Reuters doesn't 'accept' the allegations, it's merely reporting on them: "UK parliament committee says Huawei colludes with the Chinese state" is not the same a

Reuters doesn't 'accept' the allegations, it's merely reporting on them: "UK parliament committee says Huawei colludes with the Chinese state" is not the same as "Huawei colludes with the Chinese state". The report from the Select Committee is available online [1] and although it does cite _some_ very loose indications of collusion, I agree that more substantive evidence could be presented. From the report: > A further geopolitical consideration our inquiry highlighted was Huawei’s relationship with the Chinese state. It is clearly strongly linked to the Chinese state and the Chinese Communist Party, despite its statements to the contrary, as evidenced by its ownership model and the subsidies it has received. Additionally, Huawei’s apparent willingness to support China’s intelligence agencies and China’s 2017 National Intelligence Law are further cause for concern. Having a company so closely tied to a state and political organisation sometimes at odds with UK interests should be a point of concern and the decision to remove Huawei from our networks is further supported by these links. Concern about Huawei is based on clear evidence of collusion between the company and the Chinese Communist Party apparatus, and it is important that the West does not succumb to ill-informed anti-China hysteria and recognises the mutual benefits of Chinese involvement in our economy. We recommend that the UK, and allies, should ensure that decisions taken around the involvement of Chinese companies are taken in an evidence-based manner, and only when risk is demonstrable should decisions around removal be made. [1] https://committees.parliament.uk/work/134/the-security-of-5g/publications/ https://committees.parliament.uk/work/134/the-security-of-5g...