Transcripts For CSPAN2 Sen. Tom Cotton Mike Rogers Others Testify On 5G Security Huawei... 20240712

House of representatives before being elected senator. You are a regular, to use for the first and particularly on the u. S. And china relationship. For transparency, you and i have done each other for many, many years. I think prior to you entering politics so thank you very much indeed for your time today. Can i just say on a wider note we are very conscious that we meet during a challenging time for the u. S. Following the tragic death of george floyd. Our thoughts are very much with those impacted by this tragedy. The u. S. Is not alone in needing to do more to tackle the underlying issues but our thoughts and prayers are very much with those who are directly affected. Could i invite you to say a few words as an opening statement, then well move into questions. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you, mr. Chair and thank you for this kind words about some of the strife on our streets today. Of course we all want justice for george floyd and we are all deeply disturbed by that horrific video that probably all of your scene, that most of our nation sensing and at the same time we have to have an end to the violence, the looting and the writing we see and the streets. But today we are gathered here today to talk about china and specifically the threat that while way poses to our special relationships while way. And to the civilized world. Ive a few remarks at the outset on that front. You want to make clear that i am not here on behalf of the United States government. The views expressed are solely my own although i do believe they are widely shared in our nations capital. I also want to stress im a great admirer of the United Kingdom, a passionate supporter of our special relationships. In recent years ive introduce legislation that halted the planned withdrawal of forces and also help significant delay our joint development of warhead for your submarines. Both those efforts were successful. Its my hope the special relationship remains strong, although i fear china is attempting to drive a hightech wedge between us using huawei. The committee has access to testimony from very capable special about why huawei equivalent is not trust with aniston yougov has been been advised that the threat from huawei can be detained if it is kept away from sensitive facilities and the socalled core of your network. I wont way too deeply in that debate but our own technical experts to screen as well as the experts and allied democracies like australia and japan. These same experts warned that huawei could up china update host of damaging information from details about how our aircrews fly, intrusive personal information about our airmen themselves. Sin there sinners with a commune party has details about American Forces station in your country. Let me give you one hypothetical, one and i could offer. Our fighters in english with precision guided munitions. Those are transported by shipping Companies Operating on Standard Commercial networks. If that Network Includes huawei 5g quebec could be give hackers a a window into our military Logistics Operations including shipping manifests. Hackers could then redirect make it impossible to load these weapons. These are the warnings of american experts. I must take those warnings seriously. Even if all friends in the United Kingdom have come to a slightly different conclusion. But theres also another consideration i must bring to your attention. Today we judge the threat in the western pacific to be more severe than the threats in europe. China is a more grave longterm threat to International Peace and stability that is russia. So in the coming years the United States wednesday increase our defense posture in the pacific. This buildup may require us to ship assets from other commands. The case for heavy laden of air force assets in england rather than say alaska, hawaii, guam or japan was already tested in our debates in washington. Now senior u. S. Officials are realizing our troops will face Operational Security risks in the United Kingdom that they would otherwise have faced in the pacific. And i say all this as a longtime mentor and friend of our special relationship. It would be a mistake for any british moniker to misinterpret this potential realignment of u. S. Forces as a messaging effort. We believe our airmen could be at risk. We have a greater threat and different him astray will have limited number of courses to do with it. These are simply facts that are under consideration in washington right now. However, there is another patrick written conjoin the United States and other powerful free nations britain can join doesnt empower chinese intelligence. Im quitting kurds by report indicating your government intentional efforts to develop alternatives to huawei on the worlds democracies. I would welcome a close cooperation between our nations on these matters. Its no secret which of these futures i prefer that the decision of course is yours to make. Thank you again for inviting me to share my perspective as you make this important decision. Senator, thank you for those words. A lot to unpack a Witch Committee will now do. I want to start at a high level if i may. You mentioned the special relationship a couple of times. Would you agree that the pandemic we are now entering has actually exposed how frail our world order currently is . Perhaps how we can risk averse the west has become but the rise of china in pursuing a very different geopolitical agenda, and that many maybe recalibrating their views on china given what theyve been doing in relation to hong kong and coming up, suppressing the initial outbreak in the first place . And how might this lead us to the United States and britain going back to perhaps the origins of our collaboration after the Second World War and look at the Atlantic Charter . Mr. Chairman, theres no doubt that when it comes to Chinese Communist behavior over the last six months. Going back to december it is clear that beijing had knowledge of how serious this virus was. They suppressed information. He intimated the World Health Organization or at least again as late as midjanuary. They resist the travel restrictions that would have kept the virus largely contained by and in mainland china. They continue to those things in preventing the European Union from offering an honest opinion about chinese disinformation efforts. Just in last week week they have cracked down on hong kong in deep violation in 1984. And the United States, use Public Opinion moving strongly against beijing, desiring to have close cooperation with free nations, with the civilized world on things like industrial sourcing to ensure that china cant keep any of our nations over a barrel whether its things like basic medical equipment and pharmaceuticals or advanced Telecommunications Technology like were discussing today. And that situation as you said simply reiterates how important it is for our nations to cooperate and to help lead that coalition of advanced industrial democracies, combines economically, politically, militarily. We are far greater than china in terms of strength and power and the ability to maintain International Stability and peace. Divided though, china will continue to try to replace the United States as the dominant power and to rewrite the International Rules of order. Thank you. Richard drax. Good afternoon, and nice to meet you. As far as we can virtually. We heard about special relationship. Is the scope for u. S. Uk leadership in the modern world . Thank you. I think theres no doubt about that. I think thats part of what breaks it was about, the United Kingdom being able to chart its own course and not have to reach a consensus with a couple dozen other different nations. And with that greater freedom of action, the United States continues to enjoy i think theres no doubt that u. S. Uk leadership once again would be welcomed. Many nations could accuse our combined Political Economic and military might, look for instance, of what shelley is facing. One of our five eyes partner. Trade retaliation by china simple because they want investigation into the origins of this virus and also what beijing did to cover it up. I think a strong, confident, united u. S. Uk allies will, in fact, be a strong leader for the free democracies of the world. I dont want to is there anything specific that the two countries should do so for his leadership is concerned today . I think just to go back to the topic of this hearing about 5g technology, one of the challenges that will face is 5g technology is still nascent. We dont know where it might be in three years or even for that matter six months if the Technology Changes so quickly. Part of the problem, there are so few providers of 5g equipment. Theres two that are supportive but theres only three Democratic Alternatives, samsung, ericsson and nokia. That is allow them to Keep Technology and standard lockdown. If the United States and United Kingdom were to lead the way to get chinas open develop standards and you could see small and midsize businesses. Our nation and you nation and nations of the world who could compete with those five companies on price and on quality, and you know longer have huawei and zte able to undercut those Democratic Alternatives on price because theyre so heavily subsidized. Thats just one example of how we could lead the world, kind of Cutting Edge Technology and ensure that the International Order remains oriented around democracy and about capitalist economic principles. Thank you. On the issue of International Order and perhaps its strengths and weaknesses, stewart, do you want to take over from here . Thank you. Hello, senator. So weve talked about decisions that we could make us countries in different relationships. Would you say were saying of paralysis of our Current International decisionmaking at the moment . I think there is some indication, yes, that International Organizations in particular are struggling to meet the challenge the china poses. Thats in part because china has worked so effectively to try to undermine and insinuate itself into the essential decisionmaking of places in those organizations. If you look at the World Health Organization, for instance, and china Senior Leaders of their come done to the extent that our president can no longer have the confidence to remain a member or fun to get. Look what happened two or three months ago right as this pandemic get started. China was on the verge of electing a leader, of all things, the World International Property Organization when china is, in fact, the worlds leading theft of intellectual property. Now thanks to an effort by our government and yours and other free nations were able to run an Effective Campaign to defeat the chinese candidate it goes to show you how assertive effort china has undertaken of these