This interrogation within a Chinese police station shockingly reveals the degree and extent of internet and social-media scrutiny operated by China’s government. This man was arrested within a short time of posting humorous comments about the police. His cell phone and local network are designed and run as an extension of the security services inside China, the tech corporations that facilitate such mass surveillance include Huawei.
Just 24 hours after the British government chose China’s state surveillance state and its default tech snooper, Huawei, a thirty percent role in providing 5G coverage the heat on Capitol Hill is increasing. Why, it’s being asked, would Britain ignore the justified security concerns and allow a company that services the Chinese regime to construct, install and run such a critical infrastructure?
The answer of course is all about trade deals with China and the allure of profits, yet there will be serious consequences in appeasing a totalitarian authority. One that relies upon Huawei to operate and expand its suffocating surveillance apparatus which is recording, monitoring and assessing virtually every aspect of public life in occupied Tibet and East Turkistan.
Donald Trump may be many things to different people, a figure who incites almost unsurmountable arguments for, or against. One aspect of his persona however that must surely be agreed upon by his admirers and critics alike is the recognition that his modus operandi is that of bluster and opportunism. This explains his numerous volte face. His words may appear as drawn from inviolable principle and conviction, as implied by his invective on China’s trade practices and impact on the US economy. Yet this is a man driven by the securement of the deal. As such there’s no consideration of humanitarian ethics operating, only the ambition to maintain or advance profit. In that objective what looked to be uncompromising commitments are like chess pawns, abandoned when their strategic use is exhausted, or circumstance changed.
The latest turn around followed his meeting at the recent G20 Summit with Chinese tyrant Xi Jinping in which he suddenly declared (to the dismay and understandable consternation of the US political and national security establishment) that America was open for business with Huawei, the controversial tech company. This statement runs counter to the genuine concerns expressed by the President’s security advisers, that the considered alarm signalled to the White House regarding the risks to national security by allowing trade with Huawei was nevertheless unceremoniously dumped.
This suggests that Trump’s inflamed and emphatic announcements with respect to that Chinese corporation were little more than calculated rhetoric, his Executive Order blocking US companies from using Huawei‘s technology, an investment posture to be called in for the advancement of wider goals.
Having decided such objectives are now realized, by affirming American corporations can now freely invest in Huawei‘s products and services the President, in his economic calculations, must be satisfied that he has captured trading advantage to the United States, Well only time will reveal the facts on that matter.
Meanwhile, it remains the case that Huawei is deeply embedded with the Chinese regime, and cannot function without its approval. That it covertly serves as a conduit for China’s intelligence services is widely known, while lesser realized is that it has constructed (and actively operates) within occupied lands such as Tibet and East Turkistan a mass-surveillance infrastructure well beyond the nightmarish vision of George Orwell’s 1984. As shown by President Trump’s vacillations on China such factors do not trouble those who value only commercial expansion and furthering economic supremacy!
Across the water in a land where its government is often heard to boast of traditions of democracy and human-rights something is very rotten.
This week a Minister of the UK authorities, Gavin Williamson, wassummararilly dismissed from his post by Theresa May, the reason you may wonder?Well, there had been a leak of information to the media from a security star chamber called the National Security Council (NSC). This gathering is attended by Ministers, heads of MI6,GCHQ,MI5 and counter-terrorism police, they are all bound by what’s termed the Official Secrets Act. Which is effectively a state gagging order, violation of which is punishable as a crime.
A rapidly assembled inquiry was launched and within a couple of days the Prime Minister had laidresponsibility for the disclosure at the door of Mr Williamson. He had it was claimedbreached the security protocols and convention of supreme confidentiality under which the NSCoperates. What’s more there wastalk of him being open to prosecution. As it stands hecontinuesto vigorously denysuchcharges and has called for an inquiry into the affair.
What would be revealed if such an investigation was allowed to delve into events which lead to the release of press reports that Theresa May was considering allowing controversial Chinese communications and tech corporation Huawei a contract in constructing a 5G network within the UK?
