PRC China Alleges FCC Ban Plan Is Discriminatory, Violates WTO
The PRC (China) has submitted comments on the FCC plan to ban Dahua, Hikvision, Huawei, Hytera, and ZTE arguing it "violates non-discriminatory principles" in the WTO by listing "only" PRC companies.
Inside this note, we share and examine the PRC's submission, analyze its probability of success and compare it to security measures that the PRC has taken against foreign technology products.
Executive *******
***** *** *** *** **** *** ban *** ******** *********, *** *** argues **** ******* "**** **** ********* [that] ****** ** *****" ******** ***'********** ******** ** ***** ********** **** ******* ***** **** ******' products ** "** **** **********".
*** ******** ** ** **** **** Hikvision's*** ********** ** ** ***** "********" "****** because ** ****** ** ** ************* in *****", ******** ** ******* *** PRC's ******* ** ****** ************** ******* foreign ***** ************ ********.
*** ****** ***** * ****** *** strategy ** ******** ** ******* ************ discrimination ** *** **, ******** ** national ********/************* ********.
*******, ******* *** **** **** **** will ****** ** ******* ** ** policy ***** *** ***'* ******** ****** for ******** ******** ************ *** *** number ** *** ******* *******.
PRC ***** ******** ** *** ***
** ********* **, *** ************ *** **** ** ********** *** *** ** *** *** ban:
*** *** ****** "******** * ****** ****** ** trade *****" **** *** **** ** ensuring **** "***** ***** ** ********, predictably *** ****** ** ********"; **** includes*** ********* ******** ** ***** **************"**** ** ******"*********, ********* ************, ****** *** ****** codes, ***, *** "*** ***-************** *** do *** ****** *********** ********* ** trade".
Alleges ******* ******* ********* "******** ***-************** **********"
*** *** ***** * *** ******* to *****' ************ ** *** *** ******, ****** ***** ****** - *****, that ******* "**** **** ********* ****** to ***** [...] ******** ***-************** **********", specifically ****** *********'* ******* *.***** "********* ***********" ***** ******** **** another ******* "** **** **********":
******/*** ********* ******* *.****** "******** ******** ************" ** *** 'legitimate *********' ***** **** *************, ******, and ****** ************. *******, *** ***/*** agreement **** *** **** ******* ******* on ***** "******** ******** ************" *** what **** ***/****** *******, *********** ****** substantial ******.
Calls *** ****** ******** ******** ****** "********* *********"
*** *** ***** ** *** ** to ******* * "****** ********* ******** and *********** *****" ** "********* *** national ******** *******" ******* ** ******** out "******* **********", ******** **** ******** unspecified ***/*** ************ **********:
******/*** ***************** **** *********** ('************') ** ******** technical *********** ** *** ***, ****** ** *** ******** *** *** ban ** *** ***'* ******.*******, *** *** ********* **** *** mandate * "********* ******** *** *********** index" *** ******** ********.
*** *********'******** *.******** **** *** "****** ********" **** as "******** ********", * "********** ********" between *********** *** *********** *** ** skipped, *******, ******* **** ***** "**** into *******" ******* ******** *** ***********.
**** ***** *** ******* *** ******* on **** **** "*****" ***** *******; they **** *** ********* *** *** we **** ****** ** **** **.
Asks ** *** ****** ********** ******* **************
*****, *** *** ******** *** *** to *** ****** **********-******* ************** ** they *** **** ******* **** ********* "the ****-********* ***********":
**** ** ** ***** *** *** itself *** *** *** ******* ****, but *** ***** *** ****** *** feedback **. *** *** *** *** invoke *** *** ***** ** **** comment.
Impact ********: *** *******
** *********, ****** *** *************** ********* ** ** ** "************ risk" ** ** ******** ******** *** the ***/*** ********* ********* "******** ********" a "********** *********" *** ************.
************, ** ****** *** *********,***** *** ********* ** **** ** has ******** **,*** ***-******* ************* *** comments ********** ********* ** **** * actual ******* *******:
Echoes *********, *** ***** ********
*** ***'* ****** **** ******* **** companies ***** "****** ** *****" ******** "non-discriminatory **********" ** ******* *********** ******** *** ** ************ "*********" **** "****** ******* ** happen ** ** ************* ** *****".
**** ******** *** **** **** **** by *** ******* ******** ********* **** Lijian, ************ ** "****** *** ******* ** national ********" ** "******** ******* **-**** companies".
PRC **** ******* ******* **** ******** ********
*** ***'* ******* **** *** ******* that *** *****,*** *** *** ***************** ***** ************ ******* ** ********** "risks ** ******** ********" ** ***** media ******** ** ****:
*********, ****** ******** ************ **** *** ********* *** ****** for ****/***** (* ***** ***** ************ trend). ************,*** ** ******* ****** ******** **** **** "*******-***** ******** *** prohibited ** *************" **** ********* ** government ************ ********.
** ****, ***** ***** * *** ************** *** ***'* **** ********* ********* in * **** ***** ** ******* and ** ****,*** ** ***** ************** ********** "*****’* ****** ** ********** **** the ***** ** *** *** ********** has **** ****".
** **** **** **** ******** ***** evil ***** **** *** ******* *** 100 *****, **** ********* ** *** defending *********. **** **.
*******, **** ****!
*** ** *** ***'* **** ********** arguments ** *** ** ********* ** the '******** *******' ** ***** *********, e.g., "***** ***** ********** ** *** ******** Affairs ** *** ****** ****** (**)."
**** *** *** ****** *** ******* companies, *** *** ********* ** ***** 'internal *******' *** **** ***** ********* effectively ***********, **'* *** "**************"?
*** *** ******* ******* **** ***** or *** *** *** ** ******* these *********?