If There Were No Security Risks For Hikvision, Would/Should The Be Opposition Against The Company?

It seems like there are two origins of the electronic security industry's opposition to Hikvision (and other products supported by the Chinese government). The first is ethical opposition in that the Chinese government actively attempts to infiltrate/attack the U.S. government and private companies using cyber-warfare and, products under the Chinese government's control may contain risks to cyber security. Of course, the same risks may also come from truly private Chinese companies. What is the level of concern for products from manufactures based in other countries including the U.S. that use components manufactured in China? Are these production facilities free from the influence of the Chinese government?

Perhaps there is a question of whether we ought to accept certain products from manufacturers from non-allied nations. North Korea is certainly on this list but, they're not likely to have the resources to compete in security industry. But then, what about Vietnam since, several electronic component manufacturers now have production facilities in Vietnam? What about products that are complimentary to electronic security cybersecurity? Kaspersky Labs, a Moscow based company was banned for U.S. government use late last year. Yet 1,000's of large U.S. companies use and depend on this company's products for network security. While there are many rumors, officially, Kaspersky is not controlled by the Russian government. How would the U.S. security industry react to cameras and video management systems manufactured in and by Russia?