Indeed. There is a history of only the answers the politicians want to hear being presented, and doubts and counter arguments being swept under the carpet. It's propaganda unless a reputable source can corroborate it.
A country with 1.4 billion people and a centralist governance stratagem that allowed them to essentially leapfrog from telex to become the world's largest internet population and the world center for mobile payment penetration through government stimulation and investment. Now the CIA "reveals" that branches of the government had a relationship with the single most advanced telecom equipment manufacturer over the period. I would be more surprised if they didn't. Anyway, thanks to brave individuals we've heard a lot about US government methods ... this is a case of pot / kettle / black... "now give me my budget!".
There's a weird moral element to these discussions though. Lots of people think this is "wrong," or that the CIA is accusing the Chinese intelligence services of doing something wrong, whereas other people admit that all countries play the game and simply are showing this as a legitimate threat. That confusion between morality and cold threat analysis confounds a lot of national security discussions.
The issue is with the perspective, China is certainty a "legitimate threat" to the US, at least from a technological perspective, the problem is that China IS NOT a threat to the rest of the world or at least not in the same degree it is to the hegemonic power of the US, meanwhile the US indeed IS a technological and military threat to countries around the globe, so wherever the US and its agencies gaslight about China being a threat, it is always too funny, when you remember that the US has all sorts of military bases, drones subs and spy satellites deployed, not to mention it is already spying digitally on the entire planet (this conversation included ofc)
China had not set up military bases around the world in the past because they "did NOT have" the ability to do so. Now that the nation has the fund, they are certainly starting to do so.
The Chinese army set up a major base in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa just a few years ago. It is the PLAN's first overseas military base and was built at a cost of US$590 million. I'm sure it won't be the last.
If China can do what US can, they will do it. To think otherwise would just be naive.
> If China can do what US can, they will do it. To think otherwise would just be naive.
Thats a bit of overstatement don't you think. Its very different culture after all, and you are speculating based only from the American exceptionalasim viewpoint which I think is very very outdated.
Every country in the world would be an empire like the US if they only could. Its a matter of opportunity not motivation.
The bigger issue is what would China do with all that power? We know what the US does with it and I don't think a world lead by China would be as nice a place as a world run by America.
It depends on what you want. Me, I want a world with democracy and due process.
I don't see anything like that eminating from China and I doubt I ever will.
And I don't have a policy regarding dating super models. do you know why? Because I don't have the opportunity to do that thing so I don't plan for it.
Rest assured if that was a thing I could do the. I would certainly have a policy regarding it.
Its the same for countries and expansionism. Those that can, do. Those that can't, dream.
All the things you are saying such as "human nature" or "survival instinct" are just ideological and cultural precepts you simply can't back those assessments up
Couldn't Huawei debunk the allegations of having backdoors by just releasing all source code of its 5G equipment, along with a verifiable build? It wouldn't even have to be licensed as open source, just available for security reviews.
The CIA could still claim that Huawei is hiding backdoors in microcode, or even in the ethernet connectors, but it would greatly weaken their credibility.
It's work reading the UK GCHQ NCSC reports on Huawei. They consistently complain about the difficulties of verifiable builds for its software and also use of third party or outdated protocols.
Does anybody have a clue what this is really about?
Obviously it's not about the Chinese gov't putting backdoors in Huawei equipment. They put backdoors in everybody's equipment, as does the NSA and, where they can, GCHQ, the GRU, and Mossad. It's surprising any cellphone still works with all the backdoors in the baseband processors, completely invisible to (e.g.) your Android kernel running as a contained guest.
My best guess is that this is about competition with local makers of equipment, which it is much easier to hide NSA backdoors in, and easier to keep Chinese backdoors out of. Or maybe just competition with local makers, in general. The US State Dept has been caught many times with their thumb on the scales on behalf of US exporters, such as taking countries to court to stop anti-smoking campaigns. France was similarly caught spying on behalf of Airbus, vs Boeing sales.
I am not a fan of Chinese goals and methods, but this doesn't mean anything. The entire Internet has been funded by US military and intelligence, so what?
Receiving funding is different from being funded by, right? It may have been payment for the service provided by Huawei to the China's military and intelligence, right? Or can Huawei not provide service to them even if it's a Chinese company?
I'm a bit alarmed at how disinterested people are being here. Here is China, a global power, doing all it can to undermine Western countries and amass influence/power, and nobody here cares. While they steal the IP of the companies that allow us our quality/way of life, you guys are all "Ah, well, we do it too". Well, fuck, I hope so, because the US is the only superpower with anything resembling Western values that I'd like to see remain the dominant value system. And the West is the only cultural sphere that has any interest in things like due process, democracy, free press, freedom of speech, etc., while China and Russia are more than happy to jail anybody who's critical of them or their policies if they can.
