I'm not sure why you still believe this to be true when there are reports of Trump considering an executive order that would effectively ban Chinese network equipment from the US on the grounds of national security. National security is sufficient legal justification for any mercantilist American policy, whether it be tariffs or outright sanctions.
Is the US shooting itself in the foot by banning Huawei?
- Thread starter AndrewS
- Start date
- Status
I'm not sure why you still believe this to be true when there are reports of Trump considering an executive order that would effectively ban Chinese network equipment from the US on the grounds of national security. National security is sufficient legal justification for any mercantilist American policy, whether it be tariffs or outright sanctions.
We are talking about chips here, not the whole equipment. If he wants to ban all Chinese semiconductors from entering the US market, he can do that, but the damage to the US tech industry will be massive, and he and his party will have to answer to that.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Thats true ... Obama and Hilary started those bans (remember Intel) and failed "pivot to Asia", including Arab Spring which basically ruined many countries in ME.
The only different .. Trump talks too much and very loud and a bit vulgar, while Obama and Hilary worked behind the scene quietly ... but they were actually worse than Trump .. quite damaging to the world. I'd say Trump is more honest than Obama and Hilary
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Whoever has the first move advantage will end up owning the technology. Because by the time Nokia or Ericsson catch up all the ecosystem for the 5G will be owned by Huawei!
Despite all the effort to block Huawei from US market, the 5G standard increasingly look like Huawei standard
Campaign against Huawei faces embarrassing reality
US has no 5G competitor, while European, South Korean players lag far behind
By ASIA TIMES STAFF JANUARY 1, 2019 5:33 AM (UTC+8)
Intelligence agencies across the English-speaking world are in widespread agreement about the race to roll out next-generation mobile networks. Top officials from Australia, the UK, Canada and the United States have all said recently that using Chinese telecom giant Huawei’s equipment poses a national security threat.
For service providers in those countries, going along with that assessment comes with a catch. There is no good alternative.
The United States, for its part, offers no competitive fifth-generation wireless network equipment. Europe’s Nokia and Ericsson, meanwhile, are both struggling to catch up to Huawei. South Korea’s Samsung is investing heavily in the area but has come to the party late.
Thanks in part to massive government subsidies, Huawei has been able to offer equipment and services at a fraction of the price of its competitors. It has grown exponentially in the process to leapfrog Nokia and Ericsson and become the world’s largest telecommunications equipment supplier by far.
This is despite the fact that they have long been almost entirely cut out of the US market.
UK executives summed up the sorry predicament of the US-led effort to boycott Huawei, :
“Executives at one major British wireless carrier say Huawei can deliver products nearly a year before Nokia and Ericsson can offer hardware with comparable technology. They said they were telling U.K. officials, who plan to decide by spring 2019 whether to exclude major Huawei equipment from the country, that blacklisting Huawei could delay by nine months the U.K.’s launch of 5G, the coming generation of superfast wireless technology.”
Nokia and Ericsson, the report says, are also wary that they may be shut out of China’s market if they take advantage of Huawei being shut out of other markets. Indeed, at 15,000, Nokia’s workforce inside the China region is about double that in its home base of Finland. Ericsson, meanwhile, has 12,000 employees in northeast Asia.
Australia and New Zealand have already signed on to the US boycott of Huawei’s 5G gear, leaving their service providers with no choice but to wait for lagging and more expensive alternatives. But there still appears to be resistance in the UK, France and Germany. 2019 will be the year when companies in those countries either hit the ground running with Huawei or are reluctantly forced to save other firms from a terminal decline into irrelevance.
Despite all the effort to block Huawei from US market, the 5G standard increasingly look like Huawei standard
Campaign against Huawei faces embarrassing reality
US has no 5G competitor, while European, South Korean players lag far behind
By ASIA TIMES STAFF JANUARY 1, 2019 5:33 AM (UTC+8)
Intelligence agencies across the English-speaking world are in widespread agreement about the race to roll out next-generation mobile networks. Top officials from Australia, the UK, Canada and the United States have all said recently that using Chinese telecom giant Huawei’s equipment poses a national security threat.
For service providers in those countries, going along with that assessment comes with a catch. There is no good alternative.
The United States, for its part, offers no competitive fifth-generation wireless network equipment. Europe’s Nokia and Ericsson, meanwhile, are both struggling to catch up to Huawei. South Korea’s Samsung is investing heavily in the area but has come to the party late.
Thanks in part to massive government subsidies, Huawei has been able to offer equipment and services at a fraction of the price of its competitors. It has grown exponentially in the process to leapfrog Nokia and Ericsson and become the world’s largest telecommunications equipment supplier by far.