international organization. Even if you look at the eu and the kind of division you have there among nations that of an actively cultivated by china, whether it is through low interest loans, grants and things like the belt and Road Initiative or trade possessions and so forth. I dont think theres much question that china has some influence in reducing effective and united decisionmaking among the free nations of the world, especially of the north atlantic. Something our nations need to address. Thank you, senator. We could say that we are on the back foot on a lot of these or reacting very reactive. How would we amended organizations to be more fit the purpose such as the u. N. Or the World Trade Organization . I think we have to recognize that china is not a country let undemocratic like ours. Thats committing china to the World Trade Organization was mistake or you might call it an experiment that failed, fillea long time ago. Our nation made a mistake by granting china the most favored nation status. We all believe if we did those things come not by we, i dont mean any of us in particular, i mean our forerunners in his offices in washington and london, if we admitted trying to those organizations, if we treated china like an open capital as a democratic economy, china would become more so, capitalists would change china. Unfortunate i think china has change capitalism in many places around the world. We need to reassess whether it is the right thing to do to continue to allow these International Organizations to get such a large role in decisionmaking to what remains a communist, authoritarian government, and a state driven economy. And until we face up to that reality and make those kind of decisions i think china continues in aftermath of world war ii, whether political, diplomatic, economic or military. Thank you. Stuart malcolm mcdonald, he wanted to come in. Yes. Take they, chair. Senator, i could beginning is your time today. Just like the chair id like to echo the sentiment of many in the uk to believe a black american citizens right now [inaudible] you mentioned your support and admire the special relationship. Theres been no shortage by right wing of frank is on the u. S. Side as far as the huawei 5g decision and goals. I would be in agreement but on the issue of American Leadership and the special relationship, some of us feel, myself included that is being undermined by the u. S. President ial specifically the president ial leadership right now, particularly as it withdraws or institution such as the World Health Organizations treaty can such as the open skies treaty. Dont visages leave an opportunity, and attacks of right across the board for authoritarian regimes as u. S. Retreats in this kind of way . No, have to disagree. If anything its opportunity for a free democracy especially those in the northern atlantic to try to help remake world order, to maintain peace and stability just as our forebearers did in aftermath of world war ii. We understand we will have disagreements, with accounts on the open skies treaty or the paris climate accords. Our relationship [talking over each other] well, we can help refound a new organization that is a World Health Organization, not a a wd Politics Organization as w. H. O. Has become. But look you had your disagreements about brexit sop obviously there are intense disagreements to cause a lump division in society for many years and we washed up with great interest. We in our society have people who supported the leave campaign and people who support the remain campaign. Whichever one, we wouldve respected that decision and we would have remained your staunchest ally. Thats what it means have that special relationship come to have those allies that when it comes to disagreements repays them frankly but we dont let them undercut our fundamental, our fundamental longstanding, deep ties that go back to the very way we live our lives. Dont you think its a bit risky to withdraw from the w. H. O. In the middle of a Global Pandemic . That strikes me as a bit odd. Not when the w. H. O. Has taken some a steps to make the pandemic worse. The president gave them an opportunity to try to reform and try to be more open and transparent. They did not take the opportunity for 30 days. Apologies. My point is, this is not standing up for our values and the 5g debate is much as a values as his sister. It running away into leaves a great opportunity for authoritarian countries around the world. I admire the United States and it is played and honorable role in many events in history, produced some incredible thinkers. But i cant help but think that current president ial leadership and the particular his style of leadership is undermining us and that is felt by not just me of my constituents of people all political persuasions in the uk right across the board. I hope you can see that. The. I hope you can understand that point, as a lawmaker in the u. S. I i do sit just as i saw a fr Ronald Reagan and george bush as well. Okay. We will move forward if we can. Sarah, georgia take us to the five eyes aspect of this . Yes. Hello, sedative. In question two, how valuable is the Intelligence Alliance . Five eyes is the most valuable and the most powerful Intelligence Alliance in the world. For 75 years its helped us identify threats and many cases eliminate those threats in advance of them gathering on the horizon. I do of course worry that the introduction of Huawei Technology in the United Kingdom Hygiene Network could impact 5g network. We find ways to work around that especially when it relates to imminent threats but when it comes in particular to signals intelligence, electronic intelligence, i worry, i know our administration worries about the implications of having 5g technology in one of those five partners and, of course, three of the partners have rejected 5g technology from huawei or china at large, United States, australia and new zealand. Canada has not yet made a decision. I know their chief defense that has made his opinions plain that he agrees with our nation. Thats one reason why i hope we can present a united front among the five eyes partners on this question. How much of a threat will be breaking down a relationship . You mention signal technology. You mentioned three countries are going in one direction kind of to decide. How much of a threat to five eyes would it be if the government continues with its plans with huawei . It will create some tension and others to show the most instant times intelligence legislation has laster calls for intelligence to consider the extent to which partner nations have chinese Source Technology in their networks. Ive introduce legislation that would take a step further. The nsc car National Security council, is undertaking its own review. Now again we would find a way to work around on the most urgent questions of sharing intelligence, sharing analysis or sharing the imminent threats of course we always pass between our five nations. Theres no doubt our intelligence agencies would face some challenges in being as open and sharing as much information. And we have for so many years and i would hate to see that come to pass. Thank you. Just before return more in detail towards the Telecom Security, can i just go back o the five eyes . I think we all agree china is pursuing its own global rules. Its not playing by the standards and does the rest of us were hoping hoping that you would choose to adopt or indeed they are leveraging the absence of our ability to enforce those rules. Is the five Eyes Community something that could be the core of something to rebuild International Standards and values . At the moment its no for sharing intelligence, but the trust that you have come is that perhaps the genesis of a dancing and Atlantic Charter and setting a new construct or set of values and norms that we can absolutely defend . Mr. Chairman, i dont think theres any doubt five eyes intelligence sharing nations have many deep economic, political, historical, cultural ties that could help the foundation of more than mirror intelligence sharing. Our nation already so close together in so many ways that we could form the core, along with many other fairly nations, nations whose cooperate will be essential in these efforts which is japan and south korea, to help establish some of these new standards, whether their technological or international, political standards. Like you. Kevin, question before we move on to Telecom Security complete. Just on five eyes. I mean, i dont think you read documentation around huawei but also i sit on the security committee. Theres no way, at all, anything that cooperation between our two nations is going to be compromised in terms of what has been proposed. So is it not being used as a threat to trying try to change policy all of it like to explain your proposal to stop deployment of f35s to uk, for example . Auditions that methods by which you talk a special relationships and uvalue district is in it clearly you said it it would be down to yuki to make the decisions. Are these being seen as threats to try to change policy in uk . I would have to say not. I think thats like the simple but international Strata Council has undertaken this review right now because but there is no evidence here theres no way, its very clear from our security agencies, theres no way that huawei equipment will come anywhere near anything in terms of her signals intelligence. This gets into the debate about socalled core and edge which is again [talking over each other] are experts just like australia and japan disagree. I would ask why are you so eager to put a a criminal organizatis technology into your networks . Im speaking out, let me finish. Organizations Whose Technology being used to repress millions of muslim minorities in st. John province, a violator. You seem very eager use the technology. So the questions why would you be so eager to use their technology . Senator, to use honest chilean phrase i am no when a brother high when his group since is elected 19 years ago. So what are want to do, actually didnt with the facts, and look to the issue, governor looked at the issue in terms of huawei preventer you are busy having your networks. We have ours. Whats changed . And as i said experts have looked at it and they disagreed. Im happy to speeders but you have huawei equipment in your three or 4g local Wifi Networks in the United States. Are you going to rip all that out . Yes, we are. Back when providing money to some of these very small, very rolled Telecom Providers so they can remove that technology. To compare british use of Huawei Technology, which i believe is well over 50 to american use, its a triple fraction of a percent. We need to move on, kevin, think of it. Doctor hughes. Thank you. Let me associate myself with a comet you made an exposure that of my colleague and friend, Stuart Malcolm mcdonald. Because whilst we all agree and also disagree with the senator, you may be quite shocked to some the agreements i will have with you but i will disagree with some the comments you made last night on the news regarding the department of the airport but what i will agree with you is this. Handing over of your 5g networks to communist party of any country is under insanity. Now, what i do like to ask you is how does the world rely ever more strongly on data . Why is it so important . Thank you for the question. Sometimes it is misperceive the 5g networks that are currently being designed and ultimately will be built across the world are still not just and it can middle step forward from 3g and from 4g technology, and i think this apprehends the leap we are taking in some ways the Information Technology revolution through which we are living out is as big as Industrial Revolution 200 years ago or the agricultural revolution of 10,000 years ago. 3g technology was primarily about mobile web browsing. 