I think it is an issue worth discussing but the way it’s usually framed is from some sort of morally superior position instead of a tactical position. You’ve framed it like a game of chess, which is closer to how geopolitics works in reality, so I can get behind that.
I used to be more of a pacifist and idealist. The whole "the industrial-military complex is evil" shtick or "US global hegemony is terrible" thing. I've watched all of Chomsky's talks, read his books. I'm painfully aware of all the legit evil things the US has done in the name of protecting its sphere of influence and I've always been deeply suspicious and critical of the US (that whole Iraq war, black sites, etc. tend to be things that don't sit well with people who think values are important).
And I probably would've remained that way if I didn't watch on the news how Russia literally annexed a part of Ukraine without a "war" while NATO twiddled its thumbs and went "Well, they didn't invade, so dunno". Or how the US squanders its influence and power while China branches out into Africa, Asia, Europe and the US by buying out everybody and everything they can - meanwhile ensuring they maintain an iron fist over their own press or any critics, and their entire economy and culture and population. In the middle of all this, Europe is in a decade-long crisis over, well, everything and Germany couldn't influence its way out of a paper bag, despite its impressive economy.
For all its flaws (and there are a depressing fuckload), I prefer the US's world order over China's, where they can imprison a million Muslims with no repercussion. I just wish the US were better, in every way, because I know there are tons of people who'll point at the US-Mexico border and what Trump has done and say "See, they're just as bad". And they have a point that the US does terrible things, while still missing the point, and it's both infuriating and depressing because if the US actually held itself to its own standards, I wouldn't have to qualify my every statement where I defend the US over China/Russia.
I totally agree that I would prefer a US world order. I think a lot of people around the world agree. But geopolitics usually just comes down to self interest at the end of the day. And if you look at every action from an inhumanely rational point of view, geopolitics makes more sense.
I'll offer a contrasting viewpoint - I'm scared to see people propagate opinions like these though I see why people might believe these things. (In no way do I mean any disrespect to you. Power to you for being brave enough to post what may contribute to an interesting discussion.)
For one, these opinions are essentially a list of judgments based on a biased set of observations. There is a difference between making an observation and making a judgement:
For example, perhaps you observe that there are few replies on this thread and therefore judge that people are disinterested. Perhaps you observe China is a rising power and you judge that it is gathering power for the purpose of undermining Western countries. Perhaps you observe that Chinese people have copied a lot of Western ideas and you judge what they are doing to be selfish stealing. Perhaps you observe that China doesn't have due process, free press, etc and therefore judge that Chinese authorities are "happy" to jail people.
These kinds of judgments tend to attribute intention to behaviors. Such judgments aren't falsifiable nor testable, are too narrowly focused, and they put people at risk of committing fundamental attribution errors. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error)
I suspect people who post opinions like these tend to have some less-than-virtuous private psychological desire they want to fulfill. Perhaps they are projecting their own life metaphors onto abstract geopolitical entities - which I think is often silly. Even though we all know China is a country and not a person, people often personify the abstract entity of _the whole of China_ as “wanting” things or having "values" or being "happy to do anything". Perhaps they think life is supposed to be fair and so they frame the actions of countries in terms of fairness. I don’t think it is always correct to think about countries in terms of these metaphors.
Sometimes I also suspect people who have these kinds of opinions to be low-key racist since they are quick to turn observations into more than they are. Perhaps they believe Chinese people are only good at copying people and not making anything original of their own. Perhaps they think Chinese people live in inferior ways and are too inferior to come up with a superior way of living. Perhaps they think it is only natural we should always be drawing negative attention to divergences between what those people do and what we do. I can sympathize with these views but I wonder what the end goal of propagating these views are - is it a war based on an obsession with something related to identity? Or are people calling for help in finding some way to peacefully coexist? Or do people just want to stroke their own ego?
It is no great intellectual achievement to come up with a political narrative. Many narratives aren't falsifiable, some are psychologically driven, bias driven, and many should never be considered politically-actionable. It is one thing to be disinterested and another to be informed yet cautious about jumping to judgment.
... you're literally calling me racist for being concerned about a country that actively stifles dissent, doesn't have free press, and does things like implementing a great firewall that allows them absolute control over their "part" of the internet? Are you kidding me? It's nice that you've found a way to sound smart while underhandedly dismissing everything I've said as nothing but ignorance and misguided, uninformed fear, but it doesn't change geopolitical reality.