This is despite the fact that they have long been almost entirely cut out of the US market.
UK executives summed up the sorry predicament of the US-led effort to boycott Huawei, :
“Executives at one major British wireless carrier say Huawei can deliver products nearly a year before Nokia and Ericsson can offer hardware with comparable technology. They said they were telling U.K. officials, who plan to decide by spring 2019 whether to exclude major Huawei equipment from the country, that blacklisting Huawei could delay by nine months the U.K.’s launch of 5G, the coming generation of superfast wireless technology.”
Nokia and Ericsson, the report says, are also wary that they may be shut out of China’s market if they take advantage of Huawei being shut out of other markets. Indeed, at 15,000, Nokia’s workforce inside the China region is about double that in its home base of Finland. Ericsson, meanwhile, has 12,000 employees in northeast Asia.
Australia and New Zealand have already signed on to the US boycott of Huawei’s 5G gear, leaving their service providers with no choice but to wait for lagging and more expensive alternatives. But there still appears to be resistance in the UK, France and Germany. 2019 will be the year when companies in those countries either hit the ground running with Huawei or are reluctantly forced to save other firms from a terminal decline into irrelevance.
antiterror13
Brigadier
To be fair, Huawei's revenue includes the consumer BU (smartphones etc.) and enterprise BU (servers, storage). The revenue from the telecom equipment BU is probably under $50 billion. Still the largest in the world, but ...
antiterror13
Brigadier
and the others (Nokia, Ericsson, Cisco) excludes consumer BU ?
It will be enormously interesting this year to observe how the US's tech containment on China unfolds. The key observation will be around Huawei:
1. The result of Ms. Meng Wanzhou's extradition case: Will Canada concede to the US demand and agree to extradite Ms. Meng to the US? What would be China's response then?
2. The acceptance/ resistance of the deployment of Huawei's 5G technology in the world.
The US is taking the whole-of-government approach to contain Huawei. The blockade of Huawei's 5G technology got rolling with the Five-Eyes countries first, with Australia and New Zealand taking the lead. The intelligence and security agencies of UK and Canada are making noises, but the commercial companies and the governments as a whole appear to have not made up their minds. Germany and France, are giving lip services, but seem to be rather reluctant and demanding evidence. Japanese government has made some statements but it's not clear, at this point, what exactly the guidelines are (only government sector ban or entire commercial sector). India and Czech flip-flopped their decisions and gave the permission for Huawei to continue to participate 5G trials. Italy, Spain, Portugal proceed with their cooperation on 5G with Huawei without any governmental intervention. I don't think other countries would be a problem.
Australia and New Zealand are not all that important for Huawei as markets. UK is important; the ban on Huawei equipment in core networks is highly likely, but a complete ban is questionable at this point (the peripheral, the base stations etc.). Germany, to a less degree France, are critical, for the rest of the Europe may look up to Germany. Unlike the US, Europe views China less as a strategic competitor and has considerable stake in the telecom equipment industry. By tacit agreement at least, Ericsson and Nokia are given considerable market share in the huge Chinese telecom market. Banning Huawei has all kinds of negative implications for Europe as a whole, the only potential positive is to please the US administration, which the Europeans are not in a particularly good mood to do. The security case against Huawei is very weak and has no evidence whatsoever so far. The US needs to come up with stronger evidence, significantly raise the stake or offer Europe much bigger benefits to induce them.
Huawei needs to be more transparent and open up itself more. They've been doing that more recently, like press day and more updates etc. Needs to continue to do that on a regular basis to earn the trust of the consumers, enterprises and governments around the world. It's one of the world's top three electronics companies now, along with Apple and Samsung.
I guess we shall see.
1. The result of Ms. Meng Wanzhou's extradition case: Will Canada concede to the US demand and agree to extradite Ms. Meng to the US? What would be China's response then?
2. The acceptance/ resistance of the deployment of Huawei's 5G technology in the world.
The US is taking the whole-of-government approach to contain Huawei. The blockade of Huawei's 5G technology got rolling with the Five-Eyes countries first, with Australia and New Zealand taking the lead. The intelligence and security agencies of UK and Canada are making noises, but the commercial companies and the governments as a whole appear to have not made up their minds. Germany and France, are giving lip services, but seem to be rather reluctant and demanding evidence. Japanese government has made some statements but it's not clear, at this point, what exactly the guidelines are (only government sector ban or entire commercial sector). India and Czech flip-flopped their decisions and gave the permission for Huawei to continue to participate 5G trials. Italy, Spain, Portugal proceed with their cooperation on 5G with Huawei without any governmental intervention. I don't think other countries would be a problem.
