What We’ve Learned fromthe Blockage on Huawei

Published in Xinhua
(China) on March 1 2011
by HaoJun Tan (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Alice Cwern. Edited by Patricia Simoni.
Recently, Huawei offered to spend £50 million to equip London's subway system with mobile phone reception, as a congratulatory gift for the Olympics; however, the British government has rejected this large gift over national security reasons. Previously, Huawei was interested in purchasing the American company, 3Leaf, but the Americans rejected the offer, using the same reason.

As a leading Chinese manufacturer in developing and inventing new telecommunication equipment, in recent years, Huawei has sought to expand its European and American markets, but it frequently has been blocked. Since Huawei's attempt to purchase 3Com with its American partner, Bain Capital, a few years back, its bid for providing telecommunication equipment to Sprint Nextel, and now the congratulatory gift to London, Europeans and Americans have used the same reason to block them all: national security.

National security and the protection of the nation's interests must be every country's top priorities and be dealt with seriously. However, looking at all the challenges Huawei has faced in the quest to expand its European and American markets, no matter if it was 3Leaf, 3Com, Nextel, or the mobile reception in London's subway, it is hard to relate any of these incidents to national security. The only way to explain it would be the fact that Huawei's entry would be big competition for existing companies in those countries and would affect the profits of those companies. Hence, "national security" is used as a "shield" to block Huawei from entering the market.

In recent years, Europe and America have tightened trading policies on Chinese corporations; these types of activities have become especially common after the financial crisis. However, the parties involved must notice that in recent years, the actions taken against Huawei in countries such as America and Britain have gone beyond the acts of just simple protectionism. Traditionally, protectionism is carried out by adding anti-dumping duties, countervailing duties, carrying out special safeguard measures, investigations, and the like; Huawei, on the other hand, was accused with an unwarranted charge of threatening "national security".

This is due to the fact that most Chinese corporations are subcontractors and manufacturers that produce common processed products and general products; these represent low-end manufacturing, with no core technology, no core competencies, and can be restricted and restrained by using regular means of protectionism. However, Huawei is a high-end manufacturer that has mastered quite a few core technologies and whose products are quite competitive. Europe and America could use only vain excuses such as "national security" in order to block Huawei from entering their markets.

This has given China new enlightenment: Chinese corporations need to strengthen core competencies and strengthen competitiveness in foreign markets. They will face, not only their own challenges, but also external pressure; they will need not only to overcome the bonds of tradition, but will also need to change the way other countries perceive them.

So, how do we get those Chinese corporations that already have core technologies and core competencies to enter European and American markets quickly? Apparently, the effort of one corporation is not enough. On one hand, Chinese corporations need to work as a group by using international rules together to move forward into the international market, especially European and American markets; meanwhile, the departments involved need to tighten their coordination with international organizations and help ease the difficulties, conflicts, and resistance facing Chinese corporations. Also, when a corporation is purposely blocked, like Huawei was, it should join forces with the government, and the interest of Chinese corporations should be protected though negotiations between governments.

The Chinese government should also apply the same principles to foreign corporations. When a country uses an unreasonable excuse to block Chinese corporations from entering its market, China should forbid the same type of corporations from that country from entering the Chinese market.


欧美限制华为进入市场的启示

近日,华为公司欲出资5000万英镑为伦敦地铁铺设手机网络作为奥运贺礼,但英国政府以国家安全为由拒绝了这一大礼。此前,华为曾有意收购美国公司3Leaf,但美方以同样理由拒绝申请。

作为一家具有较高技术创新和研究开发能力,并掌握了不少核心技术的中国电信设备制造企业,华为公司近年来一直致力于欧美市场的拓展,但是,却屡屡遭到欧美国家的强力阻拦。从几年前联合美国股权投资基金贝恩资本收购3Com公司遭否、竞标美国斯普林特公司移动电讯设备合同受阻到现在收购3Leaf公司和向伦敦奥运送礼被拒,欧美国家几乎用的都是同一种理由——国家安全。

保卫国家安全、维护国家利益,是每一个国家都必须高度重视和认真对待的一项工作。但是,从近年来华为拓展欧美市场所遇到的一切来看,无论是3Leaf公司、3Com公司还是斯普林特公司,乃至伦敦地铁手机网络,都很难与国家安全挂起钩来。唯一可以解释的理由,就是担心华为公司的进入,会威胁到所在国企业的市场竞争地位,影响到所在国企业的利益。于是,所谓的“国家安全”就变成了这些国家阻止华为进入的“挡箭牌”。

近年来,欧美国家针对中国企业和产品的贸易保护措施并不少见,尤其是金融危机爆发以后,这种行为已成了家常便饭。但是,需要引起有关方面重视和关注的是,近年来美、英等国针对华为的贸易保护行为,与一般意义上的贸易保护相比,又有了进一步的升级。传统意义上的贸易保护,主要是通过反倾销、反补贴、特保、调查等手段,而华为所遭遇的则是威胁“国家安全”这一莫须有的罪名。

原因在于,其他企业都是一般的加工企业和制造业,所生产的产品也是普通加工品和一般制造品,属于低端制造业范畴,没有什么核心技术和核心竞争力,采取一般的贸易保护手段就可以起到阻止和限制的作用。而华为属于高端制造业,并掌握了不少的核心技术和核心产品,具有很强的核心竞争力,欧美国家要阻止华为进入,只能用“国家安全”这类很虚幻的借口。

这也给了中国新的启示,中国企业要提高核心竞争力,提高国际市场的竞争力,不仅要面对自身的挑战,还要面对外界的压力,不仅要克服传统观念的束缚,还要改变外界对中国企业的认识。

那么,如何才能让中国具有核心技术和核心竞争力的企业尽快进入欧美市场呢?显然,仅仅依靠单个企业的努力是不够的。一方面,中国企业要形成合力,共同利用国际规则,向国际市场,特别是欧美市场进军;另一方面,有关方面要加强与国际组织的协调,帮助企业排解困难、化解矛盾、克服阻力。同时,在遇到类似华为这种被故意阻止的现象,企业应当与政府部门一道,通过政府与政府间的交涉,保护中国企业的利益。

同时,中国政府也应该以对等原则对待外国企业,凡是以不合理借口阻止中国企业进入市场的国家,中国也应该禁止该国同类企业进入中国市场。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Venezuela: The Devil in Los Angeles

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Austria: Trump Is Playing with Fire. Does He Want the Whole House To Go up in Flames?

Russia: Will the US Intervene in an Iran-Israel Conflict? Political Analyst Weighs the Odds*

India: What if Trump Has Just Started Another ‘Forever War’?

Topics

India: What if Trump Has Just Started Another ‘Forever War’?

Russia: Will the US Intervene in an Iran-Israel Conflict? Political Analyst Weighs the Odds*

Cuba: Summit between Wars and Other Disruptions

Germany: Resistance to Trump’s Violence Is Justified

Germany: LA Protests: Why Are So Many Mexican Flags Flying in the US?

Spain: Trump-Musk: Affair, Breakup and Reconciliation?

Switzerland: Trump’s Military Contingent in Los Angeles Is Disproportionate and Dangerous

   

Germany: If You’re Not for Him, You Should Be Afraid*

Related Articles

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Hong Kong: Amid US Democracy’s Moral Unraveling, Hong Kong’s Role in the Soft Power Struggle

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Mexico: The Trump Problem