The Huawei case -- Il-każ Huawei

 

For some years now, several countries from the so-called ‘West’, have started looking with suspicion at the giant Chinese telecommunications company Huawei.  The suspicion is that Huawei’s technology can be used by the Chinese government to secretly spy on communications in the country in which it is used.

 

This suspicion is mostly based on three observations.  The first is that the company founder, Ren Zhengfei, was an officer in the Chinese army before founding the company in 1987.  The second is that a committee of the Chinese Communist Party exists within the company.  Thirdly there is a Chinese law that obliges organisations to colloborate in the collection of information of national signficance.

 

Due to this, some countries, such as the United States, Australia and New Zealand, have decided not to allow Huawei to supply its technology within these countries for the future infrastructure of 5th generation telecommunications networks being developed.1

 

To no avail did Zhengfei declare that he would do no harm to any other country, or that he would prefer to dismantle his company rather than violate any client’s privacy.2  His daughter, Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer of the company, remains arrested in Canada accused of fraud and with an extradition request from the US dangling over her head.  Also in Poland a Huawei manager was sacked from his work after being accused of spying in the country.3

 

To be honest, I don’t find the declarations by the founder Zhengfei particularly convincing, and I wouldn’t expect countries that have taken such serious steps to exclude this company specifically from future investment plans in telecommunications, to reverse their decision just based on such a declaration, or invitations being made to try out the technology and gain experience with it before making up their mind.

 

Nevertheless, the scope of this article is not to denigrate or point fingers at Huawei, but rather to widen the argument somewhat.

 

I do accept that if the Chinese government wanted to, it could issue an order and I have absolutely no doubt it would be obeyed even if the person on the receiving side disagreed.  One could easily see a situation developing in case of political or military emergency, or conflict if not war.  In fact, I’m surprised that the discussion is limited to suspicion of spying, I’d be more concerned about the ability of equipment being instructed to malfunction if not to stop working altogether.

 

However my point is another.  In a situation of military conflict or war, would only the Chinese government be able to issue such an order?  Cannot any other country involved in an emergency, where the constitution becomes suspended and the country governed under martial law, issue whatever order is felt necessary to defend the integrity and security of the country?  Do you think that hte United stated, in such a situation, would not order any of its big companies, the bedrock of telecommunications and IT, such as Cisco, Apple, Google, Lucent, Motorola etc to defend the country’s security and take a military advantage in some conflict?

 

No?  Really?

Even today, when military conflicts between the major powers (China, Russia, United States) do not exist (although tension exists aplenty), we know that the US has gathered information (spied) on its own citizens, apart from foreign ones, and also on heads of friendly states such as the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, from phone calls, mobile messages, internet traffic and other methods.  Also we have learnt that the British spying agency has read information from fibre optic cables going round the world carrying internet traffic.4  This all came out of revelations by the American Edward Snowden, currently exiled in Russia.

 

It was also revealed that equipment by the giant American company Cisco during its export was often secretly intercepted by the American secret services, being modified to permit surveillance before being resealed with factory seals.5  One can see that legitimate fears exist, from all sides.  Angels are based in heaven, not on earth.

 

In Australia, the federal parliament has just passed legislation to permit the Minister for Home Affairs to give directions to those holding critical infrastructure in the country to carry out, or not carry out, an action risking being of prejudice to the country’s security.  A very wide definition indeed.  How different is this to the Chinese legislation I mentioned previously?

 

Don’t get me wrong, such fears are not without foundation.  Nevertheless, there is more than one way in which such fears can be addressed.  For example, until now the UK has taken the attitude that similar risks can be managed through network architecture, and that there is no need for blanket prohibition.  BT, a massive British telecommunications company, is reportedly using Huawei technology in parts of its 5G network outside the core.  Other major operatos like Vodafone would also like to work with Huawei as they are advanced in 5G.

