In the United States, President Donald Trump
alleges that the “deep state” was in play to undermine his presidency.
Towards this end, he blamed the “deep state” for the scandal involving
Ukraine where he supposedly told his counterpart to step up the
investigation into the affairs of his political rival Joe Biden and his
son in that country
THE term “deep state” is new to many. However, one thing is becoming clear – it is a tool that politicians are increasingly using as an excuse to camouflage their short-comings.
In the United States, President Donald Trump alleges that the “deep state” was in play to undermine his presidency. Towards this end, he blamed the “deep state” for the scandal involving Ukraine where he supposedly told his counterpart to step up the investigation into the affairs of his political rival Joe Biden and his son in that country.
In Malaysia, politicians of Pakatan Harapan contend that the “deep state” is in play and was sabotaging the efforts of the government to carry out its plans and promises.
For all the negativity that the “deep state” has invoked in Malaysia, this informal group of senior diplomats, military officers and civil servants have earned the praises of the masses in the United States. This comes hot under the heels of the testimonies of Trump’s former advisor on Russian affairs, Fiona Hill and Ukraine embassy political counsellor David Holmes in the impeachment hearing of Trump for his role in Ukraingate.
In many ways, Malaysia has its own hero in Nor Salwani Muhammad, one of the officers who worked for former Auditor General Tan Sri Ambrin Buang.
Nor Salwani told a court hearing how she secretly left a tape recorder to capture the conversation of Malaysia’s top civil servants, in a meeting called by former Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Ali Hamsa, on doctoring the audit report of 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).
The audit report deleted four important points before it was tabled to the parliamentary Pubic Accounts Committee (PAC).
People such as Nor Salwani, Hill and Holmes are part of the executive who have played a pivotal role in checking the wrongs of politicians when they run the country. Trump has described the testimonies of Hill and Holmes as the workings of the “deep state”.
In Malaysia, Nor Salwani is regarded as a hero. However, she comes from the executive wing of the government that some politicians regard as the “deep state”. In the United States, Trump feels that the military, diplomats and some from the private sector were working together to undermine him and has labelled them as the “deep state”.
But does the “deep state” really exist as a formal structure or is it just some loose alliances of some segments of unhappy people serving the government?
Nobody can really pinpoint what or who actually are the “deep state” in Malaysia. It is not an official grouping with a formal structure. It generally is seen as a movement that is a “government within a government” pursuing its own agenda that runs in contrary to what the ruling party aspires.
It is said to largely comprise the civil service working well with the police and the different arms of the judiciary. Some contend that the “deep state” is closely aligned to Barisan Nasional.
The term “deep state” was coined in Turkey in the 1970s and it primarily comprised the military and its sympathisers who are against the Islamic radicals. In recent times, even the powerful President Recce Tayyip Erdogan complained that the “deep state” was working against him.
Which raises the question – if the “deep state” was so influential, how did the Turkish president get himself re-elected in 2018?
In Malaysia, the ruling Pakatan Harapan party has blamed the “deep state” for some of the incidences such as the arrest of several people, including two DAP state assemblymen, under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma). Deputy Rural Development Minister R. Sivarasa contended that the “deep state” was responsible for the arrest and it was done without the consent of the top leadership.
Other ministers have blamed the movement as sabotaging their efforts to deliver on their promises to the government. Towards this end, speculation is rife that there would be a round of changes in the civil service to dismantle the “deep state”.
Some have even pinned the commando style abduction of pastor Raymond Koh and the disappearance of social activist Amri Che Mat on the “deep state”.
If the “deep state” was really in the works, it seems like the government would be facing a humongous task to dismantle it.
Firstly, nobody is able to pinpoint who these people are except that they apparently have tentacles at every level of the executive and in the police and probably military. Secondly, if the so-called `deep state’ is essentially made of the civil service, then they have done some good work to help uncover the cover up work of senior members of the executive wanting to hide the 1MDB scandal.
In reality, it will be hard to dismantle the much talked about `deep state’ in Malaysia. Many do not look out for riches or fame. It is likely that they are more driven to seeing what is best for the executive branch of the government.