In all probabilitysuch an examination is not likely as there may well be too many politically sensitive skeletons rattling around, which could prove damagingly embarrassing to the Prime Minister’s government and her Conservative Party. There’s already an indication that the matter is being slammed down with yesterday’s announcement by the Metropolitan Police thatthe disclosure did not constitute a criminal offence, Nor it was claimeddid the informationreleasedbreach the Official Secrets Act.
“I am satisfied that what was disclosed did not contain information that would breach the Official Secrets Act,”said Neil Basu, head of the Met’s specialist operations. “I have considered all the information available to me andI have takenlegal advice.I am satisfied that the disclosure did not amount to a criminal offence either under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) or misconduct in a public office. No crime has been committed and this is not a matter for the police.”(Source: The Guardian 5/4/2019)
This statementraises an interesting possible legal defense for future whistle-blowers who couldargue that it‘s not the action itself which defines if the OSA has been breached but the nature of information. From the government‘s perspective it does something more important, eliminates the risk of exposure within a court, it also returns complete control to them. Who can now bury this controversy deeply away from what could be dangerous further scrutiny. Before exploring further some interesting connections between the UK government, former Ministers and officials with Huawei let‘s change the focus.
While the UK government struggles to justify it’s reported approval of allowingHuawei to engineer the 5G network across Britain, or reassure its allies that any potential security risk can be contained the Chinese corporation is a key facilitator in the oppression of the Tibetan people. Not that the political establishment in London extends any substantial concern towards the plight of Tibet, especially when engaged in lucrative commercial partnerships with Chinese corporations!
Yet if they bothered to carefully assess the role of Huawei in occupied Tibet they would soon realize that its insistence on being an independent business, not influenced or constrained by China’s regimeis palpable nonsense. Like all major corporations within China Huawei is deeply and actively enmeshed with the political machinery of the Chinese state, without the sanction of the authorities it would not exist. It cannot operate without the approval of Xi Jinping and his regime. We are not though talking of a well intentioned company that happens to be under the control of China’s totalitarian tyranny, Huaweiis an engaged player, fully subscribed to the extreme politicalideology which aims to expand Chinese political, military and national interests.
This is shown by its suffocating presence in Tibet where it has been constructing a range of communication and security networks, the purpose of which is to monitor Tibetans, intruding into every aspect of their daily living.Establishing an extensive CCTV coverage, creating facial recognition systems and security barriers at Tibetan monasteries and other public locations.Working in collusion with other Chinese communication providers it has engineered a surveillance network which monitors social-media and telephone systems to identity any dissent against China’s regime.
In this regardit is partnering in the repressive assault against Tibetan cultural and national identity, a collaboration which should be of serious concern to governments, including of that of the United Kingdom, which claim to place the highest value upon human rights and freedoms. Yet it‘sinterest is directed towards strengtheningties with Huawei, even to the extent of jeopardizing security alliances with the USA and other countries.
The prospect of trade and the significant profits which flow from collaborating with the Chinese technology giant are presented as being in the interest of the nation, enablingeconomic and performance benefits fron the latest network platform. Such claims, of course, are open to debate and should be measured against handing over control of communications infrastructure to an arm of the Chinese state.
While the advantages of 5G are promoted as offering a digital revolution such technology also affords a totalitarian state disturbing levels of increased social control and surveillance. That is already happening within China, facilitated by Huawei, while there are now three 5G base-stations operating inside occupied Tibet. One, at the LhasaPost and Telecommunications School, the other two are installed at the office of the TibetPost Group in Lhasa, and in China Mobile’s Tibet branch building.
It‘s said that power corrupts, in realityitprobably reveals an inherent capacity for venality, is such self-interest at the heart of this controversy? Have prominent figures linked to the UK Government and Conservative Party profited from Huawei? Was it coincidental that fairly senior people associated with former Prime Minister David Cameron’s administration were offered and accepted prominent executive positions onto the board of HuaweiUK? Clearly finance has dominated the scene since Huawei promised in 2012 that it would be investing £1.3 billion in the British economy.!
Whatever the facts, which look set to be confined indefinitely to the archives, in defending its partnership with Huawei and risking the integrity of its communications network and national security the UK authorities are collaborating with a corporation which is enabling the violent oppression and 24/7 surveillance of the Tibetan people!