While Huawei is ready to play a major role in 5G rollout globallyl, the administration of Trump has embarked on a massive boycott campaign to ban teams.
The United States wants to persuade its EU and Big Five allies that because of Huawei's strong suspicions of collusion with the Chinese government and military, the company's software and hardware could be used by Beijing for cyber espionage purposes. or sabotage.
Last week, the Trump administration took unprecedented and extreme measures against Huawei, which involved the Chinese tech giant to risk a long-term breakdown in trade relations between Washington and Beijing.
These measures include the inclusion of the Chinese telecommunications giant, such as the Russian cybersecurity firm Kaspersky, on a blacklist that forces American companies to stop doing business with Huawei, unless they have a prior official authorization.
This action has led many US technology companies (Microsoft, Intel, ARM, Google) to end their business relationship with the second largest smartphone manufacturer that occupies almost a quarter of the market.
Unsupported reasons to lock Huawei
To justify your decision, The Trump administration explained that the Huawei team exposes the United States to an increased risk of espionage.
Since according to him:
"Foreign opponents are creating and exploiting more and more vulnerabilities in information and communication technologies and services." He is convinced that "the unrestricted acquisition or use" of equipment designed by foreign opponents exacerbates these vulnerabilities to the point of constituting "an unusual and extraordinary threat to national security."
If this maneuver were to restrict Huawei in the field of network infrastructure, it could be understood.
But, what is the relationship with the material exported and specially destined for markets other than the United States? Why shouldn't the Intel, AMD and Qualcomm chips or Micron flash memory be sold to Huawei for use in Products (PC or smartphones and others) for Europe?
The United States and China have been embroiled in an intense trade war since last year, a conflict in which verbal tenders, the arrest of senior officials of multinationals on both sides and the manipulation of tariffs are among the main instruments of this economic confrontation.
Some might see the measures against Huawei as part of a strategy to increase pressure on the Chinese economy. to obtain concessions in the future. But invoking reasons related to national security in the case of Huawei, since the United States currently, could not durably damage the credibility of the United States should a real security threat appear?
Recently, President Trump addressed the press after an event that raised the issue of support for American farmers affected by the trade war between Washington and Beijing.
When A reporter asked Donald Trump about the actions against Huawei, the president's response was worrying: "Huawei is very dangerous." If you look at what they did from a security point of view, from a military point of view, it's very dangerous. Therefore, it is possible that Huawei is even included in some kind of commercial agreement. If we reach an agreement, I imagine that Huawei could be included in a commercial agreement in one way or another.
Trump appears to indicate that an embargo has been placed on Huawei because it is a threat to the national security of the United States.
However it also specifies that these restrictions could be removed under a trade agreement between the United States and China, which at first glance doesn't make sense - how could you negotiate a security threat in the context of a business deal that you know your partner can't credibly promise not to try to spy on you?
These seemingly inconsistent claims might still make sense in admitting that the national security threat on which the US president relies was a hoax.
Whatever agreement Trump signed, Chinese spy agencies will continue their activities and if Huawei was a threat before the agreement, it will be later as well.