
China's ambassador threatened Faroese prime minister to sign Huawei 5G deal - jensgk
https://www.berlingske.dk/internationalt/banned-recording-reveals-china-ambassador-threatened-faroese-leader
======
augstein
So can we all finally agree, that Huawei stating it has no ties to the Chinese
government, was a lie after all?

This false claim by Huawei, is one of the most important reasons why Huawei
isn‘t already banned here in Germany.[1]

And while we are at it, we should also ban US companies from providing
critical infrastructure like this in Germany (and Europe). After Snowden, its
clear that hardware from US vendors like Cisco should be seen as potentially
compromised.[2]

1) [https://www.businessinsider.de/trumps-huawei-verbot-ist-
rein...](https://www.businessinsider.de/trumps-huawei-verbot-ist-reine-
heuchelei-2019-5) 2) [https://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/snowden--the-
nsa-p...](https://www.infoworld.com/article/2608141/snowden--the-nsa-planted-
backdoors-in-cisco-products.html)

~~~
president
> And while we are at it, we should also ban US companies from providing
> critical infrastructure like this in Germany (and Europe). After Snowden,
> its clear that hardware from US vendors like Cisco should be seen as
> potentially compromised.[2]

Genuine question - What are the big European network infra equipment makers?
You only ever hear of US and Chinese companies like Cisco and Huawei operating
in this space.

~~~
bjelkeman-again
Others mention Alcatel, Ericsson, Nokia. How much of their equipment is made
in China? How hard would it be to compromise the manufacturing process or
loading of firmware to include backdoors?

~~~
klipklop
Much (all?) of former Alcatel/Nokia gear is not made in China. A backdoor is
highly unlikely.

------
leke
A peek inside the cutthroat world of politics, only brought to you by an
accidental recording of a private conversation.

I feel this information really shouldn't be hidden from the public as it's the
public that is supposed to a part of a democratic system. How can we elect our
officials and voice our opinions, if we are not informed of hostilities from
foreign governments?

Do you think China would have even said that if they knew that each
conversation is public record.

~~~
Svip
Diplomacy wouldn't really work if you couldn't be candid. And if you knew
everything you said in diplomatic conversations would be public, you'd be less
candid. Or you'd only work with those, who would provide you with secrecy.

For the record, we don't know whether the Faroese government let itself submit
to the pressure, or whether they are now actively pursuing other avenues. But
I would imagine with the leak, that it's not the former any more. The question
is whether it would have been had it not been for the leak.

------
mcguire
" _The Faroese government had asked the court to put an injunction in place on
the basis that publication of this information might damage the relationship
between the Danish Commonwealth and China. On Monday this week the government
then submitted a request to have the injunction remain in force._ "

Hm.

------
bigpumpkin
"Berlingske has learnt that Ambassador Feng Tie made it clear in two meetings
on 11 November - first with the Faroese foreign minister, Jenis av Rana, and
later the same day with the Faroese finance minister, Jørgen Niclasen, and the
islands' lagmand, or prime minister, Bárður Nielsen – that if the Faroese
telecoms operator Føroya Tele agreed to let Huawei build the 5G network, all
doors would be open to a free trade agreement between China and the Faroese
Islands.

He also stated that China would not enter into such a trade agreement if
Huawei did not get the contract. According to Berlingske's information, the
Chinese ambassador is said to have been »very forceful« in his statements to
the Faroese top officials."

So is there currently a Free Trade Agreement between China and the Faroes?

~~~
Svip
There is not currently a Free Trade Agreement between China and the Faroese
Islands. But the Faroese Islands and Greenland have been hoping for a free
trade agreement with China each, outside of one Denmark proper may have with
China through the EU. (Note: Neither Greenland nor the Faroese Islands are
part of the EU.)

Although it is possible, that the Faroese and the Greenlandic may consider the
value of the Kingdom of Denmark that they are part of more valuable in face of
being pressured. China pressuring the Faroese, the US considering purchasing
Greenland. Both partly the result of a Kingdom of Denmark being run on
autopilot by successive Danish governments. I'd imagine both getting extra
attention in Copenhagen the coming decade.

