By Abdul Tejan-Cole
On August 14, the Rupert Murdoch-owned US-based business newspaper, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published an article titled “Huawei Technicians helped African Governments Spy.” WSJ said its investigations found that Huawei employees had helped the governments in Uganda and Zambia use cell data and intercepted encrypted communications to track social media activity and physical movements of their political opponents.
In the case of Uganda, the article alleged that Huawei employees helped Ugandan authorities use Pegasus spyware to decode encrypted messages and used the information obtained to disrupt the concerts of the 37-year-old Ugandan musician, Member of Parliament and potential presidential candidate, Robert Kyagulanyi aka Bobi Wine. According to WSJ, the information gathered led to the cancellation of his concert, Wine’s arrest and the crackdown on his supporters.
In Zambia, the WSJ alleged that Huawei employees helped the government access the phones and Facebook pages of bloggers running a news site critical of President Edgar Lungu so they could be tracked and arrested. WSJ quoted as its source senior security officials in Zambia. These officials allegedly confirmed that Huawei technicians helped the government to access communication lines and social media sites of opposition bloggers. Citing a representative from the Patriotic Front, Zambia’s ruling party, the Wall Street Journal article states that two Huawei experts based in a cyber-surveillance unit in Zambia Information and Communication Technology Authority (ZICTA) offices pinpointed the bloggers’ locations and were in constant contact with police units deployed to arrest them.
The WSJ article also mentioned a third African country – Algeria. It reported that Huawei operated a video and cyber-surveillance system in Algeria. It claimed that a team of Ugandan security officials visited Algiers in 2017 to study a video surveillance system that included mass monitoring and cyber-surveillance centers. One official allegedly told WSJ that during their visit, they discussed "hacking individuals in the opposition who can threaten national security."
The Ugandan and Zambian governments vehemently denied the Journal’s story that Huawei employees had helped them conduct espionage. Dora Siliya, Zambia’s Chief Government spokesperson, tweeted that “(T)he WSJ article on government spying on political opponents is malicious, we refute it with the contempt it deserves.” She went on to say that "Zambia is a country of laws” with a constitution that guarantees “citizens right to privacy".
Uganda also denied the allegations. “It is totally false to claim Huawei helped African governments among them Uganda to spy on its political opponents,” Ugandan presidential spokesman Don Wanyama told Agence France-Presse. He described the story as “total hogwash.”
Don continues: “There’s no evidence. This is a continuation of the US-China trade war, a new frontier being opened in Africa. You don’t need to hack a phone to know that the Busabala concerts were political,” he said.
For its part, Huawei rejected the WSJ’s “unfounded and inaccurate allegations.” In a letter to WSJ, Huawei Technologies’ lawyer, Steven Friedman, said that “the article is neither a fair nor a responsible representation of Huawei’s legitimate business activities in these countries. Huawei is especially disappointed in the Article and video and radio podcast in light of the information Huawei provided to you during your research for this Article, including its email communications from June 19.”
He continues: "Those email communications included specific information that a number of the statements in the Article about Huawei's alleged involvement with government cyber-security forces were demonstrably false. Huawei obviously does not know the identity of your alleged anonymous sources, but it is clear that they provided you with false and misleading information. Based on Huawei's June 19 email and other information it provided to you, it is reasonable to conclude that you knew that these sources were not reliable. As a result, and at a minimum, the Journal published these false statements in reckless disregard of their veracity."
Huawei’s lawyers further noted thus: “The publication of these false statements has and will continue to damage Huawei's reputation and business interests across the globe. Huawei reserves all rights and claims in this regard and will defend its conduct and reputation."
The allegations by the WSJ did not come as a surprise. However, they left many on the continent wondering where the truth lies. Those who side with Huawei believe that this is just another attempt by the US government to depict Huawei in a bad light. They cite portions of the WSJ article where it concedes that the investigation did not find evidence that executives in China were aware – or approved – the activities. They also point to the fact that the report notes that there was no evidence that Huawei executives in China were aware of or sanctioned the alleged espionage activities of its employees in these countries.
