Chindia Alert: You’ll be Living in their World Very Soon
aims to alert you to the threats and opportunities that China and India present. China and India require serious attention; case of ‘hidden dragon and crouching tiger’.
Without this attention, governments, businesses and, indeed, individuals may find themselves at a great disadvantage sooner rather than later.
The POSTs (front webpages) are mainly 'cuttings' from reliable sources, updated continuously.
The PAGEs (see Tabs, above) attempt to make the information more meaningful by putting some structure to the information we have researched and assembled since 2006.
The richest man in China opened his own Twitter account last month, in the middle of the Covid-19 outbreak. So far, every one of his posts has been devoted to his unrivalled campaign to deliver medical supplies to almost every country around the world.
“One world, one fight!” Jack Ma enthused in one of his first messages. “Together, we can do this!” he cheered in another.
The billionaire entrepreneur is the driving force behind a widespread operation to ship medical supplies to more than 150 countries so far, sending face masks and ventilators to many places that have been elbowed out of the global brawl over life-saving equipment.
But Ma’s critics and even some of his supporters aren’t sure what he’s getting himself into. Has this bold venture into global philanthropy unveiled him as the friendly face of China’s Communist Party? Or is he an independent player who is being used by the Party for propaganda purposes? He appears to be following China’s diplomatic rules, particularly when choosing which countries should benefit from his donations, but his growing clout might put him in the crosshairs of the jealous leaders at the top of China’s political pyramid.
Other tech billionaires have pledged more money to fight the effects of the virus – Twitter’s Jack Dorsey is giving $1bn (£0.8bn) to the cause. Candid, a US-based philanthropy watchdog that tracks private charitable donations, puts Alibaba 12th on a list of private Covid-19 donors. But that list doesn’t include shipments of vital supplies, which some countries might consider to be more important than money at this stage in the global outbreak.
The world’s top coronavirus financial donors
How Alibaba compares to the top five. No one else other than the effervescent Ma is capable of dispatching supplies directly to those who need them. Starting in March, the Jack Ma foundation and the related Alibaba foundation began airlifting supplies to Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America and even to politically sensitive areas including Iran, Israel, Russia and the US.
Ma has also donated millions to coronavirus vaccine research and a handbook of medical expertise from doctors in his native Zhejiang province has been translated from Chinese into 16 languages. But it’s the medical shipments that have been making headlines, setting Ma apart.
“He has the ability and the money and the lifting power to get a Chinese supply plane out of Hangzhou to land in Addis Ababa, or wherever it needs to go,” explains Ma’s biographer, Duncan Clark. “This is logistics; this is what his company, his people and his province are all about.”
A friendly face
Jack Ma is famous for being the charismatic English teacher who went on to create China’s biggest technology company. Alibaba is now known as the “Amazon of the East”. Ma started the company inside his tiny apartment in the Chinese coastal city of Hangzhou, in the centre of China’s factory belt, back in 1999. Alibaba has since grown to become one of the dominant players in the world’s second largest economy, with key stakes in China’s online, banking and entertainment worlds. Ma himself is worth more than $40bn.
Officially, he stepped down as Alibaba’s chairman in 2018. He said he was going to focus on philanthropy. But Ma retained a permanent seat on Alibaba’s board. Coupled with his wealth and fame, he remains one of the most powerful men in China.
Media caption The BBC’s Secunder Kermani and Anne Soy compare how prepared Asian and African countries are
It appears that Ma’s donations are following Party guidelines: there is no evidence that any of the Jack Ma and Alibaba Foundation donations have gone to countries that have formal ties with Taiwan, China’s neighbour and diplomatic rival. Ma announced on Twitter that he was donating to 22 countries in Latin America. States that side with Taiwan but who have also called for medical supplies – from Honduras to Haiti – are among the few dozen countries that do not appear to be on the list of 150 countries. The foundations repeatedly refused to provide a detailed list of countries that have received donations, explaining that “at this moment in time, we are not sharing this level of detail”.
However, the donations that have been delivered have certainly generated a lot of goodwill. With the exception of problematic deliveries to Cuba and Eritrea, all of the foundations’ shipments dispatched from China appear to have been gratefully received. That success is giving Ma even more positive attention than usual. China’s state media has been mentioning Ma almost as often as the country’s autocratic leader, Xi Jinping.
AFP
So far…
Over 150 countries have received donations from Jack Ma, including about:
120.4mface masks
4,105,000testing kits
3,704ventilators
Source: Alizila
It’s an uncomfortable comparison. As Ma soaks up praise, Xi faces persistent questions about how he handled the early stages of the virus and where, exactly, the outbreak began.
The Chinese government has dispatched medical teams and donations of supplies to a large number of hard-hit countries, particularly in Europe and South-East Asia.
However, those efforts have sometimes fallen flat. China’s been accused of sending faulty supplies to several countries. In some cases, the tests it sent were being misused but in others, low-quality supplies went unused and the donations backfired.
In contrast, Jack Ma’s shipments have only boosted his reputation.
“It’s fair to say that Ma’s donation was universally celebrated across Africa,” says Eric Olander, managing editor of the China Africa Project website and podcast. Ma pledged to visit all countries in Africa and has been a frequent visitor since his retirement.
“What happens to the materials once they land in a country is up to the host government, so any complaints about how Nigeria’s materials were distributed are indeed a domestic Nigerian issue,” Olander adds. “But with respect to the donation itself, the Rwandan leader, Paul Kagame, called it a “shot in the arm” and pretty much everyone saw it for what it was which was: delivering badly-needed materials to a region of the world that nobody else is either willing or capable of helping at that scale.”
Walking the tightrope
But is Ma risking a backlash from Beijing? Xi Jinping isn’t known as someone who likes to share the spotlight and his government has certainly targeted famous faces before. In recent years, the country’s top actress, a celebrated news anchor and several other billionaire entrepreneurs have all “disappeared” for long periods. Some, including the news anchor, end up serving prison sentences. Others re-emerge from detention, chastened and pledging their allegiance to the Party.
“There’s a rumour that [Jack Ma] stepped down in 2018 from being the chairman of the Alibaba Group because he was seen as a homegrown entrepreneur whose popularity would eclipse that of the Communist Party,” explains Ashley Feng, research associate at the Centre for New American Security in Washington DC. Indeed, Ma surprised many when he suddenly announced his retirement in 2018. He has denied persistent rumours that Beijing forced him out of his position.
Image copyright GETTY IMAGESImage caption Ma discussed trade with then-President-elect Donald Trump in January 2017
Duncan Clark, Ma’s biographer, is also aware of reports that Ma was nudged away from Alibaba following a key incident in January 2017. The Chinese billionaire met with then-President-elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, ostensibly to discuss Sino-US trade. The Chinese president didn’t meet with Trump until months later.