4g was primarily about video. 5g technology is fundamentally about connecting machines. Its not about being able to access social media faster or sin more stealthy videos over your devices. Its about heavy Industrial Equipment being able to come and get with each other Autonomous Vehicles being able to make it directly with each other. That is such a giant step forward in technology that a difference in degree will it becomes the difference in time. When you talk about the 5g network that is primarily about the ways we can connect machines to not only do the economic work we need to support our societies, but also the military implications come with that as well. It becomes a much graver threat to chinas technology in 5g networks that was to have it in 4g and 3g networks. I should be clear, im not thrilled that so many countries have built 3g and 4g networks because a break some of these transition costs that your nation or other nations are going through, but the risk is much greater 5g networks and thats one reason why its so important we tried to collaborate to create open standards that eliminates the technology that we faced at that creates so many problems when you only have five competitors, knowing three from democratic nation. Let me ask you a quick follow along to the. The 5g process is one part of a data ownership. Future couplets are not just about dreadful missiles and the destruction of human life. Sulks about governments and nonstate actors owning data. Not just the commonest part of china. For example, if you take the United States, the United States, has the largest private server data network, super Data Network Server in the world. Where would your allies and even those who threaten you and enemies, perceived enemies, see the value and worth of the United States owning all of the data in the own private company . Well, im not sure the United States would not own all that data. Some companies in the United States may have substantial amounts of data, most of it is been given over voluntarily but that raises a lot of personal privacy concerns and there are concerns similar to what aire summit opening remarks about what our airmen could be exposed to in nations that using 5g networks. Thats a conversation that our elected governments need to have, how we balance personal privacy on the one hand, and individual economic choices on the other hand. I think this is important for those who believe in liberty and freedom and the right to selfdetermination such as myself. The ownership of that data is the frontline in any future war by articulating fake news, by racial profiling in any country on earth. For any country data ownership by private companies, and the largest democracy in the world. I understand this concerns and trust me those are concerns that many, Many Americans have his will. Its one reason why you see the bait in a news right now about the telecom laws that govern some of our largest Media Technology companies. We need to make some progress here. Weve got still a lot to cover. Kevin jones, quickly move on to your question, please. Thanks, chairman. The United Kingdom has once had a robust since 2003 2003 a y robust monitoring of huawei and its telecom network. With a huawei assessment center. Judging by our intelligence could you tell us about americas own systems to defend its own network . Obviously, we have similarly robust protections, whether its from our fbi and what to they o with counterintelligence or the National Security the simplest way to minimize the huawei for is not to have while we present in your networks to begin with. As a making of the early exchanges we have a very, very small while we present limited primarily to a few small rural telecoms, and he goes back to many years ago before the threat that huawei ncd post. Thats one reason why were providing funds to the Small Companies to up replace that technology in their networks. I understand. So those networks rightly put in using federal money. So is it the case then in terms of huawei there were no present in the United States x we be banning handsets provided by huawei for example . I be fine banning handsets. The opposite dont pose the same kind of threats that Core Technologies do. They also virtually no Market Penetration in the United States as well. Okay. I think this mcaninch is finished, chairman . I respect your position and i value our special relationship. The problem i think with this is it is a jew political argument. I think thats what it should be articulated out. Because i think you and quite of a of the people skirt around the technical aspects of this. Do you say you dont want China Networks thats fine by me. I think thats a more legitimate argument but i think hiding behind the arguments, or they dont stand up to a great deal of scrutiny when it comes up to technology. Im not hiding been any argument. The division of your own national subscripts and is that they can only to limited assurances about the threat disposes so they would be u. S. Government and just chilled incumbent okay, kevin, we are going to have to move on because many other to many members want to get in. Bob . Thank you much indeed, mr. Chairman. Im glad you made the point because us about to do that as well. Theres very limited assurance. You introduce the bill that was stop the u. S. From sharing intelligence with countries that use huawei in their 5g networks. Do you think the five eyes can survive u. S. Limits intelligence sharing with the uk . I do, as we discussed earlier. We will find ways to continue to cooperate with the United Kingdom and the rest of the five eyes alliance. Unfortunately, it could raise challenges and and her own Natl Security Council irrespective of the prospects my legislation is undergoing and a very some review on his own accord. I hope the results of the review is we can find ways to minimize that risk with very limited change to the way the u. S. And the uk interact in intelligence sharing and the five eyes, but part of my point here is i wish we didnt have to take, undertake that we do. Obviously we cant discuss in an open setting but concerns that our intelligence professionals and our technical experts have raised about not just the United Kingdom using huawei but any nation that uses Huawei Technology. I want to correct something one of the legislator said about my legislation that would deploy a 35 fighters to the United Kingdom. It does not delay that specifically. It simply says it raises too great a risk for us to have that advanced aircraft in any nation with that kind of system. Obviously the United Kingdom is not the only nation that uses huawei and we have bases in other nations that choose to use huawei to fill out their 5g network. [inaudible] this had been raised by a previous question but to what extent is the barrier between geopolitics and technical risk or is it all the same issue around china . I think theyre all wrapped up because the point i was discussing earlier is g technology is such a technological leap beyond 3g and 4g technology and it is so central to the way economies will function in the future. And the way our countries will secure ourselves that i believe using Huawei Technology, using any technology from a company that is the home of the Chinese Communist party would be as if we relied on adversarial nations in the cold war to build our submarines or to build our tanks. Its just not something we would have ever considered. There are certain technologies so sensitive and integral and vital to our prosperity and security we would never use adversarial nations or that technology and thats an analogy that i see today with 5g technology. Thank you. Could we turn to the us National Security council, derek twigg please. Darren. Can i just draw your attention. [inaudible] sorry mister twigg im having trouble hearing you. Can you speak up a bit . Can you hear me now . Sorry about that. Could you just tell a little bit more. [inaudible] i could hear thatsenator, did you want me to read that back to you . Its just, there is a review that the National Security council is looking at into sharing intelligence in collaboration with the uk. Can you spell out what outcomes have been provided from this . Unfortunately mister twigg and mister chairman i cant spell that out because i cant the Security Council and unfortunately for the president as i stressed at the outset im expressing my views today as a legislator and i can say that review is not specifically about the United Kingdom. It is about the broader question of intelligence sharing with any partner nation using Chinese Technology in its networks. I can say i believe that whatever the conclusion of that review is i know that our administration will work to find as many ways to mitigate that risk as they can and in particular mitigate that risk with the United Kingdom is our closest intelligence partner in the world. Derek if i made because of your sound ill follow up on the subsequent questions. We spoke about the demise of International Institutions and global architecture. Nato is the closest thing from our perspective to security, transatlantic security. Are you committed to making sure this is one cornerstone that continues to be of strength and investment in . Absolutely. Nato will remain a vital part of the United States National Security strategy and the North Atlantic Alliance has been the most successful military alliance in World History if you look at what we accomplished by bringing anend to the cold war without a shot being fired. And i think unfortunately many of our leaders have awoken to the rest that russia still poses to the north atlantic over the last five or six years. That more than ever, the United States, canada need the support and cooperation of our european nato partners to help check russian ambitions in europe. Just following on from that if i made where all facing an impending global recession because of covid19 