US War on Huawei is a War on Tech Sovereignty


Unable to compete on equal terms with Chinese telecom giant Huawei, the United States and the corporations that influence its domestic and foreign policy have decided instead to simply cut Huawei off from its many monopolies including chip manufacturing and mobile phone operating systems.

But US measures come at a time when Huawei is already well on its way to unseating US tech monopolies. US measures may only spur Huawei (and many other companies and countries) to further work toward creating alternatives to current US tech monopolies and establishing enduring technological sovereignty from US control.

US Cites False Pretext to Cripple a Competitor 

The US Department of Commerce claims:

…Huawei is engaged in activities that are contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interest. This information includes the activities alleged in the Department of Justice’s public superseding indictment of Huawei, including alleged violations of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), conspiracy to violate IEEPA by providing prohibited financial services to Iran, and obstruction of justice in connection with the investigation of those alleged violations of U.S. sanctions.

Evidence (as is the case with most US allegations) is lacking, yet US measures prohibiting “the sale or transfer of American technology” to Huawei coincidentally gives a boost to US tech companies unable to compete against Huawei in free and fair global markets.

Fortune, in its article, “Huawei Wants to Play Nice With Google and Microsoft, But Has Its ‘Last Resort’ Ready,” elaborates further on what this ban means to Huawei.

Microsoft removed Huawei laptops from its online store, while chip manufacturers including Qualcomm, Intel, Nvidia, Lattice and ARM are poised to stop supplying Huawei assembly lines.

Google is also reportedly preparing to cut Huawei off from its Android mobile phone operating system. Android and Apple’s iOS, both US-based, currently dominate the markets and without access to either, Huawei would face significant challenges, giving US tech companies a chance to catch up. This, more than any sort of ambiguous “security threat” explains the motivations of the US Department of Commerce.

Self-Inflicted Wounds Amid a Senseless Fight

US bans targeting Huawei will not be painless for US corporations involved. Huawei currently occupies second place, just behind Samsung, in the smartphone market. Depriving Huawei of US-made components will deprive US corporations of associated profits at least in the short-term. How fast other corporations fill the void left behind by Huawei, if a void appears, is hard to say. If US corporations are counting on US corporations and US-friendly nations and the respective telecom industries filling a potential void, it is a long bet.

It is clear that Huawei, if accusations by the US of its close association with the Chinese government are true, will have the support, resources and impetus required to begin developing alternatives to Microsoft, US chip designs and Google’s Android operating system. In the long-term, US corporations may find themselves faced by renewed competition, not only in terms of smartphones this time, but also in terms of everything in and on them.

Articles like, “Can Huawei make a phone without US parts?,” and “Huawei developed its own operating systems in case it’s banned from using Android and Windows,” go into detail regarding all the alternatives Huawei already has at its disposal and possible future alternatives that will further mitigate US bans.

US bans aimed at maliciously targeting and eliminating competitors will only make these competitors stronger in the long run. US bans aimed at Chinese tech companies will also give other companies in other industries and even in other countries pause for thought when depending on the US for anything. This may be the beginning of a global move to hedge against other unpredictable moves made by the US Department of Commerce and US corporations.

It may also be the beginning of a move toward greater global technological sovereignty.

Technological Sovereignty 

For as important as technology is to a nation’s economy and security, depending on foreign corporations to manufacturer and use it seems recklessly irresponsible.

This realization has prompted many nations to begin building up their own domestic alternatives and depending less on foreign corporations for their technological infrastructure.

Russia, for example, has its own mobile phone operating system called Aurora it runs government devices on. Russia has also passed legislation to begin creating an independent Internet that can operate on its own entirely within Russia. Russia also has its own social media network, VK, as an alternative to US-based Facebook as well as its own alternative to Google, called Yandex.

Russian journalist Dmitry Kiselyov (video) compared a nation’s ability to develop and deploy its own technology to having a light switch either outside or inside a bathroom. When outside the bathroom, anyone for any reason, including spite, can switch the lights off leaving the occupant helplessly in the dark. With the light switch inside the bathroom, the occupant has full control.

This point rests at the very center of technological sovereignty.

Russia’s moves illustrate a trend toward treating a nation’s information space and technological capabilities with as much seriousness as it treats its physical territory and defense industry.

For China and Chinese companies, this process is also well underway, with US measures likely only to temporarily set back China’s rise as a global leader in technology. If anything it is most likely helping pave the way for China’s technological leadership to be more complete and even less dependent on the US.

The US has an opportunity to use its technology as a means of developing constructive and lasting partnerships as well as ensuring US influence over technology used globally, but instead it seeks to use its advantages as a means of coercion.

