If the 'trust' of an entity used for critical infrastructure is not definitive, then we 'don't trust', i.e. 'distrust by default' in those scenarios.
We literally do not know who owns Huawei, legally. We know that the CCP wants to monitor all communications, everywhere, do the extent they can. We know that de facto, the CCP has the final say, and can bend Huawei at will to do as they please and interdict without consequence (see: Jack Ma).
While it's obviously a much more complicated question, there are other issues for sure, but in the end, it's as easy as that.
The same should be held for any bit of critical software, and legislation should be introduced to protect citizens from CCP oversight in consumer apps like TikTok.
The 'smart play' would be to play into the financial incentive of the companies - most of them are 'profit first' and adhere to CCP policy mostly 'because they have to' but with maybe some degree of national loyalty in some parties. But just like Hollywood can be very easily manipulated with the threat of China-blackout into making films the way the CCP wants ... Zoom and TikTok will act reasonably with the right regulation and oversight i.e. 'All US data has to be kept in the US, in certain terms, with some regulatory process etc'.. If they are forced to keep a firewall between non-China and China users by host nations, it makes it easier for them to rebuff CCP demands for interjection i.e. "Sorry Xi, but the data is kept on servers in the US on a different business unit, if we pass data across borders they will shut us down"
No, because the moral ambiguity inherent implied would kind of conflate different problems.
What is Facebook doing wrong? They're allowing people to share content. Some of that content, some people want censored, because they believe it has a negative influence, many (most) others would disagree. That's mostly it.
If Facebook, Google, Snap, Insta were all actively sharing all of their data with the Government, so that the Government could censor any and all criticism, throw people in jail arbitrarily, use FB to track down an ethnic group of citizens and throw them in brainwashing camps with no oversight, control the entire media, and stop people from accessing information outside the USA - then I would agree with your point.
"What is Facebook doing wrong? They're allowing people to share content"
I don't have a dog in that fight, I am reffering to them spying on people who have enevr even signed up tp facebook, enabling electoral fraud in Uk and conspiring with Google to manipulate the ad market. All of those activities are illegal and well documented.
We literally do not know who owns Huawei, legally. We know that the CCP wants to monitor all communications, everywhere, do the extent they can. We know that de facto, the CCP has the final say, and can bend Huawei at will to do as they please and interdict without consequence (see: Jack Ma).
While it's obviously a much more complicated question, there are other issues for sure, but in the end, it's as easy as that.
The same should be held for any bit of critical software, and legislation should be introduced to protect citizens from CCP oversight in consumer apps like TikTok.
The 'smart play' would be to play into the financial incentive of the companies - most of them are 'profit first' and adhere to CCP policy mostly 'because they have to' but with maybe some degree of national loyalty in some parties. But just like Hollywood can be very easily manipulated with the threat of China-blackout into making films the way the CCP wants ... Zoom and TikTok will act reasonably with the right regulation and oversight i.e. 'All US data has to be kept in the US, in certain terms, with some regulatory process etc'.. If they are forced to keep a firewall between non-China and China users by host nations, it makes it easier for them to rebuff CCP demands for interjection i.e. "Sorry Xi, but the data is kept on servers in the US on a different business unit, if we pass data across borders they will shut us down"