China Warns India of 'Reverse Sanctions' if Huawei is Blocked (reuters.com) 112
China has told India not to block its Huawei from doing business in the country, warning there could be consequences for Indian firms operating in China, Reuters reported on Tuesday, citing sources with knowledge of the matter said. From a report: India is due to hold trials for installing a next-generation 5G cellular network in the next few months, but has not yet taken a call on whether it would invite the Chinese telecoms equipment maker to take part, telecoms minister Ravi Shankar Prasad has said. Huawei, the world's biggest maker of such gear, is at the centre of a geopolitical tug-of-war between China and the United States. U.S. President Donald Trump's administration put the company on a blacklist in May, citing national security concerns. It has asked its allies not to use Huawei equipment, which it says China could exploit for spying.
True Colors (Score:3)
Throw a hissy fit when someone passes by without buying your wares? What a 2nd-rate player thing to do.
Re:True Colors (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would China risk national-level sanctions to protect a SINGLE company, ask yourself? A: Because they have massively invested in that company's spying tentacle as part of the "belt and road" strategy to metastatize their interests.
The same party owns Huawei that puts 1,000,000 uigurs in prison for their ethnicity, but we want to pretend it's a clean corporate globalist face like any other? Fuck that.
Their threats are very, very telling. This isn't the US they're trying to push around - it's the world.
Re: (Score:1)
Fuckin A right. I wish the US and Europe and the enemies of China (its neighbors) all banded together to boycott and embargo them at once instead of this peicemeal titty-tat 10% bullshit Trump strategy though. A coalition IS required.
Tell them collectively their dishonest bullshit isn't going to fly just because they make cheap electronics with slave labor, western economies are easily mislead for a buck but fuck around enough and find out the limit, Chi-Coms.
Toss Meng in the god damn slammer for her obvi
Re: True Colors (Score:2, Insightful)
10% is quite effective. Basically it's just enough for distributors to look elsewhere for suppliers without knocking down their business in the process. Remember that this doesn't mean that China losses 10% worth of imports, in fact it's a lot more than that. When suppliers shift their supply chain to another country, 100% of the money that was being paid to a Chinese company is now going somewhere else.
25% is downright painful and really fucks with their supply chain, and they currently face that in some i
Re: (Score:1)
Hahahahah, that's funny, pottle kettle black.
Like the weapons of mass destruction? In case you have your head in the sand, Bush administration's pre-war statements about Iraqi WMD were misleading and not supported by the underlying intelligence but of course Iraq had oil.
I could go on and on, about US lies, but I doubt you care.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well sure, that's an internally consistent explanation.
But just consider a hypothetical scenario where Huawei is *not* a government surveillance agent, it's just a successful Chinese company. The Americans secure big international sales for American companies by insisting countries around the world blacklist Huawei, on false accusations of security problems. What would you do then?
If the answer is "Throw up my hands because after all, it's just one company," what do you do when the Americans do it a seco
Re: (Score:1)
Hell of a spin into a counterfactual hypothetical.
The Chinese government functionally and usually directly owns a portion of all Chinese businesses and every business is obligated by law to help with surveillance. That is not true for other countries.
Acknowledging weakness in your claim is clear from having to invoke the orange twitterer. Fact is China is a han-sumpremacist ethnostate with admitted dreams of world domination, annexing by force one country and by soft power another, concentration camps for A
Re:True Colors (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm just saying that whatever the merits of the claim that Huawei is a threat, this is what a trade war looks like. As in any war you've got propaganda, which is not necessarily *false*, but which you shouldn't accept uncritically.
There is no *proven* misconduct on the part of Huawei. It has never actually done anything (or at least been caught at doing anything); nobody has ever come up with even a shred of evidence that Huawei has put anything into its products, and the products are of course available for examination. It's just that it *could* happen. The answer to that possibility is we should look for evidence, not insist that they prove a negative.