A more practical approach would be to work together with this movement of individuals, if they can be identified, and find out the root cost of them being unhappy with the government.
Only 18 months ago, the “deep state” was very much against former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his efforts to cover up the massive debt that 1MDB accumulated. The money was largely raised outside Malaysia and diverted to entities under the control of fugitive, Low Taek Jho better known as Jho Low.
There were countless reports on 1MDB that were leaked through the social media. From banking transactions of money going into the account of Najib to pictures of him on holiday with his family and Jho Low were made available on the social media.
Isn’t this also the work of some clandestine movement within the executive that some deem as the “deep state”’?
Consider this – even in Turkey, where the word “deep state” was coined, many believe it is still in works, protecting the country’s interest. In the United States, there is a view that the “deep state” is the gem in the government.
The government can make as many changes as it wants on the civil service or agencies under its watch. However, it is not likely to wipe out the “deep state” movement.
The views expressed are the writer’s own. Source link
The battle over 5G network suppliers is part of a broader push by the Trump
administration to check China's rise as a global technology powerhouse.PHOTO: REUTERS
News Wrap: Huawei to develop 5G networks in Russia
https://youtu.be/Lzu4MBIzhyA
SHANGHAI/HONG KONG (REUTERS, BLOOMBERG) – China granted 5G licences to the country’s three major telecom operators and China Broadcasting Network Corp on Thursday (June 6), giving the go-ahead for full commercial deployment of the next-generation cellular network technology.
The approvals will trigger investment in the telecommunications sector which will benefit top vendors such as Huawei Technologies, just as the Chinese network equipment provider struggles to overcome a US blacklisting that has hurt its global business.
China approved four operating licences for 5G networks, setting the stage for the super-fast telecommunications system amid simmering tensions with the US over technology and trade.
The country’s three state-owned wireless carriers and China Broadcasting Network Corp were granted licences for full commercial deployment, according to state broadcaster CCTV.
The operators, China Mobile Ltd, China Telecom Corp and China Unicom Hong Kong Ltd, have been testing the technology in several cities including Beijing and Shenzhen.
Full deployment of 5G networks in a country with almost 1.6 billion wireless phone subscriptions is expected to boost local companies designing gear for applications in autonomous driving, robotics, remote surveillance and virtual reality. The faster-than-expected approvals also come as Shenzhen-based Huawei Technologies Co, the world’s largest manufacturer of networking equipment, has vowed to maintain its lead in the face of a US campaign pressuring allies not to use the company’s products.
Shares of some 5G-related companies fell in Hong Kong and Shanghai trading after the licence announcement, trimming gains made earlier in the week on expectations the companies would benefit from the push for the new networks.
China Tower Corp, the three major carriers’ infrastructure provider, fell 3% as of 10.50am in Hong Kong, paring its advance in the past four days to 9.1%. ZTE Corp, which makes handsets and telecom gear, dropped 4.3%, trimming its four-day rally to 7.1%.
Betting on the fate of the nation’s next generation of telecom networks has been one of the year’s hottest trades in China and Hong Kong. An index of telecom-related shares is up 20% this year, led by a 54% rally in ZTE’s Shenzhen-traded stock.
Beijing-based Xiaomi Corp in March said it would introduce China’s first 5G phone in May or June. Huawei and ZTE, have also said they intend to offer handsets compatible with the technology this year.
Introducing 5G will directly add 6.3 trillion yuan (US$912bil) to economic output and 8 million jobs by 2030, the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology estimates. — Bloomberg
US President Donald Trump's latest confrontation with
China's telecoms giant Huawei may plunge the world into a long-term
technology “cold war,” forcing global companies to pick sides between
the US and China.
All parties suffer during the trade war, a game of
“killing 1,000 enemies while losing 800 of our own.” Many institutions
have forecast the impact of increased tariffs on China's economic growth
to be around 1 percentage point. While there is no need to panic, we
should also prepare for worst-case scenarios.
