Why is the United States Picking on Huawei and ZTE?
A congressional report labeling Huawei and ZTE as threats to U.S. national security recently became a hot topic. Why is the U.S. Congress picking on Huawei and ZTE?
One cause of the U.S. leaders’ fears is the threat of rising competition. The financial crisis caused the United States to question the stability of its leading position, and China is the most dangerous substitute. In the economic war, the United States believes that it has taken too many losses. On one hand, China has become the manufacturing center of the world. Due to the low cost of labor, large numbers of U.S. manufacturers are outsourcing to China, and the unemployment rate remains high in the United States. On the other hand, China holds a large number of U.S. government bonds, and the United States has not yet reconciled its debts. Outsourcing in U.S. manufacturing is corporate behavior. U.S. politicians have no say in it, so they take it out on China. Right now, the United States is in the midst of the election cycle: Republican and Democratic parties are competing to treat China as a political target, and Congress is a good place for verbal attacks. Venting anger on Chinese companies by listing accusations carries nearly no risk.
Second, the United States is afraid of others becoming like itself. Relying on its advanced technology, in the past the United States did many unspeakable things. Narrow-mindedly, it put China into the position. Wall Street provides two examples. One is the collaboration between U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies to launch a dishonorable military action against Iran that led to unexpected consequences such as the Stuxnet worm, that destroyed Iran’s nuclear research project, and manufacturing the cyber weapons Flame and Gauss, etc. The second is the 2007 Israeli air force’s attack on a facility in Syria that was suspected of being part of Iran’s nuclear weapons research program. There was indication, in the following year, that a French chip manufacturing company provided radar defense equipment to Syria that included a “cutoff switch” that disabled the Syrians’ ability to monitor the Israeli bombers’ attacks.
Third, the world’s recognition of China is still a long process. U.S. and European companies largely went global in the 1960s and ‘70s. During that time, they faced many difficulties, but they have successfully globalized their companies. They too, however, have yet to break into every market. India, for example, just recently allowed Wal-Mart to open stores, but the U.S. company never thought that it would attract a protest march of tens of millions of Indians. Chinese businesses have just made the first steps toward globalization, and Huawei is regarded as one of the most successful enterprises. Up until now, China has been molded into an opaque kingdom, attached with a variety of negative labels, by the Western media. Chinese companies that went global have naturally become targets of the U.S. to affix more labels and turn them into objects of attacks.
Faced with this dilemma, China must propagate its national image and spending to build soft power. Additionally, it needs to build stronger public relations globally. This incident is a learning process that cannot be avoided.
In fact, this incident is not a bad thing for Huawei and ZTE. Most of the foreign media is actually looking at it with sympathy and raising a lot of criticism for the overbearing position of the U.S. Congress. It is very rare for a Chinese company such as Huawei to receive such treatment. With the rise of China, the most familiar word for Europe and the United States is state capitalism. They are vigorously pursuing and fiercely attacking Chinese companies, as they believe that state-owned companies receive too many subsidies from the government, along with loans and land, which gives them an unfair advantage over international competition. Fortunately, Huawei does not. Nevertheless, because the founder of Huawei has military experience and Huawei is not publicly listed in Europe and the United States, it is attacked. Therefore, Huawei could bridge the gap and be listed in the United States to share with Americans and break the dilemma.
One cause of the U.S. leaders’ fears is the threat of rising competition. The financial crisis caused the United States to question the stability of its leading position, and China is the most dangerous substitute. In the economic war, the United States believes that it has taken too many losses. On one hand, China has become the manufacturing center of the world. Due to the low cost of labor, large numbers of U.S. manufacturers are outsourcing to China, and the unemployment rate remains high in the United States. On the other hand, China holds a large number of U.S. government bonds, and the United States has not yet reconciled its debts. Outsourcing in U.S. manufacturing is corporate behavior. U.S. politicians have no say in it, so they take it out on China. Right now, the United States is in the midst of the election cycle: Republican and Democratic parties are competing to treat China as a political target, and Congress is a good place for verbal attacks. Venting anger on Chinese companies by listing accusations carries nearly no risk.
Second, the United States is afraid of others becoming like itself. Relying on its advanced technology, in the past the United States did many unspeakable things. Narrow-mindedly, it put China into the position. Wall Street provides two examples. One is the collaboration between U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies to launch a dishonorable military action against Iran that led to unexpected consequences such as the Stuxnet worm, that destroyed Iran’s nuclear research project, and manufacturing the cyber weapons Flame and Gauss, etc. The second is the 2007 Israeli air force’s attack on a facility in Syria that was suspected of being part of Iran’s nuclear weapons research program. There was indication, in the following year, that a French chip manufacturing company provided radar defense equipment to Syria that included a “cutoff switch” that disabled the Syrians’ ability to monitor the Israeli bombers’ attacks.
Third, the world’s recognition of China is still a long process. U.S. and European companies largely went global in the 1960s and ‘70s. During that time, they faced many difficulties, but they have successfully globalized their companies. They too, however, have yet to break into every market. India, for example, just recently allowed Wal-Mart to open stores, but the U.S. company never thought that it would attract a protest march of tens of millions of Indians. Chinese businesses have just made the first steps toward globalization, and Huawei is regarded as one of the most successful enterprises. Up until now, China has been molded into an opaque kingdom, attached with a variety of negative labels, by the Western media. Chinese companies that went global have naturally become targets of the U.S. to affix more labels and turn them into objects of attacks.
Faced with this dilemma, China must propagate its national image and spending to build soft power. Additionally, it needs to build stronger public relations globally. This incident is a learning process that cannot be avoided.
In fact, this incident is not a bad thing for Huawei and ZTE. Most of the foreign media is actually looking at it with sympathy and raising a lot of criticism for the overbearing position of the U.S. Congress. It is very rare for a Chinese company such as Huawei to receive such treatment. With the rise of China, the most familiar word for Europe and the United States is state capitalism. They are vigorously pursuing and fiercely attacking Chinese companies, as they believe that state-owned companies receive too many subsidies from the government, along with loans and land, which gives them an unfair advantage over international competition. Fortunately, Huawei does not. Nevertheless, because the founder of Huawei has military experience and Huawei is not publicly listed in Europe and the United States, it is attacked. Therefore, Huawei could bridge the gap and be listed in the United States to share with Americans and break the dilemma.