The West can learn from Huawei’s wins

Plenty has been said lately about the national security threat of Huawei’s 5G solution. One by one, countries are signing on to the campaign to ban Huawei’s 5G technology.

Even its current 3G and 4G networks, are being pulled out in Britain citing China’s 2017 National Intelligence Law, which gives Beijing the power to compel Huawei’s support for its intelligence work.

The power of geopolitics is forcing the world to choose a sandbox to play in and the ripple effect of these choices is going to have a notable impact on larger trade. Which brings me to the question of economic security and why Western nations, like Canada and others, are not looking inward and placing more focus on this concern.

I get it. Huawei doesn’t play by Western rules, has grown at an exponential rate by employing unfair trade practices and went as far as using Cisco’s intellectual property to build its own products in the early 2000s.

I know. I wrote a book about it. But the reality is Huawei is likely not going away any time soon.

Having tracked the Huawei concern for 14 years, I wonder why the West is just now mobilizing on this? The Huawei challenge is not new. One reason is the formidable impact that a breach of a 5G network can have — it can shut down a nation.

The other is the 2017 law, despite Huawei proclaiming that it would not commit such an infraction. And another is President Trump’s energetic campaign to “change the behaviour” of the Chinese on a number of fronts. The question of whether this is also a global competitiveness issue and not just a national security concern, has been passively mentioned.

All good reasons, but why did the West wait so long to take collective action? How did Huawei get so big and strong? And how should the West claim some responsibility for it? (Part of ) the answer: money and complacency.

The West liked the money Huawei was saving them and giving them. Huawei’s products have been, and still are, less expensive than alternatives.

Also, Western universities have gladly accepted billions of dollars in research funding from Huawei to research 5G technology. In Canada, it is said that Huawei is filling a void left by Nortel.

Which brings me to the second point on global competitiveness. The West underestimated Huawei and China as a whole.

Why are Canadian (and other Western) academics satisfied with simply researching the leading-edge 5G technology for another nation’s company and not motivated to commercialize their innovation for Canada?

This is where economic security concerns begin. When I brought this up at a national security roundtable, I received chuckles, “That was Nortel.”

So then, why isn’t Canada fostering the growth of new “Nortels” to commercial- ize its innovation?

Huawei and China have done a great job of learning from Canada and other Western nations. It was a smart strategy by Huawei to tap into the best minds across the world to fuel its R&D. It’s time for Canada and other Western nations to start learning from Huawei and China.

The first lesson is better commercialization of innovation and intellectual property to fuel Canada’s economy. The Canadian government has programs in place but there is still progress to be made.

Part of the reason is the second lesson we can learn from China’s success — a unified national policy and public-private sector collaboration. Canada lacks a unified policy and position on China — academic research on 5G technology included. Universities across Canada say they are still waiting for direction from the prime minister on whether to proceed.

Canada then needs to come up with a good offence to become globally competitive high-technology leaders again.

It’s time to make economic security a priority and protect and grow its innovation advantage. It’s time to accept a new world order in trade and update its global competitiveness playbook. It’s time to wake up and smell the tea, Canada.

Amy Karam is the author of The China Factor: Leveraging Emerging Business Strategies to Compete, Grow, and Win in the New Global Economy, a fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute and an instructor for Stanford and Duke universities.