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