<![CDATA[Britain ignored the US to welcome Huawei. Can Canada do the same with 5G and Meng Wanzhou's trial?]>
The British government's decision on Tuesday to allow Chinese technology giant Huawei to develop the noncore elements of its 5G mobile phone networks should not come as a big surprise, given the hints senior British officials " including security personnel " have dropped over the past year.
But the fact that Prime Minister Boris Johnson's cabinet was able to rebuff the intense lobbying and threats by the administration of US President Donald Trump is no small feat, dealing a clear blow to the American campaign to convince its Western allies to ban Huawei on the grounds of national security.
The British decision was followed on Wednesday by the European Union's announcement that effectively recommended its member nations limit " not ban " the Chinese company's involvement in their development of next-generation mobile phone infrastructure.
The latest developments not only represent a win for Huawei but also for China, as Washington has clearly targeted the Chinese conglomerate as a proxy in its tech war against Beijing.
Chinese officials and state media have been wise not to gloat, as the fight is far from over. Britain's decision is likely to make American officials redouble their efforts to pressure other allies to exclude Huawei from their telecommunications infrastructure.
For Britain, pragmatism has trumped politics. Huawei has supplied telecoms gear to British phone networks for nearly two decades, and it already supplies all four of the country's mobile phone networks with limited 5G technology. Excluding Huawei would have set back the country's 5G development for years, and would have hurt economic growth and cost consumers a lot more by switching to technology and equipment from new suppliers.
Besides, the British government has reportedly done a thorough job of examining and evaluating Huawei's equipment and failed to find any hardware or software suspicious.
As Brexit was formally enacted on Friday, the British government's decision also reflects a broader strategy to seek a closer investment and trade relationship with China, one of its largest trade partners and investors, amid greater economic uncertainty.
Understandably, the move has disappointed and even angered some American politicians. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has urged the British government to reconsider its decision, but his exhortations are likely to fall on deaf ears.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, left, with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in London. Photo: AP alt=US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, left, with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson in London. Photo: AP
Over the past year, the White House has played up fears of spying, arguing that Huawei was "an extension" of the Chinese Communist Party and would be forced to hand over information to the party " an assertion Huawei has strongly and repeatedly dismissed.
Moreover, the British government's decision and the EU's announcement have effectively laid bare Washington's weak case against Huawei, as the United States has failed to provide any fact-based evidence to justify a total ban on the Chinese firm.
As many analysts have rightly pointed out, the US should not resort to banning Huawei but instead focus upon encouraging its companies and those of its allies to compete with it and develop better technology and equipment.
That is absolutely the right way, not least because consumers around the world would benefit from the reduced costs and economic growth spurred by this competition.
Looking ahead, Britain's decision could serve as a model for other European countries, including Germany and Spain whose governments have been weighing whether they should allow Huawei to participate in their 5G development.
Perhaps even more interestingly, Britain split from the US over Huawei despite their much-touted "special relationship", and the move also drove a wedge into the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance that also includes Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Mobile network masts in front of St Paul's Cathedral in the City of London. Photo: AP alt=Mobile network masts in front of St Paul's Cathedral in the City of London. Photo: AP
Australia, which has followed the US lead and banned Huawei, seems particularly bitter at Britain's decision, judging from press reports in that country. Huawei has reportedly urged Australia to reconsider its ban, given Britain's decision, and there is no doubt it will also step up efforts to lobby Canada and New Zealand.
Canada, which has yet to decide whether to allow the use of Huawei equipment, on Tuesday said it was studying Britain's decision " but some Canadian commentators are already debating whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should follow Johnson's lead and grant Huawei similar access with similar restrictions.
The Trudeau government's decision is further complicated by the immense pressure it is under following the detention of Sabrina Meng Wanzhou, Huawei's chief financial officer and daughter of the company's founder Ren Zhengfei.
The Canadian authorities arrested Meng in December 2018 at the behest of the US, which accused her of defrauding various financial institutions and breaching US sanctions on business dealings with Iran.
The arrest has led to a sharp deterioration in ties between China and Canada, drawing the latter into the geopolitical rivalry between Beijing and Washington. Her arrest came right in the middle of the US-China trade war.
Huawei and the Chinese government have maintained Meng's innocence, asserting that she was the victim of political persecution. The American and Canadian governments' insistence that the case was not politically motivated was somewhat undermined by Trump's suggestion soon after her arrest that he might intervene if Beijing could make more trade concessions. In apparent retaliation, China has since arrested two Canadians, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, and accused them of spying.
Meng's extradition case began on Monday with lawyers arguing whether her case met the test of "double criminality", referring to the requirement that the charges brought against her by the US must also be considered crimes in Canada. The test must be met before a person in Canada can be extradited to another country.
Court proceedings were ongoing at the time of writing. If the judge rules that the test has not been met, Meng will be freed " the best-case scenario for both China and Canada. If the test is met, the hearing will move to other phases, including whether the case is politically motivated, and could stretch on for years.
It is interesting to note that last December, Trudeau publicly pleaded with Washington to not sign a final and complete trade agreement with Beijing until Meng's case and those of Spavor and Kovrig had been resolved.
Trump reportedly raised the men's detention with the Chinese side, to no avail, and a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman said Trudeau had wasted time asking for help from the US.
This article originally appeared on the South China Morning Post (SCMP).
Copyright (c) 2020. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.