 

Malta has also not taken the route of prohibition of Huawei, on the contrary it has signed an agreement in which this company will use Malta to showcase its advanced 5G technology.6  This once again places Malta at the forefront of telecommunications and information technologies.  At the same time, it will be interesting to observe whether the Maltese government and telecom operators in the country will take any precautionary measures to mitigate any risks to national security that can be envisaged, whether through architecture or through the strategic choice of alternative suppliers of such equipment.

 

------------------------

 

Għal xi snin issa, diversi pajjiżi tal-hekk imsejjaħ ‘Punent’, bdew iħarsu b’suspett lejn il-kumpannija ġganteska Ċiniża tat-telekomunikazzjoni Huawei.  Dan is-suspett huwa li t-teknoloġija tal-Huawei tista’ tintuża biex il-gvern Ċiniż jispjuna bil-moħbi fuq il-komunikazzjonijiet f’pajjiż li fih jintuża.

 

Dan is-suspett huwa bbażat l-iktar fuq tliet osservazzjonijiet.  L-ewwel hi l-fundatur, Ren Zhengfei, kien uffiċjal fl-armata Ċiniża, qabel li beda l-kumpannija fl-1987.  It-tieni hi li jeżisti kumitat tal-Partit Kommunista Ċiniż fil-kumpannija.  It-tielet hi li hemm liġi Ċiniża li tobbliga lil organiazzazzjonijiet biex jikkollaboraw f’xogħol ta’ ġbir ta’ informazzjoni b’valur nazzjonali.

 

Minħabba f’dan, xi pajjiżi, bħall-Istati Uniti, l-Awstralja u New Zealand, iddeċidew li ma jħallux lil Huawei tforni t-teknoloġija tagħha f’dawn il-pajjiżi għall-infrastruttura futura tat-telekomunikazzjoni tal-ħames ġenerazzjoni (5G), li qiegħda tiġi żviluppata.1

 

Għalxejn stqarr Zhengfei li mhu qatt se jagħmel xejn biex jagħmel ħsara lil kwalunkwe pajjiż ieħor, jew li jippreferi li jagħlaq il-kumpannija milli jmur kontra l-privatezza ta’ xi klijent.2  It-tifla tiegħu Meng Wanzhou, kap finanzjarju tal-kumpannija, għadha arrestata fil-Kanada akkużata bi frodi u b’talba ta’ estradizzjoni lejn l-Istati Uniti mdendla fuq rasha.  Ukoll maniġer ta’ Huawei fil-Polonja ġie mkeċċi mix-xogħol wara li ġie akkużat li kien spjuna f’dak il-pajjiż.3

 

Jien ngħid għalija, ma nsibx l-istqarrijiet tal-fundatur  Zhengfei partikolarment konvinċenti, u lanqas nistenna li l-pajjiżi li ħadu pass gravi daqs li jeskludu din il-kumpannija speċifikatament mill-pjanijiet tal-investimenti futuri fit-telekomunikazzjoni, biex jerġgħu lura minn din id-deċiżjoni sempliċement abbażi ta’ dawn l-istqarrijiet, jew l-istediniet biex jippruvaw it-teknoloġija u jrabbu esperjenza magħha qabel ma jieħdu pass bħal dan.

 

Madankollu, l-iskop ta’ dan l-artiklu mhux wieħed li jmaqdar jew jipponta s-swaba lejn Huawei, imma li jitwessa xi ftit l-argument.

 

Jien naċċetta li jekk il-gvern Ċiniż irid, jista’ joħroġ ordni u m’għandi l-ebda dubju li din tiġi obduta anke jekk min jirċeviha jkun kontriha.  Wieħed faċilment jara sitwazzjoni bħal din tista’ tinħoloq f’każ ta’ emerġenza politika jew militari, jew kunflitt jekk mhux ukoll gwerra.  Jien fil-fatt niskanta li d-diskussjoni hija biss limitata għal suspetti ta’ spjunar, jien tbeżżagħni wkoll l-abbiltà li tagħmir jingħata struzzjoni biex jiffunzjona ħażin jew jieqaf għalkollox.

