The US is losing the Huawei argument. The Trump administration will likely fail to respond in any meaningful way because it does not have the capacity to do so. I suspect this will be a point in the future we will point to show where a lack of US leadership made us all worse off. https://t.co/U420bjJdmk

— Stephanie Carvin (@StephanieCarvin) January 29, 2020

Whilst it’s not as much a victory as some in China might have wanted, it is much more of a defeat for the US. There are obviously security concerns for London, but let’s not forget that it was Washington hacking Merkel’s phone, and not Beijing… https://t.co/HW7R74Ucbb

— gpovanman гпованман (@gpovanman) January 28, 2020

F35 or the S400s are the kindergarten sandbox disputes compared to how significant and long-term advantage China is gaining and disrupting the future of EU tech and comms strategy through 5G. An incredibly important process to watch in the UK. https://t.co/ic9ream0lI

— Akin Unver (@AkinUnver) January 29, 2020

The Brits have a fundamentally different approach to the Huawei problem. They believe they can manage the risk. There are actually a number of US intelligence officials who agree with them. https://t.co/YX9RSbeeVn

— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) January 28, 2020

The UK’s move to allow Huawei to build part of its 5G network is deeply concerning & shortsighted. The risk of allowing the Chinese govt access to critical networks undermines national security & the trustworthiness of vital infrastructure. I'm disappointed in our longtime ally.

— Rep. Steve Womack (@rep_stevewomack) January 28, 2020

We endorse the #5G toolbox that MS have agreed on. We can do great things with #5G. The technology supports personalised medicines, precision agriculture and energy grids that can integrate all kinds of renewable energy. All good. But only when we make our networks secure.

— Margrethe Vestager (@vestager) January 29, 2020

"The safety and security of our critical national infrastructure is crucial"

Labour's Nick Thomas-Symonds wants "guarantees" about the UK's 5G network going forward, if Huawei is to be involvedhttps://t.co/ivnyXIVqlc pic.twitter.com/YxPw3aCyMJ

— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) January 28, 2020

E.U. Recommends Limiting, but Not Banning, Huawei in #5G Rollout https://t.co/iY2ZpHkKoq#Cybersecurity #cybercrime #cyberattacks #hacker #hack #breach #phishing #dos #ransomware #malware #virus #apt #pii #nist #fcc #finra #hipaa #pci pic.twitter.com/CEimR9mbve

— Rich Tehrani (@rtehrani) January 29, 2020

Another blow for the US, just in time for Pompeo’s trip to Europe. Pompeo was a key figure in pressuring allies to cut ties with Huawei.https://t.co/puDk4ewsKY

— Bianna Golodryga (@biannagolodryga) January 29, 2020

"The twin announcements, in Brussels on Wed & London on Tues, represent a victory for the Chinese tech giant, which has launched a charm offensive in Europe after it was practically banned from doing business in the US"@MatinaStevis @nytimes #Huaweihttps://t.co/NL9qdvu3el

— China Beige Book (@ChinaBeigeBook) January 29, 2020

E.U. Recommends Limiting, but Not Banning, Huawei in 5G Rollout https://t.co/EyahZNzr2e

— Adam Segal (@adschina) January 29, 2020

F35 or the S400s are the kindergarten sandbox disputes compared to how significant and long-term advantage China is gaining and disrupting the future of EU tech and comms strategy through 5G. An incredibly important process to watch in the UK. https://t.co/ic9ream0lI

— Akin Unver (@AkinUnver) January 29, 2020

'The treatment of Huawei also indicates that despite Brexit, which takes effect later this week, London and Brussels may remain largely aligned on strategic issues, even in the face of pressure from the United States.' https://t.co/lBEF1udNGC

— Andre Barrinha (@a_barrinha) January 29, 2020

Our story: https://t.co/KwO96S4D5O

EU Experts Recommend Limiting, Not Banning, "High-Risk Vendors" IE Huawei #5G https://t.co/I9gOthJoHF

— Matina Stevis-Gridneff (@MatinaStevis) January 29, 2020

With the UK opening the door to Huawei, the US faces a tough Q: Is it really prepared to cut off intel sharing with key partners? And if so, does that hand China yet another victory by weakening the very alliances that could counter the rising superpower? https://t.co/i6roHgBFoC

— Garrett M. Graff (@vermontgmg) January 29, 2020

The Trump Administration started a war against Huawei—which it is now clearly losing. https://t.co/gVQAuOz0SH

— Nicholas Thompson (@nxthompson) January 29, 2020

"The calculation by Boris Johnson’s government that it could mitigate any potential Huawei risks is surprising for the signal it sends about the future of the UK-US relationship." via @vermontgmg https://t.co/Fwkd1yJCT9

— Lauren Goode (@LaurenGoode) January 29, 2020

Of course Huawei colludes with Chinese intelligence. The serious long-term threat they present to the U.K. & our allies cannot be offset by technical capability or financial benefit. https://t.co/j2EXDrKujf

— Rɪᴄʜᴀʀᴅ Kᴇᴍᴘ ⋁ (@COLRICHARDKEMP) January 29, 2020

"The Handelsblatt report [in Germany] cited a confidential foreign ministry document that intelligence shared by U.S. officials represented a 'smoking gun' that meant Chinese companies were unsafe partners for building next-generation 5G mobile networks."https://t.co/AFqCKGstkP https://t.co/P8dxgr4vdJ

— Jeff M. Smith (@Cold_Peace_) January 29, 2020

This is big: the first time a country acknowledged a “smoking gun” from the IC on @Huawei’s cooperation with Chinese intelligence.