The US “flipping the bathroom lights off” on China is a warning for anyone else around the world who might become targets of US spite. Nations going along with US bans against China will only make it that much easier for the US to target other nations, any nation, in the future. For as important as technology is, there is no nation big or small that can afford to allow the US to continue wielding such power uncontested.

The US war on Huawei represents the opening salvo of a much wider US war on technological sovereignty. It is a war the world must win and a crucial building block toward establishing multipolarism in favor of America’s current, unipolar international order.

Gunnar Ulson, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

New Eastern Outlook

Dear friends of this aggregator

  • Yes, I intentionally removed Newsbud from the aggregator on Mar 22.
  • Newsbud did not block the aggregator, although their editor blocked me on twitter after a comment I made to her
  • As far as I know, the only site that blocks this aggregator is Global Research. I have no idea why!!
  • Please stop recommending Newsbud and Global Research to be added to the aggregator.

Support this site

News Sources

Source Items
WWI Hidden History 51
Grayzone Project 194
Pass Blue 220
Dilyana Gaytandzhieva 14
John Pilger 416
The Real News 367
Scrutinised Minds 29
Need To Know News 2660
FEE 4717
Marine Le Pen 380
Francois Asselineau 25
Opassande 53
HAX on 5July 220
Henrik Alexandersson 945
Mohamed Omar 377
Professors Blog 10
Arg Blatte Talar 40
Angry Foreigner 18
Fritte Fritzson 12
Teologiska rummet 32
Filosofiska rummet 110
Vetenskapsradion Historia 157
Snedtänkt (Kalle Lind) 221
Les Crises 2869
Richard Falk 170
Ian Sinclair 111
SpinWatch 61
Counter Currents 9731
Kafila 492
Gail Malone 41
Transnational Foundation 221
Rick Falkvinge 95
The Duran 9840
Vanessa Beeley 133
Nina Kouprianova 9
MintPress 5651
Paul Craig Roberts 1878
News Junkie Post 58
Nomi Prins 27
Kurt Nimmo 191
Strategic Culture 4897
Sir Ken Robinson 25
Stephan Kinsella 100
Liberty Blitzkrieg 854
Sami Bedouin 64
Consortium News 2685
21 Century Wire 3610
Burning Blogger 324
Stephen Gowans 91
David D. Friedman 152
Anarchist Standard 16
The BRICS Post 1518
Tom Dispatch 530
Levant Report 18
The Saker 4374
The Barnes Review 531
John Friend 482
Psyche Truth 160
Jonathan Cook 145
New Eastern Outlook 4080
School Sucks Project 1780
Giza Death Star 1945
Andrew Gavin Marshall 15
Red Ice Radio 617
GMWatch 2332
Robert Faurisson 150
Espionage History Archive 34
Jay's Analysis 995
Le 4ème singe 90
Jacob Cohen 210
Agora Vox 15827
Cercle Des Volontaires 436
Panamza 2203
Fairewinds 117
Project Censored 953
Spy Culture 542
Conspiracy Archive 76
Crystal Clark 11
Timothy Kelly 575
PINAC 1482
The Conscious Resistance 851
Independent Science News 80
The Anti Media 6701
Positive News 820
Brandon Martinez 30
Steven Chovanec 61
Lionel 296
The Mind renewed 443
Natural Society 2619
Yanis Varoufakis 1009
Tragedy & Hope 122
Dr. Tim Ball 114
Web of Debt 147
Porkins Policy Review 428
Conspiracy Watch 174
Eva Bartlett 603
Libyan War Truth 337
DeadLine Live 1913
Kevin Ryan 64
Aaron Franz 238
Traces of Reality 166
Revelations Radio News 121
Dr. Bruce Levine 149
Peter B Collins 1593
Faux Capitalism 205
Dissident Voice 10885
Climate Audit 224
Donna Laframboise 446
Judith Curry 1137
Geneva Business Insider 40
Media Monarchy 2428
Syria Report 78
Human Rights Investigation 93
Intifada (Voice of Palestine) 1685
Down With Tyranny 12084
Laura Wells Solutions 44
Video Rebel's Blog 439
Revisionist Review 485
Aletho News 20754
ضد العولمة 27
Penny for your thoughts 3047
Northerntruthseeker 2418
كساريات 37
Color Revolutions and Geopolitics 27
Stop Nato 4715 Blog 3103 Original Content 7022
Corbett Report 2391
Stop Imperialism 491
Land Destroyer 1208
Webster Tarpley Website 1112

Compiled Feeds

Public Lists

Title Visibility
Funny Public