“There was a lot of speculation of time that Jack Ma had moved too fast,” Clark says. “So, I think there’s lessons learned from both sides on the need to try to coordinate.”
“Jack Ma represents a sort of entrepreneurial soft power,” Clark adds. “That also creates challenges though, because the government is quite jealous or nervous of non-Party actors taking that kind of role.”
Technically, Ma isn’t a Communist outsider: China’s wealthiest capitalist has actually been a member of the Communist Party since the 1980s, when he was a university student.
But Ma’s always had a tricky relationship with the Party, famously saying that Alibaba’s attitude towards the Party was to “be in love with it but not to marry it”.
Even if Ma and the foundations connected to him are making decisions without Beijing’s advance blessing, the Chinese government has certainly done what it can to capitalise on Ma’s generosity. Chinese ambassadors are frequently on hand at airport ceremonies to receive the medical supplies shipped over by Ma, from Sierra Leone to Cambodia.
China has also used Ma’s largesse in its critiques of the United States. “The State Department said Taiwan is a true friend as it donated 2 million masks,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry tweeted in early April. “Wonder if @StateDept has any comment on Jack Ma’s donation of 1 million masks and 500k testing kits as well as Chinese companies’ and provinces’ assistance?”
Perhaps Ma can rise above what’s happened to so many others who ran afoul of the Party. China might just need a popular global Chinese figure so much that Ma has done what no one else can: make himself indispensable.
“Here’s the one key takeaway from all that happened with Jack Ma and Africa: he said he would do something and it got done,” explains Eric Olander. “That is an incredibly powerful optic in a place where foreigners often come, make big promises and often fail to deliver. So, the huge Covid-19 donation that he did fit within that pattern. He said he would do it and mere weeks later, those masks were in the hands of healthcare workers.”
Image copyright GETTY IMAGESImage caption Ma at an Electronic World Trade Platform event with Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed last year
Duncan Clark argues that Ma already had a seat at China’s high table because of Alibaba’s economic heft. However, his first-name familiarity with world leaders makes him even more valuable to Beijing as China tries to repair its battered image.
“He has demonstrated the ability, with multiple IPOs under his belt, and multiple friendships overseas, to win friends and influence people. He’s the Dale Carnegie of China and that certainly, we’ve seen that that’s irritated some in the Chinese government but now it’s almost an all hands on deck situation,” Clark says.
There’s no doubt that China’s wider reputation is benefiting from the charitable work of Ma and other wealthy Chinese entrepreneurs. Andrew Grabois from Candid, the philanthropic watchdog that’s been measuring global donations in relation to Covid-19, says that the private donations coming from China are impossible to ignore.
“They’re taking a leadership role, the kind of thing that used to be done by the United States,” he says. “The most obvious past example is the response to Ebola, the Ebola outbreak in 2014. The US sent in doctors and everything to West Africa to help contain that virus before it left West Africa.”
Chinese donors are taking on that role with this virus.
“They are projecting soft power beyond their borders, going into areas, providing aid, monetary aid and expertise,” Grabois adds.
So, it’s not the right time for Beijing to stand in Jack Ma’s way.
“You know, this is a major crisis for the world right now,” Duncan Clark concludes. “But obviously, it’s also a crisis for China’s relationship with the rest of the world. So they need anybody who can help dampen down some of these those pressures.”
South Africa, Kenya latest to halt arrivals from ‘high-risk’ countries as cases across the continent double over the weekend
Concerns are growing over whether health care systems in some African nations will be able to cope
Masked volunteers provide soap and water for participants to wash their hands against the new coronavirus at a women’s 5km fun run in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on Sunday. Photo: AP
Travel bans and school closures were announced in South Africa and Kenya on Sunday, as concerns grew over the capacity of the continent’s fragile health systems to cope with the spread of the deadly new coronavirus, with more than a dozen countries reporting their first cases.
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa declared a national state of disaster, banning arrivals by foreign nationals from high-risk countries including Italy, Iran, South Korea, Spain, Germany, the United States, Britain and China, effective Wednesday.
“We have cancelled visas to visitors from those countries from today and previously granted visas are hereby revoked,” Ramaphosa said in a televised address on Sunday evening, adding that any foreign national who had visited high-risk countries in the past 20 days would be denied a visa.
South African schools will also be closed from Wednesday until after the Easter weekend. Gatherings of more than 100 people have been banned and mass celebrations for Human Rights Day and other events cancelled. “Never before in the history of our democracy has our country been confronted with such a severe situation,” Ramaphosa said.
In Kenya, where three cases of Covid-19 – the disease caused by the new coronavirus – have now been confirmed, President Uhuru Kenyatta suspended travel from any country with reported infections. Only Kenyan citizens and foreigners with valid residency permits would be allowed entry, provided they proceeded to self-quarantine or a government-designated quarantine facility, he said.
Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta reports two more cases of coronavirus in the country, bringing its total number of cases to three. Photo: DPA
Kenyatta also suspended learning in all educational institutions with immediate effect. “Some of the measures may cause inconvenience, but I want to assure you they are designed to ensure that we effectively contain the spread of the virus,” he said.
Kenya and South Africa join Ghana, Rwanda and Morocco in implementing travel restrictions or outright bans, while others are closing churches, museums, sporting activities, nightclubs and tourist attractions in a bid to curb the spread of the disease.
The continent was largely spared in the early days of the outbreak but has now recorded more than 300 cases and six deaths. Algeria, Morocco, Senegal and Tunisia all reported more new cases over the weekend, which saw numbers of new infections across Africa more than double in just two days.
As numbers rise, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said there are around a dozen countries on the continent without the capacity to do their own testing.
They will have to send samples to countries like South Africa, which itself is struggling to contain the virus, with confirmed cases doubling to 61 on Sunday, a day after 114 of its citizens were repatriated from the central Chinese city of Wuhan, the original epicentre of the outbreak and the first to be placed in lockdown.
John Nkengasong, director of the Africa CDC, warned that the risk of other African countries detecting new cases of Covid-19 remained high. “Our strategy is clear: we want to capacitate the member states, so they can quickly detect and mitigate the effects of the disease in Africa, and, if widespread transmission occurs, prevent severe illness and death,” he said.
The World Health Organisation has already warned that critical gaps remain in the capacity of many African nations to trace, detect and treat the disease. On Friday, the WHO Africa office said it was “striving to help member states fill these gaps” but warned of global shortages in personal protective equipment (PPE) including gloves, masks and hand sanitiser.
Major coronavirus outbreak in Africa ‘just a matter of time’
13 Mar 2020
WHO said its first blanket distribution of PPEs, to 24 African countries, had been completed and another wave of distributions was planned.
