What's new

Australia Bars Huawei From Broadband Project

So let me get this straight.

You are calling the Australian government (which is a left wing socialist party), who has increased trade and business ties with China, who just signed a 30 billion dollar currency swap China, a sinophobe and saying that they have the same mentality as right wing neoconservative Americans because our spy agency (who is independent of the government) made a ruling about a chinese company.

LOL. You are a great source of comedy.

The current labor government is of course a sinophobe.

Kevin Rudd was the first foreign head of state who can speak Chinese, no one expect him to be close/nice to China because of that, as clearly he learned Chinese for his career not anything else. However, everyone did expect him to at least be able to understand China. What happened? Chinese government made it known in private that they stopped dealing with this loser. For what? For his sinophobic policies.

Huawei is involved in 8 of 9 NBN projects around the world, including in UK, and the labor government is the only one that blocked it here in AUS. You tell me what else can you call them other than sinophobic?
 
Huawei owns the world of telecom. They wiped Motorolla, Nokia-Siemens-Networks, Ericsson and Alcatel-Lucent from almost all of Asia, Africa and parts of Europe and America. Even at the Qualcomm Labs. USA they've a fully-capapble 4G network installed by Huawei for testing purposes which is yet to be made public. I don't get it why would Austalia bar it who allowed it in first place where almost all of their Mobile Network are based on Huawei's Systems.
It's blatant protectionism disguised as "security" concerns. They get away with it because Australia is full of right-wing sinophobic neoconservatives that are able to successfully push this nonsense onto their larger population, just like in America.
 
Your claim is that they are rejected because of their race/ethnicity.

That's just ridiculous.

I don't think Huawei let the labor government has such inferiority.

Sure, Australia was turned into a mining middle east style country under the labor government, they dig up rocks and import networking equipments, but still, I don't think the labor government had such inferiority.
 
these austalians what can i say they seem always bite the hand that feed them
 
these austalians what can i say they seem always bite the hand that feed them

those labor losers don't represent australia/australians

the support for labor is in record low, last week's QLD election says everything. however, due to their systematic fault, they can't fix it until the next federal election, the labor is thus allowed to trash the nation again and again.
 
China's Huawei hits back at Australian cyber fears

SYDNEY — Chinese telecoms giant Huawei on Tuesday hit back at claims it was a security risk following its barring from Australia's broadband rollout, with one director labelling it "complete nonsense".

Huawei, among the world's top makers of telecommunications equipment, has been blocked from bidding for contracts on Australia's ambitious Aus$36 billion (US$38 billion) broadband plan due to fears of Chinese cyber attacks.

The government corporation rolling out the project, NBN Co., had internally endorsed Huawei, but the Chinese firm -- established by a former People's Liberation Army engineer -- was instructed by Canberra not to bid.

The issue was considered by the government's National Security Committee, a high-level group including the prime minister, foreign and defence ministers, and their decision was based on "strong advice" from intelligence operatives, according to the Australian Financial Review.

But Huawei's Australian chairman John Lord, formerly a long-serving rear admiral in Australia's navy, dismissed the cyber fears.

"Huawei is not a security risk to Australia," he told the newspaper, adding that he had done "extensive due diligence" before taking his role including talks with founder Ren Zhengfei.

"I was very confident when I took up the appointment. I am committed to Huawei."

Former foreign minister Alexander Downer and ex-Victoria state premier John Brumby are also on the board and Lord said they were "all comfortable taking up the positions" and "still are today".

According to state broadcaster ABC, Huawei noticed a marked cooling in relations after US President Barack Obama visited Australia last November.

It said people from the company were "told to get a message to China that Australia would not tolerate increased cyber hacking of ministerial offices and departments".

The computers of Australia's prime minister, foreign and defence ministers were all suspected of being hacked in March last year, with the attacks thought to have originated in China.

Beijing dismissed the allegations as "groundless and made out of ulterior purposes".

Downer, Australia's longest-serving top diplomat, said any concerns about Huawei being a security risk were "complete nonsense".

"This whole concept of Huawei being involved in cyber warfare, presumably... based on the fact that the company comes from China and everybody in China who's involved with information technology is involved in cyber warfare... is just completely absurd," Downer told ABC.

"This is about understanding the new China, the new world, the new relationships which are opening up."

