Huawei decision weighs technological benefits against political risks

Boris Johnson is expected to meet members of the national security council on Tuesday to decide whether the Chinese telecoms equipment maker Huawei should be allowed to supply equipment for the UK’s 5G mobile phone networks.

Intelligence services and armed forces chiefs will be on hand to give advice, but the final decision will be taken by a core group of politicians including Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, Priti Patel, the home secretary, and the defence secretary, Ben Wallace.

What’s the problem with Huawei?

Donald Trump and senior members of his administration have been lobbying intensively for a ban on using Huawei’s technology, arguing there is be a long-term security and surveillance risk. Washington’s warnings have become more emotive in recent days, with Mike Pompeo, the US secretary of state, writing overnight that the UK’s decision was “momentous” and that British sovereignty could be compromised.

The aim of the lobbying campaign – conducted partly through op-ed pieces in the Telegraph and Times – is to unsettle key ministers around Johnson, who will be nervous about falling out with the US, and try to engineer a last-minute change of heart. In other words, the US argument is no longer technical but political. And it is being pushed via rightwing newspapers with Brexit-supporting owners, who have an eye on closer long-term relations between the UK and the US.

But hasn’t the UK already decided to use Huawei?

Britain’s intelligence agencies have long maintained that any security risks from Huawei can be contained, which was the underlying basis for a decision taken in principle under Theresa May’s government last year to allow Huawei to supply “non-core” parts of the network.

The Chinese company already supplies 3G and 4G kit in the UK, and its software is subject to GCHQ oversight at a special evaluation centre. The main concern has been with bugs in the technology, not backdoor surveillance.

Huawei’s technology is deemed to be more advanced and cheaper than that of its principal rivals, Ericsson of Sweden and Nokia of Finland. Eliminating Huawei would reduce competition, increase cost (and people’s phone bills) and delay the introduction of 5G technology, according to the mobile service providers Vodafone and BT.

Downing Street statements over the past two weeks have made clear the UK does not see any alternative. Two weeks ago, senior US officials visited Britain and said they had new information about Huawei, but that was dismissed by the British. A few days after that, UK officials complained that “the point is that the US have no plan B”.

There are fears that intelligence sharing between the US and the UK could be compromised. But all the US has said is that Congress, of which the lower house is controlled by the Democrats, may legislate to introduce further restrictions.

Who is right?

Any decision about Huawei will be a judgment balancing benefits and risk. The benefits of using the Chinese company in terms of cost and technology are established, while the surveillance risk is more theoretical.

Huawei is a private company, although as the Snowden leaks showed, the US and the UK have been able to obtain backdoor access into high-tech firms’ communications networks and technology.

A determined Chinese state could do the same, relying on powers contained within its laws, meaning that the security of 5G and other technologies like it will depend on other measures the UK can take.

Industry sources believe the UK is most likely to impose market share caps on Huawei, to try to ensure a long-term diversity of supply, which could present an opportunity for US players such as Cisco to enter the market.

Will this week be the end of the argument?

Probably not. The weakness of the US position is that it has not, so far, offered the UK anything in return or warned the UK of a sufficiently severe penalty for ignoring Trump’s wishes. Downing Street’s remarks about the absence of a plan B are a clear hint to the US to offer something else.

Post-Brexit trade talks with Washington are due to start next month. Some observers believe that while the US has, until now, not wanted to link the Huawei decision to the forthcoming trade discussions, the White House could yet choose to do so. If emotive appeals fail, alternative tactics could be more fruitful.