Bipartisan lawmakers warn Trump officials about shipping to Huawei

Bipartisan lawmakers warn Trump officials about shipping to Huawei
Reuters reports today that 15 U.S. lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are asking the Commerce Department not to grant 90-day temporary licenses allowing American firms to ship supplies to Huawei. The latter was placed on the department's Entity List for security reasons, blocking it from purchasing components and software from the states. Approximately 300 requests for temporary licenses were received by the Commerce Department and one U.S. official says that 150 of them have been processed. In that group of 150 requests, the anonymous official says that 75 have been approved and 75 have been denied.

Last week Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross announced that the U.S. issued a third 90-day temporary general license allowing Huawei to conduct limited transactions with rural U.S. wireless operators. Ross said that the license was renewed so that rural operators, many of whom use Huawei networking equipment for their 3G and 4G networks, are able "to continue to service customers in some of the most remote areas of the United States who would otherwise be left in the dark. There are enough problems with telephone service in the rural communities - we don’t want to knock them out. So, one of the main purposes of the temporary general licenses is to let those rural guys continue to operate." The government, in announcing the first 90-day reprieve back in May, said that it was issuing the temporary licenses so that Huawei could obtain the supplies "necessary to maintain and support existing and currently fully operational networks and equipment, including software updates and patches." The previous 90-day temporary general license expired last Monday.

A bipartisan group of 15 lawmakers wants the Commerce Department to stop issuing temporary licenses to Huawei's suppliers in the states


The letter written by the bipartisan group of lawmakers said that the Trump administration should stop issuing temporary licenses to individual U.S. companies until the White House provides Congress with "a report outlining specific criteria for determining whether or not the approval of any license poses a national security threat." The letter requested that congressional leaders "be notified prior to the issuance of any licenses to U.S. firms to sell components to Huawei and its affiliates." The company is considered a national security threat because of fears that the company spies, or will spy using backdoors placed inside its phones and networking equipment. While the Chinese government can, by law, compel Huawei to collect intelligence from American corporations and consumers on its behalf, the manufacturer has denied repeatedly that its products are used to send information to Beijing.

The lawmakers wrote that if the temporary licenses continue to be awarded they will allow "Huawei to continue to pose a serious threat to U.S. telecommunications infrastructure and national security more broadly. The Commerce Department responded by saying that it is  "issuing these narrow licenses to authorize limited and specific activities which do not pose a significant risk to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States." The Commerce Department also defended issuing the temporary licenses by noting that the requests were vetted by Commerce, Defense, State, and Energy department officials.


The letter was signed by Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and Republican Senator Tom Cotton. It also included the signatures of Democrats Elizabeth Warren, Richard Blumenthal, Ron Wyden and Cory Booker, and Republicans Ben Sasse, John Cornyn, Josh Hawley, and Rick Scott.

Huawei has been able to work around the ban and is on track to ship as many as 270 million handsets this year. That is a 10% shortfall from Huawei's initial forecast, made before the ban, calling for 300 million units to be shipped in 2019. The main reason for the shortfall is Huawei's inability to license the Google Play services version of Android because of its placement on the Entity List. As a result, the latest Huawei devices cannot use Google's core Android apps including the Play Store, Maps, Gmail, and Search. This isn't so much a hardship inside China where the manufacturer is riding an unprecedented wave of patriotism, but it has affected the company's international sales.

FEATURED VIDEO

26 Comments

1. djcody

Posts: 237; Member since: Apr 17, 2013

so now isn't Trump fault just because dems jumped in. China gov is total regime with death camps if you against china party. we still remember tanks ride over people. cut that hydra down

2. dimas

Posts: 3420; Member since: Jul 22, 2014

Tone it down... You're waking up the huawei crusaders in this site. You say bad things to their peacock company and they go angry. Don't present them with chinese history facts either, they don't listen to those things.

3. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

Stop being so dramatic. I’ve yet to see anyone defend China for the massive atrocities they have committed, but you and others like you have certainly turned a blind eye to the massive atrocities that the U.S. has and continues to commit. Seems like the only “crusader” that’s been awakened is you by yet another article about Huawei.