New world order: People visit the bund in front of Shanghai's financial district of Pudong. The US-China trade war looks like the beginning of a profound break in the global order. As China and the United form two opposing economic and geopolitical coalitions, the rest of the world will be forced to choose. - Reuters
President Donald Trump has long said the goal of his trade policy is simply to get better deals for Americans. But as the trade war intensifies, it seems increasingly likely that his policies will lead to something more: a lasting break with China and a new alignment of global power.
First, consider the evidence for the break.
The current impasse in trade talks was sparked by a sudden change in terms on the part of the Chinese negotiators.
This change likely caught the administration off guard, but Trump’s response is notable: He immediately ramped up tariffs, then announced a ban on business with Chinese telecommunications firm and national champion Huawei Technologies Co.
These actions have backed Chinese President Xi Jinping into a corner and turned the trade dispute into a matter of Chinese national pride.
This limits the possibility not only of a quick resolution, but also of the chances that the Chinese people will accept any concessions to the US.
Trump’s handling of this situation stands in sharp contrast to his negotiating strategy on other issues.
Though the president railed against NAFTA throughout his campaign, he’s touted its replacement as a huge success, even though it is only cosmetically different, and has been willing to suspend his tariffs on Canada and Mexico to ease its passage through Congress.
Likewise, Trump has been more than willing to trumpet his successful negotiations with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un even though the evidence for such success is thin.
Meanwhile, the president’s tough talk against Europe and Japan for their trade practices, and against NATO allies for their defence spending, has been mostly bluster.
When it comes to China, however, the president is doubling down.
He has encouraged US supply chains to move out of China and established subsidy programmes to cushion farmers from the effects of a protracted trade war.
Which leads to the long-term implications of this battle. A protracted trade war would almost guarantee a global realignment.
Supply chains that run through both the US and China would constantly be subject to disruptions, so global manufacturers would have to decide whether to pursue an America-centric or China-centric strategy.
That’s already the case in the digital sphere, where Chinese restrictions on the Internet divide the world into two parts: that which is served by US tech giants such as Google and Facebook, and that which relies on Chinese firms such as Baidu and WeChat.
China’s threat to cut off US access to rare-earth minerals points to a potential bifurcation in commodities markets as well.
The trend is clear: As China’s economic and geopolitical power grows, countries within China’s sphere of influence will feel increasing pressure to integrate their economies with Chinese supply chains and multinationals rather than American ones.
At the same time, as my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Tyler Cowen points out, the rise of China is a main driver of populist sentiment in the UK and Australia.
This creates political pressure in those countries for further isolation from China.
In the US, Trump has made it clear that he sees the trade war with China as politically advantageous for him, and he’s probably right.
It’s probably also true that this anti-China sentiment will outlast him.
Break in global order
Add up all these factors, and the US-China trade war looks like the beginning of a profound break in the global order. As China and the US form two opposing economic and geopolitical coalitions, the rest of the world will be forced to choose.
Maybe the European Union can form a third unaligned pole, as France and Germany’s membership in the EU (and the UK’s absence from it) provides them with the negotiating power to avoid falling under the Chinese or American sphere of influence.
Of course, in some ways this type of multipolar alignment would be a return to the past. The dual-superpower world that existed for much of the second half of the 20th century was always an exception, and the era of American supremacy that began after the collapse of the Soviet Union was never going to last.
Until recently, however, a new kind of bipolar arrangement seemed possible: a kind of competitive partnership between China and the US, with the EU playing a supporting role.
The events of the last few weeks have left that looking increasingly unlikely. — Bloomberg Opinion
By Karl W. Smith , a former assistant professor of economics at the University of North Carolina’s school of government.
China now has no choice but to pursue technological independence, and will burn the cash to achieve it.
... A similar process took place when ZTE Corp. was banned from buying
U.S. products after reneging on a deal to settle charges of breaking
trade sanctions. ... The U.S. ended up
Chinese
President Xi Jinping said that "we are on a new Long March now" during
his inspection tour of Jiangxi Province this week and encouraged people
to gain strength from the spirit of the Long March to overcome
difficulties and obstacles, China's state media outlets reported on
Thursday.