 

Imma l-punt tiegħi huwa dan.  F’sitwazzjoni ta’ xi kunflitt militari jew gwerra, il-gvern Ċiniż biss jista’ joħroġ ordni bħal dan?  Ma jistgħux kwalunkwe pajjiż ieħor involut f’emerġenza tal-pajjiż, fejn il-kostituzzjoni tiġi sospiża u l-pajjiż jitmexxa taħt liġi marzjali, joħroġ kwalunkwe ordni li jħoss neċessarja biex jiddefendi l-integrità u s-sigurtà tal-pajjiż?  Taħseb li l-Istati Uniti f’sitwazzjoni bħal din, ma toħroġx ordnijiet lill-kumpanniji l-kbar tagħha, is-sisien fl-infrastruttura tat-telekomunikazzjoni u l-IT, bħal Cisco, Apple, Google, Lucent, Motorola eċċ biex tiddefendi s-sigurtà tal-pajjiż u tieħu vantaġġ militari f’xi kunflitt?

 

Le?  U ejja!

 

Anke llum, fejn kunflitt militari bejn il-potenzi l-kbar (Ċina, Russja, Stati Uniti) ma jeżistux (għalkemm tensjoni hemm kemm trid), nafu li l-Istati Uniti ġabret informazzjoni (spjunat) fuq iċ-ċittadini tagħħa stess, apparti ċittadini barranin, u anke fuq kapijiet tal-istati ħbieb tagħha bħall-Kanċillier Ġermaniż Angela Merkel, minn telefonati, messaġġi tal-mowbajl, traffiku tal-internet u metodi oħrajn.  Ukoll, l-aġenzija tal-ispjunar Ingliża taqra l-informazzjoni minn fibri ottiċi li jduru madwar id-dinja għall-internet.4  Dan kollu ħareġ mir-rivelazzjonijiet tal-Amerikan Edward Snowden, li bħalissa qiegħed eżiljat fir-Russja.

 

Kien ukoll svelat li apparat tal-kumpannija ġganteska Amerikana Cisco, waqt l-esportazzjoni tagħhom ġieli ġew imwaqqfa bil-moħbi mis-servizzi sigrieti Amerikani, u jsirulhom modifikazzjonijiet li jippermettu s-sorveljanza qabel ma jerġgħu jiġu ssiġillati bis-siġilli tal-fabbrika.5  Wieħed jista’ jara li biżgħat leġittimi jeżistu, u minn kull naħa.  L-anġli fis-sema qiegħdin.

 

Fl-Awstralja, il-parlament federali għadu kif għadda leġislazzjoni li jippermetti lill-Ministru tal-Intern biex jagħti direzzjoni lil min għandu infrastruttura kritika fil-pajjiż biex jagħmel, jew ma jagħmilx, ħaġa li għandha riskju li tkun ta’ preġudizzju għas-siġurtà tal-pajjiż.  Definizzjoni wiesgħa kemm tridha.  Kemm hija differenti mill-leġislazzjoni Ċiniża li semmejt qabel?

 

Tifhmunix ħażin, dawn il-biżgħat mhumiex mingħajr fundazzjoni.  Madankollu hemm iktar minn mod wieħed kif jistgħu jiġu affrontati.  Per eżempju, ir-Renju Unit s’issa ħadet l-attitudni li riskji simili jistgħu jiġu mmaniġġjati permezz tal-arkitettura tan-netwerk, u li m’hemmx bżonn ta’ projbizzjoni kompluta.  Il-BT, kumpannija ġganteska Brittannika tat-telekomunikazzjoni, qed tuża teknoloġija tal-Huawei f’partijiet tan-netwerk 5G li mhumiex fil-qalba.  Operaturi oħra kbar bħal Vodafone ukoll jixtiequ jaħdmu ma’ Huawei għax dawn huma avvanzati fit-teknoloġija tal-5G.

