According to this Washington Post article, back in 2011, Texas Governor Rick Perry rolled out the red carpet for Plano, Texas bound Huawei (, a worldwide telecommunications giant, operating without obstacle in many countries in the world–except the USA. Despite widespread security concerns, Mr. Perry ushered Huawei in with open arms, while onlookers sited national security issues with a Chinese telecommunications firm growing roots throughout U.S. soil. Why? It’s simple: businesses in China have long been known to have strong communist government ties. What most people don’t know though, is that it’s not always their choosing.

In China, the only way to do business is with the government’s approval, and often intervention on a number of fronts–which may or may not involve corruption, like pay offs (hong baos), etc. However, given Chinese aspirations to expand abroad, these same Chinese government company’s that thrive under the auspices of “government approval” slam into national security issues, like what Huawei is facing. And, understandably: how can a Chinese company, which by default must operate under the constant purview of the Chinese government convince anyone in the USA that their information is safely protected from Chinese government spies, and other government operators?

Well, Huawei’s executives were doing just that today, according to this Washington Post article . Huawei leadership argues that to operate under Chinese government control in the USA or anywhere beyond the borders of China would risk their entire model of commercial success–and it would. Everyone knows that, and surely Huawei managers believe that, but the argument on the other side is, what if they simply don’t have a choice? In China, you don’t just say no to the Chinese government. And, if (and possibly when, if not already) Huawei does agree to cave to Chinese government demands, who could they tell? So, if it did happen, it may very well go on for years (like it did with the Chinese hacking at Nortel) until it’s discovered.

Naturally, this is the very argument that stints growth potential for Huawei, one they propose is unfairly applied. Consider, for instance American companies that fall to Chinese pressure in mainland China to release sensitive information (remember Yahoo! giving Chinese authorities a journalist’s email?). Using the same argument, wouldn’t Yahoo! now be corrupted and likely to be under Chinese government influence here in the USA, and powerless even here to thwart demands, for fear its Chinese operations suffer?

Anyway, there you have the situation–what is your opinion, Should Huawei be allowed to freely operate in the USA, or not–or maybe it should, but under strict monitoring?