Paper
- +4
George Perkovich, Ariel (Eli) Levite, Lyu Jinghua, …
{
"authors": [
"Lyu Jinghua"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [
"Major Power Tech Relations"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "TIA",
"programs": [
"Technology and International Affairs"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Iran",
"East Asia",
"China"
],
"topics": [
"Technology",
"Economy",
"Security"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
The Race of Chinese Companies in the 5G Competition
With the potential of enabling not only significant economic growth but also the innovation of critical technologies in various fields, both the United States and China view 5G as one of the key influencing factors in the “great power competition.”
By Lyu Jinghua
Published on Sep 18, 2020
Source: Italian Institute for International Political Studies
With the potential of enabling not only significant economic growth but also the innovation of critical technologies in various fields, both the US and China view 5G as one of the key influencing factors in the “great power competition”. While the US believes that “the race to 5G is a race America must win”, China views it as representing the major leapfrog of its position in ICTs by describing the progress as “1G behind, 2G follow, 3G breakthrough, 4G synchronization, 5G leading”. Differently from competition in other traditional areas, companies rather than governments – the Chinese company Huawei as the most noticeable one – have played a significant role and become the pawns of the geopolitical game. Despite the obvious benefits such as lower costs and higher efficiency in using Huawei’s products, the company is now under huge pressure of being excluded from 5G networks by more and more Western economies – especially following Britain’s reversal of its decision.
All the declared concerns supporting the ban of Huawei, including the risks of surveillance and data collection and the potential vulnerabilities to cyberattacks or installed kill switches, sound reasonable at first. However, it is fair to say that these are inherent risks embedded in all ICT products. Why is Huawei so alarming, then? The frequently heard answer is that Huawei has much closer relations with the Chinse government than the usual ones, with three main accusations. Are they convincing enough?
This article was originally published in the Italian Institute for International Political Studies.
About the Author
Lyu Jinghua
Former Visiting Scholar, Cyber Policy Initiative
Lyu Jinghua was a visiting scholar with Carnegie’s Cyber Policy Initiative. Her research focuses primarily on cybersecurity and China-U.S. defense relations.
- China-U.S. Cyber-Nuclear C3 Stability
- What Is the U.S. Ban on TikTok and WeChat All About?Q&A
Jon Bateman, Lyu Jinghua
Recent Work
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Stalled at the Front, Russia Seeks to Undermine Ukraine’s Economic CapacityCommentary
Russian strikes are weakening the economy sustaining Ukraine’s war effort. Closing the growing funding gap will require more European support and politically contentious reforms in Kyiv.
Balázs Jarábik
- The EU’s Middle-Power PuzzleCommentary
While the EU and European governments are embracing the much-lauded middle-power moment, this entails three difficult conundrums.
Richard Youngs
- The Scramble for Europe. Russia, China, and Turkey Challenging Regional OrderBook
Europe is facing rising populism internally as well as external pressures from Russia, China, Turkey, and the United States.
Dimitar Bechev
- Sri Lanka’s Economic and Geopolitical Balancing ActArticle
Economic recovery has brought Sri Lanka a modicum of stability, but domestic strains and great-power rivalry could test how long it lasts.
Avinash Paliwal
- The Debt Toll Booth: A Modular Solution to Addressing Sovereign Debt CrisesPaper
Policy proposals on sovereign debt must both match the scale of the challenge and be implementable within existing political constraints.
David McNair
