{"id":50477,"date":"2019-09-11T06:00:44","date_gmt":"2019-09-10T20:00:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=50477"},"modified":"2019-09-12T06:50:31","modified_gmt":"2019-09-11T20:50:31","slug":"australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/","title":{"rendered":"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/figure>\n

US President Donald Trump\u2019s muddled messaging<\/a> on Chinese tech giant Huawei has had us all confused this year<\/a>. The tweets, mixed signals and excessive focus on trading away policy positions for a \u2018deal\u2019 don\u2019t always paint a picture of an administration with a long-term strategy for national security and technology<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Australian government, while it certainly can\u2019t always be held up as a strategic public communicator, does have clear messaging on its side when it comes to 5G. In August 2018, the Australian government banned \u2018high-risk vendors\u2019<\/a>\u2014including Huawei\u2014from involvement in the country\u2019s 5G networks. The government\u2019s decision on Huawei was a too-rare example of policy contestability. It was fostered by a strong and in-depth public debate<\/a> and involved input from multiple departments and agencies that spanned economic, technical, geopolitical and\u2014importantly for Australia given its geographic location\u2014strategic considerations.<\/p>\n

Huawei is now unable to participate in Australia\u2019s 5G build. Before that, in 2012, the company was banned from participating in Australia\u2019s national broadband network<\/a>. But beyond those pieces of critical national infrastructure, the company has free rein and continues to do plenty of business in Australia<\/a>.<\/p>\n

So, what motivated the Australian government\u2019s decision on Huawei? The 5G network is critical national infrastructure, not public Wi-Fi for a local swimming pool. Critical parts of the economy will sit on top of\u2014and rely on\u20145G. This is about far more than telecommunications; it\u2019s about whole-of-economy security assurance.<\/p>\n

While the media narrative has often <\/a>been that the US applies pressure to its allies to \u2018ban Huawei\u2019, that wasn\u2019t Australia\u2019s experience. In fact, Australia\u2019s former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, who was ousted in mid-2018, has gone<\/a> to great lengths<\/a> this year<\/a> to carefully and\u00a0publicly explain<\/a> why the decision<\/a> was made<\/a>. He is also on the record explaining that it was he who encouraged Trump to make 5G a greater priority<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Once the decision was done and dusted, it was clear that Australia\u2019s choice came down to a combination of three overlapping issues: risks, transparency and trust.<\/p>\n

There are many risks when it comes to working with a company like Huawei, and the Australian government\u2019s appetite for risk on 5G wasn\u2019t large enough to absorb them all.<\/p>\n

When making various decisions related to 5G\u2014and other critical technologies\u2014the potential for \u2018back doors\u2019 is only one risk being weighed<\/a>. Governments also need<\/a> to make assessments about<\/a> the integrity and availability of the data on the network, in addition to the confidentiality of information. They also need to worry about public relations and perception. For example, how closely do governments want to work and associate with a company that is complicit in enabling human rights abuses<\/a> in Xinjiang<\/a> through its work<\/a> with the region\u2019s public security apparatus?<\/p>\n

A range of risks of working with Huawei are already on the record, from allegations of systematic intellectual property theft<\/a> and dubious ethics<\/a> to allegations of sensitive data theft<\/a> that occurred under the company\u2019s watch. Increasingly, governments also need to ensure they analyse, and fully understand, the laws that govern a company\u2019s home environment. This is particularly critical when such laws mean a foreign government can exert extrajudicial direction<\/a>, something that would obviously never be publicly acknowledged<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The UK government\u2019s approach\u2014testing Huawei\u2019s equipment via the Huawei Cyber Security Evaluation Centre\u2014provided a beacon of hope for governments wanting a middle-of-the-road solution. But, unfortunately, it\u2019s turned out not to be the palatable policy option many governments were hoping to replicate. First, the evaluation centre\u2019s mandate is purely technical, which means it can\u2019t mitigate all the non-technical risks that come with working with a company like Huawei in 5G. Second, the centre\u2019s annual reports have become progressively more negative<\/a> in their outlook, and earlier this year Ian Levy, the technical director of the UK National Cyber Security Centre, gave a damning assessment<\/a> of Huawei\u2019s equipment: \u2018The chance of a vulnerability with a Huawei piece of kit is much higher than other vendors.\u2019 Third, the approach has the perverse effect of giving the most problematic major vendor an advantage over its competitors by providing it with tailored advice to improve its products.<\/p>\n