 

Malta wkoll ma ħaditx it-triq tal-projbizzjoni ta’ Huawei, anzi ffirmat ftehim li fiha din il-kumpannija se tuża lill-Malta bħala vetrina għat-teknoloġija avvanzata tal-5G tagħha.6  Dan għal darb’oħra jpoġġi lil Malta fuq quddiem fl-isfera tat-teknoloġija tat-telekomunikazzji u l-IT.  Fl-istess ħin, se jkun interessanti li nosservaw jekk il-gvern Malti u l-kumpanniji tat-telekomunikazzjoni fil-pajjiż jieħdux xi miżuri ta’ prekawzjoni biex jittaffew ir-riskji għas-sigurtà tal-pajjiż li jistgħu jiġu antiċipati, kemm permezz tal-arkitettura li tingħażel kif ukoll fl-għażla strateġika ta’ fornituri alternattivi ta’ apparat ta’ dan it-tip.

 

 

1https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46465438, retrieved 20/2/2019

2http://fortune.com/2019/01/18/huawei-ren-zhengfei/, retrieved 20/2/2019

3https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/chinese-telco-huawei-sacks-accused-spy-detained-in-poland-20190113-p50r1t.html, retrieved 20/2/2019

4https://mashable.com/2014/06/05/edward-snowden-revelations/#GBjdrEYdBPqc, retrieved 20/2/2019

5https://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/internet-privacy/snowden—the-nsa-planted-backdoors-in-cisco-products.html, retrieved 21/2/2019

6http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-07/14/c_137324156.htm, retrieved 21/2/2019

1https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46465438, retrieved 20/2/2019

2http://fortune.com/2019/01/18/huawei-ren-zhengfei/, retrieved 20/2/2019

3https://www.smh.com.au/world/asia/chinese-telco-huawei-sacks-accused-spy-detained-in-poland-20190113-p50r1t.html, retrieved 20/2/2019

4https://mashable.com/2014/06/05/edward-snowden-revelations/#GBjdrEYdBPqc, retrieved 20/2/2019

5https://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/internet-privacy/snowden—the-nsa-planted-backdoors-in-cisco-products.html, retrieved 21/2/2019

6http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-07/14/c_137324156.htm, retrieved 21/2/2019

Conversion -- Il-konverżjoni

 

In November of last year, John Chau, a 26 year old American, tried to visit North Sentinel island, part of the Andamar archipelago in the Bay of Bengal between India and Myanmar.  There lives a small population that has no contact with the outside world, one of the few remaining, and the Indian government had legislated to prohibit visits to the island to protect its inhabitants, or the ones that are left after diseases introduced to them by foreigners who had previously tried to visit.

 

He went to the island three times in two days, threatened each time, and by the third time he was killed.

 

Why did he do this?  The intention of Chau, and evangelical Christian, was to take Jesus to those who had never heard of him.  This is in response to the order by Jesus to his disciples “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.1

 

So what did this human being do wrong?  Why did they need to kill him?  Weren’t, and aren’t, they savages?  Wasn’t he right in describing the place as ‘Satan’s last stronghold’, where no one had yet heard the name of God?2

 

What do you think?  Do his actions make sense?

 

Just imagine the scene, the first time he reached the shore, some inhabitants ran towards him shouting words in their language.  He was still in his kayak, and shouted back (in English, naturally) that his name was John, that he loved them and the Jesus also loved them.

 

I don’t think he was lying, but do you think that any word he said had, or could have had, and positive impact?  If they had understood anything from what he said, or were in a position to understand, then there would have been some hope of developing some intelligent conversation, however the chance of this happening was zero.

 

Chau’s strategy was clear from what he had written the day before he was killed “You guys might think I’m crazy in all this but I think it’s worth it to declare Jesus to these people.’  In other words, he was going to do everything he could to make them hear the name of Jesus, and in fact he did so within ten seconds of contacting them.

 

Chau is right to imagine some of those reading his story thinking he was crazy.  I’m one of those thinking he was crazy, and pathetic and deluded too, God have mercy on his soul.

 

There are ways and means to proclaim God.  Jesus did not tell us to treat everyone who does not share our faith as an imbecile, or that necessarily lives with Satan if they don’t have a church and go to mass.  How long shall we continue considering those having a different value system to ours, perhaps expressed in different terms to ours, and curious practices (to our eyes), as inferior to ours and that we have (or should have) a mission to bring everyone to be in agreement with us?