KUALA LUMPUR: It looked like the start of semiconductor manufacturers’ nightmare when US President Donald Trump fired another salvo in the escalating US-China trade war by blacklisting China’s mobile phone equipment giant, Huawei Technologies Co Ltd.
The act sent shock waves along the supply chain of the global semiconductor industry, sparking strong sell-offs in semiconductor companies’ shares worldwide. The same was seen in Malaysia, which caused the Bursa Malaysia Technology Index to sink 3.47% on Tuesday — the biggest loser among the indices — led by companies linked to the industry.
But it may not be a losing battle in the long run, at least not for Malaysian companies. The trade diversion that will arise from Huawei’s ban in the US, which effectively cuts off US chipmakers from the supply chain of Huawei — the world’s largest provider of networking gear and the second-largest smartphone vendor — may benefit domestic players here.
Pentamaster Group Bhd co-founder and chairman Chuah Choon Bin told The Edge Financial Daily that he expects the group’s telecommunications segment to see a 20% to 30% decline in sales as a result of Huawei’s blacklisting in the US. The contraction may take away some 18% in total sales it anticipates for the year.
However, Chuah said Pentamaster may also stand to benefit from the ban, as he expects China will become more aggressive in ramping up their product developments in the face of what happened to Huawei.
So, he sees a silver lining for the group in the form of trade diverted from US chip suppliers to those located elsewhere, possibly in Malaysia, where Pentamaster supplies chip tester equipment or automated tester equipment.
As such, Chuah does not expect Pentamaster to be greatly affected by Huawei’s ban in the US. In fact, the eventual tally may show Pentamaster gaining from the situation.
Pentamaster was among the technology counters on Bursa Malaysia that took a beating on Tuesday, following the news on Huawei’s ban.
Its shares sank as much as 29 sen on Tuesday to RM4.05, before easing to settle at RM4.10, down 24 sen or 5.53% at market close. It was one of the top losers in Bursa Malaysia’s Technology Index, which retreated to 30.9 points, dragging the FBM KLCI down 0.1% to close at 1,603.74.
Other semiconductor stocks that were badly hit include: Inari Amertron, which fell 10 sen or 6.67% to RM1.40; Mi Technovation Bhd, which was down 11 sen or 6.43% to RM1.60; Globetronics Technology Bhd, which retreated 10 sen or 5.92% to RM1.59; and Frontken Corp Bhd, which fell eight sen or 5.63% to RM1.34.
Nonetheless, the rebound on Wall Street among semiconductor stocks that were bogged down by fears over the trade war’s ripple effects, raised hope that its peers in Malaysia may follow suit, if the upward trend seen on Tuesday is sustainable.
The share price recovery was fuelled by the temporary 90-day reprieve that was granted to Huawei on Monday. The initial ban was to take effect on May 20. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index gained 2.1% to end a three-day slump on Tuesday.
“The disruption to (the) supply chain will definitely be negative in the short term,” said an analyst who tracks the semiconductor industry, citing as example people who are considering switching mobile phones after the news that Alphabet Inc’s Google would be cutting off the supply of hardware and selected software services to Huawei once the 90 days is up.
“The trade war seems like breaking the supply chain into two ... this is going to be bad in the short term. But if China cannot get their supply from the US, they are likely to turn inwards ... [or to] countries like Malaysia,” the analyst added.
A Singapore-based fund manager commented that Malaysian tech companies presently do not have much to do with Huawei. But the ban is causing everyone in China to sit up and rethink their supply chain strategy. “In short, no one will believe in the US [anymore]. It is not a reliable and credible supplier. What it means is that it is positive for some of those tech companies in Malaysia that can offer what the Chinese need,” he said.
Some analysts, however, have a more cautious stance, saying it is too early to draw any conclusions on the matter given that it is hard to predict any retaliatory moves the two countries could make.
The lingering concern remains that any slowdown in international trade volume will not augur well for the world economy, including Malaysia. Meanwhile, some have pointed out that the valuation of Malaysian semiconductor stocks are relatively higher compared with elsewhere.