Getting a straight answer out of Huawei\u2014on a range of important issues\u2014is difficult. This lack of public transparency puts the onus back on governments to conduct their own investigations to inform 5G policymaking. That\u2019s a burden they don\u2019t have to carry with other 5G vendors like Ericsson and Nokia.<\/p>\n

For example, Huawei has struggled to explain who exactly owns the company and how its governance structure works<\/a>. This is no small matter. Huawei has also struggled to prove its independence from the state. On the issue of internal Chinese Communist Party branches, a Huawei overseas executive said that while the company has one such branch, it<\/a> \u2018has no say in our operations. It meets in non-working hours and looks after staff social issues and activities. It has nothing to do with the management of the company and is run by a retired employee of the company.\u2019 But through Chinese-language sources, we know this number and explanation are not correct.<\/p>\n

In 2007, Huawei had reportedly<\/a> established more than 300 CCP branches and counted 12,000 CCP members among its employees. The CCP\u2019s expectations of these party committees\u2014and associated branches\u2014are clear<\/a>. Article 32 of the CCP\u2019s constitution outlines their responsibilities, which include encouraging everyone in the company to \u2018consciously resist unacceptable practices and resolutely fight against all violations of party discipline or state law\u2019.<\/p>\n

The company has also struggled to explain what happened in the African Union headquarters <\/a>\u00a0between 2012 and 2017, when there was reportedly a data breach that whisked sensitive information to servers in Shanghai every night. Huawei was the key ICT provider in the African Union headquarters and was responsible for protecting data from security threats. Huawei CEO Ren Zhengfei hasn\u2019t denied the hack took place, instead telling the media<\/a>: \u2018For the breach of equipment used by the African Union, it had nothing to do with Huawei.\u2019<\/p>\n

That may well be true, but wouldn\u2019t a private company conduct an independent review to figure out how, over a period of five years, it all went so wrong? Meanwhile, Huawei\u2019s work in Xinjiang is increasingly in the spotlight<\/a>, and for good reason. In July 2019, the company argued that it is providing equipment in Xinjiang \u2018via a third-party<\/a>\u2019. That is not true<\/a>. In fact, many of Huawei\u2019s business dealings in Xinjiang are done directly with local authorities, police and security agencies<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The announcement of one Huawei public security project in Xinjiang in 2018 even quoted<\/a> Huawei director Tao Jingwen as saying<\/a>, \u2018Together with the Public Security Bureau, Huawei will unlock a new era of smart policing and help build a safer, smarter society.\u2019<\/p>\n

Because 5G is critical national infrastructure, most governments must make sure they can trust the companies they partner with. The suite of risks, combined with a lack of transparency, has resulted in a crippling trust deficit<\/a>. It would have been negligent of the Australian government to allow high-risk vendors, like Huawei, into Australia\u2019s 5G network.\u00a0In many ways, it wasn\u2019t just the right decision. Given the evidence available, it was the only possible decision.<\/p>\n

A version of this piece was published in <\/em>The Diplomat magazine\u2019s August 2019 issue as a section in the cover article, \u2018<\/em>Asia\u2019s great Huawei debate<\/em><\/a>\u2019; it<\/em> has been republished with permission.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

