Nothing will satisfy Washington with Huawei other than its destruction


The 5G equipment maker is not any more dangerous than any other major global telecoms gear supplier. Its real threat is not cybersecurity, but China’s potential challenge to America’s technological dominance, especially in cyber networks

Alex Lo
Published: 9:00pm, 1 Oct, 2020

You almost feel sorry for Luigi De Vecchis for his desperation. Speaking on cybersecurity, the Huawei president in Italy says he is ready for its equipment to be “vivisected” to show it poses no security threat.

If he was speaking to an audience of network security or computer forensic experts, the offer might make sense.

But what Huawei is really facing is America “the grand inquisitor”, whose sole interest is to destroy the Chinese 5G pioneer. To do that, Washington has to drag Huawei’s reputation through the mud with unfounded accusations, try to put its founder’s daughter – who is also its chief financial officer – behind bars on trumped-up charges with its sanctions law against Iran, and pressure allies in Europe and client states in Latin American to ban Huawei. It is working.

“We will open our insides, we are available to be vivisected to respond to all of this political pressure …,” said De Vecchis at the opening ceremony of the company’s cybersecurity centre in Rome.

He also said Huawei had no intention of leaving the Italian market, despite all the pressure from trade sanctions imposed by Washington over security concerns. He may be fighting a losing battle.

During his current European diplomatic tour, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has made significant inroads in persuading European countries to curb China’s 5G technology. France and Britain are set to phase out the Chinese technology. Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte has said he will heed US security concerns about Chinese 5G telecoms while his country’s main telecoms operator has said it will not use any Chinese 5G equipment.

In an inquisition, no evidence will ever exonerate the accused. Accusations are made, however outlandish, for the defendant to refute, not for the prosecutor to prove. The absence of guilt is just a spur for judges to dig deeper and go harsher with their ordeal for the victim to produce proof of guilt.

As part of the Edward Snowden revelations, we know US cybersecurity agencies had breached Huawei’s mainframe networks in Shenzhen and found nothing untoward. Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), its key signals intelligence agency, had conducted a thorough examination of the security issues surrounding Huawei’s 5G equipment. Its conclusion that the risks were manageable was what initially led British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to allow Huawei a limited role in building his country’s 5G infrastructure, only to reverse his decision under intense American pressure.

Huawei’s equipment is not any more dangerous than that of any other major global telecoms gear supplier. Its real threat is not cybersecurity, but China’s potential challenge to America’s technological dominance, especially in telecoms networks. America’s business is not just business, but hegemony at any cost.