The U.S. and China have for months been involved in a hot dispute over control of fifth-generation technology, otherwise known as 5G. The US has always expressed concerns that the Chinese government could use Huawei's technology for espionage. As a result, the US government has restricted trade with Huawei and four other Chinese firms. In May, Huawei was put on the US government’s Entity List, effectively prohibiting US tech companies from selling it components. It is also lobbying to persuade US allies to keep Huawei out of next-generation 5G telecommunications infrastructure, citing concerns the company could spy on customers. Japan and Australia have banned Huawei but many other countries, including the United Kingdom, have not. Huawei has repeatedly denied it is controlled by the Chinese government, military or intelligence services.
The company’s development of next-generation wireless communications has made it a crucial global player. If the US’s allegations of espionage against Huawei prove true, it will come as a big blow to the Chinese giant and its suppliers. A case of espionage would lead to the immediate cancellation of a number of contracts.
Proponents of Huawei think the WSJ story is just another attempt to discredit Huawei and destroy its standing in the growing African market. A subscriber on Twitter noted that “the war between China and USA has now slopped down to Africa. We all know why the ‘Wall Street Journal’ is trying to paint these shitty accusations against ‘HUAWEI’”. Huawei is the largest, biggest and most successful telecommunication company which is in China not USA.” The US administration has long campaigned for a boycott of Huawei. If people believe the WSJ story and push Huawei out of the market, the biggest beneficiaries will be US companies such as Apple and Ericsson and this will be a big boost for the US economy.
For their part, Huawei’s opponents note thus: “This story highlights concerns over the lack of transparency related to Huawei's expansive presence in Africa. The public just doesn't know if these employees were acting in an official capacity or if these two cases were exceptional. The company, for its part, denies wrongdoing.” Another stated that “there is another compelling reason to ban Huawei technology: it is at the forefront of China’s alarming campaign to export its authoritarian values and Orwellian surveillance tools to autocracies in Africa and worldwide.”
Although there is no conclusive evidence against Huawei, many even within Africa are very suspicious and fear that in its desire for global dominance, it will do anything to appease African governments. However, many also note the US’ hypocrisy. China and Huawei are not the only ones spying. The US and many other Western powers have been spying for a long time. In 2013, a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee and subcontractor, Edward Snowden, made public many secret global surveillance programmes run by the US’ National Security Agency (NSA) and Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance (FVEY), the intelligence alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
According to columnist and the author of Extreme Environment, Ivo Vegter, “…Edward Snowden’s disclosures proved that the US government has deals to pipe data directly from major technology firms, including Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook and Apple. Its spooks can peruse your emails, see your search queries, view your browsing history, trawl through your photos and read the documents you share. It can track your mobile devices anywhere, at any time, even when location services are switched off. It knows who you call and can read your SMS messages. It has agreements with financial firms like Visa and SWIFT to track your buying habits. It vacuums up vast quantities of data from around the world.”
Vegter further notes that “(A)lmost all the world’s leading powers, exploit security vulnerabilities to hack into networks and computer systems and host fake websites to steal login credentials. They work with manufacturers to install backdoors in routers and have bribed major security companies to build backdoors into their encryption software. They deploy malware to hijack your devices. They can use the cameras and microphones on your devices without you knowing they were ever there. Some companies – notably Microsoft – provide information on newly discovered vulnerabilities to intelligence agencies before disclosing them to the public, so the spies have a ready supply of zero-day exploits available to them.”
Huawei’s alleged spying is made easier because of its dominance in Africa. Huawei has built over 70 per cent of Africa’s communications infrastructure. Together with the Guangdong based ZTE, Huawei built most of Africa’s telecom infrastructure. They have established more than 50 third-generation (3G) telecoms networks in more than 36 African countries. They have also built national fiber-optic communications networks and e-government networks in more than 30 countries.
Huawei and China are taking advantage of a great business and information communications technology opportunity on the continent. They must not allow the profits, benefits and desire for global dominance to let it sink so low as to do unethical things. However, ultimately, responsibility rests with African governments. They must resist the temptation to breach the confidence of their citizens. By doing so, they continually lose their trust. Greater transparency and open governance is the way forward. No matter what intelligence they get from any source, if they fail to do what is right, it will only be a matter of time before change happens.
(c) 2019 Politico Online
