On March 13, as part of the investigation into bribery involving Huawei, more than twenty addresses, including Huawei’s office in the European Union headquarters in Brussels, were raided by the police, and several individuals were taken in for questioning. The European Parliament immediately decided to suspend Huawei representatives’ access to the parliament. Analysts believe that Huawei is deeply embroiled in the geopolitics, and the investigation at the EU headquarters is fundamentally tied to its fate being closely linked to the Chinese Communist Party.
According to reports from Belgian media, approximately 15 European Parliament members have come under the scrutiny of investigators. They may have been invited for “luxurious trips to China, or even provided with cash, in order to secure their support for Huawei when the company faced obstacles in Europe.”
A spokesperson from the Belgian Prosecutor’s Office stated that the subjects under investigation are suspected of engaging in fraudulent activities and forming a “criminal organization” under the guise of “commercial lobbying.” The purpose of these activities is to influence European Union policies in favor of “commercial interests,” and may also involve money laundering.
While this investigation pertains to Huawei’s bribery allegations, the underlying logic is not simple. When European and American officials mention this issue, the focus is on Huawei’s security threats.
Thomas Regnier, the spokesperson for the European Commission, stated, “Our 5G network security is evidently crucial to our economy. Compared to other 5G suppliers, Huawei poses significantly higher risks.”
In contrast to the “risks” mentioned by Regnier, American officials across the Atlantic have taken a more severe tone, directly labeling Huawei as a spy agency.
Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, posted on X platform, questioning what’s happening in Europe. The EU is now engulfed in an escalating corruption and bribery scandal involving the Chinese manufacturer Huawei.
Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton expressed similar views on X platform, stating that like all major Chinese companies, Huawei exists to serve the interests of the Chinese Communist Party. Legislators worldwide should seriously consider whether they should do business with the corrupt Chinese (CCP) espionage machinery.
Su Ziyun, the Director of the Strategic and Resource Division at the Taiwan Institute for Defense and Security Studies, mentioned that during the Trump administration 1.0, there were warnings about Huawei’s 5G base stations posing cybersecurity risks. Many European countries did not believe it at the time, but eventually discovered the actual risks.
He pointed out that many independent cybersecurity companies in Europe have tested and indeed found unauthorized message transmissions. For instance, if Chinese intelligence agencies or embassies know the phone numbers of political figures in a country, they would relay this information to Huawei. Huawei then transfers it to European base stations remotely. Once these phone numbers go online for calls or data transmissions, backups are sent to specified IP locations.
“The most crucial aspect is information infrastructure. Regardless of future economic and trade relations between China and Europe, Europe’s interactions with China will need to elevate their defense mechanisms,” he said.
Despite the investigation into Huawei that started two years ago, this incident comes at a critical juncture in EU-China relations. With Trump recently threatening tariffs on the EU, European Commission President von der Leyen stated last month that “we can even expand trade and investment ties with China.”
This is seen as a signal of restoring relations after years of tension between Europe and China.
The investigation by Belgian authorities into Huawei could have significant geopolitical implications, especially if charges are brought against Huawei or any individual suspects.
In fact, the rise and fall of Huawei in the European market echo the geopolitical fluctuations between the US and China.
A report from the Communist Party’s People’s Daily in 2020 stated, “Huawei’s biggest challenge in its 30-year history is the hostility from the US.”
During Huawei’s rapid expansion in Europe, it coincided with the US being pulled into the war on terror, leaving little attention to China’s global expansion over the past two decades.
During this period, from Huawei establishing its first research institute in Europe in Sweden in 2000 to 2019, Huawei reached its peak in Europe business.
By 2019, Huawei had almost a 20% market share in the European smartphone market, and European countries had adopted Huawei’s inexpensive 5G equipment. Europe had become Huawei’s largest overseas market, with Huawei CEO Ren Zhengfei considering Europe to be Huawei’s “home away from home.”
During this time, Huawei carried out extensive lobbying and public relations activities targeting European business, political, and academic elites. From lavish gift bags, grand luxurious banquets, summits, to extensive cooperation with European governments, universities, international organizations, business community, and tech industry, Huawei had penetrated various facets of European society.
It wasn’t until 2019, when Trump raised concerns, warning European countries that the Chinese government might use Huawei-produced 5G equipment to monitor Europeans.
On May 16, 2019, the US government added Huawei to its trade blacklist, and four days later, Google restricted Huawei’s access to key Android features.
This severely impacted Huawei, with the company’s smartphone market share in Europe dropping to 5% within a few years. Huawei began focusing on selling telecom equipment to European network giants.
In 2019, Huawei increased its lobbying efforts, establishing a team comprised of former Western journalists and politicians, directly linked to power players in various European countries.
According to LobbyFacts data, Huawei spent over 3 million euros in public relations activities in Brussels that year.
With over two decades of deep-rooted presence in Europe, as of early 2021, Huawei still optimistically believed that Europe’s demand for affordable, fast 5G infrastructure would outweigh concerns about security.
However, the complete invasion of Ukraine by Putin in 2022 altered everything. For many Europeans, Huawei’s base stations, like Russia’s natural gas, had their risk-reward calculations change overnight.
Since then, Huawei has been gradually downsizing its operations in Europe. By 2023, looking at Huawei’s global market growth, the European market showed the lowest increase.
However, according to the latest 5G update report from Strand Consult, as of the fourth quarter of 2024, nearly one-third of the 5G sites in 32 European countries were provided by Chinese suppliers.
With Trump back in office, EU-US-China relations are once again at a delicate crossroads. The search on Huawei carries significant implications as a crucial indicator.
