US Plays by the Rules -Of Course Not

[OhOh]

The US is taking steps to limit Chinese produced elecronics makers bidding for contracts.

Globalisation hit a another wall as developing nations are excluded form "developed" nations market.

Wall Street Journal - 07/11/10

"Sprint Nextel Corp. is excluding Chinese telecommunications-equipment makers Huawei Technologies Ltd. and ZTE Corp. from a contract worth billions of dollars largely because of national security concerns in Washington, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Defense Department and some U.S. lawmakers have been increasingly concerned about the two companies' ties to the Chinese government and military, and the security implications of letting their equipment into critical U.S. infrastructure.

Some officials argue China's military could use Huawei or ZTE equipment to disrupt or intercept American communications.
The Obama administration has also weighed in on the matter. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke called Sprint Chief Executive Dan Hesse this week to discuss concerns about awarding the work to a Chinese firm, but didn't ask Sprint to exclude the Chinese suppliers, according to an administration official familiar with the conversation. Mr. Hesse declined to comment.

The rejection by Sprint is the latest defeat for Chinese companies seeking to break into the big leagues of U.S. phone companies. Huawei and ZTE lost out even though they submitted bids that were lower than those of their three competitors, Alcatel-Lucent SA, Telefon L.M. Ericsson of Sweden and South Korea's Samsung Electronics Co., said a person familiar with the matter."

[Rural Surin]

China is considered developing? They still play this card, do they?

[Muadib]

Not a very good idea to have companies providing technology for infrastructure projects involving secure communications who may influenced by a foreign nationalistic government...

The brief excerpt of the article posted eludes to why the company was forbidden from bidding... But of course, to hypocrites like OhOh, reality rarely matters...

[OhOh]

Thanks for your comments.

I introduced the "developing" status. I don't speak for the official Chinese view.

My point was that the so called globalisation of the worlds economy is only allowed when some countries, and is this case the USA (but others have a similar viewpoint), are seen and promote the take over the low level types of industry from the countries who no longer want them.

This, to some extent, has backfired as we see from the way in which the developed countries are now scrabbling around to find jobs for their own citizens.

The ability of these upcoming countries to deliver the new technology products is not a technical issue as I believe if they couldn't meet the specs they would not be able to partner in these types of projects.

The implication that the US cannot vet these devices prior to deployment raises concerns. If the Chinese can hide control mechanisms then by definition the more advanced countries can as well. We may have seen something already with the Siemens control system alert.

The issue of the Chinese needing to build the system to be able to "listen in" is also facetious.

The use of the "national security" card, the reason stated in the article, only opens up option for other countries to play it at a later date.

For a country which speaks of "transparency" in all business dealings and "ethics" in politics around the world it's another example of double speak.

If this system was for the military only use I can understand the concern but as its a commercial cell phone system and the tender is open, its the US who are being hypocritical(deceitful, pretending).

At the moment the west may have the upper hand, but it may not always be so, and the other countries may reciprocate.

[attaboy]

Are Huawei or ZTE publicly traded companies so an individual can look at their books? I ask because their bids may not be fair. They may be government subsidized. If they are publicly traded have the Chinese signed on to some sort of internationally accepted rules of accounting? They are notorious cheats. Not that that should matter. We should only be concerned with our own conduct setting an example that we can feel good about ourselves with. This is what is most important. The conduct of those on the other side of the table is none of our business. We cannot look through the filter of our culture and judge their ways as cheating. To do so is insensitive.

[OhOh]

Here is a link which appears to show that they are bona fide companies.

Huawei

Huawei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And another not so rosy one.

ZTE

ZTE - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again both from wikipedia.

For the later part of your reply, could apply to any business or country.

[Marmite the Dog]

So the contract may go to someone like Dell, whose products are 100% US manufactured, right?

[Humbert]

Some officials argue China's military could use Huawei or ZTE equipment to disrupt or intercept American communications.