and one of the budget challenged in any economic downturn is the defense budget. You wouldnt be surprised to hear this committee is very keen to make sure our budget is unaffected. I dont know what willhappen over the United States but do you agree this is not the time to let our guard down. Absolutely i agree that we need to ensure that our militaries are not harmed by this pandemic. Especially in the years ahead. As we do face budgetary constraints. Ive introduced legislation that would offset many of the cost and schedule overruns that industries will obviously face. Here as im sure there, theres a lot of Media Attention on businesses that are consumer facing. Theres not as much attention on ourdefense industry but they too have been affected by this pandemic , small and midnight midsize businesses and military suppliers have had to shut down factories or suffer reduce our inevitably going through no fault of those contractors will lead to cost overrun and schedule overruns. I dont want to see that lead to lower budgets in the future or even worse a reduction in the number of aircraft or shifts or vehicle that we are able to produce. Id also say that collectively, nato or the free world is probably up there spending my six or 7 trillion. Im trying to survive this pandemic and get our economy back on their feet. When there spending thatkind of money , to not spend a few billion or tens of billions of dollars collectively between all of our nations, would be the ultimate example of swallowing cameras while choking onthats. We will pass on to our chancellor, thank you. John stoddard. We cant hear you, john. Cant hear me at all . Good. Senator, i think you can see from the discussion that this issue has caused divisions between traditional allies. Not least between myself and my old party friend and defense holly kevin jones. Who are normally allied on issues. But what i want to go to now is the question of what chinas intentions and actions, more broadly. In particular particularly where there increasing commonness of the war and diplomats and manifestations and also how you see their strategy and their objectives playing out over the next 10 to 15 years. Thank you for the question mister miller. I admit chinese ambitions are pretty straightforward. You can see it from your their actions but you can listen to the words of german g. In the short term they want to push the United States and our allies out of the electoral in the western pacific and indian ocean. And want to reduce countries on their periphery. So thats a safe that they have yet so often over the course of history. And they want to reunify what they perceived to be all of china. Forcibly ifnecessary to taiwan. I think you can see hong kong as something of a test run. For what they may plan to do with taiwan if the free world does not stand steadfast with that Democratic People. So i dont think their intentions are concealed or veiled in any way. Ultimately their longterm intention is what it was longterm up to the hundred Year Anniversary of the founding of modern communist china and they accelerated that because of the impact of the pandemic is to replace the United States as the worlds preeminent economic and military power. With all that means for reordering the International Rules of peace and stability. Thank you. One of the advantages they have maybe being a bit more strategic. Maybe then maybe more than our allies plan to the end of or example with huawei, have a possibly a strategic objective of selling dissension division amongst allies should we be looking far more as a strategic and coherent and agreed approach. Its true that china has had a remarkably rise over the last 30 to 40 years. Fortunately unfortunately too many people in the us and europe aided and abetted that rise even once it became clear in thelast 15 or 20 years of their intentions. Where not benign. But i think its also true that Democratic People can often look at authoritarian governments and say they have advantages because they have one strongman or they can direct capital to state uses like huawei and bbe but history showing time at the end of the advantages of democratic nations in termsof the dynamism of their people , the innovative spirit, the willingness to stand and fight for our freedom and our way of life is an incalculable advantage that we have over communist authoritarian nations. Of course we have traditions, your statement churchill said the only thing worse than fighting with allies is fighting without them and i guess you could say that about thosepeaceful decisions as well but in the end , im very confident that if we stand together, despite our occasional differences that we recognize chinas malign intentions that we will be able to face off against this threat justlike we have time and again over the centuries. Senator, thank you. Mark french law, if youre there. Im here. The floor is yours. Senator, youve mentioned earlier there were a limited number of providers around the world to manufacture highend 5g technology. What our committee has taken over the mismatch, one of the things we focused on is why theres no american manufacturers. Why do you see that beingthe case . Sadly think its the result of failed economic and trade policies going back 30 years that we could outsource so much of our manufacturing capacity in so many different sectors of our economy around the world to include two hostile communist nation like china. We just deliberated at the peak of a pandemic where we were worried about having enough masks and gloves for ourdoctors and nurses and were worried about china having the market cornered in vital pharmaceuticals. So that theres been a degree of economic thinking over the past 20 to 30 years that privatize market efficiency over an area of market principles and thats an important principle , for resiliency in production is a very important point as well. I wish we had an american producer on the scale of samsung, gnocchi or eris ericsson. We have a lot of small and Midsize Companies can possibly compete with those giant companies if they had the kind of open standards and technology wasnt locked up. Im sure at t and verizon and a lot of our small suppliers would love to be able to choose between dozens of manufacturers of this equipment as opposed to just five worldwide and only three democratic ones and i think that really needs to be a vitally urgent effort on our part and on your nations part and the part of advanced democracieseverywhere. You for that. Sir. Something thats been put to me is go ahead. Mark, go ahead. Quickly to say that part of the heart of 5g would be hardware as well as software. Companies like cisco that are far advanced, senator, would you agree that between us have the technology and the amounts to create a less than 5g system if we have the will. You think that that is something that the United States and the United Kingdom historically as allies could help to lead on integrating if you like 5g. Absolutely and especially if you stand beyond just the us and the United Kingdom, if youlook at what your governor suggested. The heat and of democracies, the g7 and the south korea and japan combined, or other european nations as well with the United States and United Kingdom at itsheart , i have no doubt that we have the talent, the productive capability, the innovative entrepreneurial spirit, to develop 5g technologies on software and hardware that will surpass in Quality Performance unlike anything china produces. Okay, lastly, do you think its realistic given the economic pressures of cobit that congress would help finance that or at least help. Theres no doubt about that. This would be an example of straw and cameras and choking on that. Theres legislation in Congress Proposes spending a few hundred million dollars, 1 billion on helping promote that kind of technology. We would of course call on our partners to help kitchen to the kind of alliance that your government has suggested so were all in the boat rolling in the same direction. But in the same way that it would be penalized and foolish to shortchange our military it would be foolish to shortchange the opportunity we have in the months and years ahead to try to develop an open 5g system that can overcome Chinese Technology. Thank you mark. Final question. Senator, in order to explore your initial reaction to the uk governments decisions to allow huawei to continue a presence in the 5g structure. Like our governments stated reaction in january, it disappointed me. I understand you think a different kind of situation then we because of the Legacy Networks you have in 3g and 4g networks that use Huawei Technology. I do hope that if the governmentrefines its decision , that if it doesnt revert out right, we will mitigate and minimize the use of Huawei Technology, put it on a shorter timeframe, limit the expansion of 5g networks and which is what weve done to help Wing Networks off of their legacy technologies. Ive seen the media reports that suggest that could happen as early as 2023. Iwould welcome that , maybe even earlier. I am intensified why you spend that money using onetime technology only carried out three years later again, we will continue to observe and work with your governments and the decisions they take to try to ensure that our Alliance Remains as strong as it always has been. And that we are also creating kinds ofalternatives mister francoise and i were discussing for the rest of the world. The government did change tax by 2023 as you just said without enough to mitigate your concerns . In 2023 and obviously would but many of my concerns are not specific to the uk. Again, you got an act legislation about f 35 fighters, weve got to make a decision about deploying those many different countries. Obviously if you no longer have dochertyhughes technology in your Huawei Technology a virus could be made under my legislation. That doesnt mean i would drop my legislation, if my legislation is not about the United Kingdom. Its about huawei and the threat it poses to our airmen andaircraft. But i would welcome that decision to go to zero by 2023 and i would urge you to try to do so even sooner. Thank you senator. The following off my final question on Mark Francoise question. The reason why were in the situation is because we relied heavily on the commercial sector to provide the answers to 5g while what chinas response is very much to state fund their commercial sectors and provide a hightech solution with which are now able to sellwith abundance around the world. Congratulations on your driving on connecting up with the space station, thats a great example like apollo of america between the commercial sector and state funding. Clearly, the layout, the parameters for 5g go way beyond any individual nation. Would you agree that there is not five community to invest and put money up front, to work with the commercial organizations to create