US President Donald Trump\u2019s muddled messaging on Chinese tech giant Huawei has had us all confused this year. The tweets, mixed signals and excessive focus on trading away policy positions for a \u2018deal\u2019 don\u2019t always …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":691,"featured_media":50479,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[2268,17,2267,1369],"class_list":["post-50477","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-5g","tag-australia","tag-huawei","tag-telecommunications"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nAustralia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust | The Strategist<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust | The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"US President Donald Trump\u2019s muddled messaging on Chinese tech giant Huawei has had us all confused this year. The tweets, mixed signals and excessive focus on trading away policy positions for a \u2018deal\u2019 don\u2019t always ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"The Strategist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-09-10T20:00:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-09-11T20:50:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/GettyImages-1142487791.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"702\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Danielle Cave\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@ASPI_org\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Danielle Cave\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\",\"name\":\"The Strategist\",\"description\":\"ASPI's analysis and commentary site\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/GettyImages-1142487791.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/GettyImages-1142487791.jpg\",\"width\":1024,\"height\":702,\"caption\":\"SHENZHEN, CHINA - APRIL 12: A member of Huawei's reception staff walks in front of a large screen displaying the logo in the foyer of a building used for high profile customer visits and displays at the company's Bantian campus on April 12, 2019 in Shenzhen, China. Huawei is Chinas most valuable technology brand, and sells more telecommunications equipment than any other company in the world, with annual revenue topping $100 billion U.S. Headquartered in the southern city of Shenzhen, considered Chinas Silicon Valley, Huawei has more than 180,000 employees worldwide, with nearly half of them engaged in research and development. In 2018, the company overtook Apple Inc. as the second largest manufacturer of smartphones in the world behind Samsung Electronics, a milestone that has made Huawei a source of national pride in China. While commercially successful and a dominant player in 5G, or fifth-generation networking technology, Huawei has faced political headwinds and allegations that its equipment includes so-called backdoors that the U.S. government perceives as a national security. U.S. authorities are also seeking the extradition of Huaweis Chief Financial Officer, Meng Wanzhou, to stand trial in the U.S. on fraud charges. Meng is currently under house arrest in Canada, though Huawei maintains the U.S. case against her is purely political. Despite the U.S. campaign against the company, Huawei is determined to lead the global charge toward adopting 5G wireless networks. It has hired experts from foreign rivals, and invested heavily in R&D to patent key technologies to boost Chinese influence. (Photo by Kevin Frayer\/Getty Images)\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/\",\"name\":\"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust | The Strategist\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-09-10T20:00:44+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-09-11T20:50:31+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/1730ec525f034baa16dd911fea57775f\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/1730ec525f034baa16dd911fea57775f\",\"name\":\"Danielle Cave\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-AU\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0eb0eb0ac065aaf45b63a5b7a87b53d7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0eb0eb0ac065aaf45b63a5b7a87b53d7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Danielle Cave\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/danielle-cave\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust | The Strategist","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust | The Strategist","og_description":"US President Donald Trump\u2019s muddled messaging on Chinese tech giant Huawei has had us all confused this year. The tweets, mixed signals and excessive focus on trading away policy positions for a \u2018deal\u2019 don\u2019t always ...","og_url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/","og_site_name":"The Strategist","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/ASPI.org","article_published_time":"2019-09-10T20:00:44+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-09-11T20:50:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":702,"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/GettyImages-1142487791.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Danielle Cave","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@ASPI_org","twitter_site":"@ASPI_org","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Danielle Cave","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/","name":"The Strategist","description":"ASPI's analysis and commentary site","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-AU"},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/GettyImages-1142487791.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/09\/GettyImages-1142487791.jpg","width":1024,"height":702,"caption":"SHENZHEN, CHINA - APRIL 12: A member of Huawei's reception staff walks in front of a large screen displaying the logo in the foyer of a building used for high profile customer visits and displays at the company's Bantian campus on April 12, 2019 in Shenzhen, China. Huawei is Chinas most valuable technology brand, and sells more telecommunications equipment than any other company in the world, with annual revenue topping $100 billion U.S. Headquartered in the southern city of Shenzhen, considered Chinas Silicon Valley, Huawei has more than 180,000 employees worldwide, with nearly half of them engaged in research and development. In 2018, the company overtook Apple Inc. as the second largest manufacturer of smartphones in the world behind Samsung Electronics, a milestone that has made Huawei a source of national pride in China. While commercially successful and a dominant player in 5G, or fifth-generation networking technology, Huawei has faced political headwinds and allegations that its equipment includes so-called backdoors that the U.S. government perceives as a national security. U.S. authorities are also seeking the extradition of Huaweis Chief Financial Officer, Meng Wanzhou, to stand trial in the U.S. on fraud charges. Meng is currently under house arrest in Canada, though Huawei maintains the U.S. case against her is purely political. Despite the U.S. campaign against the company, Huawei is determined to lead the global charge toward adopting 5G wireless networks. It has hired experts from foreign rivals, and invested heavily in R&D to patent key technologies to boost Chinese influence. (Photo by Kevin Frayer\/Getty Images)"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/","url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/","name":"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust | The Strategist","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2019-09-10T20:00:44+00:00","dateModified":"2019-09-11T20:50:31+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/1730ec525f034baa16dd911fea57775f"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-AU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/australia-and-the-great-huawei-debate-risks-transparency-and-trust\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Australia and the great Huawei debate: risks, transparency and trust"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/1730ec525f034baa16dd911fea57775f","name":"Danielle Cave","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-AU","@id":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0eb0eb0ac065aaf45b63a5b7a87b53d7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0eb0eb0ac065aaf45b63a5b7a87b53d7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Danielle Cave"},"url":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/author\/danielle-cave\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50477"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/691"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=50477"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50477\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":50515,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50477\/revisions\/50515"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/50479"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50477"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50477"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50477"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}