~~~
GordonS
A little OT, but I'm surprised the Faroese Islands and Greenland economies
would be big enough for China to care a jot - what am I missing?

~~~
Svip
Someone may be able to correct me on this, or fill in the details, but part of
China's larger Belt and Road Initiative, which is presented as investments
into smaller countries, is to ensure non-aligned countries (in a manner of
speaking) are beholden to China.

China builds you a new airport, and suddenly you are indebted to them for
decades.

As for the Faroese Islands, and in particular Greenland, they don't care so
much about their economies. What they care about is their proximity to the
Arctic ocean, and its potential riches. Having a foot in the door, would be a
huge boon for China. Indeed, the notion of China building oil rigs and mines
in Greenland has been a subject debated a lot in Denmark.

Pressuring the Faroese may be a good way to make Greenland follow suit. But
there I am merely speculating. Besides, the Faroese are the ones making
overtures to China, so China can counter with demands like this at no expense
to themselves.

~~~
yorwba
> part of China's larger Belt and Road Initiative, which is presented as
> investments into smaller countries, is to ensure non-aligned countries (in a
> manner of speaking) are beholden to China.

Not really. The most prominent case where that happened is a shiny new port
they built in Sri Lanka, but which turned out to be impossible to run
profitably, so the Sri Lankan government handed them the port for a 99-year
lease instead of paying their debt. Now China has a port in Sri Lanka they
can't run profitably either.

What the BRI is is a great opportunity for Chinese officials to earn kickbacks
from Chinese companies for helping them land government contracts abroad. I
assume that's what happened here: someone working for Huawei really wanted to
close this deal and receive a fat bonus, so they offered the ambassador a cut
for intervening on his behalf.

~~~
paperskull
While this is true from an economic perspective many argue that the true value
of the Sri Lankan deep water port is that it allows the Chinese military
(officially this is for hunting pirates) a foothold in the Indian ocean,
similar to how the US can project its power far outside its border through the
use of military bases around the world. Hence it isn't a major concern how
profitable the port is, or so the thinking goes.

~~~
yorwba
Building and leasing an oversized commercial port is a kind of expensive plan
if all they wanted was a naval base. Last I heard, the Sri Lankan government
expressly forbade China from using the port for military purposes and instead
moved their own base there: [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sri-lanka-
china-port/sri-...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sri-lanka-china-
port/sri-lanka-to-shift-naval-base-to-china-controlled-port-city-
idUSKBN1JS22H)

So whether the primary aim was economic or military doesn't matter much, since
the outcome was an expensive failure either way.

------
cozzyd
Interestingly, in Greenland, we are forbidden from deploying Huawei equipment
according to the terms of our LTE license.

------
jariel
Once again 100% validation that 5G and Huawei are part of the CCP's imperial
designs.

We can't blame China for playing hardball, but this is proof-positive that the
government is acting in concert with Huawei and that is enough to put major
tariffs, bans or at least heavy scrutiny.

------
Bendingo
It's not a threat -- it's an offer. Take it or leave it.

~~~
cmonnow
You don't really NEED food. You could choose to eat or you could choose to
die. It's up to you. Take it or leave it.

No point in playing with semantics. Fear is subjective. It is caused by
ignorance of whether you might lose a wanted thing, or obtain an unwanted
thing.

By your logic, we can completely rid the dictionary of the word 'threat'. Name
any 'threat' today, I can convert it into an 'offer'.

------
justicezyx
Now it seems everything is on the table to get huawei into other nations
network.

It becomes suspicious is this really just national pride mixed with business
interest, or something else...

~~~
pc2g4d
Totally unfounded but to me reasonable speculation: it's a means of building a
global surveillance network anywhere Huawei does business.

~~~
president
It's also a potential weapon. Imagine the havoc you can create by shutting
down another nation's critical network infrastructure, especially one that is
supposed to power the next generation of technology platforms and fleets of
internet-connected devices.

~~~
chopin
But what will playing that card have as a consequence? Any technology having
the slightest tie to China would be banned. That's very short of economical
suicide. That one could only be pulled in an all out war. It's not a credible
threat. I'd go with surveillance which is already good enough to get Huawei
banned. But that's true of Cisco either...

~~~
mensetmanusman
That’s an obvious concern.

What tends to happen in authoritarian countries is that obvious concerns do
not get raised, which is why they tend to make occasional disastrous decisions
for their long term stability (e.g. “it probably wont be a good idea to
imprison all the Muslims, we might make our trading partners mad”)

------
microcolonel
Wow, coverups like this are what the death penalty is for.

~~~
dang
Please stop posting unsubstantive comments and/or flamebait to HN. We've
already told you at least three times that we don't want to have to ban you
again, but if you keep breaking the guidelines we will.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

