> In fact, the U.S. and other countries are barring the use of Chinese-built 5G equipment from Huawei and ZTE thanks to allegations...
This doesn't seem like it should be legal either but the article has no issue with it, rather touts it as being good. I'm sure if the US lost economically due to allegations it would be a different story altogether.
> I'm sure if the US lost economically due to allegations it would be a different story altogether.
Are you joking? China has many more restrictions on foreign competition in far less sensitive areas than their communications networks.
Setting that aside, it seems reasonable for any country to decide for any reason what they allow to be used in such core infrastructure. Any country that can afford not to depend on someone they might not completely trust now or decades in the future is foolish to do so.
I don't really follow your thinking. When you said "Any country that can afford not to depend on someone they might not completely trust now or decades in the future is foolish to do so." I believe by "any country" you were referring to the U.S. But when you said "China has many more restrictions on foreign competition in far less sensitive areas than their communications networks.", you seemed to completely ignore your rhetoric that "any country" (say China?) would be foolish to not put restrictions on foreign competition if they don't trust them. I guess you like to have your cake and eat it too.
My comment was about the reporting and not the actions of the US or China. Reporters should speak straight. If it’s about competition say so and not muddled with unverified threats.
This doesn't seem like it should be legal either but the article has no issue with it, rather touts it as being good. I'm sure if the US lost economically due to allegations it would be a different story altogether.