That would limit telecommunications company to only supply equipment/services to their own country. This move of the US government will potentially hurt Cisco and Alcatel-Lucent in the China market.
Telecom equipment would then be like the defense business. The question one has to ask yourself: Is it more important that a military truck or a communications system comes from your country or its allies for national security?
Each person can answer that question for themselves.
Lightmonkey has a point. Compared with how insanely much money the US spends on military equipment, where it would be unthinkable to use Chinese suppliers, it seems a bit weird to let Chinese vendors supply the telecomuncations equipment for essential parts of the major networks.
Then again, if the telecom business was run the military industry style, an iPhone would cost about 5 MUSD and mobile phone users would be counted in thousands. Not sure that's the way to go. Also, I doubt that any country can reach any reasonable level of independence in terms of homegrown suppliers for telco equipment, when everyone is so dependent on vast networks of subcontractors.
By the way, I wonder if this decision should worry Apple. They're a pretty obvious target for any retaliation in terms of trade policies.
re: US vs Huawei/ZTE: The Verdict"Once the full report is released it'll be interesting to see the full details of the Committee's decision." So I believe the report is out. But no news/analysis about it on light reading. Is this some kind of self-censorship?
I am very pleased with the U.S. government for not allowing the Chinese to potentially infiltrate our networks. As someone stated the first thing to go in any war would be our ability to use the network to defend out selfs. But, maybe more importantly not give them the ability to spy and learn the secrets of U.S. Manufacturers on a daily basics.
I mean really? Now the federal government decides that telecom networks and equipment is worth saving after years of refusing to do anything to mitigate the fall out from cheaper goods and the disaster of divestiture, trivestiture and quadvestiture, etc., etc? Obviously the car industry was a much more worthwhile industry to save than the telecom one was. Given how much Chinese parts, etc. goes into what little remains of the "US" telecom market this really does seem a little bit like too little too late. I'm just sayin'
Neyo -- no self-censorship; it's more that we're in a busy week with a lot of internal stuff going on (tradeshow participation and the like) and with two editors on the road.
I've glanced at the report but haven't seen anything too surprising or new beyond what's been reported (or what we already knew) -- but again, that's just a very quick glance.
If you find anything in there that's particularly eye-popping, do let us know.
1 - The 60 Minutes piece would have the biggest impact on the general US public and;
2 - There were only smaller players that are US companies outside of Cisco (who is only partly a carrier company).
I also answered a question about what it would be like if you treated Telecom Equipment like Defense products.
Now, a bit of my personal history. I worked at AFC who had a dicey Intellectual Property history. AFC sued and settled with Marconi. We had approximately 10 "clones" (aka copies) in China and other places (one in Brazil and one in the US outside of Marconi). One of my jobs was locating the latest clone at Supercomm so that we could tell them to get the heck out of the US.
But I am not done. In 97, AFC did $50M in China. We found out in 98 that we were to be excluded because foreign companies had to have approval for their V5.2 interface and we did not. Local companies did not have to have that approval and continued to sell. By the time we got the approval (the first as far as I know approved), we had systems in China with both our cards and clone cards in them.
Much of this information is available or determinable publicly if you want to research it. To do so, you can look up AFC's legal actions, the shareholder lawsuit against AFC for the stock drop in 6/98, and finally the insider trading involving two engineers (one of whom worked directly for me).
So, my IP rights and open trading views of China are definitely biased. But I also have issues with the current state of the Chinese currency. My solution is to allow Huawei, ZTE, and others in with two things. First, complete disclosure and hacking by the CIA/NSA/DHS of all designs sold into the US market. In other words, give the US government complete capability of hacking the designs. Second, tax ALL Chinese imports 100% until the currency is completely floated. But that is just me. I also do not think this needs to be fair.
That would limit telecommunications company to only supply equipment/services to their own country. This move of the US government will potentially hurt Cisco and Alcatel-Lucent in the China market.