“With Covid-19 officially declared a pandemic, all countries in Africa must act,” said Dr Matshidiso Moeti, WHO regional director for Africa. “Every country can still change the course of this pandemic by scaling up their emergency preparedness or response.
“Cases may still be low in Africa and we can keep it that way with robust all-of-government actions to fight the new coronavirus.”
The 55 member states of the African Union have suspended meetings until May, while the six countries that make up the East African Community have suspended all planned meetings until further notice.
In Algeria – one of the worst-hit North African countries, with 48 cases and four deaths, as of Monday morning – all schools and universities have been closed, while Senegal, with 24 cases to date, has closed schools and cancelled its Independence Day festivities on April 4, which this year marks 60 years since its independence from France. Cruise ships have also been banned from docking in Senegal.
On Sunday, Rwanda closed all its places of worship and suspended large gatherings such as weddings and sporting activities. Schools and universities in the central African country are also closed. National airline RwandAir has also suspended flights between the capital Kigali and Mumbai until April 30.
This is in addition to earlier suspensions of its routes with Tel Aviv and the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou, which remain in place until further notice.
While most African airlines have suspended flights to cities in mainland China, Ethiopian Airlines has continued flying to most of its destinations, describing its China routes as among its most profitable. Nevertheless, chief executive Tewolde GebreMariam last week said coronavirus fears had cut demand by a fifth on most of its routes.
Beijing has lent billions of dollars to countries on the continent to build railways, highways and airports but critics say the borrowings are unsustainable
Chinese officials say the projects will pay off in the long run and host nations are well aware of their limits and needs
Illustration: Lau Kakuen
When Clement Mouamba went to Beijing last year, he had two main tasks.
The prime minister of the Republic of Congo needed to find out exactly how much his country owed to China, a number the struggling, oil-rich central African nation had until then not been able to provide the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to qualify for a bailout. He also needed to convince Beijing to restructure its debt to ensure sustainability.
The IMF had put talks for further loans on hold until Mouamba’s administration could say exactly how much it had to repay to the country’s external creditors, including China – the republic’s single largest bilateral lender – and oil multinationals such as Glencore and Trafigura.
The country, which heavily depends on oil revenue, turned to China and private oil majors for funding to run the government when in 2014 oil prices fell from a high of US$100 per barrel to as low as US$30.
The Republic of Congo has since restructured its borrowings from China, which holds about a third, or US$2.5 billion, of the Congolese debt, by extending the repayment period by an additional 15 years.
A number of other African countries struggling to service their loans from Beijing have also pursued concessions. Ethiopia has had part of its Chinese debt written off and terms relaxed for the US$3.3 billion loan it took to build its railway, while Zambia is seeking similar adjustments for its borrowings used to build airports and highways.
Critics say countries on the continent are being burdened with unrealistic levels of debt for inviable infrastructure backed and built by China without adequate transparency and scrutiny.
The biggest concern is that several African countries will be left with huge debts and grandiose infrastructure that they cannot maintain and run profitably. I liken it to borrowing money to buy a Tesla when you don’t have adequate access to electricity: Obert Hodzi of the University of Helsinki in Finland
But Chinese observers say the West must take some of the blame for the countries’ debt problems and that the support China offers will benefit the host countries in the long run.
In the early 1990s, when China began to embrace Africa again after years of isolation from the outside world, the aspiring manufacturer was at a serious disadvantage in the race for raw materials and markets for its industrial goods.
The former colonial powers of the West had already sewn up deals for many of the continent’s most lucrative and readily exploitable reserves, from fossil fuels to minerals.
China needed new strategies to convince African governments to allow it access raw materials for its industries and markets for its products to a largely unfamiliar partner.
China also wanted to challenge the dominance of the US in global trade and politics so it courted allies in Africa to help it push for political legitimacy in international institutions.
A Kenya Railways freight train leaves the port station on the Mombasa-Nairobi railway in Mombasa, Kenya, a huge project backed by China. Photo: Bloomberg
At the time, many African leaders were under fire to liberalise their economies. China’s approach was to promise not to meddle in individual country’s internal affairs and assure African countries that they could get billions in exchange for future delivery of minerals through resource-backed deals.
Beijing sold its policies that it had no conditions attached to its development finance. In the drive to drum up business, China promised affordable loans for African countries to build roads, bridges, highways, airports and power dams.
Is Kenya’s Chinese-built railway a massive white elephant?
But Beijing also pursued tied finance, ensuring that countries borrowing from China used Chinese contractors to implement the projects rather than open them up to outside bids.
In addition, many of the deals were built on weak financial, technical and environmental conditions, with Chinese state firms conducting the technical feasibility, environmental impact assessment and financial viability studies for free for projects that they also build.
For example, in Kenya, the China Road and Bridge Corporation conducted a free feasibility study that was used in the construction of the railway.
The same company was handed the contract to implement the project and is operating both the passenger and cargo train service for a fee.
Chinese companies were responsible for the construction of a rail line between Addis Ababa and Djibouti. Photo: AFP
In contrast, the World Bank and its partner institution, the IMF, demand that such studies be done by an independent consultant and not by the company that implements the project.
According to data compiled by the China-Africa Research Initiative, at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, Beijing has advanced loans worth US$143 billion to African countries since 2000, levels that some critics say are unsustainable for the borrowers.
China meets resistance over Kenya coal plant, in test of its African ambitions
For many of China’s new African partners, these arrangements – from easy lending terms, to non-competitive bidding and opaque contract details – have led to new problems – problems that corrupt or poorly managed governments now share substantial responsibility.
Some critics, both in the West and in host countries, suggest there is a “debt-trap strategy” at the heart of Beijing’s push for international business and influence, but there is no evidence that China deliberately pushes other countries into debt to seize their assets or gain sway.
However, the drive for overseas contracts and big business has led some countries into difficulties with new debts, and there are question marks over the viability of many of the projects the money is funding.
Obert Hodzi, an international relations expert at the University of Helsinki in Finland, said the Addis Ababa-Djibouti railway and the Mombasa-Nairobi railway were good examples of huge projects that were financed by easy borrowing terms from China but were not sustainable and that had in turn forced the African partners to seek further Chinese help.
“The biggest concern is that several African countries will be left with huge debts and grandiose infrastructure that they cannot maintain and run profitably,” Hodzi said. “I liken it to borrowing money to buy a Tesla when you don’t have adequate access to electricity.”
Ken Opalo, a Kenyan scholar at Georgetown University in Washington, said the key issue was the inability of African countries to design projects that were actually needed for the local economies.
A road is not just a means of transport but an economic belt or corridor that will catalyse the development of the whole region: Huang Xueqing, spokeswoman for the Chinese embassy in Nairobi
“Most African countries have been willing to accept projects designed, financed, and implemented by Chinese firms,” Opalo said.
