CIA versus Huawei

It makes sense that Huawei’s 5G equipment was banned because the US security state had no reliable back door into Huawei’s gear. Likewise, anti-competitive business practices – and far worse – are legion in US (and UK) telecoms industry, which this author can write about with authority having worked in telecoms for many years.

For example, US 5G band auctions were conducted by the FCC from 2018-2019 and “won” by Verizon and AT&T most predictably, because the feds have a vested interest in those providers, due to their coverage of military networks. Verizon is the former Bell Atlantic and owns the former Worldcom and MCI, highly suspect and semi-criminal operations deeply mired in the dark web of military networks, for decades. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCI_Inc.

Meanwhile, whatever motivated the US military to abort its previous JEDI cloud network auctions (similar to the 5G auctions) is unknown. A revised version of the JEDI auction allows the entire tech Evil Empire including Microsoft, Amazon, Oracle, IBM, etc to compete in proposals and bidding for cloud military network connectivity. Google bailed from JEDI for murky reasons, saying that they either don’t have “the certification” to run military networks, or that Google doesn’t want to be associated with entities that “hurt people”. * Link: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-google-massive-pentagon-cloud.html

US corporations provide network equipment/hardware for military connectivity containing non-US components, but note that all US military network connectivity must undergo an incredibly anal/arcane certification process, usually redundant, and usually discouraging to the development of new technology. And the feds/military are so paranoid about cloud computing (think of commercial cloud servers as being a legit version of the TOR network) that any US person who signs up for a VPS hosted server – example: OVHCloud – will be asked for KYC and AML authentication. (ie same as when you open a bank checking account)

Consider that network cryptography is part of the federal skullduggery history too. By the year 2000, US restriction on the export of cryptography technology was effectively scrapped. It’s possible that a more business-minded and broad-minded globalist ideology existed back then, twenty-two years ago, as opposed to the extreme militarist globalist ideology of today. Ed Snowden proved that the NSA has a “backdoor” into certain versions of crypto technology too, which may account for the relaxation of crypto export controls by 2000. Regardless, the lapse in US crypto-tech export enforcement after 2000 allowed foreign (non-US) entities to manufacture advanced SHA and RSA capable devices, for example the “antminers” made in China which hash SHA-256 bitcoin.

At some point the western powers deduced that broad-minded business ideals and cooperation with China on high-tech is not their thing, especially with the advance of AI computing, and especially if your “partner” won’t provide your intelligence services with backdoors into their gear. So the US resolved to confront China rather than cooperate, perceiving China to be a threat to the western Axis Powers. For private telecom corporations though, wireless/telecoms cash rewards are of course very high; so the result is a mix of federal CIA skullduggery linked to potentially enormous profits in the US wireless and network communications space. That’s a toxic outcome for Huawei, but just another learning experience with regard to American business and how it intersects with the Security State for China.

Interesting too, the US 5G spectrum was being auctioned at the very same time the CIA forced its “allies” (read: ‘foreign-compliant business interest entities’) to ditch Huawei, according to a new book by Richard Herbaj, The Secret History of the Five Eyes https://www.booktopia.com.au/the-secret-history-of-the-five-eyes-richard-kerbaj/book/9781789465556.html Regarding Britain’s 5G implementation, a message from the US:

[A related article is unfortunately pay-walled but describes US CIA threats versus the UK implementation of Huawei 5G in some detail: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/5g-wars-the-us-plot-to-make-britain-ditch-huawei-mcqdld8sx ]

Essentially and eventually, all US partners in its usual crimes acquiesced to CIA pressure and demands to hose Huawei’s 5G equipment. Canada finally followed suit in May of 2022. Of course the CIA is driven by its ideology of world domination (a CIA construct that both Truman and JFK wanted to end, but couldn’t) and not by cash. So in this case, the war on Huawei is in aid of the hegemon’s power, and to “punish” China, also for the sleight that China did not provide the CIA with a back door into Huawei’s 5G equipment, as implemented within the “five eyes” collective west. After all, Mike Pompeo said so.

Recall that the policy direction of the United States is not established by one individual, whether that individual be a maverick or not, but set by the great business interests who own and operate the country. It was Trump’s Pompeo who demanded that Britain deconstruct its Huawei 5G infrastructure because that infrastructure allegedly posed a threat to United States security. When the reality was, that Pompeo and his CIA henchpersons had no backdoor into that technology. The ultimate ignominy for China was the arrest of Huawei’s Meng Wanzhou by Canada in 2018, with the compliant Ottawa cool kid doggedly following his CIA master’s orders.

Too bad Truman did not prevail, and that JFK did not live… Our globalist ideology may have evolved quite differently, and not comprise the CIA’s “rules based order” travesty we are forced to experience in the west today. And Meng’s arrest would have likely never been ordered.

*strange for a company in part founded by In-Q-tel venture capital

Steve Brown