Australia and New Zealand are not all that important for Huawei as markets. UK is important; the ban on Huawei equipment in core networks is highly likely, but a complete ban is questionable at this point (the peripheral, the base stations etc.). Germany, to a less degree France, are critical, for the rest of the Europe may look up to Germany. Unlike the US, Europe views China less as a strategic competitor and has considerable stake in the telecom equipment industry. By tacit agreement at least, Ericsson and Nokia are given considerable market share in the huge Chinese telecom market. Banning Huawei has all kinds of negative implications for Europe as a whole, the only potential positive is to please the US administration, which the Europeans are not in a particularly good mood to do. The security case against Huawei is very weak and has no evidence whatsoever so far. The US needs to come up with stronger evidence, significantly raise the stake or offer Europe much bigger benefits to induce them.
Huawei needs to be more transparent and open up itself more. They've been doing that more recently, like press day and more updates etc. Needs to continue to do that on a regular basis to earn the trust of the consumers, enterprises and governments around the world. It's one of the world's top three electronics companies now, along with Apple and Samsung.
I guess we shall see.
Last edited:
What about Samsung?
I had a quick glance at the comments section in the article you posted and found one writer who disagreed with the article.
Samit Basu said, "..... Samsung is actually ahead of Huawei in the equipment race.......
es, it is true that Ericsson and Nokia are falling behind Huawei, but not Samsung, Samsung is actually ahead of Huawei in 5G equipment race.
Samsung currently holds a 3 month lead over Huawei in mid-band 5G, but a whopping 2 year lead over Huawei in mmwave 5G.............
Yes, it is true that Ericsson and Nokia are falling behind Huawei, but not Samsung, Samsung is actually ahead of Huawei in 5G equipment race.
Samsung currently holds a 3 month lead over Huawei in mid-band 5G, but a whopping 2 year lead over Huawei in mmwave 5G.
Anyway it prompted me to investigate this viewpoint further and found
Samsung Electronics is smoothly implementing its strategies to stay ahead of the game in the 5G mobile communication network equipment market.
According to the telecommunication equipment industry on May 2, Samsung Electronics received the approval of the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on an indoor router for next-generation 5G mobile communication services.
Samsung Electronics is currently working on 5G commercialization by partnering with Verizon in the United States. In January, Samsung Electronics and Verizon signed a contract on the supply of 5G communication equipment. Verizon plans to launch 5G commercial service for the first time in the world in the second half of this year. Since July last year, the US mobile carrier has implemented a tentative 5G fixed wireless access (FWA) service in 11 cities across the United States. Samsung Electronics provided telecommunications equipment to seven cities, including Sacramento, the city in which Verizon will launch its first 5G commercial service.
The 5G FWA service is a technology that directly provides 5G-based ultra-high-speed mobile communication services to each household wirelessly. The service can make it easy to build a fast network in a large land area like the United States because it does not need work to lay optical cables underground and licensing or permitting processes for the work.
Since the United States has a large land area and people live mainly in single houses, about 10% of total households use broadband internet services based on optical cables. For this reason, it is necessary to realize 5G services through the FWA method which sets up a 5G router in each home and receives 5G signals via the router and sends them to terminals. Instead of installing a communication network in every building, a 5G router is installed in a building and an antenna is set up outdoors to connect with a 5G base station wirelessly.
The 5G router approved by the FCC this time allows 5G services to be wirelessly enjoyed in a home. Earlier, in February and March, Samsung Electronics’ 5G equipment was approved by the FCC.
This time, the company received the approval on an indoor 5G router. "We will be able to provide services such as autonomous vehicles and smart homes based on speed up to 20 times faster than that of the 4G long term evolution (LTE) in the 5G era," an industry expert said. “We will provide an environment where 5G services such as smart homes can be used in American homes."
In the meantime, "Competition to realize the world’s first 5G commercialization is further intensifying. It will record a 20% market share in the equipment market," said Kim Young-ki, CEO of network business at Samsung Electronics in the Mobile World Congress (MWC) 2018 the world's largest mobile exhibition held in February. “Samsung Electronics will record a 20% share in the world network equipment market in the 5G era.”
I don't expect realistically that Cisco can keep their China business. Tit for tat is bound to happen. As for Ericsson and Nokia, that will depend how the EU will treat Huawei, but I am expecting that China may implement a closed doors policy on 5G. Losing the Chinese market can mean that networking equipment can end up raising their costs, as you now got a smaller market to amortize volumes of said equipment, leading to higher equipment costs for the rest of the world.
- Status