From @Reuters: "Germany has proof that Huawei worked with Chinese intelligence: Handelsblatt". https://t.co/gJOSlbRH0e

— Mike Rogers (@RepMikeRogers) January 29, 2020

"At the end of 2019, intelligence was passed to us by the U.S., according to which Huawei is proven to have been cooperating with China's security authorities," the newspaper cited the document as saying. https://t.co/Ljp27qBepA

— ?❄️⛄️???? ?. ??????? مارک Марк Жонсон (@BlogGuero) January 29, 2020

Germany has proof that Huawei worked with Chinese intelligence: Handelsblatt | Article [AMP] | Reuters https://t.co/uHC6OX7cDi

— Juliette Garside (@JulietteGarside) January 29, 2020

Germany has intelligence that #Huawei worked with Chinese intelligence, according to @handelsblatt https://t.co/0HLEzRMax5

— David Jack (@DJack_Journo) January 29, 2020

Germany has proof that Huawei worked with Chinese intelligence: Handelsblatt - Reuters https://t.co/X1rDLqyL3o

— Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs (@Journal_INDOPAC) January 29, 2020

Ahana Datta: Countries that open the door to Huawei may be handing China the ability to transform itself from a hardware power into an information monopoly https://t.co/y6iizgzdkL

— Financial Times (@FinancialTimes) January 29, 2020

Yes - such an agonizing #Huawei dilemma for the #UnitedKingdom: either pay more for @Ericsson or @Nokia #5G gear, or (as the author puts it) let #China "transform...into an information monopoly, the cost of which is inestimable": https://t.co/NVZ5tuV0tY #BoJo #tech #allies?

— (((Alan Tonelson))) (@AlanTonelson) January 29, 2020

turns out the @FT head of IT Risk and Cyber Security can really write - op-ed here by Ahana Datta who lays out very clearly and elegantly the risks of the UK doing 5G business with Huawei https://t.co/NG68KgM0Nn

— Tony Tassell (@TonyTassell) January 29, 2020

This is a very important read on 5G networks from an Australian professional, with the importance and challenges under debate described in layperson's terms. https://t.co/ciG3GbcUEh

— Dhruva Jaishankar (@d_jaishankar) January 29, 2020

The best thing I’ve read on 5G and Huawei so far - by someone who actually understands the tech - “there is no physical or logical separation between the core and edge of the network” https://t.co/8ntlSUtpU0 via @aspi_org

— Bill Hayton (@bill_hayton) January 29, 2020

Outstanding post on the UK’s 5G decision from someone who knows what they’re talking about https://t.co/IyDEqRPciQ (ex ASD head of signal intelligence and offensive cyber missions)

— Fergus Hanson (@FergusHanson) January 29, 2020

A damming indictment of the UK Huawei 5G decision has been released by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. In granular detail it tears apart the UK decision "whoever has the keys to 5G will be the Borg"

cc@thespybrief@LouiseMensch@john_sipher
https://t.co/gZKgOebCAc

— Pete EVANS (@911CORLEBRA777) January 29, 2020

the best thing I have read so far on the disastrous decision to allow Huawei (aka the Chinese Communist Party) to build a large chunk of our digital infrastructure over the next decade https://t.co/CjcMvrTOZw

— Edward Lucas (@edwardlucas) January 29, 2020

Fascinating piece on 5G from a former senior official at ASD. "We developed pages of cybersecurity mitigation measures to see if it was possible to prevent a sophisticated state actor from accessing our networks through a vendor. But we failed." https://t.co/D8VJ5fD0C4

— Fergus Hunter (@fergushunter) January 29, 2020

Former head of Australia's Signals Directorate weighs in on U.K.'s choice to stick with Huawei:https://t.co/z5ioyHXstY pic.twitter.com/3JUHH7Ydkb

— Jenna McLaughlin (@JennaMC_Laugh) January 29, 2020

5G choices: a pivotal moment in world affairs | Simeon Gilding | https://t.co/cgjnQtzioS pic.twitter.com/BO3MozPHLJ

— ASPI (@ASPI_org) January 29, 2020

I'm tweeting this out one last time because it is authoritative, sensitive, timely and damning - every journalist everywhere who thinks 5G matters should read this https://t.co/wo0bdUhiZT

— Rory Medcalf (@Rory_Medcalf) January 29, 2020

A former head of the Australian Signals Directorate’s SIGINT & offensive cyber mission excoriates the UK Huawei decision. "they have doubled down on a flawed and outdated cybersecurity model to convince themselves that they can manage the risk" https://t.co/oMakFcC1kq pic.twitter.com/wi3ARwSTEY

