Huawei and the NBN: Good reason to draw the line

It was observed that one of China’s methods was to use ethnic Chinese “insiders” to steal information and funnel it back to companies or universities on the mainland, while Chinese intelligence agencies and corporations also exploited Chinese citizens with trans-Pacific family ties when such ties could prove useful.

In the end, Australian opinion will be divided over Chinese involvement in the Australian economy. The Coalition says the decision to ban Huawei is “clumsy, offensive and unprofessional” with the Opposition finance spokesman Andrew Robb accusing the Gillard Government of dama ging “our relations with China, India, Japan and Indonesia at a time when the middle class across that region is exploding”. Robb also states “we must bear in mind that this is a company which is heavily involved in eight of nine NBN roll-outs around the world”.

But Robb should consider all the evidence that helps explain why national governments have turned to Huawei.

One Indian journalist argued that letting Huawei be involved in India’s telecommunications industry was like “letting the fox to guard the henhouse”, after India announced further plans to entrust Huawei with a crucial role in helping ferret out spy software hidden in imported telecom gear.

While India also has a lab to address intelligence and security concerns given government suspicion that Chinese companies could use the telecom equipment to spy on India and even launch cyber-attacks, an official declared that “India was compelled to take the help of the Chinese company because no Indian firm makes telecom gear and no other foreign company was willing to assist because of worries about intellectual property rights”.

In these times of economic difficulties and ongoing budgetary constraints, one can note such awareness and confidence within Huawei Australia’s Submission to the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper March 2012: “Huawei Australia believes Australia’s policy settings are inadequate to embrace and fully capitalise on the exciting opportunities offered by the emerging and growing nations to our north. With funds from traditional investors dwindling, Australia must engage with Asia like never before. But this engagement must go beyond energy and resources. Australia must harness Chinese and Asian advances in technology, construction, urban design, manufacturing, education, health and security”.

I argue that the Australian government has solid political and security reasons to support the U.S. against mercantile and authoritarian China, despite potential risk to the Australian economy.

I don’t think China will stop purchasing Australian minerals and fuels, as long as we remain competitive in cost terms. China already has enough political reasons to favor Brazil and elsewhere should cheaper opportunities arise. Like any other international entity, whether it be a private or state-owned or backed corporation, Chinese companies will seek to gain profit from wherever it can.

As observed in October 2011, Huawei had no moral concerns when Western companies (notably Ericsson) pulled back from Iran after the government’s bloody crackdown on its citizens two years ago. Huawei stepped up and now dominates Iran’s government-controlled mobile-phone industry. In doing so, Huawei played some role in enabling Iran’s state security network at a time when more than 6,000 people were arrested since the 2009 election.

It is just nonsense for Western government to allow the rise and rise of Chinese corporations given Communist Party control or influence alien to Western interests and expectations.

While Chinese buy our minerals, our houses, our farms, and shops, and we know very little about what extent such fortunes are tied to membership of the communist party and/or corruption, is not any Australian industry sacred from Chinese influence? Should we not as a Western nation, with our own important national and international political and strategic interests, draw the line somewhere on what the Chinese can buy and to what extent? I suggest telecommunications is a good starting place, given its obvious importance.