Lai Rongwei, CEO of the Taiwan Inspirational Association (TIA), stated that regardless, the Huawei incident once again highlights that the EU is now very cautious in dealing with China.
He pointed out that the EU, for a long time, sought to change China’s political and human rights conditions through economic engagement. However, instead of improvement, the CCP has intensified its repression, especially in 2020 when Xi Jinping cracked down on the Hong Kong democracy movement. During the engagement, EU companies have less competitive power. Moreover, the CCP has even leveraged economic ties between the EU and China to conduct economic coercion.
“For the EU, it’s like telling everyone that despite Trump’s tariffs, we cannot relax our vigilance against the CCP,” he said.
He believes that the US and Europe are allies, and Trump’s imposition of tariffs is simply a negotiation tactic for Europe to engage with him.
“He has a transactional nature, feeling that the whole world is freeloading, taking advantage of the US. Trump also intended to tax Taiwanese chips, but when TSMC increased its investment in the US, the tariffs seemed to disappear,” he added.
Wang Xiuwen, Assistant Researcher at the Institute of Chinese Politics, Military Affairs, and Operational Concepts of the Institute of National Defense and Security Research, stated that if the investigation confirms Huawei’s involvement in bribery, it could stir up significant turmoil within the EU, leading to a halt or delay in Huawei’s 5G network expansion progress in Europe.
Su Ziyun indicated that the CCP anticipates deterioration in US-European trade relations, which could lead Europe to engage in more economic cooperation with China. The ongoing Huawei incident may potentially worsen to raise EU’s alertness against the CCP, limiting economic cooperation.
The lack of trust towards Huawei by the US and Europe stems from the fact that Huawei is not a straightforward enterprise. Despite branding itself as a private company, foreign researchers widely doubt this claim.
A research report in May 2019 suggested that if 99% of Huawei’s shares are held by a workers’ committee, then Huawei could effectively be viewed as a state-owned enterprise, given that independent workers’ unions do not exist in China.
In fact, Huawei had established a party branch as early as 1996. In December 2007, Huawei announced that the company’s party committee had veto power over executive appointments.
Researchers have also taken into account Huawei’s connections with the Chinese military and national security. In another 2019 study, researchers analyzed 25,000 leaked Huawei employee resumes and found that some Huawei employees also worked for various departments of the Chinese military, state-sponsored hacker groups, and the national security bureau.
A Bloomberg report in 2019 stated that over the past decade, Huawei employees had collaborated with various arms of the Chinese military on at least 10 research projects covering artificial intelligence and wireless communications, among other fields.
While business-military research partnerships exist outside China, the issue lies in the forceful denials of any connection between Huawei and the Chinese military.
Nevertheless, this denial is not convincing. In June 2020, the Pentagon included Huawei on the list of 20 companies owned or controlled by the Chinese military.
Su Ziyun mentioned that Huawei’s founder is a former member of the Chinese military, coupled with improper subsidies from the CCP that enabled Huawei’s growth, surpassing European players like Ericsson in global markets. This scrutiny over Huawei’s relationship with the Chinese government has become more prominent and perceived as a threat.
Wang Xiuwen stated that Huawei’s positioning, viewed through the lens of capitalist societies, is indeed not a simple private enterprise.
She believes that Huawei could be considered a “private enterprise” nurtured by the CCP as a representative of the national government. Thus, under the policy of military-civil fusion, the close relationship between Huawei and CCP national security and military is a natural development. It could even be said that Huawei is a “private enterprise” actively intervened by or funded by the CCP since its inception.
“Communist parties, be it in North Korea, Soviet Union, or the CCP, engaging in espionage infiltration, deception, and other acts should be commonplace. However, if they wish to operate globally, they must adhere to global norms, like wearing suits instead of military uniforms,” she said.
Lai Rongwei stated that the CCP operates in democratic societies, claiming to be private enterprises to lower others’ guard. However, many well-known companies abroad posing as private enterprises have shadows of the leadership in Zhongnanhai (China’s central leadership compound).
He mentioned that in the CCP’s overseas investments, the main entities are usually large state-owned enterprises. The four words “state-owned enterprise” imply not being driven by market considerations, where everything—from personnel appointments to investment decisions—is essentially in line with government directives.
“Because the essence of the CCP regime is party-led governance, with political leadership as the primary focus, all aspects involve political decisions, political directions. Many Chinese enterprises’ investments have political objectives, such as intelligence collection, using economic means to influence local social figures, engaging in cognitive operations, and interfering in elections,” he added.
Su Ziyun remarked that the CCP is like a chameleon, infiltrating everywhere and lacking ethical standards. It aims to influence politics through business. Especially in the information age, through information technology companies like Huawei, it has more manipulation capabilities, extracting data from the grassroots, and even working with its authoritarian friends to conduct surveillance through Huawei.
“If Western countries are still cooperating with similar industries with the CCP, they need to set up more barriers, combining commercial, technological, and political security.,” she added.
Lai Rongwei mentioned that in various hybrid warfare strategies of the CCP, their methods are mixed with economic, cultural, and even legal aspects. The counteraction from Western societies is simple: they should not tolerate or appease the CCP.
He pointed out that for every move the CCP makes, immediate responses are necessary, as appeasing A will inevitably lead to BC and D, spreading like ripples. Hence, tailored responses are vital, exposing the CCP’s misconduct through news reports, hosting press conferences, public hearings, etc. This approach can act as a deterrent or make them realize that their actions are not worthwhile.