16. dimas

Posts: 3420; Member since: Jul 22, 2014

Hi there pea-brainhuawei fanboy? How's your huawei ass-licking day? Dramatic? Me? You mean you could not detect that I am making fun of you, huawei crusaders? Tsk tsk tsk, that's bad. You need mental counselling, up 'til now, america is evil and huawei is a saint for you. How about you go out with your family, get some great time and put your huawei pitch fork at least for 5 minutes?

18. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

LMAO I do so love it when you get so enraged that you have to hurl insults every time I defend Huawei. It not only shows how right I am about you, but it also is a huge sign of weakness and inability to converse maturely, and it shows that you’re alone and unwanted. Keep it going, because your salty tears are truly making my day! LMAO!

8. Venom

Posts: 3825; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

Lol called it. The Huawei apologists will swear up and down that Huawei is innocent. The facts speak for themselves.

10. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

Lmao I think you mean that I was correct about him. And you’ve yet to provide evidence of Huawei doing anything wrong. Still waiting. Tick tock.....

17. dimas

Posts: 3420; Member since: Jul 22, 2014

@Venom for them huawei is jesus christ, just like the hardcore apple/android fanboys that can't distinguish business products from real important things.

19. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

Says the Zealot worshipping his deity that is the U.S. Pot, meet kettle.

6. MsPooks

Posts: 245; Member since: Jul 08, 2019

It's always been bipartisan. In fact, the Democrats are even more anti-China than Republicans or Trump.

4. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

I’ve said this before, and I’ll keep saying it: It’s companies in the U.S. that stand to lose the most by this attack on Huawei due to “concerns” with no proof of wrongdoing. Huawei has been showing, and continues to show, that they can not only survive, but be successful and thrive without the U.S. u.S. companies stand to lose a revenue source to the tune of 11 billion annually. Huawei has already been successful in finding suppliers abroad to replace some U.S. suppliers, and they continue to make moves to replace the rest, like them turning to Japan in an effort to replace U.S. suppliers: https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Huawei-crackdown/Huawei-turns-to-Japan-as-US-blacklisting-hits-supply-chain

5. MsPooks

Posts: 245; Member since: Jul 08, 2019

2 indictments, and 23 charges have been issued against Huawei. Just because YOU haven't seen the evidence against them doesn't mean there is. One. You might want to educate yourself on what they're up against. They're free to come represent themselves in court. If you think national security is trumped by 11 billion dollars, I wonder what you'd sell your soul for.

9. Venom

Posts: 3825; Member since: Dec 14, 2017

And that silenced him and the other Huawei guys that continue to swear that Huawei is totally innocent and have done nothing wrong. National security shouldn't be compromised just for the sake of using a company that has heavy ties with the Chinese government.

12. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

And you’re incorrect, as usual. I’ve yet to see anyone, especially YOU, post any links with concrete proof that Huawei has been spying and has backdoors in their equipment on behalf of the Chinese government. There is this thing called “evidence” that one should present if they want to he believed.

20. Gottaluvnewtech28

Posts: 18; Member since: Apr 20, 2019

Huawei has been on the US radar for almost a decade. The white house back then concluded that, while no spying occurred, there are backdoors that could lead to spying, which is an obvious national security threat. The fact that, just like the article states, the Chinese govt can COMPEL THEM BY LAW, to gather info is enough of a security risk to ban their equipment. "Reuters interviews with more than a dozen current and former U.S. government officials and contractors found nearly unanimous agreement that Huawei's equipment poses risks: The company could send software updates that siphon off vast amounts of communications data or shut them down in times of conflict." A quote from this article back in 2012 google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/id​USBRE89G1Q920121018

21. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

“There are no laws in China that obligate us to work with the Chinese government with anything whatsoever.” That was taken from here: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/3013936/huawei-not-bound-chinese-spy-laws-companys-cybersecurity-chief-john It has never been proven that Huawei has backdoors in its equipment. However, it HAS been proven that U.S. companies like Cisco has such backdoors for the U.S. government. Huawei has even stated that it is willing to license its own IP to U.S. network providers in order for them to build out their networks themselves. Would a company that’s guilty of spying actually agree to do that? Absolutely not. If Huawei were truly the threat that the U.S. government is making them out to be, they would have banned them almost a decade ago. This is nothing more than the current U.S. administrations way of trying to get a leg up in the trade with China, aka B.S. political propaganda, like I’ve been saying.