“It would be better to decouple the feasibility studies and design phases of projects from the financing. That way African governments can ensure that they are truly getting value for money.”
But Chinese officials said Beijing had invested in infrastructure largely at the request of the host countries, adding that it could take time to yield returns on the projects.
Huang Xueqing, spokeswoman for the Chinese embassy in Nairobi, said the projects were valid assets with value that would grow in time.
“So, in the long run, it is beneficial to the host countries. Just like when young people buy a house with a mortgage, they may take some debts, but they have a place to live in and have their own assets,” Huang said.
“Underdeveloped infrastructure is the bottleneck that has been holding back Africa’s development. Up to today, many African countries, although in the same continent, are not connected with direct flights, railways or even roads. You have to fly to Paris or Zurich in order to get to some African countries.
“A road is not just a means of transport but an economic belt or corridor that will catalyse the development of the whole region.”
Huang said Beijing had advised the countries to act within their means and not to overstretch themselves when they considered projects that might not be in line with local conditions.
“When making investment decisions, the Chinese side, along with the recipient countries, carry out rigorous feasibility studies and evaluations. We do things according to our ability,” she said.
China’s leadership has also said it is paying close attention to the fiscal and financial difficulties faced by some African countries.
“As a good friend and good brother … the Chinese side is willing to lend a helping hand when needed by the African people to help them overcome temporary difficulties,” State Councillor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in January while on a trip to Ethiopia, adding that the debt situation in Africa is also a legacy issue.
China must allay any debt-trap fears in its dealings with Africa
“The African debt issue does not come up today, still less is it caused by the Chinese side. The African people know who are the initiators of African debt.”
The West should take a lot of the blame for worsening debt problems in some African countries, according to Li Anshan, from Peking University’s Centre for African Studies.
He cited the cases of Liberia and the Democratic Republic of Congo, two countries that have had close relations with the West for many years but remain ravaged by war and poverty despite immense natural resources.
“China-Africa relations have been going on for quite some time. Is there any African country which has got poorer because of its deal with China?” Li said.
Gyude Moore, a former Liberian minister of public works whose department oversaw construction and maintenance of various public infrastructure funded and built by China, said it would be difficult to imagine that China would knowingly ensnare its partners in debt.
“China attempts to differentiate itself from Western donors by limiting non loan-related conditionality. China also practices non-interference, so how a country manages its resources, treats its people or deploy its finances were considered ‘internal’,” he said.
“So, Chinese loans are negotiated faster and place less emphasis on public financial management.”
Moore, now a visiting fellow at the Centre for Global Development, said there were trade-offs in such situations.
China focuses on sustainable projects to dismiss fears of African debt trap
“If the loans are going to be fast – the due diligence will not be as rigorous. Chinese project selection mixes political with economic considerations. So, while a project may not make as much economic sense, it may pay political dividends,” he said.
He said non-transparent processes would invite abuse, be they Chinese, Western or African.
Other observers say the question of opacity is more directly related to China’s own economic system.
Howard French, author of China’s Second Continent: How a Million Migrants are Building a New Empire in Africa, said China has very limited transparency and public accountability in its own domestic processes.
The Mombasa railway station is seen in Mombasa, Kenya, in 2018. Photo: Xinhua
“So it would be unusual to expect that China would introduce greater transparency and accountability in its dealings with African countries than it is used to at home – that is, unless African governments insist on it,” French said.
“And this is where African governance comes in. African states should insist on contract transparency but often don’t do so because that offers leaders plentiful opportunities for graft.”
David Shinn, professor of international relations at George Washington University in Washington, agreed that China’s lack of loan transparency was a huge problem and increased the risk of corruption on both the African and Chinese sides. But he also said that in some cases, African governments might have negotiated poorly.
“This is, however, the responsibility of the African government. I don’t think China is purposely trying to encourage African debts in order to gain leverage,” Shinn said.
“In fact, China is becoming more careful about its lending because it is concerned it has made too much credit available to some African countries.”
China ‘ready to talk’ about trade deal with East Africa bloc
Huang Hongxiang, director of China House, a Nairobi-based consultancy that helps Chinese in Africa integrate better, agreed, saying the Chinese government needs to communicate more about projects in Africa but African countries also have a bigger part to play in ensuring better deals.
“On commercial viability, accountability, transparency and governance, I believe the responsibility does not lie with China, the US or the West but in the hands of African countries,” he said.
Wherever the fault lies, one thing is clear when money is wasted on ill-designed projects that have little to no economic return, according to Opalo.
“The lack of planning and transparency creates default risks … [and] African taxpayers will be left holding the bag.”
This article is the third in a series examining the local impact of Chinese investment and infrastructure projects in Africa. Read part one here and part two
Civil Aviation Administration of China has not decided whether to take up invitation to be part of task force looking into automated flight control system, according to state media
The FAA is putting together an international team of experts to review the safety of the Boeing 737 MAX after two fatal crashes. Photo: EPA-EFE
China’s aviation regulator has been invited to join the US Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) task force to review the automated flight control system of Boeing’s 737 MAX jets, state media reported on Saturday.
The Civil Aviation Administration of China has not decided whether to accept the invitation, state broadcaster CCTV reported, citing an administration official.
But the official said the regulator would closely follow the investigation into two fatal crashes involving Boeing 737 MAX planes.
The FAA on Wednesday said it was forming an international team to review the safety of the Boeing 737 MAX following the accidents.
China was the first country to ground all Boeing 737 MAX 8 jets after an Ethiopian Airlines plane crashed outside Addis Ababa on March 10, killing all 157 people on board.
It was the second crash involving Boeing’s newest model, after 189 people were killed when a Lion Air plane crashed into the Java Sea off Indonesia on October 29.
Noting the similarities between the two accidents, China’s civil aviation regulator ordered domestic airlines to ground all 737 MAX 8 aircraft. It stopped taking applications for Boeing’s 737 MAX 8 airworthiness certification on March 21.After China ordered a dozen carriers to ground their 96 planes – about a quarter of all 737 MAX aircraft in operation globally – authorities in Ethiopia, Indonesia, Mongolia, Morocco and Singapore followed suit, along with airlines in Latin America and South Korea, before it was grounded worldwide.
How every Boeing 737 MAX was grounded in five days
China’s civil aviation regulator has said the plane would only be allowed to resume flights after it is satisfied measures to effectively ensure safety have been taken.