We shouldn't trust this company, nor should we trust American companies. The architecture and management of the telecom system should not depend on complete trust of any hardware provider.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Ask yourself this. Why is the US so willing to sanction the company, despite having no proof of hacking, etc. And when most countries have actually expressed a desire to use Huawei products in some form or another, WHY is the US is threatening them not to.
It's pretty obvious.
The US threats are very VERY telling. This isn't China they're trying to push around - IT'S THE WORLD.
Re: (Score:3)
China is clamping down on attempts to target specific companies. If it doesn't then the US will keep doing it and other countries will join in observing the bans, which is obviously a very bad precedent.
By forcing countries to choose between China or the US they weaken the power of US attacks in the trade war.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would China risk national-level sanctions to protect a SINGLE company, ask yourself?
Why would America bail out their car industry?
Huawei employes 320000 people, and have a massive manufacturing base for both consumer and infrastructure equipment in an industry expected to deliver close to $3.9trillion in GDP for players who have the biggest influence on 5G.
You think Trump cares about spying? Oh you sweet child. Put your tinfoil hat back on and take your meds before laying down.
"Reverse" sanctions? (Score:1)
What the fuck are "reverse" sanctions?
That term sounds a lot like when left wingers say that blacks exhibiting racist behavior is somehow acceptable because it's "reverse racism".
Of course, those are just left wing word games.
"Reverse racism" is just racism, plain and simple.
"Reverse sanctions" are just sanctions, plain and simple.
There is no need for this nonsensical "reverse" qualifier and the nonsensical implications of innocence that it supposedly connotes.
Re: (Score:1)
I am very sure that the original quote was in chinese, and that a better translation would have been "counter sanctions."
Translator is either retarded or trying to make china sound retarded.
USA = 2nd-rate player (Score:1)
Throw a hissy fit when someone passes by without buying your wares? What a 2nd-rate player thing to do.
LOL that's exactly the Trump administration's trade policies which started this tit-for-tat trade war.
another propaganda clickbait (Score:1)
Yes they do that and USA does that too. More of double standards from USA. They do exactly the same but their deeds are 'holy' and 'patriotic' and 'defending the freedom'.
Being caught red handed multiple times just means nobody trusts anything you say anymore. Which means that China gets MORE POWER to do shit around the world. Thanks morons!
TL;DR be a double standard dumbass and end up living in a shit world without rules
Fuck Huawei, the WORLD avoids it for good reason (Score:1)
13 counts brought in the Eastern District of New York state:
(1) and (2) Conspiracy to commit bank fraud: Between around November 2007 to May 2015, Huawei, Skycom, and Meng Wanzhou allegedly conspired to defraud “US Subsidiary 1,” a subsidiary of a global financial institution identified only as “Financial Institution 1,” by misrepresenting Huawei’s relationship with Skycom to clear more than $100 million of transactions to it through the United Stat
Desperate (Score:3, Interesting)
China's growing desperate. I love it.
Re: (Score:1)
Mafia threatens to break my kneecaps
"The mafia's growing desperate. I love it."
Re:Desperate (Score:5, Interesting)
More like "mafia is threatening to break its own kneecaps" at this point. Their entire economy is set up for constant, strong growth. If it stops growing, they're fucked for the next decade, much like Japan in the 80s.
Don't underestimate the power of totalitarianism (Score:4, Interesting)
First off, they have like what, something like 10x the population of Japan? And without that severe "graying of the population" issue that Japan is still dealing with. Bonus points for whomever brings up the sex ratio thing, but it's not much of an impediment to economic growth.