China-U.S. trade tensions | Mideast tensions take turn for worse
https://youtu.be/eQbQbvGBDaM
封杀华为 发难大疆 美滥用国家力量打压中国企业！| CCTV中文国际
https://youtu.be/dtT0rHgJ9-I
Growing US pressure won't force China to submit
The US Department of Homeland Security warned that drones pose a
potential information risk because they contain components that can
compromise users' data and share information on servers other than
users.
Since nearly 80 percent of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
(UAV) drones in North America are produced by China's Dajiang Innovation
(DJI), a Shenzhen-based company, analysts generally believe that
tarnishing DJI's reputation may be laying the groundwork for taking
actionsagainst DJI.
DJI is the world's largest producer of
civilian drones and is said to control more than 70 percent of the
world's civilian drone market. The drones it produces are not only good
in quality but also cheap. Many products are under $1,000, so they are
popular and increasingly versatile.
The US military is also a DJI
drone user. The use of DJI drones by the US military has not completely
stopped following the controversy over its information security. This
shows that while the US has real concerns about the information security
risks of DJI UAV , there is no real evidence to support such concerns.
The
US Department of Homeland Security raised the issue of the information
security risks of UAV to increase leverage and pressure on China after
the US decision to cut off supplies to Huawei. It seems Washington is in
a hurry to press China to make concessions and reach a trade deal at an
early date beneficial only to the US.
The vast majority of users
in the US use DJI drones in non-classified areas. The airspace over
sensitive US institutions is closed to drones and there is another set
of security measures that have nothing to do with the use of DJI drones
in the US market. The prevention of forest fires, assistance with
construction layouts, and the development of express delivery services
to remote areas are obviously not the direction that intelligence
agencies are aiming for. It is hard to believe that DJI has an incentive
to engage in "intelligence activities" at the risk of being shut out of
international markets.
The US is abusing the concept of national
security. It is the US that was caught a few years ago spying on the
leaders of its allies. It is now saying that Beijing's intelligence
threat is everywhere. A big part of it is putting on a show. It may be
partly because the US does install a lot of "back doors" into its
electronic exports, Washington thinks other countries will do the same.
China
will not fall into the trap to make unconditional compromises as
Washington increases its pressure. If the US cracks down on Chinese
companies, American consumers and suppliers will also suffer losses.
The
US is having a profound effect on the global economic order by abusing
national security and trampling on commercial principles. Current US
administration is destroying the reputation and national image that
generations of Americans have built. Such arrogance and hegemony are by
no means good signs for the US..
Chinese people do not know whether we should call US
approaches hegemonic politics or profiteering politics. But in short,
they are crooked means. The threat of tariffs will not work. Neither
will US threats against Chinese companies create a shock wave against
China. The US is picking a wrong opponent at a wrong time. It will find
no way of crafting a good result from a strategic mistake.
In custody: A profile of Meng is displayed on a
computer at a Huawei store in Beijing. The Chinese government, speaking
through its embassy in Canada, strenuously objected to the arrest, and
demanded Meng’s immediate release. — AP
https://youtu.be/8Uxk0mEonTA
https://youtu.be/sAha76_6YQQ
China urges release of Huawei executive
- In violation of universal human rights
Chinese officials are urging the US and Canada to clarify why Meng Wanzhou, a senior executive of Huawei Technologies, has been detained and to immediately release her, slamming the arrest as a violation of her rights.
Experts said on Thursday that Meng's detention is a move by the US to heat up the ongoing trade war between China and the US.
Meng, who is Huawei's chief financial officer and the daughter of Huawei's founder Ren Zhengfei, was detained as she was transferring flights in Canada, according to information provided by Huawei, one of China's tech giants.
Meng's detention was made following a request by the US, which is seeking her extradition on as yet unspecified charges made by prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York, a Huawei spokesperson told the Global Times on Thursday.
Meng was arrested in Vancouver on Saturday, the New York Times reported on Thursday, citing a spokesperson from Canada's Justice Department.
"China has demanded that the US and Canada immediately clarify the reasons for Meng's detention and to release her," Geng Shuang, spokesperson of China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told a daily press briefing on Thursday.