Huawei's technology is used to build mobile phone networks around the world. It has repeatedly denied any links to the Chinese military, but has also run afoul of regulators and lawmakers in the United States.

AFP: China's Huawei hits back at Australian cyber fears

Opposition slams NBN exclusion of Chinese giant

The coalition says the federal government's decision to ban Chinese telecoms giant Huawei from taking part in tenders for work on the national broadband network (NBN) is ''clumsy, offensive and unprofessional''.

Huawei Technologies, which is close to becoming the world's largest telecommunications equipment provider, was advised late last year that it could not tender for NBN contracts because of security concerns about cyber attacks emanating from China.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard told reporters in Seoul, where she is attending nuclear security talks, the NBN is a crucial national infrastructure project.

''You would expect, as a government, we would make all of the prudent decisions to make sure that infrastructure project does what we want it to do, and we've taken one of those decisions,'' she said, when asked about the Huawei decision.

A spokesman for Attorney-General Nicola Roxon told AAP today the $36 billion NBN project was the ''backbone of Australia's information infrastructure'' and as such the government had a responsibility ''to do our utmost to protect its integrity and that of the information carried on it''.

''This is consistent with the government's practice for ensuring the security and resilience of Australia's critical infrastructure more broadly,'' the spokesman said.

Opposition finance spokesman Andrew Robb, who last year toured Huawei's facilities in mainland China and Hong Kong on a trip sponsored by the company, said decisions such as this would reinforce the increasingly ''dim view'' overseas investors had of Australia.

''Over the last four years the Rudd-Gillard governments have damaged our relations with China, India, Japan and Indonesia at a time when the middle class across that region is exploding,'' Mr Robb told AAP.

''This looks to be the latest clumsy, offensive and unprofessional instalment of a truly dysfunctional government.''

He said the fact that former foreign minister Alexander Downer and former Victorian premier John Brumby were on Huawei's Australian board, and that the company had a leading role in Britain's telecommunications sector, warranted the government considering it with ''clear eyes''.

''We must bear in mind that this is a company which is heavily involved in eight of nine NBN roll-outs around the world,'' Mr Robb said.

The parliamentary pecuniary interest register shows opposition deputy leader Julie Bishop and frontbench colleague Bronwyn Bishop also visited Huawei's facilities as guests of the company.

Ms Bishop declined to comment on the tender process, which she described as ''a matter for the government'', and said she had not been lobbied in regard to the NBN or any other matter.

''My trip included a tour of Huawei headquarters in Shenzhen, where I was shown some of the technology under development by its research and development division that comprises about half of Huawei's 120,000 staff,'' she told AAP.

A Huawei Australia spokesman told AAP it had issued an open invitation to all MPs, and the media, to tour its facilities.

''We haven't targeted one party over another,'' the spokesman said.

However, former NSW Labor premier Kristina Keneally rejected a statement by a Huawei spokesman earlier today that she travelled on a company sponsored trip to the firm's China facilities.

''This is incorrect,'' she said in a statement.''I have never undertaken any travel paid for by Huawei.''

When told of Ms Keneally's statement, the spokesman said there had been a miscommunication.

Huawei spokesman Jeremy Mitchell said Australia was still getting used to privately owned Chinese companies, but Huawei would not give up on tendering for NBN projects, which are being managed by the Australian government-owned NBN Co Ltd.

''We're not used to companies coming from China that are leading in technology and also global - 70 per cent of our work is outside of China,'' Mr Mitchell said.

''This is new territory.

''We see this as a setback. We're obviously disappointed. But through looking at what we've done overseas, looking at what we've done in the United Kingdom, we can put in place measures that help the Australian government consider us as a partner in the NBN.''

Huawei was established in the late 1980s by Ren Zhengfei, a former major in the People's Liberation Army, and is headquartered in the special economic zone of Shenzhen, near Hong Kong.Its Australian office opened in 2004 in Sydney and is the operations hub for its business across Australia, New Zealand and the South Pacific.NBN Co declined to comment.