On Wednesday, the FAA said it would set up a Joint Authorities Technical Review (JATR) team to evaluate the safety of the Boeing 737 MAX. Experts from the FAA, Nasa and international aviation authorities would “conduct a comprehensive review of the certification of the automated flight control system on the Boeing 737 MAX aircraft”, the FAA said in a statement
“The JATR team will evaluate aspects of the 737 MAX automated flight control system, including its design and pilots’ interaction with the system, to determine its compliance with all applicable regulations and to identify future enhancements that might be needed,” the statement said.
The move comes three days after 157 people were killed after an Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 crashed 6 minutes after take-off from Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa on Sunday.
SNS Web | New Delhi | March 13, 2019 9:37 am
The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) on Wednesday informed that all Boeing 737 Max aircraft will be grounded before 4 pm today. This is to cater to situations where aircraft are to fly back to India or go to maintenance facility for parking.
Boeing 737 Max operations will stop from/to all Indian airports. Additionally no Boeing 737 Max aircraft will be allowed to enter or transit the Indian airspace effective 1600 hrs Indian time or 1030 UTC, the DGCA ordered.
The timeline is to cater to situations where aircraft can be positioned at maintenance facilities and international flights can reach their destinations.
Earlier on Tuesday, India grounded Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft used by the country’s airline companies in light of the Ethiopian Airlines crash that killed 157 people.
SpiceJet has around 12 ‘737 Max 8’ planes in its fleet, while Jet Airways has five.
“DGCA has taken the decision to ground the Boeing 737-Max planes immediately. These planes will be grounded till appropriate modifications and safety measures are undertaken to ensure their safe operations,” the Ministry of Civil Aviation said in a tweet.
“As always, passenger safety remains our top priority. We continue to consult closely with regulators around the world, airlines, and aircraft manufacturers to ensure passenger safety,” it added.
Following the DGCA decision, SpiceJet suspended Boeing 737 Max operations. “Safety and security of our passengers, crew and operations are of utmost importance to us,” the airline informed.
The move comes three days after 157 people were killed after an Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max 8 crashed 6 minutes after take-off from Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa on Sunday.
Meanwhile, the Civil Aviation Secretary has called an emergency meeting of all airlines at 4 pm today in Delhi.
Earlier, the DGCA had issued additional safety instructions to the two Indian carriers that operate the Boeing 737 Max aircraft. Pilots of SpiceJet and Jet Airways should have at least 1,000 hours of flying experience to command these planes, the regulator ordered.
A total of 149 passengers and 8 crew members from 35 countries were on board the Ethiopian Airlines flight ET 302 when it ploughed into a field in Bishoftu (formerly Debre Zeit), a town located 48 kilometres south east of Addis Ababa.
Four Indians, including a UNDP consultant attached to India’s Environment Ministry, lost their lives in the crash.
This was second such crash involving the 737 Max 8 aircraft in less than five months.
In October last year, an aircraft operated by Lion Air crashed killing over 180 people in Indonesia.
Following Sunday’s accident, Ethiopian Airlines grounded its entire Boeing 737 Max 8 fleet until further notice.
European Union and many countries across the world have already banned the use of 737 Max 8 aircraft in their respective airspace.
On Monday, China, too, grounded all of its Boeing 737 Max 8 jets. Australia too followed the suit on Tuesday.
Chinese President Xi Jinping, also general secretary of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and chairman of the Central Military Commission, joins deliberation with deputies from Fujian Province at the second session of the 13th National People’s Congress in Beijing, capital of China, March 10, 2019. (Xinhua/Li Xueren)
BEIJING, March 10 (Xinhua) — President Xi Jinping on Sunday afternoon joined deliberation with deputies from Fujian Province at the second session of the 13th National People’s Congress, China’s national legislature.
“[We] should create a favorable development environment for innovation, entrepreneurship and creativity,” said Xi, also general secretary of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and chairman of the Central Military Commission.
China should seek momentum from reform and opening up, unleash to the maximum the whole society’s power for innovation, entrepreneurship and creativity, and keep improving the country’s influence and competitiveness in a world that is undergoing profound changes, Xi said.
Xi stressed creating favorable conditions for the development of small and medium-sized enterprises and young people, and establishing an acceleration mechanism for high-tech companies.
He urged solid implementation of the policies and measures to encourage, guide and support the development of the private sector.
Fujian must leverage the combined strengths of the special economic zone, pilot free trade zone, comprehensive experimental zone and the core zone of the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road, and keep exploring new approaches, Xi said.
Xi called for efforts to explore new ways for integrated development across the Taiwan Strait.
The two sides of the Taiwan Strait should enhance economic and trade cooperation, infrastructure connectivity, energy and resource exchanges, and shared industry standards, he said.
Cross-Strait cooperation and cultural exchanges should be strengthened, he added.
Xi stressed the importance of implementing the people-centered development concept in the work on Taiwan, urging efforts to benefit Taiwan compatriots in the same way as people on the mainland are served.
He encouraged listening to the voice of Taiwan compatriots and research on what other policies and measures can be introduced to bring them benefits.
Xi said that this year marks the 70th anniversary of the founding of New China, and it is necessary to ensure that no one in the country’s old revolutionary base areas falls behind in the process of building a moderately prosperous society in all respects.
He called for adherence to targeted poverty alleviation and efforts to identify the root causes of poverty to enhance the effectiveness of anti-poverty measures.
More efforts should be put into coordinating economic development with ecological protection, Xi said.
The African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa is a shiny spaceship-like structure that glistens in the afternoon sun.
With its accompanying skyscraper, it stands out in the Ethiopian capital.
Greetings in Mandarin welcome visitors as they enter the lifts, and the plastic palm trees bear the logos of the China Development Bank.
African Union HQ, Addis Ababa
Everywhere, there are small indications that the building was made possible through Chinese financial aid.
In 2006, Beijing pledged $200m to build the headquarters. Completed in 2012, everything was custom-built by the Chinese – including a state-of-the-art computer system.
For several years, the building stood as a proud testament to ever-closer ties between China and Africa. Trade has rocketed over the past two decades, growing by about 20% a year, according to international consultancy McKinsey. China is Africa’s largest economic partner.
But in January 2018, French newspaper Le Monde Afrique dropped a bombshell.
It reported that the AU’s computer system had been compromised.
The newspaper, citing multiple sources, said that for five years, between the hours of midnight and 0200, data from the AU’s servers was transferred more than 8,000km away – to servers in Shanghai.
This had allegedly continued for 1,825 days in a row.
Le Monde Afrique reported that it had come to light in 2017, when a conscientious scientist working for the AU recorded an unusually high amount of computer activity on its servers during hours when the offices would have been deserted.
It was also reported that microphones and listening devices had been discovered in the walls and desks of the building, following a sweep for bugs.
The reaction was swift.
Both AU and Chinese officials publicly condemned the report as false and sensationalist – an attempt by the Western media to damage relations between a more assertive China and an increasingly independent Africa.