The implication that the US cannot vet these devices prior to deployment raises concerns. If the Chinese can hide control mechanisms then by definition the more advanced countries can as well. We may have seen something already with the Siemens control system alert.

What country's military in an advanced nation would benefit by having American communications intercepted or disrupted and would they not also be excluded from the list of bidders if there was a perceived risk?

[attaboy]

Here is a link which appears to show that they are bona fide companies.

Huawei

Huawei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And another not so rosy one.

ZTE

ZTE - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again both from wikipedia.

For the later part of your reply, could apply to any business or country.

Stellar reputations both of them.

Source wikipedia:

Huawei Technologies became the focus of a major intellectual property scandal again later in 2004, when Yi Bin Zhu, a Huawei employee, was caught afterhours in a competitor's booth at the SuperComm tradeshow, "examining circuit boards taken from the vendor's displayed gear and taking photographs"

US government's Strategic Studies Institute report on Argentina published in September 2007 describes Huawei as "known to bribe and trap clients". The report further details unfair business practices, such as customers framed by "full-paid trips" to China and monetary "presents" to be offered and later used by Huawei as "a form of extortion"



The ZTE wiki entry appears to have been written by an army private.



The USA is not the only one concerned.


Source wikipedia:

Security concerns

In 2005, the possibility of Huawei's bid on British telecommunications company Marconi has triggered a request from Conservative Party to UK government to "consider the implications for Britain's defense security". [47] Marconi was later acquired by Swedish telecommunications giant Ericsson. In March 2009, Alex Allan, the Chairman of Joint Intelligence Committee, has briefed members of UK government about the "threat", allegedely imposed by Huawei's equipment in British national telecom network BT.[48]

In 2008 Military Report to the Congress, [49] Pentagon stated that Huawei "maintains close ties" to Chinese People Liberation Army (PLA). In the same year, the proposed merger of US-based communications company 3COM Corp by Huawei met with US Congress investigation[50] and subsequent determination by Director of National Intelligence that "3Com-Huawei merger would undermine U.S. national security".


Security concerns on Huawei are repeatedly expressed by U.S. lawmakers. In a letter to FCC chairman sent on Oct 20 2010, a group of U.S. senators expressed an opinion that Huawei "would pose a threat to national security if there was manipulation of switches, routers or software embedded in American telecommunications network". [51] The letter became the second such request lawmakers have made to the Obama administration within just two months.
In September 2009, Australian security agency ASIO started investigating the alleged links between local Huawei employees and Chinese military.[52]

In October 2009, Indian Department of Telecommunications reportedly requested national telecom operators to "self-regulate" the use of Chinese-made equipment (including ZTE and Huawei), quoting security concerns. [53] Earlier, in 2005, Huawei was blocked from supplying equipment to India's national network BSNL.[54] In 2010, Indian security intelligence (CBI) insisted on canceling the rest of the Huawei contract with BSNL and pressed charges against several top BSNL officers regarding their "doubtful integrity and dubious links with Chinese firms".[55][56] In April 2010, Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd., the Indian unit of Russia's AFK Sistema, didn't get clearance to buy Huawei equipment.[57]




Perhaps the US State Dept.'s concerns about national security is merely a polite deflection. To outright say we don't do business with unsophisticated theiving crooks wouldn't do. The Chinese might lose face.

[Cujo]

Fair enough.
Fuck the Chinese, they have a history of hiding trojans and spyware in Software sold to their competitors.
Wouldn't trust the cunts as far as I could throw them.
no way they should be allowed anywhere near anything like this.

[Cujo]

Thanks for your comments.

I introduced the "developing" status. I don't speak for the official Chinese view.

My point was that the so called globalisation of the worlds economy is only allowed when some countries, and is this case the USA (but others have a similar viewpoint), are seen and promote the take over the low level types of industry from the countries who no longer want them.

This, to some extent, has backfired as we see from the way in which the developed countries are now scrabbling around to find jobs for their own citizens.

The ability of these upcoming countries to deliver the new technology products is not a technical issue as I believe if they couldn't meet the specs they would not be able to partner in these types of projects.