international secure established network for us to move forward with so we can actually replacehuawei far faster and perhaps even our government is intending to do. I think thats a great opportunity for our nations. And it will probably in the long run the exactly that kind open Network Technology that allows hundreds or thousands of companies to compete, ratherthan putting all our eggs in one Democratic Alternative , a company that we hope will be able to compete with huawei which is what the Chinese Government has done with its massive subsidies, time develop an open protector will allow a pretty our country or your country to compete build his cuttingedge technology our countries will be dependent on. Center, thank you very much for joining us today and its reassuring to hear your determination to continue furthering the special relationship but i hope we would also prove that when there are differences or views, where it to express them really work through them. We faced a very challenging time internationally and i think the more the us and United Kingdom can set up and Show International leadership as we did during the Second World War and creating the bedrock of organizations for that period, again, must we Work Together in this difficulttime now. Senator, on behalf of the committee and i say thank you for joining us thisafternoon. Thank you all. Iq, unconscious of those in a few minutes but we will continue on, we may lose Committee Members but im delighted to welcome Brigadier General spalding and mike rogers who i hope are now with us. Good to see you both. Brigadier general robert spalding, former air force general, senior director for strategy for president trump, now senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and mike rogers, former u. S. Army, former fbi, former congressman from michigan and now writing on Cyber Intelligence and 5g physically in connection with huawei and said he and now chairman of 5g action now. Center both very much welcome to market our Committee Hearing , we must look forward to hearing what you have to say. Because of time constraints we will gostraight into it if i may. And invite kevin jones to ask the first question. We cant hear kevin so thats an excellent start. Kevin is now back. Kevin, over the user. Welcome gentleman. Could you give an overview of your concerns about chinas involvement in the Telecom Sector western mark. I guess ill take that and start. Very much mister chairman and Committee Members, the understand after the committee theres a chance for a pipe along the way. I went back for that portion of the committee testimony. And thank you again for that special relationship. I do, i am a complete believer that we are Better Together as we go forward this uncertain time for this Great Power Competition about the on i would say my concern Chinese Communist Party Involvement and the heavy involvement that they have in the Telecommunications Business is really three buckets. Economic security, so think about it theft. Trillion dollars of intellectual property stolen, that means Economic Prosperity for the future could be lost and likely is lost. The fact they put themselves in a position or economic extortion. We have seen that most recently when australia came out and said they were going to investigate the origins of covid19 and the Chinese Government said that would be great so maybe the chinese would be interested in drinking australian wine or eating japanese bees so when you empower them in an economic sphere with 5g we have something to worry about for sure. National security is that other bucket. Think about government secrets, military secrets, diplomatic secrets, there continued targeting of us military readiness technology, capability. All of that is all part of that bucket of National Security that we worry about including the fact by the way that they can turn things off so you get into a conflict, if their controlling networks in Great Britain or the United States or anywhere else they would have the ability to shut certain parts of the network down. You can imagine the confusion and chaos that might cause for anybody that stating the chance to use this fear and lastly, that last bucket is personal security so you think about personal data. Ive heard you talk to senator cotten earlier about privacy of data. Thats going to be incredibly important. This is a nation who set up a credit scoring system to get every piece of data and in some reports as many as 2000 points of data on each citizen and then score them and then use that against those citizens if they have ill feelings towards the communist party in china. In the past couple of years 6 million chinese citizens were prohibited by the government from buying tickets on airplanes and trains because the Chinese Communist party deemed them not worthy of having that right within their country and remember these are the same folks talking about trying to get hold of our networks and the data that flows over them and as a cyber securityguy can tell you if i can touch your data , i can get your data read accesses everything including in the intelligence base so i look at that bucket, those three buckets of whiteim concerned. And Going Forward, why we worry about this together and i hope the Prime Minister is as he talked about maybe rethinking his position on huawei as i hope that he reconsiders and i hope that we will have at least some time today to talk about issues why, even further and just my last bit of, im going to read some of the charges that have been brought against this company. These are us charges but other countries have experienced the same. This is against huawei, conspiracy to steal trade secrets, ensure the wire fraud, bank fraud and wire fraud conspiracy to violate international power. And effective trade secrets and the list goes on. Construction of justice, if this were a French Company or a russian company, a us company that came to britain and said because we are big and important we think that you should give us a piece of your market area that we should guarantee that i get percentage of your market. What board of directors in the world would look at a company with this track record and say yes, come on in. It will make accommodations foryou. Based on what we know about their behavior in the past , and just a couple of quick newspaper highlights. China cycles for an internet control coronavirus coverage. The financial times. European mobile traffic seriously routed through china for two hours. Independent in the uk and by the way, if not mysterious, we know how this works and they did it, china systematically hijacks internet traffic research. The it news in australia and by the way what i found was anytime there was a trade negotiation or something of importance to the Chinese Government , traffic routed china so eat these are the folks who had control of networks, using that access to those networks to do things that would not the inline i think with our values and that list is long and i could go on for a while that gives me at least mister chairman or gives you at least the understanding of why i thinkso many of us in the national can i agree with you on the threat from china in hacking, clear examples of proxy from companies but what is interesting to know is the relationship between the us and china. A lot of these are funded by investors from the United States investing in Chinese Companies and the ability of huawei to do the network, explain how that would happen. Ive attended briefings on this, to understand how you would do that when europe has direct control of the network. It would be pieces of the Network Number one. The one thing about 5g, people say we can protect the core, the 5g development of technology, all of that is important, 5g functioning properly, it is about pushing security to the edges. When you do that, the ability if im doing any multitesting in that system meaning if im moving data im interpreting data and sending data somewhere we notice pieces of equipment, if i am doing patches on those pieces of equipment, operators do the patching every day, lots of Administrative Functions going to these devices to make sure they are functioning properly and they get update in the latest and greatest technology. If you have the ability to do any of this you have the ability to disrupt the function. Might not be your whole network that goes down but what you could do is jeopardize certain parts of your network and if you know they are interested in economic extortion then you would have to be concerned about their ability to make things difficult or even slow down. You dont need access to hardware to build hacking assistance. The example you have just given, a Network Vendor operating to let you know if data is taken out of the network will stop you. The biggest thing is Hacking Technology which china is invested in close to the military and others to still seek it. That does not lead to necessarily the hardware but hacking issue that is exponential. Not sure about the general things. I was just a lieutenant in the army. Lets allow the general can i give the floor to you please . These are all great issues and a good conversation. The challenge we have is understanding what 5g is. When i hear the Telecom Ministry talk about it they are not talking about 5g. 5g is not about faster speed. It is really about building an industrial internet that provides for automation. Self driving cars, industry 4. Oh. The challenge we have is threefold. First is the technological challenge. We built the current mobile internet on fundamentally the same data model the internet was built on it as an open data model. To the point about once you are in your in, that is the challenge with the data model. That turned into a business problem for the telecoms. What happened with the open data model is Tech Companies from Silicon Valley came over the top and monetized use of data and when they monetized user data they took the value out of the system so in the United States we spent 250 billion building these networks and the Telecom Industry wasnt paid back for it. On top of that what you had over the course of 10 years from 2007 when the iphone came out a complete change in the Global Economy from an industrial economy to an information economy so at t, the top 5 in market cap in 2007. In 2018, nowhere to be seen, you have dead facebook, amazon and google. What you have in addition to the Technology Problem in the business problem is a policy problem. We havent caught up to the fact that National Security is fundamentally shifted from the traditional battlefield arena to in our own midst. Talking about undermining of collective economies. Most of that surrounding the use or misuse of data. This is what the Chinese Communist party figured out. The way they do this is create a moat around their population to ensure they cant be attacked and have the freedom to attack others by deploying the network. They know there is a business problem in the Telecom Industry. They take all about and 0. 