Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 157 posts

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#111

Post by ZainRiz »

rgbrenner wrote: post #105
tempguy095432 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These were not UN sanctions. If you read the report it clearly says these were regulations placed by Washington. UN had no banking restrictions on Iran if the activity was unrelated to nuclear proliferation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran

Computer equipment can be used to run simulations for nuclear weapons (in fact, this is how nuclear weapons have been tested for decades.. and why we don't detonate them any more), and therefore is prohibited under the UN sanctions. Additionally, the UN sanctions also prohibit banking services for prohibited items. This is what Meng is accused of: attempting to transfer HP computers to Iran, and using the US financia…

The sanctions should include pencils too, since they can be used to do math which can be used to figure out nuclear equations, thus violating the nuclear sanctions

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#112

Post by glitchc »

ZainRiz wrote: post #110
syntaxing wrote: post #74

Warranted or not, sanctions can be seen as one step before war. It's an effective method to hit them where it hurts (their pockets) without creating casualties directly. The whole point of sanctions is to drive the enemies GDP down on purpose to "flex your arms". It does not matter whether the sanctioned goods are dangerous or not. Once again, the ultimate goal is to smother their GDP growth. And like all foreign pol…

Would you expect China to arrest you on Chinese soil if you did something in the US that was illegal in China? If China creates a law that says "no one in the world may drive faster than 40 mph" and you, an American citizen, fly to China, can China arrest you for driving 60 mph in the USA?

The analogy is inaccurate. She broke US law and then came to the US. If you break the law in China, for example by calling Tibet (or Hong Kong) a separate state on social media, you should fully expect to be arrested the next time you travel there. Extending further, if instead of China, you travel to a country friendly to China with an extradition treaty (ex. Russia or Nigeria), China is well within its rights to demand your arrest.

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#113

Post by manfredo »

tempguy095432 wrote: post #103
manfredo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, copyright is a good analogy: I don't get to legally torrent non-American works just because they're foreign. And if I did breach the copyright laws of a country with which the US has no extradition treaty, I absolutely could be persecuted if I travel to that country.

Nope, you cant. This is like saying if I smoke weed in a country where it is legal and then go to a country B where it is illegal. Country B can arrest me because I broke their law. Copyright law is a domestic law. You cannot be prosecuted for break US copyright law if you broke the law in an unrelated country B and you are not US citizen. Also B doesn't recognize US's jurisdiction to enforce copyright law in that co…

> This is like saying if I smoke weed in a country where it is legal and then go to a country B where it is illegal. Country B can arrest me because I broke their law.

This is the case for several countries, such as South Korea: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/23/bong-arm-of-th...

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#114

Post by drak0n1c »

tareqak wrote: post #99
ars wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> over the top of an existing country There was no existing country, it was British territory, and Ottoman, and others. The last time the place was an independent country it was part of the ancient Kingdom of Israel, around 2,200 years ago. And now it's an independent Israel again. Same place, same people, same name, same capital. Different laws and government though.

There are and were different groups of people who existed there and considered that land their homeland.

Everyone who was living in the area that considered the land their homeland were welcome to stay, maintain their private property, and join the fledgling nation. Arabs who stayed and abided by the UN agreement were given first-class citizenship and many went on to become leaders, run successful businesses, and even serve as officers in the IDF. Unfortunately, many rejected the UN agreement and even rejected the terms for a second Palestinian state for the alternative of trusting the call of neighboring nations to flee and fight. Unfortunately those neighboring nations ended up reneging on their word after losing the wars that they started and were not so welcoming towards those who fled, setting the stage for the current quagmire.

To be fair, the people alive now were not in a decision-making position back during the formation of Israel, but I wanted to bring up the historical context since we're discussing the formation period.

More background: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_supporters_of_Israel

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#115

Post by toufiqbarhamov »

shittyadmin wrote: post #34
lamarpye wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So a company's business practices should supersede a country's laws. Does this apply to only to sanctions? How about environmental laws?

This isn't a country's laws - Huawei is a Chinese company, it's not Chinese prosecutors going after Huawei. Companies should not be subject to the laws of arbitrary countries. Would you say US copyright laws should be applied globally too?

I dislike American copyright law and despise how it’s so broadly enforced around the world. Having said that I’m unmoved by the “Chinese company” argument. Practically speaking most companies are effectively stateless multinationals, and even state entities like Huawei do business around the world.