"Even though we all know China is a country and not a person, people often personify the abstract entity of _the whole of China_ as “wanting” things or having "values" or being "happy to do anything".
In this case, and in this context, "China" as a concept can be entirely reduced to the Chinese government, and we do know exactly what their values are (entirely antithetical to everything that I listed), how they behave and what their interests are (hint: None of it is in our best interests). Hell, at this point, we could probably reduce it down to President Xi Jinping. Depending on context, "China" could also mean the corporations that represent China abroad, which are almost always state-sponsored, owned and subsidized anyway (they just hide it pretty damn well), and the end point is, again, the Chinese state.
As for the idea that a country can't "want" anything or have "values" ... that's just not true. I'm not even sure how you can say that as a fact, even though countries often behave in goal-oriented ways to get what they want - and what they want is generally entirely dependent on its government, its economy, its population, etc. A country isn't a separate concept from these things - it is these things. Do you know what we call a country's values? Culture.
You've essentially said a whole bunch of nothing while addressing none of my actual concerns. It's disingenuous and deceitful and I'm not sure why you're trying to paint my comment in such a bad light in such a way.
I'm a bit alarmed at how disinterested people are being here. Here is the US Government , a global power, doing all it can to undermine national sovereignty and amass influence/power, and nobody here cares.
While they steal the resources that allow us our quality/way of life, you guys are all "Ah, well, we do it too". Well, fuck, I hope so, because China is the only superpower doing anything that resembles caring about climate change, and thus human survival.
While the West is the only cultural sphere that pretends to any interest in things like due process, democracy, free press, freedom of speech, etc., the US and their constituent companies are more than happy to jail, fire, or otherwise ostracize anyone who's critical of them or their politics.
Nationalistic flamewar, which this comment crosses into, is not ok here. Please do not post like this to Hacker News, regardless of which nations you're in favor of or against.
42 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 119 ms ] thread“We know it’s a national security threat, because we do it”.
The issue is with the perspective, China is certainty a "legitimate threat" to the US, at least from a technological perspective, the problem is that China IS NOT a threat to the rest of the world or at least not in the same degree it is to the hegemonic power of the US, meanwhile the US indeed IS a technological and military threat to countries around the globe, so wherever the US and its agencies gaslight about China being a threat, it is always too funny, when you remember that the US has all sorts of military bases, drones subs and spy satellites deployed, not to mention it is already spying digitally on the entire planet (this conversation included ofc)
The Chinese army set up a major base in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa just a few years ago. It is the PLAN's first overseas military base and was built at a cost of US$590 million. I'm sure it won't be the last.
If China can do what US can, they will do it. To think otherwise would just be naive.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2018/05/03/two-us-airmen-inj...
Thats a bit of overstatement don't you think. Its very different culture after all, and you are speculating based only from the American exceptionalasim viewpoint which I think is very very outdated.
Every country in the world would be an empire like the US if they only could. Its a matter of opportunity not motivation.
The bigger issue is what would China do with all that power? We know what the US does with it and I don't think a world lead by China would be as nice a place as a world run by America.
It depends on what you want. Me, I want a world with democracy and due process.
I don't see anything like that eminating from China and I doubt I ever will.
Not every country has an expansionist policy
Surprise.
Rest assured if that was a thing I could do the. I would certainly have a policy regarding it.
Its the same for countries and expansionism. Those that can, do. Those that can't, dream.
Those with sufficient survivial instinct will have a drive to dominate and those that don't won't dominate.
The CIA could still claim that Huawei is hiding backdoors in microcode, or even in the ethernet connectors, but it would greatly weaken their credibility.
Obviously it's not about the Chinese gov't putting backdoors in Huawei equipment. They put backdoors in everybody's equipment, as does the NSA and, where they can, GCHQ, the GRU, and Mossad. It's surprising any cellphone still works with all the backdoors in the baseband processors, completely invisible to (e.g.) your Android kernel running as a contained guest.
My best guess is that this is about competition with local makers of equipment, which it is much easier to hide NSA backdoors in, and easier to keep Chinese backdoors out of. Or maybe just competition with local makers, in general. The US State Dept has been caught many times with their thumb on the scales on behalf of US exporters, such as taking countries to court to stop anti-smoking campaigns. France was similarly caught spying on behalf of Airbus, vs Boeing sales.
https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-goo...
- A concerned German
I could go on ... you are confusing Western values that came about even before the US ever existed with US jingoism.