He noted that Chinese consular officials in Canada have already provided assistance to Meng.
Meng's detention, made without any clearly stated charges, is an obvious violation of her human rights, said Geng.
The Chinese Embassy in Canada also said on Thursday morning that it firmly opposes and has made strong protests over the action which has seriously curtailed the rights of a Chinese citizen.
"The Chinese side has lodged stern representations with the US and Canadian side, and urged them to immediately correct the wrongdoing and restore the personal freedom of Meng Wanzhou," the Chinese Embassy in Canada said in a statement published on its website.
A Canadian source with knowledge of the arrest was quoted in the Canadian newspaper Globe and Mail on Thursday as saying that US law enforcement authorities allege that Huawei violated US sanctions against Iran but provided no further details.
Although Meng's detention stems from terms of the US-Canada extradition treaty, the US should not be taking such legal action without providing concrete evidence, especially when it has been trying to restore relations with China, Hao Junbo, a Beijing-based lawyer, told the Global Times on Thursday.
Chinese officials and experts criticized the US for its long-arm jurisdiction, which not only hurts individuals but also enterprises.
Rising obstacles
Huawei has been targeted by the US for many years, from patent infringement lawsuits to political pressure, Xiang Ligang, chief executive of the telecom industry news site cctime.com, told the Global Times on Thursday.
"As the Chinese company grew stronger, it faced more obstacles in foreign markets as it is considered as a threat to local players," he said.
Cisco Systems filed the first lawsuit against Huawei in 2003. Motorola filed a lawsuit accusing Huawei of theft of trade secrets in 2010, according to media reports. The company also faced investigation by the US Congress on security issues.
Since at least 2016, US authorities have been probing Huawei's alleged shipping of US-origin products to Iran and other countries in violation of US export and sanctions laws, Reuters reported in April.
The US also asked its major allies to say 'no' to Huawei equipment, as it was worried about alleged potential Chinese meddling in 5G networks, the Wall Street Journal reported on November 23.
While the company faces rising difficulties in the US market, it has been actively exploring other markets such as the EU and Africa.
It became the world's largest telecom equipment provider in 2017, surpassing Ericsson and ZTE, industry website telecomlead.com reported in March, citing IHS data.
Huawei has a 28 percent market share in the global telecom infrastructure industry, followed by Ericsson and Nokia, which have 27 percent and 23 percent respectively, said the report.
Escalating trade war
The US will not stop countering China's rise in the technology sector and will never drop its hostility toward China's "Made in China 2025" strategy, Wang Yanhui, head of the Shanghai-based Mobile China Alliance, told the Global Times on Thursday.
"Huawei has become another card for the US to play against China in the ongoing trade war," he said.
China and the US announced a trade truce following a meeting between the two countries' top leaders in Buenos Aires on Saturday.
But experts warned that China should be prepared for a long-lasting and heated trade war with the US, as it will continue to attempt to counter China's rising power.
"The latest Huawei incident shows that we should get ready for long-term confrontation between China and the US, as the US will not ease its stance on China and the arrest of a senior executive of a major Chinese tech company is a vivid example," Mei Xinyu, a research fellow with the Beijing-based Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, told the Global Times on Thursday.
Huawei said there is very little information about specific allegations and that the company is not aware of any misconduct by Meng.
"The company complies with all laws and regulations in the countries in which it operates, including export control and sanctions laws applied in the UN, the US and the EU," Huawei said. - Global Times by Chen Qingqing
We hope that Canadian authorities handle the case
seriously and properly. We also hope that Ms Meng will be treated
humanely and will be bailed out. We would like to see Meng's case being
handled properly, so that she can regain her freedom as soon as
possible. Chinese society has always respected Canada, and it is
sincerely hoped that the way how Canadian authorities handle this matter
will live up to Chinese people's expectation and impressions regarding
the country.
The Chinese government should seriously go behind the US
tendency to abuse legal procedures to suppress China's high-tech
enterprises. It should increase interaction with the US and exert
pressure when necessary. China has been exercising restraint, but the US
cannot act recklessly. US President Donald Trump should rein in the
hostile activities of some Americans who may imperil Sino-US relations.
