Walden Urges Compromise on Telecom Equipment Legislation, After UK's Huawei Decision
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo played down concerns Thursday about potential strain in the U.S. intelligence sharing relationship with the U.K. after that country’s decision to allow equipment from Chinese telecom equipment manufacturer Huawei on “non-core” parts of its communications infrastructure (see 2001280074). House Commerce Committee ranking member Greg Walden, R-Ore., meanwhile, told reporters he believes the decision should put pressure on Congress to reach a deal on legislation to provide funding to help U.S. communications providers remove from their networks equipment determined to threaten national security.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The U.S. intelligence sharing relationship with the U.K. “is deep, it is strong, it will remain” and “our two nations will find a way to work together to resolve this difference” over Huawei, Pompeo said during an event with U.K. Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab. “We will never permit American national security information to go across a network that we don’t have trust and confidence in. That’s the standard.”
The U.K.’s National Security Council said this week it would allow some limited Huawei presence but bar the company’s equipment from more essential parts of the country’s networks and in “sensitive locations” like military bases. The U.K. decision drew the ire of many U.S. lawmakers, some of whom recently filed legislation to bar the U.S. from sharing intelligence “with any country that permits operation within its national borders” of Huawei-produced 5G equipment (see 2001080002).
The U.S. was “trying to make the case” to the U.K., “as we made the case with every country in the world, that we think putting Huawei technology anywhere in your system is very, very difficult to mitigate and therefore not worth the gamble,” Pompeo said. “But as we move forward together to make sure that next generation of technology is right, is secure and operates under a Western set of values and system, we'll get to the right place.” Pompeo later met with U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, with talks partly on “the importance of maintaining the integrity of communications networks,” a State Department spokesperson said.
“We need to lead” on legislation to reduce the presence of Huawei equipment on U.S. networks given the U.K.’s decision and “Congress needs to come together” on consensus language once “the Senate’s freed up” after it completes its impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, Walden said. Talks resumed earlier this month (see 2001080002) to reach a compromise between the House-passed Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act (HR-4998) and the similar Senate Commerce-cleared U.S. 5G Leadership Act (S-1625), which both would provide funding for equipment replacement.
“We need to work out a” funding mechanism to pay for U.S. carriers to replace suspect equipment since that remains the main sticking point in talks, Walden said. “We need to realize that the threat is real.” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, objected in December when Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., attempted to pass HR-4998 via unanimous consent (see 1912190068). S-1625 sets a $700 million limit in equipment removal grants and specifies the money would come from spectrum auction proceeds. HR-4998 would allocate at least $1 billion in funding but allows lawmakers to increase that amount. That bill doesn’t delineate a clear funding source, which was Lee’s main concern.
Walden said he’s “disappointed” in the U.K. decision and believes “they really should rethink it, especially” given the country’s intelligence relationship with the U.S. “We’ve got to know” that U.S.’ intelligence partners “have secure networks,” he said. “That’s a frustration internationally” and something “I raised when I was in Germany last year” with officials there. “I think [Germany] is going to go down the same path and that’s a dangerous path from our perspective,” Walden said.