Second and more importantly, China is a totalitarianism. They can weather this storm. That helps them weather storms that would cause instant upheaval and reform (for better or worse) in a democracy. They have corruption issues for miles and miles and all kinds of other issues but I don't see how this is going to cripple them. America certainly isn't their only customer, and not all future presidents are going to be pursuing this same policy. For all their evilness (and I've ranted on this evil quite a bit for years now), the leadership does seem to have adopted a long view of history. (It might have something to do with that "5,000 year old culture" badge they so proudly wear.) They're simply not North Korea or the USSR, and yet they do possess the totalitarian tools to stay the course and weather the storms. You can slow it down from time to time but, economically speaking, I don't see how this juggernaut ever gets stopped. For all the corruption and evil bullshit they've got too many people, too much infrastructure, and a patient, modern Confucian dedication to stability and long term thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Don't underestimate the power of totalitariani (Score:4, Insightful)
I simply don't see how the trade war against them is going to inflict long term damage. Short term yes, medium term maybe but I don't see Trump's successor as pursuing it with such zeal, and it seems like the Chinese leadership has patience and tools to deal with short-term chaos (if indeed this is a recipe for chaos). They just need to punt. And it seems like the Chinese are decent at punting. They agreed to that approach regarding HK and Macau and in a way (though it's a lot more complicated and tense) it seems like they're content to go that route with Taiwan. And the time frames and issues at stake there are a lot longer than the time frames and issues at stake here.
So consider, they've been content to be a long term boa-constrictor (and also to alter themselves a bit, adjust more to this "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" doublespeak) regarding Hong Kong, prioritizing stability and continued growth over other concerns. so why would they hyperventilate and self-destruct over this trade war? (I don't disagree about the self-interest of the CCP but I'm not sure the distinction between their interest and the people's interests matters hugely in this case, except to the degree that they are to distort public perception regarding what's going on, which only makes their job easier.)
Re: (Score:2)
Second and more importantly, China is a totalitarianism. They can weather this storm.
Not sure where you get this idea. Seems all authoritarian regimes end up in crisis or failed states. The ability to keep an oligarchy in charge at any cost is not really a sign of a stable society.
Re: (Score:2)
I love democracy too, but things don't become true just because you wish them so. If the USSR could pull off totalitarianism for 75 years before collapsing, I th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I think that's kind of a reflection of what people want and expect (e.g. society). People have become accustomed to strong growth, and that their children will live better lives than they do. Is that an absurd or harmful outlook?
You must be living rather comfortably if you're content to keep and offer your current lifestyle to your children. I don't think many people are. You can argue for redistribution all you want, but that's never been the historical norm, and steady growth offers the best opportuni
Re: (Score:3)
Actually this could be a gift for them. If India doesn't pick Huawei now they will have an excuse to hit them with sanctions. Never mind the technical or security merits.
Re: (Score:1)
Select from its own products, a world of actual competition.
Why get locked into a product from Communist China?
Given the war of 1962, the Nathu La and Cho La clashes?
China is still full Communist.
Re: (Score:3)
China's growing desperate. I love it.
Just like America did when GM was in trouble. 5G is expected to generate some $3.9trillion in GDP for the winning players. The most successful companies and countries in the world are very VERY desperate to be the king here.
Here's what baffles me (Score:1)
Why would anyone expect a country founded on Stalinism to follow a capitalist agenda? Nixon had to know going in that that was never going to happen. The same goes for all the corporations who shifted their manufacturing there.
Re: (Score:1)
No, not bullshit.
Big tech's wet dream is the surveillance state -- one of the few things China is actually innovative at creating.
With the possible exception of Apple, how many of the bigger US tech firms have sources of income driven largely by data harvesting and consumer tracking?
The only difference is the Chinese government is actively creating the panopticon; here in the US the tech firms are having to do an end-run around crumbling civil liberties (i'm looking at you Ring/Amazon), but the result event
Re:Here's what baffles me (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would anyone expect a country founded on Stalinism to follow a capitalist agenda? Nixon had to know going in that that was never going to happen. The same goes for all the corporations who shifted their manufacturing there.
