Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver • Hacker News Board

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#211

Post by analognoise » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:29 AM UTC

wtfstatists wrote: post #191

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then Canada gets to do the arresting That’s...what happened. > if you want to justify violance you need stronger triggers Violating sanctions is a criminal offense under U.S. and Canadian law. Huawei chose to do business in America and Canada. Its executive chose to travel to Canada. This is a difficult story to mangle into a morality play.

No Canada is arresting on behalf of US. On the contrary, Huawei is building 5g infra for Canada. > Violating sanctions is a criminal offense under U.S. and Canadian law. Just because its legal does not mean there wont be an aggressive reaction[1]. China will probably respond with force. Huawei with market exit. Then there are other actors who would respond in there own way we would never know about. US probably going…

Why, yes, I'd rather we didn't do business with a country that has close to 1M people in forced reeducation camps. I am OK with not profiting from some things. A dystopian "social credit" police state, for example, is apparently very high on my list of places not to invest in, be associated with, or deal with at all.

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#212

Post by adventured » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:31 AM UTC

wtfstatists wrote: post #191

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then Canada gets to do the arresting That’s...what happened. > if you want to justify violance you need stronger triggers Violating sanctions is a criminal offense under U.S. and Canadian law. Huawei chose to do business in America and Canada. Its executive chose to travel to Canada. This is a difficult story to mangle into a morality play.

No Canada is arresting on behalf of US. On the contrary, Huawei is building 5g infra for Canada. > Violating sanctions is a criminal offense under U.S. and Canadian law. Just because its legal does not mean there wont be an aggressive reaction[1]. China will probably respond with force. Huawei with market exit. Then there are other actors who would respond in there own way we would never know about. US probably going…

> Do you want to hurt US market/USD ? Because thats what use of your justifications will do.

That's not going to happen. China is also not going to over-react. They're going to under-react, because their economy and global political context is at a slightly precarious point. It's why the US has been able to apply such immense tariffs without China doing anything crazy so far: they still need the US more than the US needs China (which isn't the same thing as the US not needing China at all). It's also partially why China is relatively eager to find positive ground with the US on trade issues. For example the US is currently building a coalition to reform the WTO in a manner that is detrimental to China (it caused the recent surge in Chinese interest in settling the trade dispute). The US is running perpetual trade deficits with almost everyone (specifically of importance, the major economies), which leaves most everyone having more of an interest in going along with the US rather than China on trade modifications. To say nothing of the IP issues and market barriers in place in China.

China will find a modest way to stab the US over this, unless it's resolved relatively quickly. It won't be a big deal for China, arresting one executive is not something they'll care to shake the world over at all. This isn't Jack Ma we're talking about, which would demand a big response due to his prominence and popularity. This is a nation run tightly by a Communist party that at the highest levels (ie Xi) barely likes business executives to begin with, they merely tolerate them as useful tools to get from here to there in a process that China perceives itself as going through. Executives of that sort are pawns that can be thrown away or swapped out with little concern. Overall it may be nothing more than the US acquiring a small bargaining chip at a tiny cost, which it can then release to perceived good will when it does so. It's a relatively simple political move if that's the case.

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#213

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:33 AM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #126

lustysocietyorg wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A country locking up a foreigner for breaking their laws It is absolutely crazy to think that US law should apply worldwide. The article does not even mention if Wanzhou Meng is US citizen who broke US law in the US. This case might be retaliation and fear mongering similar to the case of Julian Assange which is pure retaliation and fear mongering.

> It is absolutely crazy to think that US law should apply worldwide Don't steal a Canadian company's technology [1], market products in America [2], issue dollar-denominated debt [3] and then violate sanctions in dollar-denominated transactions, and the U.S. and Canada will probably leave you alone. [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/former-nortel-exec-warns-ag... [2] https://www.huawei.com/us/ [3] https://www.for…

[deleted]

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#214

Post by xapata » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:33 AM UTC

mciak wrote: post #8

Note that this arrest was due to the lesser sin of export control busting, rather than Huawei's biggest sin: facilitating surveillance and IP theft. Remarkable that they (she?) went through all the effort to set up a HK front company, but then left the Huawei logo on their powerpoint decks

She probably didn't write the PowerPoint.

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#215

Post by vtesucks » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:34 AM UTC

TallGuyShort wrote: post #160

dreamcompiler wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article suggests she took US-made products and routed them to Iran through Huawei. That's a US crime, and the US can issue a warrant for her arrest, and if she shows up in a country with extradition to the US, she can get arrested. Which is apparently what happened.

Huh - I always assumed that extradition treaties only applied to people traveling on passports of the relevant country.

In case you were wondering why you were downvoted (as I used to be), generally one (of the few) good thing about this forum is that personal opinions that don't add value arent encouraged.