But Le Monde Afrique said that AU officials had privately expressed concerns about just how dependent they were on Chinese aid – and what the consequences of that could be.
In the midst of all of this, one fact remained largely unreported.
The main supplier of information and communication technology systems to the AU headquarters was China’s best-known telecoms equipment company – Huawei.
The company says it had “nothing” to do with any alleged breach.
Huawei “served as the key ICT provider inside the AU’s headquarters”, said Danielle Cave of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, in a review of the alleged incident.
Huawei headquarters in Shenzhen, China
“This doesn’t mean the company was complicit in any theft of data. But… it’s hard to see how – given Huawei’s role in providing equipment and key ICT services to the AU building and specifically to the AU’s data centre – the company could have remained completely unaware of the apparent theft of large amounts of data, every day, for five years.”
There is no evidence to indicate that Huawei’s telecoms network equipment was ever used by the Chinese government – or anyone else – to gain access to the data of their customers.
Indeed, no-one has ever gone on record to confirm that the AU system was compromised in the first place.
But these reports played into years of suspicions about Huawei – that a large Chinese company might find itself unduly influenced by the Chinese government.
Ren and the rise of Huawei
“When I first started out 30 years ago… we didn’t really have any telephones. The only phones we had were those hand-cranked phones that you see in old World War II films. We were pretty undeveloped then.”
Huawei’s founder and chairman Ren Zhengfei is reminiscing to the BBC about the origins of the world’s second-biggest smartphone firm, while sitting in the Huawei headquarters in Shenzhen – a symbol of the success that he’s worked his whole lifetime for.
A long marbled staircase, covered in plush red carpet, greets you as you first walk in.
At the top of the stairs, a giant painting depicts a traditional Chinese New Year scene.
Inside Huawei’s Shenzhen HQ
A few kilometres away in Dongguan, Huawei’s latest campus is even more eye-catching.
The site – designed to accommodate the company’s 25,000 R&D staff – comprises 12 “villages”, each of which recreates the architecture of a different European city, among them Paris, Bologna and Granada.
It’s as if Silicon Valley had been re-imagined by Walt Disney. Long corridors of Roman pillars and picturesque French cafes adorn the campus, with a train connecting the different areas, running through manicured gardens and past an artificial lake.
It’s a world away from the environment that Mr Ren found himself in when he first started the company in 1987. “I founded Huawei when China began to implement its reform and opening up policy,” he says. “At that time, China was shifting from a planned economy to a market economy. Not only people like myself, but even the most senior government officials, did not have the vaguest idea of what a market economy was. It seemed it was hard to survive.”
Ren was born in 1944 in Southern China – a tumultuous, chaotic place, one of the poorest regions in an already destitute country.
For a long time, hardship was all he ever knew.
He was from a family of seven children. “They were very poor,” says David De Cremer, who has co-written a book on Ren and Huawei.
“I think hardship is something that you can see throughout his life, and which he keeps emphasising himself.”
To escape that life of poverty and drudgery, Ren did what many young Chinese men of that era did. He joined the army.
Soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army, 1972
“I was a very low-ranking officer in the People’s Liberation Army,” he says. “I served in an ordinary construction project, not a field unit. At the time, I was a technician of a company in the military, and then I became an engineer.”
He left the military in 1983 when China began to downsize its forces, and went into the electronics business.
By his own admission, he wasn’t a great businessman at first.
“I was someone who had been in the military all my life at the time, used to doing what I was told,” he says. “Suddenly, I began to work in a market economy. I was at a total loss. So I too suffered losses, I too was deceived, and I was cheated.”
But he was quick to learn, and was a keen student of Western business practices and European history.
“I did research on what exactly a market economy was all about,” he says. “I read books on laws, including those about European and US laws. At that time, there were very few books on Chinese laws, and I had to read those on European and US laws.”
Five years later, he founded Huawei – the name can be translated as “splendid achievement” or “China is able” – to sell simple telecoms equipment to the rural Chinese market. Within a few years, Huawei was developing and producing the equipment itself.
Sometime in the early 90s, Huawei won a government contract to provide telecoms equipment for the People’s Liberation Army.
By 1995, the company was generating sales of around US$220,000, mainly from selling to the rural market.
The following year Huawei was given the status of a Chinese “national champion”. In practice, this meant the government closed the market to foreign competition.
At a time when China’s economy was growing by an average of 10% per year, this was no small advantage. But it was only when Huawei started to expand overseas in 2000, that it really saw its sales soar.
In 2002, Huawei made US$552m from its international market sales. By 2005 its international market contracts exceeded its domestic business for the first time.
Ren’s early days in business instilled in him a desire to protect his company from the whims and fancies of the stock market. Huawei is privately held and employee-owned. This gave Ren the power to plough more money back into research and development. Each year, Huawei spends US$20bn on R&D – one of the biggest such budgets in the world.
“Publicly listed companies have to pay a lot of attention to their balance sheets,” he says. “They can’t invest too much, otherwise profits will drop and so will their share prices. At Huawei, we fight for our ideals. We know that if we fertilise our ‘soil’ it will become more bountiful. That’s how we’ve managed to pull ahead and succeed.”
One story from the early days of the company tells how Ren was cooking for his staff (he loves to cook, or so the story goes). Suddenly he rushed out of the kitchen and announced to the room: “Huawei will be a top three player in the global communications market 20 years from now!”
And that’s exactly what happened. In fact, those ambitions were surpassed.
Today, Huawei is the world’s biggest seller of network telecommunications equipment.
From aspiring to be a company like Apple, it now sells more smartphones than Apple.
But shadows have continued to loom over Huawei’s international success.
Ren and Huawei’s links to the Chinese Communist Party have raised suspicions that the company owes its meteoric rise to its powerful political connections in China. The US has accused Huawei of being a tool of the Chinese government.
It’s an accusation which Ren denies. “Please don’t think that Huawei has become what it is today because we have special connections,” he says. “Even 100% state-owned companies have failed. Do good connections mean you will succeed then? Huawei’s success is still very much due to our hard work.”
The case against
It was 1 December 2018. US President Donald Trump and China’s President Xi Jinping were dining on grilled sirloin followed by caramel rolled pancakes at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires.
They had a lot to discuss. The US and China were in the middle of a trade war – imposing tariffs on each other’s goods – and growth forecasts for both countries had recently been cut as a result. This was adding to the fear of a slowing global economy.
In the event, the two leaders agreed a truce in the trade war, with Donald Trump tweeting that “Relations with China have taken a BIG leap forward!”
Xi Jinping and Donald Trump at dinner, December 2018
But thousands of kilometres north in Canada, an arrest was taking place that would throw doubt on this rapprochement.
