US Ambassador Openly Warns Brazil: If You Don’t Ban Huawei, You Will Bear the Consequences

Recently, the US ambassador to Brazil said that if Brazil allows China's Huawei to participate in its 5G network construction, Brazil may face "consequences". In the past two years, the US's "small moves" to instigate other countries to ban Huawei are nothing new, but the US ambassador's public clamor on Brazilian territory has aroused the disgust of netizens and called his actions "gangsterism"...

US Ambassador "patted" Brazil: Eat the knife or eat candy, think carefully

According to Reuters, US Ambassador to Brazil Todd Chapman said in an interview published by local media on the 29th that if Brazil does not follow the advice of the United States and chooses the Chinese company Huawei, "I will not say there will be retaliation, but there will be consequences."

According to the report, Chapman mentioned that the United States has issued a warning about "China's failure to protect intellectual property rights" and said that if Brazil rashly cooperates and signs contracts with "companies that may infringe intellectual property rights", it may "scare away foreign investment."

Chapman then said the U.S. government has agreed to use $60 billion in funds from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation to help allies that choose to buy telecommunications infrastructure from "trusted suppliers."

"The U.S. position is to remind our allies and friends, like Brazil, who they are working with," Chapman said.

Foreign media reports believe that Chapman’s remarks are highly threatening. If Brazil does not "obediently" ban Huawei, it may face retaliation from the United States.

Netizens: Blatant bullying

It is understood that Brazil is scheduled to launch a tender for the development of the next-generation telecommunications technology (5G) next year. Public data shows that Brazil is the most populous country in Latin America, with a population of 212 million. For Brazil, China is its largest trading partner.

AFP reported that the above pressure from the United States is putting the Brazilian government in a dilemma.

Once the above remarks were published, they became a hot topic on social networking sites, and the US ambassador's words shocked many netizens.

User KaraboRamela described the US's actions as "gangsterism at its best. They should be ashamed of themselves."

"When did Brazil become a colony of the United States?" user NegroniCocktail asked a soul-searching question.

"This is bullying, did the same thing to the UK, now Brazil," user Gursimran Singh said.

"If you can't beat them, ban them," said user DT Money. Another user, DyingMinion, said, "I'm not surprised at all, because the same thing happened in the UK not long ago."

The pressure seems to be effective, and the US is "pursuing victory"

In fact, this is not the first time that Brazil has been pressured by the United States. On June 11, local time, U.S. Ambassador to Brazil Todd Chapman said that the United States is negotiating with Brazil and its local telecommunications companies on the purchase of 5G equipment produced by European operators Ericsson and Nokia. At that time, Chapman claimed that allowing Chinese companies to participate in the country's 5G deployment may even hinder the investment of other foreign companies on the grounds that "this type of funding is related to U.S. national security." (Related reading: "Adding trouble" to Huawei! The United States plans to subsidize Brazil to purchase Nokia and Ericsson 5G equipment)

That same month, a Huawei executive warned that Brazil’s plans to deploy 5G telecom networks could be delayed by years and face higher costs if the country succumbed to U.S. pressure and boycotted the Chinese equipment supplier.

On July 14, the UK announced a ban on Huawei. The UK's move was seen by the outside world as succumbing to US pressure, but the UK claimed that "it has nothing to do with the US." On the same day, at a press conference held in the Rose Garden of the White House, US President Trump responded to the "Britain ban on Huawei", claiming that "we persuaded many countries not to use Huawei, and in most cases I did it," and "the UK (finally) made a decision."

In response, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said on the 15th of this month that this once again proves that the decision to ban Huawei has nothing to do with national security, but is a highly politicized manipulation. "It also once again makes the world see clearly that it is not China but the United States that is intimidating, threatening, provoking and coercing everywhere."

Regarding the relevant decision of the United Kingdom, Hua Chunying stressed that the United Kingdom, without any solid evidence, cooperated with the United States in repeatedly discriminating against and excluding Chinese companies under the pretext of unfounded risks, openly violated the principles of market economy and free trade rules, violated the relevant commitments made by the United Kingdom, seriously damaged the legitimate interests of Chinese companies, and seriously impacted the basis of mutual trust in China-UK cooperation. China strongly opposes this. "China is seriously concerned about this. China will comprehensively and seriously evaluate this incident and take all necessary measures to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies."

In addition to Brazil and the United Kingdom, South Korean telecom operator LG Uplus also came under pressure from the United States last week (after "persuading" the United Kingdom, the United States has set its sights on South Korean telecom operators...).

Yonhap News Agency reported on the 22nd that Robert Strayer, the US Under Secretary of State for Cyber ​​and International Communications and Information Policy, urged telecom operators including South Korea's LG Uplus to abandon Huawei and choose equipment and technology provided by "trusted suppliers" during a video conference that day. Strayer said that the United States would not provide any incentive subsidies for replacing equipment, and also claimed that the cost of eliminating existing Huawei and ZTE equipment was "less than 10% of the total operating budget of telecom operators."