US takes aim at Huawei
Arrest of telecom giant's CFO escalates US-China tech battle
THE Trump administration’s efforts to extradite the chief financial officer of China’s Huawei Technologies Co over criminal charges mark the start of an even more aggressive phase in the technology rivalry between the United States and China and will increase pressure on Washington’s allies to shun the telecommunications company.
Armed with a US extradition request, Canadian authorities arrested Meng Wanzhou on Dec 1, the same day as President Trump was holding a summit with Chinese counterpart President Xi Jinping. But White House officials said Trump had no advance knowledge of the arrest, indicating the action was on a separate track from trade talks currently under way between Washington and Beijing.
Meng’s detention underscores a sense of urgency, at the Justice Department and other US agencies, to address what they see as a growing threat to national security posed by China’s ambitions to gain an edge in the tech sector. For years, Washington has alleged the Chinese government could compel Huawei, which supplies much of the world with critical cellular network equipment, to spy or to disrupt communications.
Huawei has long said it is an employee-owned company and isn’t beholden to any government, and has never used its equipment to spy on or sabotage other countries. The Chinese government, speaking through its embassy in Canada, strenuously objected to the arrest, and demanded Meng’s immediate release.
US prosecutors made the extradition request based on a sealed indictment for alleged violations of Iran sanctions that had been prepared for some time, people familiar with the matter said. A federally appointed US overseer, formerly charged with evaluating HSBC Holdings PLC’s anti-money-laundering and sanctions controls, relayed information about suspicious Huawei transactions to federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York, some of the people said.
Meng, the daughter of Huawei’s founder, Ren Zhengfei, is now in custody in Vancouver, and a bail hearing has been scheduled for Friday, according to a spokesman for Canada’s justice department.
Some worried a lack of coordination on the various strands of the Trump administration’s China initiatives could be counterproductive, especially if Trump decides to use the detention of Meng as leverage to extract concessions in the trade talks. The two sides agreed on a 90-day window from the Dec 1 summit to settle a trade dispute that has seen the two sides exchange tit-for-tat tariffs on each other’s goods.
“I’m very concerned that that’s just going to ratchet this trade war and make negotiations much more difficult,” said Gary Locke, former US ambassador to China. “This is I think a really hot-button, almost a grenade with respect to the 90-day negotiations.”
China has a long history of reading darker motives into US actions. “The risk is conspiracy theories in Beijing,” said China scholar Michael Pillsbury at Hudson Institute, who consults regularly with the Trump trade team. He compares the events to when China rejected US explanations that the United States had made a mistake when it bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade in 1999 during the Kosovo war.
The arrest indicated the Justice Department had significant evidence against Meng, and that additional charges were likely, said Brian Fleming, a trade and national security lawyer at Miller & Chevalier. “This is just the tip of the iceberg,” he said.
The arrest could also add ammunition to an extraordinary US government campaign to persuade wireless and Internet providers in allied countries to stop using telecommunications equipment from Huawei, said national security experts.
US officials say they are intensifying efforts to curb Huawei because wireless carriers world-wide are about to upgrade to 5G, a new wireless technology that will connect many more items—factory parts, self-driving cars and everyday objects like wearable health monitors – to the Internet. US officials say they don’t want to give Beijing the potential to interfere with an ever-growing universe of connected devices.
Tech rivalry: The high-tech trade war shows
that for all the hoopla over manufacturing jobs, steel autos and
tariffs, the real competition is in the tech sector. — Reuters
IF you only scan the headlines, you could be forgiven for thinking that the US-China trade war is mainly about tariffs.
After all, the president and trade-warrior-in-chief has called himself “Tariff Man”. And the tentative trade deal between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping was mainly about tariffs, especially on items like automobiles.
But the startling arrest in Canada of a Chinese telecom company executive should wake people up to the fact that there’s a second US-China trade war going on – a much more stealthy conflict, fought with weapons much subtler and more devastating than tariffs. And the prize in that other struggle is domination of the information-technology industry.
