It has been a particularly testing last couple of weeks for leading Chinese telecoms equipment provider, Huawei, underlined by the dramatic arrest in Canada of its Chief Financial Officer, Meng Wanzhou, pending hearings for extradition to the United States over Iran-linked transactions with multi-national banks.
Huawei’s Iran dealings and whether it misled US banks may well signal a corporate culture that doesn’t conform with normative transparency and accountability rules, however, the circumstances leading to Ms Wanzhou’s detention are of little concern to Guyana at this point.
What should be of greater interest to the government here and particularly its Ministry of Public Telecommunications is the growing international concern about whether Huawei is at the beck and call of the Chinese government and can be made to do its bidding against the interest of its clients like Guyana and particularly in security sensitive areas like fifth generation telecommunications.
Undoubtedly, some of the angst directed by the US against Huawei and another major Chinese telecoms equipment provider, ZTE is linked to the battle for market dominance and is a reflection of the trade war which has been ratcheted up by the Trump Administration against Beijing. However, security experts have also raised valid concerns about how 5G networks can be compromised by hardware and other suppliers and this has been raised in connection with Huawei. It is a concern that Guyana has to be alive to particularly as it has begun to engage with Huawei on a broadband network and could potentially steam towards 5G operations.
Just over a year ago, Cabinet granted a no-objection to a US$37.6 million contract with Huawei to enable the provision of more government services via the Internet.
The project includes the expansion of Guyana’s LTE (Long Term Evolution) network, the upgrading of the current data centre, the creation of a second data centre as backup, the installation of more CCTV cameras around the country, the construction of a CCTV footage command centre, and the development of infrastructure for e-health and e-education services, among others.
Under the former PPP/C government, Huawei had constructed the US$32M E-Government network along the Guyana coast. This network consists of a fibre optic system in Georgetown, and a 4G LTE network that extends from Skeldon, Berbice to Charity, Essequibo Coast and is the system that the Government is currently utilizing to provide internet access to schools, communities and governmental agencies on the coast. So Huawei is well-established here in securing greater internet penetration.
It is incumbent upon the Guyana Govern-ment to ensure that there is no prospect of telecommunications networks being compromised or being employed for unauthorised purposes. In its recent dealings with ExxonMobil, the APNU+AFC government showed itself wholly incapable of protecting Guyana’s interests and very little has changed in its outlook or its ability to bring to bear the relevant expertise or prowess.
There should, of course, be a CARICOM-wide perspective on protecting vulnerable telecommunications networks and policies towards suppliers like Huawei who may have exposure on various fronts. There has been no concerted effort across CARICOM that would provide guidance to countries like Guyana in which Huawei is now a major player.
Georgetown should take a lead role in CARICOM in ensuring that there is no actual risk to its telecommunications networks from engaging companies like Huawei and should seek to employ local and regional experts to provide the necessary assurances. Guyana should also press for a common regional position on the evolution of telecommunications networks and how to manage these to ensure regional compatibility and their secure operation.
The depth of concern raised globally about Huawei should not be easily dismissed. Reuters reported on December 13 that a British government report released in July found that technical and supply-chain “shortcomings” with Huawei equipment had exposed national telecom networks to new security risks.
Sources told Reuters that officials of Britain’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) had become frustrated by Huawei’s slow response to the report and its findings, which included issues raised in previous years about limitations on checking internal product code.
Reuters said Huawei now increasingly needs to secure the approval of British authorities, who have so far resisted US calls to act against the company and who say they guard against security threats by having Huawei products assessed at a special company laboratory.
Meanwhile, Britain’s BT Group said on Wednes-day it was stripping Huawei’s equipment from the core of its existing 3G and 4G mobile operations and would not use the company in central parts of the next network
On December 7th, Reuters reported European Union (EU) tech commissioner Andrus Ansip as saying that the EU should be worried about Huawei and other Chinese technology companies because of the risk they pose to the bloc’s industry and security.
Ansip said he was concerned because Chinese technology companies were required to work with Chinese intelligence services, such as on “mandatory back doors” to allow access to encrypted data. He also said the companies produced chips that could be used “to get our secrets”.
“As normal, ordinary people we have to be afraid,” he said, according to Reuters.
Japan also plans to ban government purchases of equipment from both Huawei and ZTE Corp as a means of defending against intelligence leaks and cyber attacks and is to issue new rules.
Two weeks ago, New Zealand’s intelligence agency rejected its telecom industry’s first request in the country to use 5G equipment provided by Huawei, citing concerns about national security.
New Zealand Intelligence services minister Andrew Little said, according to Reuters, “The difference between 5G networks and conventional 4G and 3G networks is the configuration of the technology…With 5G technology, every component of the 5G network means every part of the network can be accessed.”
Earlier this year, Australia banned Huawei from supplying 5G equipment, also citing security risks.
The government here should urgently enlist the growing cadre of information technology, telecommunications and cybersecurity professionals to advise it on the way forward with Huawei.
