US seeks to freeze out Huawei from Europe using rule of law argument
- Washington urges allies to ban networking products from countries without independent court systems
- Move is aimed at keeping Chinese tech firms out of advanced 5G networks
The US is urging allies to ban networking products from countries without independent court systems, an approach intended to block China’s Huawei Technologies and ZTE from competing for new 5G telecoms networks in Europe and Asia.
Rob Strayer, the State Department’s deputy assistant for cyber policy, said some European countries were signalling support for broader rules that would effectively freeze Chinese 5G products out of their markets.
The US is engaged in a global campaign to keep Chinese tech companies out of advanced 5G networks promising faster connections, enabling uses such as autonomous vehicles and remote surgery. American officials fear that the Chinese government may force companies such as Huawei to incorporate software code or hardware that would allow Beijing to spy on the US or allies and disrupt sectors ranging from power to transport and manufacturing in a crisis.
“The most fundamental security standard, really, is that you cannot have this extrajudicial, non-rule of law compliant process where a government can tell its companies to do something,” Strayer said on Monday.
Some European countries have dismissed US warnings that Huawei may enable Chinese espionage.
President Donald Trump’s administration has barred the use of Huawei equipment by US agencies and contractors and has been pushing its allies to take similar steps. The US points to China’s National Intelligence Law, which requires all its organisations and citizens to assist authorities with access to information. According to the Trump administration, that makes any Chinese company a potential tool for espionage.
Why the price of Europe following the US’ Huawei boycott may be far too high
Many countries – including France and Japan – have balked at directly targeting Huawei. China’s commerce ministry warned last month that Japan’s restrictions on Chinese technology could damage bilateral ties. The US hoped that focusing on broad standards that did not name Huawei but nonetheless blocked it would be more palatable for its allies, Strayer said.
So far, not a single European country has followed the US’ lead.
But Strayer, who has engaged in 5G diplomacy with dozens of nations, said the efforts were paying off. He praised Germany for making progress towards adopting strict 5G standards.
The French parliament started debate this month on a bill that would subject equipment to tests that may be tantamount to suppliers handing over industrial secrets in order to be eligible to bid for contracts.
“We want to see them apply that in a way that does end up – because of the way the laws apply in China – banning Huawei and ZTE because they are part of a regime that doesn’t have the rule of law,” Strayer said.
Huawei has rejected US allegations that its products may be used for Chinese espionage.
If they do not, the US has warned allies, sharing information on matters of national security could become complicated. “It will make it more difficult – much more difficult – if they adopt technology or use vendors that are not secure,” Strayer said.
How US went from telecoms leader to 5G also-ran without challenger to China’s Huawei
Australia, New Zealand and Japan have acceded to US requests to bar Huawei’s 5G equipment. Those allies have also banded together to provide aid to the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea so that they would reject a Huawei submarine cable carrying broadband connections, saying the line represents a national security threat at its connection point in Australia.
The US was not in talks with Huawei – nor with China – to negotiate terms that would satisfy national security and cyber authorities in Washington, Strayer said. There was nothing the company or the Chinese government could do to convince the US that their equipment was safe, he said, not even turning over all Huawei or ZTE code to the US for inspection.
Due to the volume of code, the prospect of unknown weaknesses and patches, Strayer said “we would be exposing ourselves to substantial vulnerabilities”.