— Shashank Joshi (@shashj) January 29, 2020

This is a great summary of the 5G/Huawei issue, particularly on the offensive enablement factor. h/t ⁦@JennaMC_Laugh⁩ https://t.co/VMfdYOHi1D

— ░J░a░s░o░n░ ░K░i░c░h░e░n░ (@jckichen) January 29, 2020

‘Although I remain sceptical about some of Huawei’s marketing claims, my concerns are not about the company or the quality of its products. They relate to the legal and political power of the Chinese state to compel the company to do its bidding.’ https://t.co/cgjnQtQTNs

— ASPI (@ASPI_org) January 29, 2020

Decisive criticism of the UK’s 5G policy from an ally: Simeon Gilding, former head of the Australian Signals Directorate’s signal intelligence and offensive cyber missions explains why the UKs approach is misguided and dangerous. https://t.co/HDTYuhf7BC

— John Hemmings (@JohnHemmings2) January 29, 2020

Interesting view on the UK’s Huawei decision—and the “core-edge” debate—from a former Australian SIGINT chief https://t.co/nNEOEjqAU2

— Ankit Panda (@nktpnd) January 29, 2020

Withering assessment of UK’s #5G decision from top Australian cyber official https://t.co/r2rtc3zsoe

— Noah Barkin (@noahbarkin) January 29, 2020

E.U. Recommends Limiting, but Not Banning, Huawei in 5G Rollout. by @matinastevis https://t.co/NrDhEfbnqk

— Steven Erlanger (@StevenErlanger) January 30, 2020

#NOTE: EU Recommends Limiting, but Not Banning, Huawei in 5G Rollout
—
EU experts suggested members limit and monitor the involvement of “high-risk” vendors as they invest in next-generation mobile communications infrastructure.
—
NY Times Jan 28, 2020 https://t.co/bGQX7yG6Pl

— Pham Quang Vinh (@vinhlhq2015) January 30, 2020

The EU has released its “5G toolbox,” guidelines for member states on how to navigate the political concerns associated with 5G, and recommended limiting, rather than banning, the use of “high-risk” carriers, @MatinaStevis reports for @NYTimes: https://t.co/vTyCiZaC7i.

— Reconnecting Asia (@ReconAsia) January 29, 2020

The US Is Losing Its Fight Against Huawei

The Trump administration has spent years pressuring the UK to ban Chinese giant Huawei. It didn't work. https://t.co/u2Shpgd44H

— Helena Vieira (@helenavieira1) January 30, 2020

Just like Americam tech/comms companies work with US intelligence? Huh. https://t.co/ni8SvyNYX3

— Gus Lanzetta (@GusLanzetta) January 30, 2020

Ahana Datta: Countries that open the door to Huawei may be handing China the ability to transform itself from a hardware power into an information monopoly https://t.co/U4Cfkbsi86

— Financial Times (@FinancialTimes) January 29, 2020

"While Huawei 5G may not touch critical national infrastructure such as the oil and gas sector, or nuclear and electric grids, it may have access to consumer and citizen data" - Ahana Datta, the FT's head of cyber security https://t.co/z71VFFWkha

— Jonathan Derbyshire (@Jderbyshire) January 29, 2020

Very alarming on Huawei, from the man who used to run Australia's cyber spy unit (until December 2019)https://t.co/Mlco7H05X4

— Emma Graham-Harrison (@_EmmaGH) January 30, 2020

UK is wrong to think it can quarantine Huawei's presence on its networks; the whole point of 5G is collapsing the core/edge distinction. This will offer PRC virtually unbeatable network access. This comes from a veteran leader of Australian sigint/cyber. https://t.co/pGfnVscioN

— Arzan Tarapore (@arzandc) January 30, 2020

Fact check: true -- "5G decisions reflect one of those quietly pivotal moments that crystallise a change in world affairs" https://t.co/F8RjoHEU3c

— chris zappone (@chrizap) January 30, 2020

5G choices: a pivotal moment in world affairs | I’m happy. I’ve finally found a technical, nuanced, and articulated critique of the UK decision. Superb. Lots to unpack here, so let’s get cracking: https://t.co/42Rf88mBBO

— Alessio Patalano (@alessionaval) January 30, 2020

Great quote ⁦@SimeonGilding⁩ “So, if your telcos have a 5G operation and maintenance contract with a company beholden to the intel(..) agencies of a foreign state(..) you need to consider the risk that you are paying a fox to babysit your chickens” https://t.co/nMEzHJaype

— Adam Strickland (@_Cyber_Sec_) January 30, 2020

The EU will follow the #UK 's example in not banning #Huawei | via @androidcentral https://t.co/yTf3Ha1TQJ #5G

— Scott Gibbons (@grfmountain) January 30, 2020

EU following UK's stupid decision to allow Chinese spyware into their phone systems. This isn't about pleasing America, guys, it's about YOUR security! Would you have let the KGB into British Telecom, or Deutsches Telekom, in 1985?https://t.co/Z2bikTu9HY

— Ian Fletcher (@IanHFletch) January 29, 2020