The arrested executive, Wanzhou Meng, is the chief financial officer of telecom-equipment manufacturer Huawei Technologies Co (and its founder’s daughter). The official reason for her arrest is that Huawei is suspected of selling technology to Iran, in violation of US sanctions.
It’s the second big Chinese tech company to be accused of breaching those sanctions – the first was ZTE Corp in 2017. The United States punished ZTE by forbidding it from buying American components – most importantly, telecom chips made by US-based Qualcomm Inc.
Those purchasing restrictions were eventually lifted after ZTE agreed to pay a fine, and it seems certain that Huawei will also eventually escape severe punishment. But these episodes highlight Chinese companies’ dependence on critical US technology.
The United States. still makes – or at least, designs – the best computer chips in the world. China assembles lots of electronics, but without those crucial inputs of US technology, products made by companies such as Huawei would be of much lower quality.
Export restrictions, and threats of restrictions, are thus probably not just about sanctions – they’re about making life harder for the main competitors of US tech companies.
Huawei just passed Apple Inc to become the world’s second-largest smartphone maker by market share (Samsung Electronics Co is first). This marks a change for China, whose companies have long been stuck doing low-value assembly while companies in rich countries do the high-value design, marketing and component manufacturing.
US moves against Huawei and ZTE may be intended to force China to remain a cheap supplier instead of a threatening competitor.
The subtle, far-sighted nature of this approach suggests that the impetus for the high-tech trade war goes far beyond what Trump, with his focus on tariffs and old-line manufacturing industries, would think of. It seems likely that US tech companies, as well as the military intelligence communities, are influencing policy here as well.
In fact, more systematic efforts to block Chinese access to US components are in the works. The Export Control Reform Act, passed this summer, increased regulatory oversight of US exports of “emerging” and “foundational” technologies deemed to have national-security importance. Although national security is certainly a concern, it’s generally hard to separate high-tech industrial and corporate dominance from military dominance, so this too should be seen as part of the trade war.
A second weapon in the high-tech trade war is investment restrictions. The Trump administration has greatly expanded its power to block Chinese investments in US technology companies, through the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.
The goal of investment restrictions is to prevent Chinese companies from copying or stealing American ideas and technologies. Chinese companies can buy American companies and transfer their intellectual property overseas, or have their employees train their Chinese replacements.
Even minority stakes can allow a Chinese investor access to industrial secrets that would otherwise be off-limits. By blocking these investors, the Trump administration hopes to preserve US technological dominance, at least for a little while longer.
Notably, the European Union is also moving to restrict Chinese investments. The fact that Europe, which has opposed Trump’s tariffs, is copying American investment restrictions, should be a signal that the less-publicised high-tech trade war is actually the important one.
The high-tech trade war shows that for all the hoopla over manufacturing jobs, steel, autos and tariffs, the real competition is in the tech sector.
Losing the lead in the global technology race means lower profits and a disappearing military advantage. But it also means losing the powerful knowledge-industry clustering effects that have been an engine of US economic growth in the post-manufacturing age. Bluntly put, the United States can afford to lose its lead in furniture manufacturing; it can’t afford to lose its dominance in the tech sector.
The question is whether the high-tech trade war will succeed in keeping China in second place. China has long wanted to catch up in semiconductor manufacturing, but export controls will make that goal a necessity rather than an aspiration. And investment restrictions may spur China to upgrade its own homegrown research and development capacity.
In other words, in the age when China and the United States were economically co-dependent, China might have been content to accept lower profit margins and keep copying American technology instead of developing its own. But with the coming of the high-tech trade war, that co-dependency is coming to an end. Perhaps that was always inevitable, as China pressed forward on the technological frontier. In any case, the Trump administration’s recent moves against Chinese tech – and some similar moves by the EU – should be seen as the first shots in a long war.
After years of planning, the robotic Chang'e-4 mission will launch tomorrow at 1:30 p.m. EST.
Rising space power China is preparing to launch a ground-breaking mission to soft-land an unmanned spacecraft on the far side of ... China prepares mission to land spacecraft on moon's far side. By Christopher Bodeen | AP.