 

I have no doubt with the good intentions of missionaries of this type, and missionaries there have been, and still are, in the hundreds of thousands, and those of other religions too, but good intentions are not enough.

 

Jesus did not only tell his disciples to preach to all nations, but also told the parable of the Good Samaritan3.  A parable is a made-up story with his unique style with the intention of passing on a moral lesson.  In this parable, he taught how any person could do the will of God even if not forming part of of the so-called ‘people of God’, that is the Jews of yesteryear, and for those who are Christian today, the Christians.

 

These fervent attempts to convert people come what may, do more damage than do good.  Here in Australia, there are as many stories as you like about missionaries who took aboriginal people, usually young children, and gave them no choice but to learn a language, culture and religion that was completely alien to their own, forced to separate from their families and communities, and today are referred to as the Stolen Generation, who suffered an incredible trauma whose effects have long been and will continue to be felt for decades.

 

A good conversion occurs when one gives witness to his beliefs through his actions, with useful and altruistic work, an open heart, empathy, words of comfort and a ready ear.  When others sees this witness, noting its positive attributes especially when compared to the rest of society, and asks what is driving it, then one can talk about the faith that inspires the action.  A mature, sincere and free conversion can then come about.

 

--------------------------

 

F’Novembru tas-sena l-oħra, John Chau, Amerikan ta’ 26 sena, ipprova jmur fil-gżira North Sentinel, parti mill-arċipelgu Andamar fil-Bajja tal-Bengal bejn l-Indja u Myanmar.  Hemmhekk tgħix popolazzjoni żgħira li m’għanda l-ebda kuntatt mad-dinja, waħda mill-ftit li baqa’, u l-gvern Indjan kien għadda liġi li jipprojbixxi li wieħed iżur lill-gżira biex jipproteġi lill-abitanti, jew dawk li baqa’ wara l-mard li kien introdott lilhom minn barranin oħra li kienu ppruvaw iżuruhom.

 

Niżel tliet darbiet fuq il-gżira f’temp ta’ jumejn, kien mhedded kull darba minnhom u mat-tielet darba inqatel.

 

Għaliex għamel dak li għamel?  L-intenzjoni ta’ Chau, Nisrani evanġeliku, kienet li jwassal lil Ġesù lil min qatt ma sema’ bih.  Din hija bi tweġiba għall-ordni ta’ Ġesù lid-dixxipli “Morru mela, agħmlu dixxipli mill-ġnus kollha, u għammduhom fl-isem tal-Missier, tal-Iben u tal-Ispirtu s-Santu”1.

 

Allura x’għamel ħażin dan il-bniedem?  Kellhom għalfejn joqtluh?  Mhux slavaġ kienu u għadhom?  Mhux bir-raġun iddeskriva l-post bħala ‘l-aħħar fortizza tax-xitan’, fejn ħadd ma kien għadu sema’ b’isem Alla?2

 

Intom x’taħsbu?  Dak li għamel fil-fatt jagħmel sens?

 

Immaġinaw ftit ix-xena, l-ewwel darba li resaq lejn ix-xatt, u xi abitanti qabdu jiġru lejh jgħajtu b’xi lingwa tagħhom.  Hu kien għadu fil-kajjik, u għajjat lura (bl-Ingliż, naturalment), li jismu John, li jħobbhom u li Ġesù kien iħobbhom ukoll.

Jien ma naħsibx li kien qiegħed jigdeb, imma taħsbu li xi kelma milli qal kellha, jew seta’ jkollha, kwalunkwe impatt pożittiv?  Kieku fehmu xi ħaġa milli qal, jew kienu f’pożizzjoni li jifhmu, kieku kien ikun hemm xi tama li jiżviluppa xi djalogu intelliġenti, imma ċans ta’ dan kien hemm żero.