Read more: Opposition slams NBN exclusion of Chinese giant
 
Using that logic, why doesn't the Australian and American governments ban Cisco and other American companies from their own government tenders as well since they also have helped build China's national IT infrastructure? The logic you use is not logical because it basically means any company that has helped build China's IT infrastructure should be banned. It's discrimination plain and simple because it only applies to China. Huawei is a privately held company, it doesn't require nor does it need to release any information for that reason. How many private companies have to voluntarily release information at all? Answer, none but yet this should apply to Huawei on trumped up charges that have never been proven. The fact that Huawei even released any information at all even though no other private companies are discriminated in this same way speaks to it's openness and desire to expand its business in paranoid cultures like Australia and America. These exclusion measures are simply to protect and maintain what remaining competitive advantage existing non-Chinese companies have in the face of overwhelming Chinese business advantages.

Its different for a number of reasons, the equipment Cisco and the like provided are based on universal protocols. eg FTP. The network being built in Australia will a ground up build that will require an individual approach. You have to understand this is going to be a major piece of Australian infrastructure that needs to last a long time. You also have to understand Chinese business practices and culture. How many corporates in Huawei are CCP members? I dont know, maybe a lot, maybe none. China does not have the same corporate ethical standards that apply to other countries. You will find most of China's richest people are CCP members. Corporates and the CCP have well established links, and thats not paranoid thats just observation.
As far as openness is concerned Huewai does have an obligation to release information about who is running the company, especially when competitor bidders may be at a disadvantage because Huewei may have other means of coercion, as we have seen in the past.
As far as "paranoid cultures like Australia and America" thats just a silly remark. There is nothing paranoid about wanting to protect your own security. You will find Australia and America strengths line in the fact we are both very open societies who encourage participation of all cultures, races, sexes etc. Trying to leverage a balance of paranoia with China and Australia on this swing and come out batting for China is an uneducated remark on this topic.
 
CISCO

Cisco Leak: 'Great Firewall' of China Was a Chance to Sell More Routers | Threat Level | Wired.com



It is a private company not listed anywhere in the world. Why should they make that information publically available?

When Boeing airliners are related to the safety of billions, do you ask them to publically release the blueprint?

Learn something you 85 IQ loser

Wow maybe you should change your name to passive aggressive or something.

You always lose the argument when you have to resort to personal insults, shows you have nothing to add

Because im a good sport ill answer the first part. Yes Boeing does need to comply with providing information regarding the safety of their aircraft. How do you think maintenance staff inspect and maintain the aircraft? Do you really thing maintenance staff across the world just guess how to fix and maintain their planes? If you have the money you can go out a buy a Boeing aircraft if you want.
 
First to address the sensible part of your post:

The swap deal is not so much to Australia's benefit as it is to China's benefit. Aussies cannot buy ziltch outside of China from this swap deal. The Yuan is not an internationally tradeable currency. And put that picture with the trade deficit situation between Australia and China and you will know clearly who will benefit.

Regarding the creation of Aussie jobs: All these jobs in mining are not exactly the kind of jobs that the Aussie government would ideally prefer. Most of them (except for the Mandarin Kevin of course) would like to ensure that the value addition too is happening within Australia and the economy is moving up the ladder in terms of maturity of supplies.

Regarding the troll that you came up with: Aussies do not kill Indians for "sport" or "slaughtered". In fact in general Aussies are most tolerant and fun (if you excuse the straight forwardness-they do not beat around the bush :) ).The acrimonious situation is limited to the whole situation of the taxi driving!! If you are in Australia then you would know already. But then we can see about that later. And the response from Indians should give you some idea of how much mistrust China has created in Indians too. Time to rethink the problem outsourcing policies??



LoL, over 50% of the students are now Chinese in New Zealand. What other focus do you want to get on with them now? There has been already a successful demographic change!!

If you read news about Aussie economy, the one in trade deficit is China, not Australia. Sino-Australian trade is more than 100 billions last year, and thank mining boom Aussie economy is still running OK. Chinese economic boom is like the savior of Aussie minning industry which contributes greatly to Assie economy and government income.

Japan has also swap deal with China along with other Asian nations and nations around the world. What China really wants is a win win situation. You may not clearly reckon the benefits for both sides, but those nations willing to have this deal clearly see the benefit.

Aussie racists did kill Indian students in Melbourne and there were Indian protest and even diplomatic tension between two nations. And Aussie ambassador in India said something like that if your Indian did not like what happened to Indian students, just did not come to Australia. General Aussie are nice and fun guys, but I don't think they could boast how tolerant they really are. The bottom line is not to fk with them, otherwise they will make you look bad. Of course not to mention those bloody racists and idiotic politians.