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#216

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:39 AM UTC

peteretep wrote: post #143

lustysocietyorg wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A country locking up a foreigner for breaking their laws It is absolutely crazy to think that US law should apply worldwide. The article does not even mention if Wanzhou Meng is US citizen who broke US law in the US. This case might be retaliation and fear mongering similar to the case of Julian Assange which is pure retaliation and fear mongering.

> It is absolutely crazy to think that US law should apply worldwide. Sure, but, most crime denominated in dollars goes through New York too. The section called "Stationary bandits" in the following expands this theory a bit: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-27/don-t-...

[deleted]

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#217

Post by vtesucks » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:40 AM UTC

xapata wrote: post #208

DenisM wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First it was Chinese foreigners buying up all the real estate, but that was proven false. How was it proven false?

The market impact appears to be negligible. At least not as large as factor as implied or popularly claimed.

To convey the spirit of your parent, is there any credible source? Remember china has a huge media manipulation budget.

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#218

Post by FabHK » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:41 AM UTC

ptero wrote: post #64

wybiral wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But yeah, if this is the game that the nations are going to play, then you don't want to be the poor schmuck sitting in a Chinese prison for 10 years just so they can make a point. Facilitating deals with Iran to deliver US products in defiance of US sanctions seems like something the average schmuck hopefully isn't getting mixed up in. It's not quite the same as accidentally violating some random domestic business…

But on general grounds, why a Chinese company should comply with sanctions between US and Iran? And why a fourth country is arresting Chinese citizens violating US rules? I am sure most of us break UAE laws on being with members of opposite gender without a chaperone and even post pictures of class reunions, etc. But I'm not expecting to be arrested for this while visiting, say, Sweden.

A lot of the extraterritorial power of US jurisdiction is due to the fact that a lot of international commerce is denominated in USD. Matt Levine writes about this occasionally in his informative and amusing news letter "Money Matters" [1], for example [2]:

> The basic system of international trade is:

> 1. International trade is done using U.S. dollars.

> 2. Any trade done using U.S. dollars is subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. government: Dollars flow through banks in the U.S., and if the U.S. government doesn’t want dollars to be used for some purpose—to fund genocide or terrorists or dictators or narcotraffickers—then it can reasonably effectively cut off dollar funding for those purposes, and punish banks, including foreign banks, that disobey it.

> 3. The U.S. is a good and responsible steward, and only cuts off dollar funding for bad purposes like genocide or terrorism or totalitarianism or drugs.

[...]

> If other countries lose confidence that the U.S.’s decisions about who can use dollars are predictable, stable, constrained by the rule of law and responsive to the concerns of other large economies, then those other countries might look elsewhere.

Or the beginning of [3]:

> There was also a sense of uneasiness with the U.S. using the power of the dollar to enforce its foreign policy: Because all dollar payments are nominally processed through the U.S., moving dollars anywhere in the world effectively puts you under U.S. jurisdiction, even if the dollars are financing purely non-U.S. transactions. Lots of Europeans — bankers but also politicians and businesspeople and regular citizens — didn’t have the same antipathy to, say, Cuba that the U.S. does; they found it unfair that European banks were prohibited from doing business in Cuba not by European regulations but by American ones.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/authors/ARbTQlRLRjE/matthe...

[2] Section "Dollar hegemony" of https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-12-04/trying...

[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-20/u-s-sa...

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#219

Post by wbl » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:42 AM UTC

Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #198

Retric wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look for laws to be enforced cops need to be aware of them. Specialists exist both on the government side as say food safty inspectors etc, and the private side as compliance officers. So, rules like this are not obscure for people building factory’s to manufacture cheddar and your local cops are not going to know about this crap they are searching your house for something else. This actually works really well, as we…

It's just a bit odd that highly specific examples like this make it into written law. A pretty clear example of what happens when you have a Government that can be heavily influenced by corporate lobbying. I don't think your average reasonable person is in opposition to requirements to label food correctly and not mislead consumers. These things are already written in law, in the case of food it's governed by the FDA…

Why is it odd to have identity standards for food?

Re: Canada has arrested Huawei’s global chief financial officer in Vancouver

#220

Post by taneq » Thu, Dec 06, 2018, 2:45 AM UTC

Retric wrote: post #181

DINKDINK wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The problem is this, you're always violating some law. "21 USC §§331, 333, 343 & 21 CFR §133.113(a)(3) make it a federal crime for a cheesemaker to sell cheddar cheese unless the curd was matted into a cohesive mass." https://twitter.com/crimeaday

Look for laws to be enforced cops need to be aware of them. Specialists exist both on the government side as say food safty inspectors etc, and the private side as compliance officers. So, rules like this are not obscure for people building factory’s to manufacture cheddar and your local cops are not going to know about this crap they are searching your house for something else. This actually works really well, as we…

It's not about local cops picking you for some arcane law. It's about anyone in government having the ability to find something to fuck you with at any time they want to.