The CCCP was founded on the principles of Marxism. Stalin and Mao viewed each other more as competitors then friends, cooperating only when fighting against their common enemy U.S led NATO. The Maxist ideals were effectively abandoned after the "Opening of China" following the Nixon visit. Their current economic philosophy is Market Socialism and their governing system is Totalitarianism
Re:Here's what baffles me (Score:4, Interesting)
" The Maxist ideals were effectively abandoned after the "Opening of China" following the Nixon visit." - That's half true only. China's ingrown protectionism wasn't "Marxism" nor did it really "go away" entirely.
"Their current economic philosophy is Market Socialism" - Hmm, no. It's PLANNED economics with state-ownership distributed among an oligarchy of cabalist in-party-only families. Not all workers/parties.
"Market Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are owned either by the state or by the workers in each company (meaning in general that "profits" in each company are distributed between them: profit sharing) and the production is not centrally planned but mediated through the market
Their governing system is Totalitarianism, that's entirely accurate. They have no laws or guarantees or freedoms. It's essentially an ethno-fascist kleptocracy made to resemble the Communist original in rhetoric/parades only.
Socialism it is not.
Re: (Score:2)
" The Maxist ideals were effectively abandoned after the "Opening of China" following the Nixon visit." - That's half true only. China's ingrown protectionism wasn't "Marxism" nor did it really "go away" entirely.
Protectionism has little to do with Marxism or any other economic system. The U.S was quite protectionist through most of its history, only embracing free-market globalism after WW2 and quite notably backsliding into protectionism under the tenure of the current administration
"Their current economic philosophy is Market Socialism" - Hmm, no. It's PLANNED economics with state-ownership distributed among an oligarchy of cabalist in-party-only families. Not all workers/parties.
"Market Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are owned either by the state or by the workers in each company (meaning in general that "profits" in each company are distributed between them: profit sharing) and the production is not centrally planned but mediated through the market
That quite accurately describes their system of SOE's (state owned enterprises). Every government does some form of economy steering eg: they give tax-breaks for gas drilling or solar panel installations but that's quite different from
Re: (Score:1)
"Protectionism has little to do with Marxism or any other economic system" - I'd agree in the context, that was my point. (I'm OP)
"Every government does some form of economy steering " - True, but China's single party (5 year plan, etc) controls the direction. There's no ambiguity like in more diverse systems. There's no "Ross Perot" in China, lol.
"hey give tax-breaks for gas drilling or solar panel installations but that's quite different from a "Planned economy" where the state orders drilling or sola
They really don't get India, do they? (Score:2)
It's like Canada, you Chinese n00bZ, attacking them only makes them fight back harder.
it's time to wall off china! (Score:4, Funny)
it's time to wall off china!
Superpower Reverse-Bingo (Score:2)
India is between a rock and a hard-place. It's like both siblings asking for a loan but you only have enough for one. So, do you piss off your brother and have him smash your gaming system, or piss off your sister and get kicked in the nuts?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't understand India to make that statement. India isn't a country that can be blackmailed like that, they routinely blacklist foreign companies to try to protect domestic industries. Their states are highly regulated, almost to the point of full blown communism in some states in India. If they decide to blacklist Huawei it will be because they want to force a producer to make the stuff for the Indian market in India.
Re: (Score:1)
They do a lot of business/trade with both China and the US. I'm sure they don't want to lose either of those markets for their products or services. If another country bans your exports to them, you lose revenue and customers.
While protecting their own industries is important to India, so is their export market. The US or China can shut them out at will. So yes, they can be "blackmailed", or at least forced
Re: (Score:2)
Given the choices, I piss off my brother. I can get a new gaming system....
Extortion (Score:2)
Nice businesses you've got there, India, would be a real shame if something.. happened to them..
Now, shall we discuss our future plans for Huawei within India? I think we have a bright and profitable future together.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sarah Lee remembers.
The memory is a lie.
Pepperidge Farm, on the other hand, remembers. All of it.
Re: (Score:1)
China also blocked this dude's meds.