Meng Wanzhou, Huawei’s chief financial officer and Ren Zhengfei’s eldest daughter, had been detained by Canadian officials while transferring between flights at Vancouver airport.
The arrest had come at the request of the US, who accused her of breaking sanctions against Iran.
“When she was detained, as her father, my heart broke,” says Ren, visibly emotional. “How could I watch my child suffer like this? But what happened, has happened. We can only depend on the law to solve this problem.”
Meng Wanzhou being driven to court in Canada
Huawei’s problems were just beginning. Nearly two months later, the US Department of Justice filed two indictments against Huawei and Ms Meng.
Under the first indictment, Huawei and Ms Meng were charged with misleading banks and the US government about their business in Iran.
The second indictment – against Huawei – involved criminal charges including obstruction of justice and the attempted theft of trade secrets.
Both Huawei and Ms Meng deny the charges.
January 2019: Acting US attorney general Matthew Whittaker announces charges against Huawei and Meng Wanzhou
The charge of stealing trade secrets centres on a robotic tool – developed by T-Mobile – known as Tappy.
According to legal documents, Huawei had tried to buy Tappy, a device which mimicked human fingers by tapping mobile phone screens rapidly to test responsiveness.
T-Mobile was in partnership with Huawei at the time, but it rebuffed the Chinese firm’s offers, fearing it would use the technology to make phones for T-Mobile’s competitors.
It’s alleged that one of Huawei’s US employees then smuggled Tappy’s robotic arm into his satchel so that he could send its details to colleagues in China.
After the alleged theft was discovered, the Huawei employee claimed that the arm had mistakenly fallen into his bag.
Huawei claimed that the employee had been acting alone, and the case was settled out of court in 2014. But the latest case is built on email trails between managers in China and the company’s US employees, linking Huawei management to the alleged theft.
The indictment also details evidence of a bonus scheme from 2013, offering Huawei employees financial rewards for stealing confidential information from competitors.
Huawei has denied any such scheme exists.
Meng Wanzhou, photographed in 2014
This is not the first time that Huawei has been accused of stealing trade secrets. Over the years companies like Cisco, Nortel and Motorola have all pointed the finger at the Chinese firm.
But US fears about Huawei are about much more than industrial espionage. For more than a decade, the US government has seen the company as little more than an arm of the Chinese Communist Party.
These concerns have been brought to the fore with the advent of “fifth generation” or 5G mobile internet, which promises download speeds 10 or 20 times faster than at present, and much greater connectivity between devices.
As the world’s biggest telecoms infrastructure provider, Huawei is one of the companies best placed to build new 5G networks. But the US has warned its intelligence partners that awarding contracts to Huawei would be tantamount to allowing the Chinese spy on them.
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently cautioned against Huawei, saying, “If a country adopts this and puts it in some of their critical information systems, we won’t be able to share information with them.”
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
The UK, Germany and Canada are reviewing whether Huawei’s products pose a security threat.
Australia went a step further last year, and banned equipment suppliers “likely to be subject to extrajudicial directions from a foreign government”.
Huawei was not mentioned by name, but Danielle Cave of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute says the company posed a national security risk because of its government links.
She cites an article in Chinese law that makes it impossible for any company to refuse to help the Chinese Communist Party in intelligence gathering.
“Admittedly, what is missing from this debate is the smoking gun,” she says.
“For the average person who has a Huawei smartphone it’s not a big deal. But if you’re a Western government that has key national security to protect – why would you allow this access to a company that is in the political system that China is in?”
For his part, Ren says that Huawei’s resources have never and would never be used to spy for the Chinese government.
“The Chinese government has clearly said that it won’t ask companies to install backdoors,” he says. A “backdoor” is a term used to describe a secret entry point in software or a computer system that gives access to the person or entity who installed it to the inner workings of the system.
“Huawei will not do it either,” he continues. “Our sales revenues are now hundreds of billions of dollars. We are not going to risk the disgust of our country and our customers all over the world because of something like that. We will lose all our business. I’m not going to take that risk.”
Xi’s China
Zhou Daiqi is Huawei’s chief ethics and compliance officer.
He’s been with the company for nearly 25 years, in a number of different positions – chief engineer, director of the hardware department, head of the research centre in Xi’an, according to his biography on the company’s website. He is also understood to combine his high-ranking executive duties with another role – party secretary of Huawei’s Communist Party committee.
All companies in China are required by law to have a Communist Party committee.
Zhou Daiqi’s profile on Huawei’s website
The official line is that they exist to ensure that employees uphold the country’s moral and social values. Representatives of the committee are also often tasked with helping workers with financial problems.
But critics of China’s one-party system argue that they allow the state to exert control on corporate China. And they say the level of this control has increased in recent years.
“[President] Xi Jinping is exerting greater control over the business community in China,” says Elliott Zaagman, who regularly advises Chinese companies on their PR strategy. “As these companies gain power and influence overseas, the party doesn’t want to lose control over them.”
Ren, however, argues that the role of Huawei’s Communist Party committee is far less important than many in the West believe.
“[It] serves only to educate its employees,” he says. “It is not involved in any business decisions.”
In China, most chief executives are Communist Party members.
Every year, they dutifully turn up to the National People’s Congress along with local and national party chiefs, officials and chief executives.
It’s where the big economic decisions are voted on – although no proposal is put forward which hasn’t already been agreed upon.
Still, big CEOs come to show their commitment to the party, and to contribute to working papers that are meant to help the government understand the concerns of the business community.
Being a member of the party is very much a networking opportunity – in the way one would join a business association.
Elliott Zaagman argues that this is a system that demands loyalty.
“There is no separation from the party and the state,” he says.
“The system in China encourages the lack of transparency in companies like Huawei.”
The worry is that these close links mean that if the Communist Party asked a company to do something, they would have no choice but to comply.
And if that company is one that is involved in sensitive global telecoms infrastructure projects, it’s easy to see why Western observers would be worried.
There is no evidence to indicate that Huawei is in any way under the orders of the Chinese government, or that Beijing has any plans to dictate business plans and strategy at Huawei – particularly when it comes to spying.
But the way in which the Chinese Communist Party has robustly defended Huawei has raised questions about how independent the company is of its influence.
For example, Beijing stated that Ms Meng’s detention was a rights abuse .
And while her extradition case to the US was moving forward, China detained two Canadian citizens and accused them of stealing state secrets. Critics say the detentions are linked to Ms Meng’s arrest.
December 2018: Chinese police patrol outside Canada’s embassy in Beijing
While not commenting on the arrest of the Canadians, Ren says China’s defence of Huawei is understandable.
“It is the Chinese government’s duty to protect its people,” he says. “If the US attempts to gain competitive edge by undermining China’s most outstanding hi-tech talent, then it is understandable if the Chinese government, in turn, protects its hi-tech companies.”
