Dear Editor,
In these modern times the world’s peoples, including Guyanese, are becoming increasingly dependent on technology. We can now use computers and smartphones to communicate, file taxes, pay bills, transfer money, store personal data, among countless other applications. Our phones contain information about our finances, friends, business associates and our daily routines. As a result of these developments, we need to be aware of the dangers of our personal data falling into the wrong hands.
Former US Defence Department contractor Edward Snowden, by exposing alleged US government spying, revealed to the world the frightening reality: governments can and do spy on their own citizens. For this reason Guyanese should be concerned about our government’s activities, such as ties to companies allegedly linked to electronic spying. One such company is Chinese communications giant, Huawei Techno-logies Ltd (HTL).
Editor, HTL is the largest telecommunications and networking company in the world with annual sales of computer, phone and related equipment, of about US$50 billion. HTL under the leadership of Ren Zhengfei, an ex-officer and engineer in the Chinese army, has been accused of questionable practices in numerous countries. Consequently, HTL’s equipment has been banned by many governments suspicious of the company’s intentions and spying capabilities. In spite of these facts, the Government of Guyana unilaterally and without tendering, awarded HTL a contract worth US$14 million to lay a fibre optic cable between Brazil and Guyana. We may also recall that after the contract was finalised, the Jagdeo government accepted a US$50,000 “gift” from HTL.
HTL has been accused of many things, including stealing trade secrets from other companies, selling equipment to terrorists, extortion, bribing government officials, worker abuse and perhaps most importantly, facilitating the gathering of data by unscrupulous government officials.
The information in the public domain is alarming, copious and spans many years. In 2001, the Indian government investigated HTL following indications that the company was supplying equipment to the Taliban. India finally abandoned the investigation because, given the secretive nature of HTL, the investigators were getting nowhere. But India kept the company under scrutiny and eventually took decisive action to protect Indian interests.
In 2005 India banned HTL from bidding on a contract to provide cellular equipment to a major Indian cellular network; In 2009 India’s Department of Telecommunications publicly warned companies to be cautious when doing business with HTL; in 2010 all government arrangements with HTL were cancelled due to, “doubtful integrity and dubious links.” India was not the only country to take action to protect its citizens.
The United Kingdom expressed concern as early as 2005 and raised the issue in its legislature in 2009. In 2012, the governments of Australia and Canada excluded HTL from tendering for contracts to expand their respective countries’ cellular networks.
Needless to say, the United States is also concerned about what is considered a secretive company with ties to the Chinese military establishment. In 2011 the US government used extraordinary laws to force US companies to disclose ties to HTL. The following year, the US House Intelligence Committee recommended: “[HTL] be barred from doing business with the US government.” The committee described HTL as a national security threat.
But why are so many countries up in arms; what has HTL been doing to cause such alarm around the world?
According to intelligence analysts, equipment made by HTL is designed with embedded hardware and software to allow remote access to data. Respected German security experts Felix Lindner and Gregor Kopf reported in 2012 that wireless equipment, particularly routers, made by HTL could not only be accessed by external parties, but could actually be controlled. In other words, HTL could give a government the ability to directly take over a HTL-manufactured device, perhaps remotely activating a computer’s webcam or a phone’s microphone, and sending data and images to spy agencies.
Western countries may be concerned that China, through HTL, can spy on, and even gain control of critical systems; the US recently ordered all HTC equipment removed from military hardware.
India may have additional concerns: What if HTL allowed Pakistan to access India’s data and defence systems? Citizens of other countries may have reason to worry as well: What if their governments give contracts to HTL, and use HTL’s equipment to intercept their phone calls, emails and other data? What if dictatorial regimes use such devices to monitor opposition politicians, businesspersons, journalists, academics and even private citizens?
In November 2012, Cabinet Secretary Dr Roger Luncheon, admitted that the government engages in wiretapping to catch criminals. But how do we know that the system is not being used against ordinary Guyanese?
We know that the government has an intelligence gathering unit; I wonder if the unit uses equipment manufactured by HTL.
Yours faithfully,
Mark DaCosta