First to address the sensible part of your post:

The swap deal is not so much to Australia's benefit as it is to China's benefit. Aussies cannot buy ziltch outside of China from this swap deal. The Yuan is not an internationally tradeable currency. And put that picture with the trade deficit situation between Australia and China and you will know clearly who will benefit.

Regarding the creation of Aussie jobs: All these jobs in mining are not exactly the kind of jobs that the Aussie government would ideally prefer. Most of them (except for the Mandarin Kevin of course) would like to ensure that the value addition too is happening within Australia and the economy is moving up the ladder in terms of maturity of supplies.

Regarding the troll that you came up with: Aussies do not kill Indians for "sport" or "slaughtered". In fact in general Aussies are most tolerant and fun (if you excuse the straight forwardness-they do not beat around the bush :) ).The acrimonious situation is limited to the whole situation of the taxi driving!! If you are in Australia then you would know already. But then we can see about that later. And the response from Indians should give you some idea of how much mistrust China has created in Indians too. Time to rethink the problem outsourcing policies??



LoL, over 50% of the students are now Chinese in New Zealand. What other focus do you want to get on with them now? There has been already a successful demographic change!!

If you read news about Aussie economy, the one in trade deficit is China, not Australia. Sino-Australian trade is more than 100 billions last year, and thank mining boom Aussie economy is still running OK. Chinese economic boom is like the savior of Aussie minning industry which contributes greatly to Assie economy and government income.

Japan has also swap deal with China along with other Asian nations and nations around the world. What China really wants is a win win situation. You may not clearly reckon the benefits for both sides, but those nations willing to have this deal clearly see the benefit.

Aussie racists did kill Indian students in Melbourne and there were Indian protest and even diplomatic tension between two nations. And Aussie ambassador in India said something like that if your Indian did not like what happened to Indian students, just did not come to Australia. General Aussie are nice and fun guys, but I don't think they could boast how tolerant they really are. The bottom line is not to fk with them, otherwise they will make you look bad. Of course not to mention those bloody racists and idiotic politians.
 
Its different for a number of reasons, the equipment Cisco and the like provided are based on universal protocols. eg FTP. The network being built in Australia will a ground up build that will require an individual approach. You have to understand this is going to be a major piece of Australian infrastructure that needs to last a long time.
Huawei is known worldwide to provide high quality networks with unbeatable value that usually includes unbeatable financing terms. What exactly is the problem aside from Huawei taking all the business? Oh wait...that is the problem!

You also have to understand Chinese business practices and culture. How many corporates in Huawei are CCP members? I dont know, maybe a lot, maybe none. China does not have the same corporate ethical standards that apply to other countries. You will find most of China's richest people are CCP members. Corporates and the CCP have well established links, and thats not paranoid thats just observation.
Just because a business is based in China does not automatically mean it is controlled by the Chinese central government. Just because a Chinese citizen is part of the CCP does not make them spies. You might as well accuse registered members of the American Democratic and Republican parties are American spies. It's absolutely ridiculous if you compare the analogies. This talk about the CCP is always based on cliched stereotypes that are perpetuated in media as fact.


As far as openness is concerned Huewai does have an obligation to release information about who is running the company, especially when competitor bidders may be at a disadvantage because Huewei may have other means of coercion, as we have seen in the past.
No private company has any obligation to release information that is immaterial to their safe operation just because hostile parties ask for it. Besides, even after Huawei voluntarily released private information, it didn't stop the accusations or sanctions. There's always another excuse to discriminate against Huawei because the point isn't about security, it's about protection of marketshare and exclusion of a powerful and otherwise lethal competitor.


As far as "paranoid cultures like Australia and America" thats just a silly remark. There is nothing paranoid about wanting to protect your own security. You will find Australia and America strengths line in the fact we are both very open societies who encourage participation of all cultures, races, sexes etc. Trying to leverage a balance of paranoia with China and Australia on this swing and come out batting for China is an uneducated remark on this topic.
The reality is, Australian attitudes align with American attitudes, which is a combination of fear and loathing of China. There is absolutely no denying that. The question is, where do these attitudes come from and why.
 
It's really boring how every discussion about Australia seems to turn into an unnecessary discussion about "racism" and how apparently Australia is against China and about America. America has nothing to do with this topic. Take it else where.

