In recent years, the US government has stepped up its attacks on Chinese technology giant Huawei, trying to force countries around the world to ban it from their 5G rollout projects. Such acrimony against a firm is unprecedented in the history of global high-technology, and there are no signs of the US relenting. It is hard to predict the outcome of the standoff, but it is clear that the US government does not have proof that Huawei broke the law or breached data security.

Faced with media scrutiny and inquiries by allies, US government officials have been unable to provide evidence. Nick Read, CEO of Vodafone, the world’s second largest mobile operator, said at Mobile World Congress (MWC) in Barcelona on February 25, “We need to have a fact-based risk-assessed review […] People are saying things at the moment that are not grounded. I’m not saying that is the case for the US because I have not met them directly so I have not seen what evidence they have, but they clearly need to present that evidence to the right bodies throughout Europe.”

Huawei’s rotating chairman Ken Hu Houkun called for the US and other countries to show evidence for their claims that Huawei is a security risk. In a meeting with reporters on December 18, 2018, he said, “There has never been any evidence that our equipment poses a security threat and we have never accepted requests from any government to damage the networks or business of any of our customers.”

In spite of no evidence, the US government has taken the knives out for Huawei. In the MWC, Robert Strayer, ambassador for cyber and international communications at the US State Department, called Huawei “duplicitous and deceitful.”

The US’ words and deeds have damaged Huawei’s normal business. On March 7, the technology firm announced that it will sue the US government. Huawei defending its legitimate interests through legal means is the best way for the company to show its innocence.

People are confused about the motive of the US government to uncharacteristically go after Huawei. The root cause is huge calculable and incalculable interests, including national, business, security and political ones.

Michael R. Wessel, commissioner of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, was more straightforward during his interview with the Voice of America: “We tend to focus on the economic cost and not consider the national security cost of something as significant as a nationwide 5G network rollout.”

Wessel also shared a bill: “US 4G leadership contributed around $125 billion in US company revenue from abroad and more than $40 billion in US application and content developer revenue, and created 2.1 million new jobs from 2011-2014.”

The US obviously worries that Huawei, a dark horse in 5G, will make the country lose its leadership in 5G network and great national interests. The commercial interests concerned are more specific, and Cisco Systems would be the first to be affected.

Cisco has long been the major lobbyist to shut the door on Huawei. After the case of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, Cisco sent an email to its staff, asking them to avoid non-essential travel to China.

Besides, if Huawei enjoys open market and fair competition in the US, other US high-tech giants including Apple and Qualcomm will be affected.

The major reason behind Huawei’s sufferings is security and political interests. It is not that Huawei’s products have security risks, but as Huawei rotating chairman Guo Ping said in an article in the Financial Times: “Huawei… hampers US efforts to spy on whomever it wants.” This is the foremost reason for Washington suppressing Huawei.

By now it is clear that the US attacks Huawei for its own interests. But can Washington act unscrupulously for its interests?

The US arrested Meng, filed criminal charges against Huawei, instigated the company’s partners to defect, and even threatened allies. All such methods reflect the notorious FUD strategy in high-tech – fear, uncertainty and doubt. Industry monopolies such as IBM and Microsoft used FUD to deal with weak competitors.

FUD intends to frighten competitors and their allies, and discourage people from buying competitors’ products. Finally, FUD helps companies maintain their monopoly.

The US government is using FUD because of its worldwide hegemony. Although it may violate law and ethics, Washington only needs to pay a little to win its interests. This is the driving force behind US suppression of Huawei.

Therefore, balancing costs and interests should be the right way to restrain the US government. The US’ impact on Huawei is obvious. Washington is also hurting the industrial chain and consumers, and even sabotaging innovation in technology. The Chinese government has maintained a firm stand. After all, it is the government’s responsibility to protect the basic rights of its citizens and enterprises.

Being dragged into a whirlpool, Huawei needs to consider the law as its weapon, and more importantly, carry forward in the spirit of entrepreneurship. Fair competition is the main battlefield for enterprises. No one wants to oppose governments, especially the powerful US establishment. However, Huawei has to face the problem squarely.

The root cause of Huawei’s success is its outstanding entrepreneurship and spirit to turn risks into chances. The statements of Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei and many other executives show the company’s spirit in the face of challenges.

The US’ moves run contrary to fair play and justice, and are doomed to fail. The European Commission ignored US calls to ban Huawei as it announced a series of 5G cybersecurity recommendations on Tuesday.

Fair competition and innovation are the best ways to usher in the 5G era. The spirit of the times is driving the human race toward a better future; such spirit will overcome all interference and sabotage. The US government should immediately stop using dirty tricks to take on Huawei.

The author is director of the Center for Internet and Society at Zhejiang University of Media and Communications and founder of Beijing-based technology think tank ChinaLabs.

(In association with Global Times)