The implication that the US cannot vet these devices prior to deployment raises concerns. If the Chinese can hide control mechanisms then by definition the more advanced countries can as well. We may have seen something already with the Siemens control system alert.

The issue of the Chinese needing to build the system to be able to "listen in" is also facetious.

The use of the "national security" card, the reason stated in the article, only opens up option for other countries to play it at a later date.

For a country which speaks of "transparency" in all business dealings and "ethics" in politics around the world it's another example of double speak.

If this system was for the military only use I can understand the concern but as its a commercial cell phone system and the tender is open, its the US who are being hypocritical(deceitful, pretending).

At the moment the west may have the upper hand, but it may not always be so, and the other countries may reciprocate.

Fuck off.
The Chinese are deceitful lying little cowards, exclude them as they would others.

[SEA Traveler]

In this case and for the reasons described, sounds like a sound practice and decision to exclude the Chinese participation in the bidding. Wise choice to keep in house. Defense and Intel capabilities as well as those affecting the Defense and Intel areas are best maintained within the allied community.

[Cujo]

if anyone thinks for a minute U.S. firms would be allowed anywhere near Chinese communications infrastructure they are wrong.

[OhOh]

So the contract may go to someone like Dell, whose products are 100% US manufactured, right?

"Sprint initially planned to award three suppliers with a piece of the contract. But it is now renegotiating with two finalists, Samsung and Alcatel-Lucent, in the hopes that the companies will submit a lower bid now that they have a larger piece of the work, said one of the people familiar with the matter."

Security Fear Kills Huawei Bid in U.S. - WSJ.com

[Cujo]

So what's your problem with this Ohoh?

[larvidchr]

The Chinese is certainly not playing by any rules, they are royally screwing us over stealing production and jobs from the western world, by breaking every safety law, environment law, pension laws, intellectual property law ect. ect. and we let them!!!

No Governments forbid western company's to move their production to China India ect, and then later peddle their by western standards illegally produced wares back home in our own countries, we are committing economic hara-kiri with our own liberal laws and attitude towards private businesses and their maximising profit considerations.

All the sucking up to the so-called economic Chinese miracle is nothing but pure bullshit, it's like applauding a doped up Tour de France winner.

[OhOh]

So what's your problem with this Ohoh?

Capitalism by definition encourages the production of goods and services by the most efficient means. Globalism encourages this to be spread around to any country that companies chose to do business.

Most countries, if they are able to, ensures that their local workers/processes are "upgraded" in some way. If there is a choice and one company is willing to invest production etc in the user country they will receive the contract over another company who will not. This way the "product" is produced, the winning company wins a deal and makes a profit and the receiving country improves their workforce to enable them to undertake "better" projects in the future because they have some knowledge and a track record of delivering.

The British, French and Spanish empires did not work this way so much. Their model was to conquer a country and lock them into consuming products manufactured in the "mother" country and rape the conquered countries raw materials at low prices.

Some believe that they also added other types of "benefits", government, infrastructure, protection, religion etc.

We now have the US government deciding/taking a view that some types of business should not be allowed by some countries companies. In this particular case there seems to be a "security" issue.

We have posters saying:

"Fuck the Chinese, they have a history of hiding trojans and spyware in Software sold to their competitors.
Wouldn't trust the cunts as far as I could throw them."

But we trust, continue to do business with and applaud other countries who have actually delivered this.

"The Chinese is certainly not playing by any rules, they are royally screwing us over stealing production and jobs from the western world, by breaking every safety law, environment law, pension laws, intellectual property law ect. ect. and we let them!!!"

The corporations who decide to produce their products for sale around the world are the one who are the exploiters. Do they not know the conditions that exist where they products are being produced? But of course they are making profits for their shareholders so that's OK. The consumers who buy the products just look at the price tag and buy some more. If the consumers looked at where these products were produced and decided they felt strongly enough they wouldn't buy them.

Rather than blame the Chinese maybe a look in the mirror is all that's required.