10, Silicon Valley tech company example, they pull an enormous amount of money. Ali baba made 38 billion last november on 1111 in one day, they pull that money and subsidize deployment of the network, they want access to the data. They are leading Artificial Intelligence research, and saudi arabia to oil, the goal is behind that firewall. And monetize that data. The Economic Dominance of data is also to influence, if you look at coronavirus, 40 of the posts on social media are coming from bots. I would venture to say you are seeing the same thing going on with what is happening in the United States right now. They learned very well, how the internet can be used to influence populations, chairman rogers talked about in their own society. And how they do it abroad by using huawei as one of the avenues from it. Not just huawei. Huawei is a member of 3 gp which is the industry standards making body, if you just look at the security of the 5g Network Today across all the text ask of 5g there are 800 right ups in front of 3 gbp for security, 3000 technical vulnerabilities just on the 5g network stack. There networks that are built on 2 g, 3g, 4g, adding 5g radios to an already Insecure Network with an insecure text apps. Talking about the right things, we have to understand the problem we face, not a problem that is unique. In front of their eyes, used to undermine economies in our society, the need to stop it primarily because in the United States they created Global Engagement center. This was supposed to counter influence over the internet, we found the Global Engagement center in state department doesnt have the authority to collect data, what is going on. Carnegie mellon is one of the universities and others around the country, and the Intelligence Community is sidelined because of their own laws. And they harnessed it for their own ends. Good afternoon. Can we pick up a question, the French Branch reform on every single defense. China is buying up, in the pandemic, anything happening in america. I you checking your supply lines as well . This started in 2014, the Tech Startups is dual use technology. The erosion of the industrial base. We dont have an industrial policy to speak of, who either made in the United States or in the country an ally. Is that that is my question, why they dont have a global market, you have answered that in several ways, the ability to collect data. We are not doing enough. The chief problem in the history today. And with data sovereignty, and industrial, military grade network, to protect and prevent the hacking of self driving cars that is number one. The thing that is really preventing us, we dont have enough volume of production of the radios gets us to a private point. The only ones deploying a lot of 5g radios, the south koreans did, production flow in for the radio and get a price point in addition to that. They were not buying enough radios. If we want to get after this it is really about having a major project that bumps up the production flow. One point. The relationship, in the brits are on that list. And and. And if you look at ericsson and no kia in your neighborhood. They have the same values we would appreciate and build on these efforts. Why they cant compete is with a company like huawei is so heavily subsidized by the Chinese Communist party. They subsidize the research and development which takes the cost almost offtheshelf for pricing. They finance deals with no loans at all by financing deals, places where the deal is so good that no western company or freemarket company can even compete on the price which is exactly how a shot to the problem back in 2010, somebody wants to build 13 powers and it cost me two towers for the nearest competitor. Taking issues off that high, something doesnt snore right. That kicks off the investigation of how they were crushing private sector freemarket Competitive Companies who have the same values they do by doing these deals they compete with. We have an opportunity to step in and help them through xm bank and other things. We can allow you to be competitive with chinese company. It is pretty hard to do that when the government is supporting the efforts. We heard from witnesses. And it is such a serious issue and the defense of the west. What are they doing about it. The government is having debates, and we are going to finally confront huawei. They will not allow it here. Depriving them of revenue since the security standard of what the security standard should be for these companies. Huawei wouldnt fit that. That is the first step. And you can be a little pregnant with huawei here and everything will be okay. I dont believe that. It also hurts the notion of if they are a collection platform for the state of china, illegally subsidizing using it to illegally steal international property, using it for espionage purposes in addition to we shouldnt allow them to be anywhere. The most immediate thing we can do is to say now. Because you dont raise to these standards we cant let you in. If you want to change the way they do business we should think about it. The data dominance by 2041. Thank you for that. The focus of this study. Not just a nudge government into that thinking but parliamentary colleagues. You talked about what a funny debate. It is not resonating with the general public. Are we facing a sputnik moment, 1957 where, were far far ahead. It was an invigorated effort not only to catch up. Do you do that or is that yet to come . It is yet to come. If you see the signs but if you are not looking forward it is difficult to tease out the impact to our democracy and economies of what is going on over the last we 10 years. That is the challenge, describing it to people. Most people dont understand the technology, the business, the policy, the Foreign Policy and National Security policy implications. Im not talking the general public but National Security professionals. They are totally comfortable talking about the land, the sea, the air and space in terms of the threat to our society but in terms of what the internet has it is very difficult in terms of that group to understand it or articulate it. To add on that im optimistic because of the tragedy we are in with covid19. People i keep seeing the stress on what people thought would be normal behavior, to share masks or personal Protection Equipment or medicines, and the Chinese Communist party went internal, hugged around it, use it as a weapon that we have differences. That will wake up the American Public on a reliance on supply chain of critical materials. I would argue we can slide 5g into that in the future. Do you want to be dependent on the Chinese Government when everything goes wrong . My argument is probably not. Thank you. You wrote a memo to your own government about government bills out on 5g networks. Have you had any response from this at all . There has been a positive response in some quarters. The problem is the same problem you have and other democracies have is the entrenched interest in the Telecom Industry, dont want to see change and quite frankly are not capable of deploying the type of network that i think we are trying to get to in terms of promoting industry 4. Oh. With convention, because of established Business Models. It is one of those things where government has to take a leading role. I look at British Telecom as one example. There is a requirement for British Telecom to provide services to the people of the uk but there is also a definite need for the uk Going Forward for in advance ai platform for the automated things of the future. Thats not British Telecoms business right now. Ultimately you cant take that network and modify it to do those things. You have to build an entirely new network and thats the challenge we are facing. All these applications we are talking about will never come to market unless you build the market. What we are talking about is a new type of network, not just communication but also computing and it needs to be done securely. We lost a couple colleagues. We are having a vote on how we should vote given the virtual process of voting is whether we should be here in person or not. It clashed with our committee, with the challenges we are currently facing. Im conducting my own little rebellion against this by staying with you and focusing on my committee work. Glad to see my other colleagues have done the same. I just want to focus on the actual companies themselves. If you want to not use huawei, who is out there . From the british perspective, what you are very familiar with, focusing on japan, samsung and korea. The companies that are advancing your own 5g capabilities, are they now gaining state sponsorship to grade their abilities to overtake . There are a couple companies that produce 5g radio. Gma is more of an open rand company. Air span had more proprietary equipment like samsung but very small volumes, the problem quite frankly is lack of Real Investment in 5g. Those are the radio providers. On the court providers sign it is a mixandmatch of companies that have been selling to the Telecom Providers based on Service Based architecture. Green wave is another. Microsoft just bought a firm, another Software Core based on a Service Based architecture. All of these are essentially building Traditional Telecom Software Core so right now looking at the core business there is not a lot of what i would call an enterprise industrial Internet Provider among the Software Providers for the network equipment. None of these are receiving state funding to expedite, advance their offering. Not yet. It seems late in the day given the length of time that this debate is happening. I would agree with you that sputnik moment hasnt come. You mentioned the policy or program the talked of a coalition forming. Can you expand on that and what is happening on that front . There are companies coming together in open rand. At the end of the day the problem with open rand just like i stated is lack of investment coming from the Telecom Industry to accelerate the deployment of that. You will see open rand 5g radios in the market by the end of the year. Again, if you want widespread deployment youve got to get into production and we are talking volume orders. We need to see an order for 10,000 radios, not in order, that is the challenge we face today. To make the country competitive for the future you have to look at this more as a strategic investment and somehow stimulate that with policy. On this, the group that is coming together. Interesting conversations from the us administration, even the ones currently in the business, how that plays out in the future. Im optimistic about that. One of the other reasons, theres been a little bit of a difference in debate on how we get there. I have been for the Us Government trying to