    - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
      I've seen it before, but I couldn't find any specific evidence. The tenor of the report is generally characterized by the following passage: > Huawei’s failure to provide further detailed information explaining how it is formally regulated, controlled, or otherwise managed by the Chinese government undermines the company’s repeated assertions that it is not inappropriately influenced by the Chinese government. In my book, that translates roughly to, "We have no evidence that Huawei is controlled by the Chinese state, but we're going to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt." That's typical of the US government's approach towards Huawei so far. They refuse to provide evidence of backdoors, but keep insisting they're there.
      - thoughtstheseus 7y ago
        Just go to any random page in the report for evidence.
        7y ago
- 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
  As much as American government is in bed / interests aligned with its companies? Doesn't mean USA shouldn't try to fight against Chinese, but it's absurd to claim that the difference is anything else in America, there are just s bit different rules for the game and cultural rules.
Ericson2314 7y ago
China can organize its economy however it likes, but that's not a reason to expect other countries to be content with a lack of transparency.
elfexec 7y ago
> I think china views the concept of separation of companies, the government, and the military as a western notion. "China" views it that way. All 1.4 billion chinese do? > The ecosystem is fundamentally different from in the US This is simply not true. The history of US began as a government created to protect US business interests. The first major act of congress was a tariff to protect american companies. Every war we fought against the native americans, chinese, middle easterners, south americans, mexicans, etc were to further the interests of US companies. Whether you are talking about railroad companies in the 1800s or US oil companies in the 20th century. Maybe you might want to read up on where the term banana republics came from? > and western observers dont seem to be aware of this. Actually western observers are aware of it because it was the "west" which helped china industrialize. Do you want to know what country china modeled itself after to modernize its economy? The 1800s US. Which is the modeled followed by south korea, japan and taiwan as well. Pretty much every major world economy works the same exact way - collusion between state + companies + military. The only difference between US and china is that the US is the inheritor of the european colonial word order and hence is leading the "western/white" bloc. China has no bloc ( at least yet ) so is going alone at it. The separation of companies, government and military is a western notion - one that no western power practices. Which wasn't lost on the chinese, south koreans, japanese, taiwanese, etc.
- zpallin 7y ago
  Great points all around but I've got a nitpick about the second to last paragraph. In fact, China is not going it alone. It is something like 9 unique nations that have within the last few hundred years gone through considerable change in political control. Only in approximately the last 70 years have most been forced to coalesce by the CCP. Alternatively, the primary difference between the USA and PRC is not that the US necessarily has more global influence, but that the PRC does not pretend to value the autonomy of its citizens.

agent00f 7y ago

It's so cute when Americans who parrot the party line sincerely believe it's everyone else in the world who do.

zaphirplane 7y ago

I wonder if this is a fair implication. Hypothetically let’s say huawei is controlled by the ccp what can they be made to do that an American company can’t be made to do by an American Congress and president (ccp is kind of both combined) I imagine is an American company can fight back in court thou we’ve seen stories about companies being unable to fight back or comply very willingly Serious question

NicoJuicy 7y ago
It makes dumping prices that kill entire industries more realistic. Eg. Solar power, steel, ... They used to take care for entire countries and they lost it all thanks to dumping prices.
some_random 7y ago
Chinese companies, by law, cannot refuse to assist the Chinese government in intelligence work, as per the Chinese National Intelligence Law of 2016.
- zaphirplane 7y ago
  I am not saying 2 wrongs make a right. Can companies in other countries ?
zaphirplane 7y ago
I’m down voted for pointing out that basically all companies comply with the directives of the president/parliament/prime minister. Then we have an article about a NSA lotus notes back door