Over the past few years, there have been signs of a bigger push by the government to get private companies, and in particular tech firms, to cooperate with party rules – even when they are firmly resistant.
A Didi Chuxing logo adorns a building in Hangzhou, China
China’s ride-hailing giant Didi Chuxing’s troubles are an example of the struggles Chinese firms face when they try to uphold their independence in the face of government pressure.
Chinese attitudes to data collection and data privacy are different to those in the West – many people don’t care if businesses have access to their data, arguing that it adds to the convenience of life and work.
Government access to data in China is not the free-for-all that many outside of China assume it to be
Samm Sacks, CSIS
So it wasn’t unusual when, after the murders of two of its passengers by Didi drivers, regulators used the scandal to force Didi to share more corporate data with the government. But Didi resisted – citing customer privacy. Under Chinese law, it had no choice but to comply.
When it did, it handed over “three boxes of data printed on paper, including 95 hard copies for authorities to review”.
According to Samm Sacks of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the case demonstrates that “government access to data in China is not the free-for-all that many outside China assume it to be”.
She says this indicates that there appears to be “a kind of tug of war between the government and companies over data”.
How this plays out will determine how Chinese companies are viewed by foreign governments when they do business overseas.
Companies like Huawei have grown up in a system where to survive and thrive they needed strong links to the Chinese government – there was and is no other choice. But these links could harm their reputation abroad.
“It’s two different systems,” says Zaagman. “Think of it like an electrical outlet. China’s plug doesn’t fit in to the outlets we have in the West.”
What’s at stake
“Basically you want to connect to everything that can be connected.”
Zhu Peiying, head of Huawei’s 5G wireless labs, is showing off devices that can connect to the new technology. From a smart toothbrush that collects data about how well you brush your teeth, to a smart cup that reminds you when you should drink some water, this is a world where everything you can think of is being measured and analysed.
At its most sophisticated, everything in entire cities would be connected – driverless cars, the temperature of buildings, the speed of public transport – the list is endless.
Huawei is thought to be a year ahead of its competitors in terms of its technological expertise and what it can offer customers, according to industry sources.
It’s also thought that the company can offer prices that are about 10% cheaper than its competitors, although critics claim this is because of state support.
Ren dismisses this, saying that Huawei doesn’t receive government subsidies.
He says the real reason behind the US resistance to Huawei is its superior technology.
“There’s no way the US can crush us,” he says. “The world needs Huawei because we are more advanced. Even if they persuade more countries not to use us temporarily we could just scale things down a bit.”
Many analysts say that Huawei’s exclusion from US networks could actually cause the US to fall behind in its 5G capabilities.
“It would mean we wouldn’t be able to participate in any blended network [using Huawei] in Europe or Asia,” says Samm Sacks of CSIS. “That would put us at a significant disadvantage.”
What this would mean in reality is a world of two internets – or what analysts are calling a “digital iron curtain” – dividing the world into parts that do business with Chinese companies like Huawei, and those that don’t.
Because of US pressure on its allies, Huawei has been on an aggressive public relations campaign to win over customers and government stakeholders.
In recent days, Vodafone’s boss Nick Read called on the US to share any evidence it has about Huawei, while Andrus Ansip, the European Commission’s vice president for the digital single market, said in a tweet that he had met with Huawei’s rotating CEO to discuss the importance of being open and transparent, as they explored ways of working together.
But suspicions about Huawei remain.
One security firm reports a sharp rise in inquiries by Asian government clients about Huawei.
“Some have asked us how much they should worry about whether Huawei is really a liability,” says an analyst who consults to Asian governments, on condition of anonymity.
Ren is sanguine about such concerns.
“For countries who believe in them [suspicions about Huawei] we will hold off,” he says. “For countries who feel Huawei is trustworthy, we may move a little faster. The world is so big. We can’t walk across every corner of it.”
But this is about more than just one company or one CEO and his family.
Increasingly, this is perceived as a battle between two world orders, and which one is the future.
In the early days of China opening up, US presidents like George HW Bush espoused the merits of engagement.
“No nation on Earth has discovered a way to import the world’s goods and services while stopping foreign ideas at the border,” he said in a 1991 speech. “Just as the democratic idea has transformed nations on every continent, so, too, change will inevitably come to China.”
1989: George HW Bush in Beijing – he encouraged economic engagement with China
Previous US administrations believed that economic engagement in China would lead to China following a freer, more “liberal” path.
There’s no denying China has made remarkable strides in the past 40 years. The economy grew by an annual average of 10% for three decades, helping to lift 800 million people out of poverty. It is now the second-largest economy in the world, only surpassed by the US.
Some estimates put China’s economy ahead of America’s by 2030.
It achieved this while maintaining one-party rule and the supremacy of the Communist Party.
But its success has raised concerns that it is only possible with a huge amount of government control over the country’s companies. The fear is that control could be used to achieve the Communist Party’s goals – which are at this point unclear.
“It’s a double-edged sword for China,” says Danielle Cave. “[Because of its laws] the Chinese Communist Party has made it virtually impossible for Chinese companies to expand without attracting understandable and legitimate suspicion.”
Added to this, China has become more authoritarian under Xi Jinping’s rule.
President Xi Jinping
“Xi is systematically undermining virtually every feature that made China so distinct and helped it work so well in the past,” writes Jonathan Tepperman, editor in chief of Foreign Policy.
“His efforts may boost his own power and prestige in the short term and reduce some forms of corruption. On balance, however, Xi’s campaign will have disastrous long-term consequences for his country and the world.”
But Ren dismisses this, insisting that China is more open than ever before.
“If this meeting took place 30 years ago,” he says of our interview, “it would have been very dangerous for me. Today, I can be straightforward when answering difficult questions. This shows that China has a more open political environment.”
Still, Ren is hopeful of the direction China will take in the future.
“China has more or less tried to close itself off from the outside world for 5,000 years,” he says. “Yet we had found ourselves poor, lagging behind other nations. It was only in the past 30 years since Deng Xiaoping opened China’s doors to the world that China has become more prosperous. Therefore, China must continue to move forward on the path of reform and opening-up.”
In one of Huawei’s vast campus sites across Shenzen, lies a man-made lake. Swimming in these serene waters are two black swans.
There is a story that Ren put the birds here to remind employees of “black swan” events – unpredictable and catastrophic financial eventualities that are impossible to prepare for. He dismisses this as an urban myth, but it’s hard not to read something into it.
For Huawei, and Ren, these are highly uncertain times with no way of telling what lies ahead.
Image copyright GETTY IMAGES
Image copyright GETTY IMAGES
Image copyright GETTY IMAGES
CHINDIA ALERT: You'll be living in their world, very soon 