 

L-istrateġija ta’ Chau kienet ċara minn dak li kiteb il-ġurnata qabel ma nqatel “Intom forsi taħsbu li jien miġnun f’dan kollu imma naħseb li hemm valur meta tiddikjara lil Ġesù lil dawn in-nies”.  Fi kliem ieħor, kien se jagħmel minn kollox li jsemmalhom l-isem ta’ Ġesù, u fil-fatt għamel dan fl-ewwel għaxar sekondi tal-kuntatt magħhom.

 

Għandu raġun Chau jimmaġina lil uħud minn dawk li jaqraw fuq l-istorja tiegħu jaħsbu li huwa miġnun.  Jien wieħed dawk li jaħsbu li kien miġnun, u patetiku u illuż ukoll, Alla jaħfirlu.

 

Hemm mod u mod kif ixxandar ‘l Alla.  Ġesù ma qalilniex biex nittrattaw lil kulħadd li m’għandux l-istess twemmin tagħna bħala imbeċilli, jew li neċessarjament qiegħed jgħix f’post ix-xitan għax m’għandhomx knisja u jmorru l-quddies.  Kemm se ndumu nikkonsidraw lil dawk li għandhom skala ta’ valuri differenti minn tagħhna, forsi espressi b’termini differenti minn tagħna, u prattiċi (għalina) kurjużi, li huma inferjuri għalina u li għandna (jew għandu jkollna) missjoni li nġibu lil kulħadd jaqbel magħna?

 

Jien m’għandix dubju mill-intenzjonijiet tajba ta’ missjunarji ta’ dan it-tip, u missjunarji kien hawn, u għad hawn, mijiet tal-eluf, u ta’ reliġjonijiet oħra wkoll, imma l-intenzjonijiet tajba mhumiex biżżejjed.

 

Ġesù ma qalx biss lid-dixxipli biex ixandru lill-ġnus kollha, imma rrakkonta l-parabbola tas-Samaritan it-Tajjeb3.  Parabbola hija storja vvintata fl-istil uniku tiegħu b’intenzjoni ta’ tagħlima fuq il-morali.  F’din il-parabbola, għallem kif kwalunkwe bniedem jista’ jagħmel ir-rieda t’Alla anke jekk ma jiffurmax parti mill-hekk imsejjaħ ‘poplu t’Alla’, jiġifieri l-Lhud ta’ dakinhar, u għal min hu Nisrani llum, l-Insara.

 

Dawn l-attentati ferventi li nikkonvertu lin-nies akkost ta’ kollox ħsara jagħmlu u mhux ġid.  Hawnhekk l-Awstralja, hawn stejjer kemm trid ta’ missjonijiet fejn kienu jittieħdu nies aboriġeni, aktarx tfal żgħar, fejn ma kellhomx għażla ħlief li jitgħallmu lingwa, kultura u reliġjon kompletament aljena għalihom, mġiegħla jisseparaw mill-familji u l-komunitajiet tagħhom, illum jissejħu ġenerazzjonijiet misruqa, li ġarrbu trawma inkredibbli fuqhom li l-effetti tagħha ilhom u jibqgħu iħossu għal għexieren ta’ snin.

 

Il-konverżjoni tajba sseħħ meta wieħed jagħti xhieda ta’ dak li jemmen b’għemil tajjeb, xogħol fejjiedi u altruista, qalb miftuħa, empatija, kliem ta’ faraġ u widna lesta li tisma’.  Meta ħaddieħor jara din ix-xhieda, jinnota l-attribwiti pożittivi tagħha speċjalment meta mqabbla mal-bqija tas-soċjetà, u jistaqsi mnejn sa fejn kienet ġejja, imbagħad wieħed jista’ jitkellem fuq it-twemmin li jispira din l-azzjoni.  Konverżjoni matura, sinċiera u libera tista’ mbagħad isseħħ.

 

 

1Mt 28:19

2https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/03/john-chau-christian-missionary-death-sentinelese, retrieved 5/2/2019

3Lk 10:25-37

1Mt 28:19

2https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/03/john-chau-christian-missionary-death-sentinelese, retrieved 5/2/2019

3Lk 10:25-37