Pentagon Halts Military Base Sales of Huawei, ZTE Devices, Citing Security Risks
The United States Department of Defense has halted the sale of all smartphones, routers, modems, and other hardware that contains any equipment manufactured by Huawei or ZTE. The order affects all of the stores on various Pentagon military bases and covers both the initial hardware and “adjacent products.”
“These devices may pose an unacceptable risk to the department’s personnel, and mission,” Pentagon spokesperson Major Dave Eastburn told Reuters. The orders are unsurprising if you’ve followed recent news about either company, though the justifications for the orders differs. In Huawei’s case, it’s the latest in a series of security decisions by the US government that have identified Huawei equipment and hardware as a potential threat to US security. We at ET tend to see this issue a bit differently; our Ryan Whitwam doesn’t think the bans are justified, while I’m personally more inclined to trust the national security determination and to assume that it’s based on information that hasn’t been made publicly available because doing so would tip our hand on why we know and how we know it.
The ZTE ban is more straightforward. Last month, the US government banned all US corporations from doing any business with ZTE whatsoever. The ban stems from an investigation into ZTE’s business practices, which found that the company had broken US law and misled US investigators when the firm bought US products and then did business with Iran and North Korea. As part of its punishment, ZTE was expected to discipline some 35 employees for their roles in the criminal enterprise in additional to firing four senior employees. The company did fire its senior employees, but refused to penalize the other 35. The US blanket ban on doing business with ZTE is the result, and a similar ban could be incoming for Huawei. Last week, the US announced it was investigating whether Huawei did business with Iran in violation of US sanctions.
These blanket bans on all companies doing business are some of the heaviest weapons in the United States trade arsenal. There is no way to build a smartphone without at least some components from US suppliers. Business leaders have indicated that the bans could kill ZTE outright. And if Huawei was found to be in violation of US sanctions against Iran, the US could theoretically levy equally heavy penalties against the company — though to be clear, the penalties levied against ZTE are for violating its agreement with the US after its actions were discovered. It’s not clear if the Trump administration would choose to hit Huawei with such heavy penalties immediately or if, like ZTE, the ban would kick in only if the company refused to comply with the terms of its original punishment. (ZTE’s decision to give the employees in question bonuses instead of penalties might have had something to do with the United States’ response).
Thus far, China’s remarks on the ZTE scenario have been muted. If Huawei, a significantly larger company than ZTE, is hit with a similar penalty in the future, that could change.
Continue reading
Think One Military Drone is Bad? Drone Swarms Are Terrifyingly Difficult to Stop
Drones aren't just a threat one-by-one. Cutting-edge research is focusing on deploying large numbers of tiny drones, with potentially deadly results.
Pentagon Will Only Accept Proposals for Military Cloud Network on DVD
The Pentagon is now in the early planning stages of deploying a cloud computing platform called JEDI, but it's still looking for a contractor to build and maintain it. If you want to throw your hat in the ring, you'll need a DVD burner.
Microsoft Wins $480M Contract to Provide HoloLens to US Military
Microsoft has signed a major deal with the US military to provide HoloLens devices for both training and, eventually, live combat.
Microsoft CEO: Selling HoloLens to Military Is a ‘Principled Decision’
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella dismissed accusations that the company is war profiteering by selling HoloLens to the US Army to increase troop lethality. It's not clear he's even considered the question.