get out of the web and one of the ways we do that is clearing spectrum. They call it the goldilocks spectrum. Unfortunately that has been clogged up and it has been clogged up for a long time but we got the federal Communications Commission to agree on an auction, chairman pie has done an excellent job opening up the spectrum and clearing out, put it up for auction and i think you will get lots of investment once there is certainty. Right now there wouldnt be certainty based on what spectrum we have available and this is been for the United States a secular firing squad. We talked about why we dont investor cant invest because we cant get in and have no certainty and have no certainty because we have to leak the spectrum to someone else. That is starting to get cleared away in a way that i think will allow the United States not only we will make those boxes dumb. There is to be no intellectual property of value meaning that could be a commodity. Im not sure i care where it is produced because the real value will be in the virtualization and Network Slicing that lays over that gear. Open radios clear out the spectrum and allow us companies to bid on the spectrum in the United States, now you will get at t and verizon and all the big players, new Companies Like century link and others to participate in a way they couldnt participate before. I am not as pessimistic but i think we are a little behind but once we unleashed the hounds of American Innovation that is how we will not match the chinese but beat the chinese in the nearterm. When you go back to the last industry disruption it was based on the mobile platform and the 4g network in that case, what you could do is rely on consumers to buy the equipment, there was consumer adoption that drove the industry disruption. Will be are talking about with 5g is on the infrastructure side, consumers dont drive infrastructure investment, that is at the enterprise level. We look at enterprises that need to invest in technology, having determined what the Business Model is. How do you Spare Investment in an enterprise investment, not a consumer purchase. When you look at the sheer number of sensors and what it means for productivity increases is going to drive the strength and that is the other side of it and there are companies out there looking at secure 5g, they have to clear out the underbrush. Western vendors themselves, the challenge in relation to that. Can you understand the british set up, there is pressure from the United States, open pressure and so on, huawei should get out of our 5g conversation. You are aware how embedded they are in 3g and 4g. Is it realistic for this government to make a commitment to unpick that in the next couple years . I think it is possible but there is a commitment and it is not going to happen overnight. We are working through this with companies that have huawei gear and old legacy systems in the last decade. It is expensive to replace no doubt. The Us Government is considering, that is all but they certainty coming up in the fall and help promote mitigation, we would like to have it happen fast. I think rick could do the same thing, gives you an opportunity, if you say in order for 5g to work you have to have a functioning 3g and 4g model. Can you come up and be creative, that helps you mitigate the problem. I know the answer is yes, theres Great Technology on the horizon and put the brits over the head, about this. It is better to invite someone to the dance. What worries us and worries me, the chairman and Security Work they do now and the message it sends, the uk says our guy said it doesnt matter, therefore it doesnt matter. What it is going to do make people make decisions, a heavily subsidized Chinese Government product that has interior motives because it is cheaper. I worry about that a little bit but we will try to find our way forward. Do you want to comment . We have some issues in terms of the adoption by the rural operators because to deal with the challenge with that, thats one thing to consider when looking at what your policy should be i favor a standalone 5g network that is built securely alongside your existing networks because it allows you to take a clean sheet of paper and design a secure network from the ground up. That is the only way you will deploy the network, if youre trying to do it the other way he will constantly have security issues. Martin . Good morning. We have an expression in scotland, you buy cheap you by twice. Quite clearly that is where Great Britain and Northern Ireland are heading right now. My question is how can western governments Work Together to contain high risk chinese vendors in their networks . And you work with your key outliers. Do you agree . I agree with that 100 particularly when we go back to what chairman rogers talked about i would advocate making bulk by of radio so when you go to spend the money, to invest in it, those radios are in production flow and you get more bang for your buck. We could really do a great job if the guys got together and stimulated production. If you do that, the investment will go a lot farther. You are relying on the rural markets. If you stimulate a large by for the five of us, we have radios you can use to maximize. I agree with general spalding and i would argue again, the security standard for anybody that competes in any of them that block would get to with the purchasing the general talked about and prevent Companies Like huawei making the argument because we know what they are doing. And we will get around that, this is the security standard, adopted by others, to get it right. If you do huawei gear, and it will happen and figure out how to get out of it and the start would be lets band together and create the requirements. And and we have a 5g vendor, democratic state, not just the west. To invite to the dance who would you invite to the dance to create a more robust 5g network for democratic nation . I dont disagree with your description, we have a time crunch. We have these very deep security relationships that we can sit in the room behind the curtain as we would say and we are going to share what we know about how Security Services of china manipulate the networks and companies we can have that pretty quickly. Not that we dont trust other nations but the challenge is we dont have the length of relationships, we dont have the depth of relationships in each country has a different view of intelligence and how we share it. If you want to do it fast, just say for us we set the standard and invite people in the standard, at least broadened it out. Look at the countries in asia under the foot of heavy chinese influence operations and other things. The depth of relationship, uk, try to get it and there is no way to invite others in a roundabout way, with relationships with the french republic. The incredible sharing relationship, it is an easy meeting, for whatever reason. That kind of thing would be worked through. How open these countries are in really sensitive things. We dont have the same relationship with the French Intelligence Service but a great relationship with french intelligencer us or the germans or the polls. On the technical side dont race to the same level. The bigger this is the better it is but if you want a Quick Solutions of setting what is the security standard looks like because we have this incredible start with the 5 is, an easy meeting to convene, getting bigger you have to go through the nuances. Can we share this or not share that the way the brits dont share things, we dont question that. That would have to be worked through. I love everybody at this party, famous american singer said that at some point. We need to have that 5 i relationship. That is the way i would do it. I would totally go off that theme and look at interoperability and the need for our forces to operate across one common platform. Nato might be another idea, nato and japan, between those right there, you could create a strong buying coalition for secure 5g network, all the forces need them. All the bases need them and this would stimulate deployment of those alternative military grade secure networks. With the democratic vendor, 5g, it is not a term in the 21st century. The chinese this is a far easier challenge, something we have been struggling to meet and that is getting usaid developed a finance corporation, a kind of strategic application of development in bringing organizations, this is the thing among the same group of countries we could come together and be more forward thinking about how rather than i call it building rather than breaking and using the combined effort. The development in the economies, promotes democratic principles and human rights and civil liberties, that needs to be done. We dont act strategically in this way, we typically tend to focus on military aspect of our alliances and dont focus more on the building part of our collective economy or get the private sector involved. Many in the United States dont get involved outside our borders with usaid. This is something, we change the way we collectively work in terms of how we promote our collective security. In terms of europe and the United Kingdom. In terms of europe and north america, we lost our technological dominance. This is what i found when working in the white house. The problem, the technological dominance has shifted out of the Telecom Industry into the defense industry. We have been pouring money into defense and because of market forces, in at t, that gives money to do basic science and research. The basic science research, the stuff that still remains is in the defense prime. Being deployed, one off in the military, bringing that into the commercial sector, recognizing telecom, deploying it in the proper way. Do you want to add anything . I do think we used to be so far superior, counting on decades long gap in intelligence with our nearest are adversary and that is closing. We are knocking it out of the park. China is beating us in a i. The reason there are algorithms in ai performing at the level they do, not at the level they are, i would argue in many places ahead of us, they collect data, think about the pools of data where we can imply ai algorithms candidly are pretty small compared to what the chinese do, 700, 800 million people, 2000 data points, they run on bigger data bases. Weve got some issues, weve got to Work Together as liberal democracies will do and get over small differences and all rays are you there are smaller differences than our adversaries. We are going to be okay as long as we Pay Attention and try to get ahead. If we just let it happen, we are looking, standing in the dust wondering what happened. We got to get out of the way and empower the private sector and use the private sector with the government. We are going to be fine and the development on 5g if we can get open sourced radios and spectrum figured out the good news