It’s not shocking that a country with the muscle to flex would say “If you want to do business with us, follow these rules.” No one forces a company of country X to do business in country Y, and they knew the score when they decided to expand to a given market. Add to that the fabric of treaties and obligations tying countries together and all told it’s a reality of a modern world which sought to avoid a Third World War. Sure it’s annoying when the US acts like a BSD on behalf of its moneyed interests, but the underlying structure of international obligation is better than the alternatives.

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#116

Post by TaylorAlexander »

dunpeal wrote: post #106
1024core wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's an effective method to hit them where it hurts (their pockets) without creating casualties directly. That's not always the case. The sanctions against Iraq, put in place around 1991 (after Gulf War 1), lead to the deaths of 1000s upon 1000s of children, as hospitals couldn't acquire critical supplies like incubators.

Reliable source for that claim? I'll be very surprised if the sanctions blocked hospitals from purchasing medical supplies. If anything, I'd suspect the problem was poverty.

Here’s a few google results, but I haven’t checked them for accuracy:

https://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/01/world/iraq-sanctions-kill...

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/were-sanctions-r...

This one looks promising:

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/report/57jqa...

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#117

Post by tempguy095432 »

rgbrenner wrote: post #109
tempguy095432 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UN sanctions were only on nuclear weapon related items. They were breaking US led (EU accepted those as well) sanctions on banking. It's says so in the new report above. Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran although wikipedia, it clearly states UN had no banking restrictions over iran from 2006.

It does have banking restrictions on nuclear weapon related items. Computer equipment is dual use, and can be used to further nuclear weapons research and test nuclear weapon designs. In fact, it's a critical part in developing modern nuclear weapons. And of course the US has laws to enforce the sanctions they agreed (and China agreed) to implement under the UN resolutions.

Dual use only contains items which can be directly used in nuclear weapon research and not any other thing. Some computer equipment specific to nuclear research is dual use.

It doesn't outlaw for example concrete just because concrete can be used to make nuclear reactors.

US sanctions, china never agreed on them. India another example didn't agree on them and traded oil with Iran for other non nuclear related items even during US sanctions. They didn't use US and EU banks to do this but they did indeed trade. The only problem here is Huawei used international banks to do the trade. The items are fine to be traded.

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#118

Post by tempguy095432 »

manfredo wrote: post #113
tempguy095432 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, you cant. This is like saying if I smoke weed in a country where it is legal and then go to a country B where it is illegal. Country B can arrest me because I broke their law. Copyright law is a domestic law. You cannot be prosecuted for break US copyright law if you broke the law in an unrelated country B and you are not US citizen. Also B doesn't recognize US's jurisdiction to enforce copyright law in that co…

> This is like saying if I smoke weed in a country where it is legal and then go to a country B where it is illegal. Country B can arrest me because I broke their law. This is the case for several countries, such as South Korea: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/23/bong-arm-of-th...

In Huawei's case even domestic law doesn't apply to them. Its like a canadian citizen being arrested in South Korea for smoking weed in Canada

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#119

Post by free652 »

tempguy095432 wrote: post #98
free652 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were breaking UN sanctions when they were in place.

UN sanctions were only on nuclear weapon related items. They were breaking US led (EU accepted those as well) sanctions on banking. It's says so in the new report above. Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iran although wikipedia, it clearly states UN had no banking restrictions over iran from 2006.

The sanctions also restricted dealings with IRGC, if skycom was working with the largest telecom in Iran then they were dealing with IRGC's owned entity - TCI.

Re: New documents link Huawei to suspected front companies in Iran, Syria

#120

Post by manfredo »

tempguy095432 wrote: post #118
manfredo wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is like saying if I smoke weed in a country where it is legal and then go to a country B where it is illegal. Country B can arrest me because I broke their law. This is the case for several countries, such as South Korea: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/23/bong-arm-of-th...

In Huawei's case even domestic law doesn't apply to them. Its like a canadian citizen being arrested in South Korea for smoking weed in Canada

Huawei broke international treaties. My understanding is that violation of such treaties is enforceable by any signatory. It's more like someone laundering money in one country and getting arrested in another country that is a signatory of an international anti-laundering law.

If this weren't the case, then international treaties would be pointless. Countries just wouldn't bother enforcing them against their own citizens.

Post reply on HN