And I probably would've remained that way if I didn't watch on the news how Russia literally annexed a part of Ukraine without a "war" while NATO twiddled its thumbs and went "Well, they didn't invade, so dunno". Or how the US squanders its influence and power while China branches out into Africa, Asia, Europe and the US by buying out everybody and everything they can - meanwhile ensuring they maintain an iron fist over their own press or any critics, and their entire economy and culture and population. In the middle of all this, Europe is in a decade-long crisis over, well, everything and Germany couldn't influence its way out of a paper bag, despite its impressive economy.
For all its flaws (and there are a depressing fuckload), I prefer the US's world order over China's, where they can imprison a million Muslims with no repercussion. I just wish the US were better, in every way, because I know there are tons of people who'll point at the US-Mexico border and what Trump has done and say "See, they're just as bad". And they have a point that the US does terrible things, while still missing the point, and it's both infuriating and depressing because if the US actually held itself to its own standards, I wouldn't have to qualify my every statement where I defend the US over China/Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik
For one, these opinions are essentially a list of judgments based on a biased set of observations. There is a difference between making an observation and making a judgement:
For example, perhaps you observe that there are few replies on this thread and therefore judge that people are disinterested. Perhaps you observe China is a rising power and you judge that it is gathering power for the purpose of undermining Western countries. Perhaps you observe that Chinese people have copied a lot of Western ideas and you judge what they are doing to be selfish stealing. Perhaps you observe that China doesn't have due process, free press, etc and therefore judge that Chinese authorities are "happy" to jail people.
These kinds of judgments tend to attribute intention to behaviors. Such judgments aren't falsifiable nor testable, are too narrowly focused, and they put people at risk of committing fundamental attribution errors. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error)
I suspect people who post opinions like these tend to have some less-than-virtuous private psychological desire they want to fulfill. Perhaps they are projecting their own life metaphors onto abstract geopolitical entities - which I think is often silly. Even though we all know China is a country and not a person, people often personify the abstract entity of _the whole of China_ as “wanting” things or having "values" or being "happy to do anything". Perhaps they think life is supposed to be fair and so they frame the actions of countries in terms of fairness. I don’t think it is always correct to think about countries in terms of these metaphors.
Sometimes I also suspect people who have these kinds of opinions to be low-key racist since they are quick to turn observations into more than they are. Perhaps they believe Chinese people are only good at copying people and not making anything original of their own. Perhaps they think Chinese people live in inferior ways and are too inferior to come up with a superior way of living. Perhaps they think it is only natural we should always be drawing negative attention to divergences between what those people do and what we do. I can sympathize with these views but I wonder what the end goal of propagating these views are - is it a war based on an obsession with something related to identity? Or are people calling for help in finding some way to peacefully coexist? Or do people just want to stroke their own ego?
It is no great intellectual achievement to come up with a political narrative. Many narratives aren't falsifiable, some are psychologically driven, bias driven, and many should never be considered politically-actionable. It is one thing to be disinterested and another to be informed yet cautious about jumping to judgment.
"Even though we all know China is a country and not a person, people often personify the abstract entity of _the whole of China_ as “wanting” things or having "values" or being "happy to do anything". In this case, and in this context, "China" as a concept can be entirely reduced to the Chinese government, and we do know exactly what their values are (entirely antithetical to everything that I listed), how they behave and what their interests are (hint: None of it is in our best interests). Hell, at this point, we could probably reduce it down to President Xi Jinping. Depending on context, "China" could also mean the corporations that represent China abroad, which are almost always state-sponsored, owned and subsidized anyway (they just hide it pretty damn well), and the end point is, again, the Chinese state.
As for the idea that a country can't "want" anything or have "values" ... that's just not true. I'm not even sure how you can say that as a fact, even though countries often behave in goal-oriented ways to get what they want - and what they want is generally entirely dependent on its government, its economy, its population, etc. A country isn't a separate concept from these things - it is these things. Do you know what we call a country's values? Culture.
You've essentially said a whole bunch of nothing while addressing none of my actual concerns. It's disingenuous and deceitful and I'm not sure why you're trying to paint my comment in such a bad light in such a way.
I'm a bit alarmed at how disinterested people are being here. Here is the US Government , a global power, doing all it can to undermine national sovereignty and amass influence/power, and nobody here cares.
While they steal the resources that allow us our quality/way of life, you guys are all "Ah, well, we do it too". Well, fuck, I hope so, because China is the only superpower doing anything that resembles caring about climate change, and thus human survival.
While the West is the only cultural sphere that pretends to any interest in things like due process, democracy, free press, freedom of speech, etc., the US and their constituent companies are more than happy to jail, fire, or otherwise ostracize anyone who's critical of them or their politics.