23. Gottaluvnewtech28

Posts: 18; Member since: Apr 20, 2019

The article I posted clearly states they have back doors. Nobody is innocent is this not even American companies. The article even says that cisco has vulnerabilities, but the Huawei equipment is even more exploitable. "At a conference in Kuala Lumpur last week, Felix Lindner, a leading expert in network equipment security, said he had discovered multiple vulnerabilities in Huawei's routers. "I'd say it was five times easier to find one in a Huawei router than in a Cisco one," Lindner said." Also I guess it depends on who you talk to about Chinese law because google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/03/05/huawe​​​i-would-have-to-give-data-to-china-governmen​t-i​f-a​sked-experts.html "Two pieces of legislation are of particular concern to governments — the 2017 National Intelligence Law and the 2014 Counter-Espionage Law. Article 7 of the first law states that "any organization or citizen shall support, assist and cooperate with the state intelligence work in accordance with the law," adding that the the state "protects" any individual and organization that aids it." "And it appears that organizations and individuals don't have a choice when it comes to helping the government. The 2014 Counter-Espionage law says that "when the state security organ investigates and understands the situation of espionage and collects relevant evidence, the relevant organizations and individuals shall provide it truthfully and may not refuse."

24. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

“There is no solid evidence that Huawei has in fact installed hardware back doors in its products that could be used for either state intelligence or corporate espionage. Huawei has also repeatedly denied any ties to the Chinese military as it portrays itself as the victim of U.S. protectionism aimed at keeping it out of the U.S. market. But the recent revelations about the NSA's efforts to find such a link indicate that the U.S. remains wary of the Chinese company.” I got that from here: https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/computing/hardware/us-suspicions-of-chinas-huawei-based-partly-on-nsas-own-spy-tricks So I guess it depends on who you talk to about Huawei having backdoors, because the linked article that I posted contradicts that. Also, vulnerabilities DO NOT equal “purposely placed backed doors”, like those found in Cisco’s networking equipment. I have never once claimed that Huawei is incapable of doing such a thing, I have always asked for solid proof, of which the U.S. has not been able to provide. There is this thing called “Innocent until proven guilty”. The U.S. government has made their decision based on speculation and fear. Wireless carriers from around the globe have also come out and stated that there is no evidence of Huawei spying: https://www.androidheadlines.com/2018/02/no-evidence-of-huawei-spying-on-anyone-wireless-carriers.html “A number of wireless carriers from across the globe say there's no evidence of Huawei spying on anyone like some congressional committees and intelligence experts in the United States recently suggested, Reuters reports. Deutsche Telekom revealed its collaboration with Huawei is both long-lasting and multifaceted, with the network equipment procured by the Chinese company being specifically built to the telecom giant's specifications, then examined by its security experts. Bell Canada VP of Wireless Networks Bruce Rodin said the firm relies on independent cybersecurity auditors to asses Huawei's equipment and never had any spying suspicions reported to it in approximately a decade of collaboration. No "malicious code or backdoors" have ever been discovered as part of Huawei-made network solutions and the company's recent issues in the U.S. are "a commercial thing," Mr. Rodin said, suggesting that Washington is simply trying to protect its own industry by blocking Huawei's attempts to rival it.” Why is it that so many have come out in defense of Huawei if Huawei is guilty? And how come when Microsoft recently asked the U.S. government to give them proof of Huawei spying, the government could not provide any evidence? Surely they would jump at the chance to provide such evidence if this were true, right? I deal in cold, hard facts, not in fear and speculation, and BS political propaganda in an attempt to gain an upper hand in a trade war. The article I listed in my previous comment contradicts the one you listed about that law in China, so I guess it does indeed depend on who you ask.

25. jiangqiushi

Posts: 38; Member since: May 28, 2019

It's so funny to see the US is scared the sht out of itself by Huawei. Anti-China is the biggest political correctness in the US now. At least Huawei is uniting the divided country, good for the Americans.

11. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

Charges don’t mean that Huawei is guilty of anything. Just because YOU choose to believe otherwise, doesn’t make it a fact. You might want to educate yourself on how judicial systems work, and you might want to educate yourself on how Huawei has been doing quite well without the U.S. If you think this isn’t some BS political propaganda, then there isn’t any wonder that you believe whatever the government spoon feeds you.

26. PhoneCritic

Posts: 1367; Member since: Oct 05, 2011

@Meanestgenius I would agree with you on certain aspects of your argument but however when you said this "You might want to educate yourself on how judicial systems work..." that's were you lost me completely This is a self defeating argument- That is the whole point; China ( communist State) dose not abide by a Western judicial systems. "It is not innocent till proven Guilty" but guilty and now it is on you to prove your not guilty. Almost all foreign company doing business in China may take Local or nation Chinese companies to court, in china, for violating IPs and patents but will almost never win or have good resolutions because the State will always favor the local or national entity ( why should it not be the same in the US?) the Chinese state always makes demands of foreign companies that are questionable and those companies have no recourse of a court system that will stand up to the state and say No because they are the state. So, in this regards I stand with the administration. But none the less you did make some valid points.

27. meanestgenius

Posts: 22504; Member since: May 28, 2014

@PhoneCritic That statement is not self defeating. It’s a fact. Huawei isn’t being put on trial in China....it’s not being charged of crimes by China with no proof....it’s being charged by the U.S. government for crimes against the U.S. in the U.S. Therefore, the rules and regulations of the U.S. judicial system should apply. What you’re saying is that the U.S. should act like a communist government does, even though they are a democratic government (more like a fascist government these days). With the U.S. acting like a communist government in that retrospect (and MANY others), they are no better than China. And let me be CLEAR: The Chinese government is HORRIBLE. They have committed atrocities and human rights violations, and that is NOT ACCEPTABLE. BUT THE SAME GOES FOR THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. They have committed, and still commit, atrocities and human rights violations. I DO NOT SUPPORT any government that does these things, for any reason. The U.S. included. I have always defended/supported Huawei because there has been no solid evidence provided that they have committed any wrongdoings, and I’ve supplied sufficient evidence via links to support my stance. I am in NO WAY a fan of “blame without solid proof”. I in NO WAY support the Chinese government, just like I in NO WAY support the U.S. government, and it’s due to the atrocities they both have committed and continue to commit. Thanks for recognizing my valid points. Much appreciated.

7. domfonusr

Posts: 1094; Member since: Jan 17, 2014

I have no problem with US lawmakers pushing for the block on Huawei, or possibly other Chinese firms, like ZTE... I am sure Huawei is not the only Chinese firm to pose a security risk to the US and allies; however, I am interested to see what the Chinese firms can do when they are left to their own devices. They could end up with a competitive product in Harmony OS, and as long as they can source everything themselves, which I am reasonably sure that they can do now that ARM has declared their chip tech in-question to be of British origin, and not of US origin - I think the UK will let ARM license their tech to Huawei so that they can continue designing Kirin chips for the TSMC foundries to produce - and, thus, Huawei and other Chinese OEM's that band together may yet produce something unique and interesting, and worth a look.

13. mootu

Posts: 1541; Member since: Mar 16, 2017

" I think the UK will let ARM license their tech to Huawei" Nothing to do with the UK, our stupid government allowed ARM to be sold to SoftBank years ago, they are Japanese.

14. QuantumRazer

Posts: 171; Member since: Apr 27, 2019

ARM already stated that they would let Huawei use their future core designs a few weeks ago.

22. Subie

Posts: 2429; Member since: Aug 01, 2015

So lets say you purchase a company in a foreign country. The operations of that company would still be subject to the laws and regulations of that country. The fact that the owner is from a different country is irrelevant. ARM is still a UK company operating out of and with its headquarters in England. Thus it definitely operates under UK law. If the British Government deemed Huawei a national security threat and barred commerce with UK companies ARM would have to comply with whatever it was bound to by law. SoftBanks only long term recourse around this would be to pull ARM completely out of Enlgand...

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.