Opinion | Australia should reverse its Huawei 5G ban

The ban was made under the pretext of protecting national security, yet there is no evidence that Huawei gear is insecure

Reading Time:3 minutes

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison speaks during a cabinet meeting at Parliament House in Canberra, Australia, 28 August 2018. Photo: EPA-EFE

Published: 6:30am, 14 Sep 2018Updated: 4:14pm, 14 Sep 2018

This week, 600 delegates from the organisation that sets standards for the world’s telecommunications industry will meet on Australia’s Gold Coast. Their goal: to ensure that the next generation of mobile technology – 5G – will adequately serve the country’s businesses and households.

Unfortunately, the Australian government has just made that outcome less likely. Amid a leadership shake-up last month, it blocked Huawei Technologies, a Chinese company whose technology underpins mobile broadband for about half of all Australians, from building the country’s future 5G networks.

The ban was made under the pretext of protecting national security, yet there is no evidence that Huawei gear is insecure. Because it is headquartered in China, Huawei has undergone more scrutiny than any other information and communications technology supplier in the world. In several markets, including the UK, its source code is reviewed by independent security experts. In the 31 years since its founding, no public evidence of wrongdoing has ever come to light. Canberra’s decision to ban the company was purely political.

Australian citizens will be paying for that decision for decades to come. 5G will form the basis of future broadband networks. By keeping a leading 5G provider out of its market, Australia has reduced the country’s supply of telecommunications infrastructure just as demand for 5G is starting to grow.

Basic economics dictates that when supply drops, costs rise. Perhaps that is why Americans live with the second-highest prices in the world for mobile phone services. In the US, 90 per cent of wireless infrastructure sales are made by just two companies, Ericsson and Nokia. Meanwhile, the quality of US mobile services, measured by download speeds, is ranked 61st in the world, after Chile, Egypt and Peru.

National security obviously takes precedence over download speeds. But if security is the goal, banning telecommunications equipment suppliers on the basis of geographic origin makes no sense. Today’s telecommunications industry is transnational and borderless. Threats can originate anywhere. Programmable code can be implanted virtually in hardware and software, allowing malicious actors to spy or launch a cyberattack. Unauthorised functionality can compromise the product of any company, anywhere in the world.