It's all rubbish, it's all boring and it's just off topic.

Why can't we just have a normal discussion about the topic?
 
In retaliation China should bar all raw material and other natural resources from Australia and China should impose an embargo on all Australian raw material. This would lead to the collapse of the Australian economy which has witnessed an unprecedented growth thanks to China. China should urge Australia to send all their natural resources to the indebted US war criminals who in fact could never replace China and rescue the Australian economy. This is how Australia thanks China for having prowered its economic growth.
 
China's Huawei down but not out in Australia

(Reuters) - China's Huawei Technologies still hopes to win contracts to build Australia's $38 billion National Broadband Network, despite being blocked from bidding on cyber security concerns, and is ready to make concessions to do so.

Huawei, which denies being involved in cyber espionage, said on Tuesday these concessions could include opening up the source code its devices use and ensuring only Australian citizens who are security cleared work on the project.

"We want to be open and transparent," Jeremy Mitchell, director for corporate affairs at Huawei, Australia, New Zealand & South Pacific, said. "We are confident that we can get over this hurdle."

The National Broadband Network (NBN) is one of the world's most ambitious communications projects, aiming to connect 93 percent of Australian homes and workplaces with optical fiber and superfast broadband services. It is due to be ready by 2020.

Industry analysts said the decision to freeze out Huawei was baffling as Australia's New Zealand and UK allies have allowed the firm to build similar networks, and Huawei has already been involved in significant telecoms projects in Australia itself.

But they also said it might be hard to change the government's mind, adding it had been common knowledge for months that Huawei had been left off shortlists for NBN contracts, and that another mainland China company which would usually aggressively pursue such business, ZTE, had earlier pulled out. Sources at ZTE said it had backed out because of commercial reasons, without elaborating.

Australia's main intelligence body, the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO), has cited state-sponsored espionage attacks via the Internet as a major security threat.

The Australian Financial Review on Tuesday quoted sources in the Australian government as saying a submarine cable between Perth and Singapore, being built by a joint venture between Huawei and Global Marine Systems of the UK, might also be investigated on security grounds.

ENORMOUS PROJECT

Huawei has been blocked from deals in the United States due to national security concerns and allegations it violated sanctions by supplying Iran with censorship equipment.

But this is the first time Australia has blocked a company from its largest trading partner from a telecommunications deal.

Huawei was founded by its CEO Ren Zhengfei, a former officer of the People's Liberation Army in China, which has fuelled the claim it has a cozy relationship with the Chinese government - a claim denied by the company.

Analysts said the idea Huawei might at some point compromise its global business, and that of other Chinese companies, by using its equipment to eavesdrop, made little sense.

"The idea that they'd risk it all—it would have to be an incredibly valuable piece of data for them to put the whole Chinese technology export industry at risk," said Tony Brown, Brisbane-based senior analyst at Informa Telecoms and Media.

"If they were to be caught with their hand in the till would be disastrous for Huawei."

Huawei, for its part, acknowledges such concerns exist, but says they are unfounded. "I think it's important that we don't paint China with one brush," said Mitchell. "Yes, we are Chinese in origin, but we are privately owned, we are a global company."

Any cyber attacks, he said, were the work of "private citizens, vigilante groups."

After strenuous efforts so far, and with such a big prize, it seems unlikely Huawei will give up immediately.

Huawei had launched a major public relations and lobbying campaign, including having a dedicated NBN team in Australia and appointing former foreign minister Alexander Downer and Victorian premier John Brumby to its local board. The NBN's own website refers to a paper commissioned by Huawei on the values of broadband Internet connections.

"It's an absolutely enormous project and kind of unique on that scale," said Andrew Milroy, Asia Pacific vice president of ICT Research for Frost & Sullivan.

Huawei has become a significant player in Australia. It supplies equipment to Optus and Vodafone, and has conducted trials with Telstra. But the NBN dwarfs all those—and most other such projects. It has attracted players such as Nokia Siemens Networks, Ericsson, Cisco and Alcatel-Lucent, all of whom have won contracts for the phased rollout.

A spokesman for Australian Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said on Monday the government's position on the NBN was consistent with its practice "for ensuring the security and resilience of Australia's critical infrastructure more broadly."

China's Huawei down but not out in Australia | Reuters

what the aussie government doing is try to get more out of this deal from huawei
 
Back
Top Bottom