about all of that is what happens next is what lays over those networks. Software defined networks, we are going to own that, something where the United States and our allies are far superior to where the chinese are today. My argument is we are to continue to promote that as well. The access point in terms of technology and 5g and issues around ownership of data, gaining accurate data, high quality data. Gaining knowledge and talked about ai, they are getting that and pushed by a human being in a specific purpose. Are rerunning the battle around access to accurate highquality data with points on that as well. The challenge, the open data model, the challenge, the authoritarian regime figured out the power of that lies in the aggregation of data. The more data you have, the better your ai is is one of the things democracies have the ability to do is not listen in on their citizens. What im talking about his pervasive encryption across an ai platform that enables preservation of privacy but at the same time allows the use of those algorithms in ways that promote our principles. This is not something the Chinese Communist party can compete with and it would become a competitive advantage but requires us in the free world to change our focus from an open data model to more of a closed data model that is more consistent with gdp are. Gdp are doesnt work because the world is still on an open data model requiring a change in how we treat data with the network. We change the way we treat data, owned by the individual creator. It is more powerful in terms of innovation on the part of ownership of data, what someone distributed a letter i am wondering about the late distribution of technology of liberal democracies, the distributed. Of technology can be utilized to create trust around ownership of data, a huge element of disinformation, with liberal democracies. It causes great cause for concern. The only way you do it is by increasing the data and i would argue youve got to get to quantum encryption. On the block chain technologies themselves you have proof of work and proof of state. For proof of work you have quantum computing vulnerability you have to hash once you get to the power of the quantum computer on proof of that, it depends on the security of the platform you are running the block chain on. If you are on an insecure platform like we have to do you cant verify the security of that implementation. Those are two great applications that require to be laid over a secure encrypted network. Think about how we get here. Tech Companies Like google and facebook and others are very tech savvy advertising company. Revenues based on advertising. Advertising is based on, if we get something for free, you are the problem and that is what they did. They gave it to you for free and so the product is you and i will mark it back to you, things to make it more efficient. That is the model of which we are in. Until we change how that works. Candidly, most people are accepting of that. Im willing to do facebook knowing they will send me ads, i like the ads. Until we figure out a way, we are never going to get encryption at a state until it is after quantum level computing and encryption a quantum level computing then it is much more difficult to find, only nationstates versus, enterprises. We will be in this transition, how do you protect that data. One of my arguments, why we get huawei into liberal democracies around the world diverting that, they get their hands on that data they used it for purposes that adversarial to their interests. You mentioned information operations. You saw what happened in 2016 here, limited information operations, pretty aggressive, the billy ability to me to be late data that gets you to think one thing or another is on the rise. You know you want to interfere with elections. This is something to focus on and worry about because it is coming. It is coming. We are up against the parliamentary clock. We ask him to give their questions, do you want to go first . Thank you very much. This is the question that was debated more than any other question. Have our militaries become too reliant on data and hightech systems. There is a hell spawn, takes out all the technology, absolutely useless and 10 inches or whatever it may be. Do we risk the sufficient kit. My question, and how smaller software firms, building a new advanced 5g networks. Do you have to have scale or tech giant to be an effective player in this market. I have lived through this in the u. S. Air force. We started back in the early 2000s, shut off gps and shut off our radios. The challenge that brings to military forces, get used to fighting in the stone age. You forget about the fact if the stuff gets shut off, we get chaos in the streets. There is no way we are fighting abroad, we bring peace to the street, we lost focus how these technologies return to our society to keep them from functioning as civil societies. That is harmful. It forces us, prevents us from building emp hard and resilient military grade it systems that take a licking and keep on ticking. That is what we need for our society. Shut off the internet, shut off the power in a major city and youve got chaos in a few hours. If youre responsible for the military to think this way in terms of we are going to shut off everything, not thinking with implications of that as it happens in our own society into the other question. The big problem we have for scale is cost of radios. We have to get the cost of the radios down to deploy. In terms of the software it is easy to scale as long as you have an antenna and a radio. You dont have an antenna and a radio you cant scale like a Typical Software company in 5g. Thank you for that. My favorite example of this, certainly our adversaries, if you look at the Chinese Defense posture in the past 15 to 20 years they realize the advantages we having smart soldiers, smart bombs, smart aircraft, the whole 9 yards. They are just it to that and try to develop a defense plan and offensively plan that would go after our ability to have smart bombs. Candidly they were a little ahead of us because we couldnt get caught up. They were aggressive. Just to make the point come home the United States Naval Academy started in 2017. They hadnt done this in 20 years, required that every new commissioned officer in the navy that came out of the Naval Academy in 2017 and subsequent classes had to understand an important piece of technology to compete and that was the sextant developed in 1728. They gotten away, decided they better get back to adjusting case the gps systems werent working. That brought the point home to the military, we have issues, imagine, this is why russians try to get into the electric grid. That was announced by the administration, they found the chinese intelligence efforts to get into our electric grid, they are trying to get into yours. It creates a problem because they know if they turn off the lights they get chaos in the streets, they get that levels of disruption you couldnt get gas, pump gas, get cash out of your atm, do a credit card transaction online. Imagine the chaos that creates. We have to look at the military and civilian protection of these networks. If you go to its basic point you really want to take a risk, do you want to roll the dice that huawei is going to be a good player, china is going to cooperate when you need them to cooperate . History has shown us that is not the case so i would be extra careful on that and look at how we build out systems that are secure and secure, we secure every piece of that. On a Small Company that im a part of, and onto a printer invested in a couple Small Companies that do exactly this. It is hard, it is not easy, sometimes it was the money but at the end of the day the innovation to solve these hard problems is excited to be a part of. That spirit is alive and well in the United States. Dod is reaching out to find ways to talk to these companies, the air force is a good program where they get the contract at the end of the day. You get Development Money at the end of the day which is nearly impossible and the small entrepreneurs and sometimes that is why big tech isnt going to solve the problem. Does these small innovative take leaders that come out and go we have a better way, we have a better mousetrap, we just need somebody to see it. We are in that time right now. That is what we are doing in the United States, very exciting time to be here, exciting time to be talking about the 5g problem because it could be a massive opportunity, for the betterment of all liberal democracies. Thank you for that. I just read a fascinating book, the shadow war talking about the changing character of conflict, a global clash of ideology wont be on the conventional but it will all be very much the Business Space we are speaking about. Would you concur with that . Absolutely. My book explains how that happened and is based on my last 5 or 6 years when i was focused on us china competition. It has shown how they moved warfare out of the traditional battlefield into the area of globalization, the internet and turned all everyones strengths into vulnerabilities by undermining each one of them. If you understand how that works and you understand we as a community of free nations really lost sight of what is important when it comes to protecting our democracies. Thank you very much indeed for helping us with our study on this. It has been really illuminating. Appreciate your time. It is your birthday today, correct . I wanted to spend it with you. We are honored by that. Sir nicholas sends his best wishes. Always good for a good quote at dinner. We miss him dearly here. We thank you both, extend my thanks to senator tom cotton. It has been in illuminating afternoon. Thank you to my colleagues on the, we are grateful for your time and that concludes this particular session on 5g. Order, order. Coming up live tuesday on our network on cspan, politico playbook hosts a conversation with new jersey governor phil murphy. A new we go to houston, texas for the funeral of george floyd who died in Police Custody in minnesota. At 2 30 p. M. The Senate Finance Committee Examines Unemployment Insurance during the covid19 pandemic. On cspan2 the senate returned at 10 am to resume consideration of legislation to Fund National parks. On cspan 3 the Senate Homeland Security Governmental Affairs Committee holds a hearing on federal government buying industries and strategies in response to covid19. Next, a discussion on policing and racial inequality with alloy presented of bobby rush, st. Paul, minnesota in rochester, new york and the president of the naacp, derrick johnson. The event was hosted by axios, about george floyd and the protest across the nation at the measures needed to Reform Police departments. Good afternoon. I am the executive director of axios. Welcome to our live event. Many of your joining us live