Following the prosecution of the Canadian government, the Canadian Border Services Agency and the Royal Mounted Police (collectively the prosecution of the Canadian government) on March 4, on March 7, Huawei launched a counterattack, high-profile announcement of the US Defense Act of 2019. The constitutionality of Section 889 filed a lawsuit in the US Federal Court, requesting the court to determine that the sales restriction clause against Huawei was unconstitutional and ordered the permanent prohibition of the implementation of the restriction clause (this case is commonly referred to as the US government).
Within a week, Huawei’s actions continued, and the US and Canadian governments were successively prosecuted, apparently because the Meng Xiazhou case was forced to take remedial measures because it had entered the substantive judicial process of extradition.
If the prosecution of the Canadian government is still directed against the Meng Xiazhou case itself, then the prosecution of the US government is clearly opening up a second war, intended to surround Wei to save Zhao. If you can win the case, it proves that Meng Zhouzhou was arrested for political reasons, so the possibility of not being extradited and released is greatly increased. Otherwise, Huawei has no intention to sue the US government because the “Frequency Authorization Act of 2019”, which restricts the sale of Huawei products, was passed in the US House of Representatives as early as May 24, 2018, and was approved by President Trump on August 13, that year. The signing came into effect, when the Chinese Foreign Ministry asked the United States to “not implement the relevant negative provisions concerning China.”
Therefore, if Article 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act of the 2019 fiscal year is unconstitutional, it was unconstitutional at the time of its entry into force last year. Huawei should prosecute rights protection. At that time, it should be prosecuted, but until now Huawei decided to sue, apparently because of the accident in Meng case. break out. If there is no Meng case, Huawei will certainly not spend huge sums of money, hire a luxury lawyers team, fight in two lines, and will not go to the United States to fight this lawsuit that the US government is suspected of being unconstitutional.
If there is no Meng Xiazhou case at the end of last year, Huawei does not intend to sue the US government. This is in line with the general principle of Chinese people doing things. It is a blessing to lose money, and it is better to have more money than to be rich. It is not a matter of nothing. Where is the hang on a tree, anyway, the world is so big, not only the American one, forget it, it’s a big deal to give up the American market! Moreover, Huawei has basically completed the end of the year as early as April 2018. Fully prepared to withdraw from the US market, so whoever says that Zhang butcher is dead, is it necessary to eat a pig? Without the US market, Huawei can’t live?
However, the intention of the United States is obviously not only to limit the sale of Huawei or Huawei to the US market, but also to limit the sale of Huawei at least in the West, but to completely eliminate the rise of Huawei and eliminate the US in the field of telecommunications. The most powerful competitors ensure the leading position in the United States. Therefore, it is not enough to sell only (that is, the prohibition of prohibition). It is also necessary to use the power of the state to use Huawei’s executives to force Huawei to surrender and even dispel its dismemberment. Mind.
If the United States succeeds in this move, any China’s slightly influential high-tech companies will face the same fate in the future. The rise of Chinese technology companies will probably be completely wiped out by the United States in the bud, and there will never be a day.
Therefore, although Huawei is now forced to sue the US government, if it wins, it can be slashed and slashed, which can not only solve the problem of Meng Xiazhou, but also clear the obstacles for Huawei to enter the United States again, and let the United States deliberately build the world. The anti-Huawei joint defense line completely collapsed. Therefore, China has a complete account for this, and it is a public good, a matter of reason, and no matter what the victory or defeat, the prosecution of the US government is a good idea worthy of a try. Even if it finally loses, the US government can be further hypocritical. When exposed to the world, the people of the US government collapsed, and the myth of the “separation of powers of the three parties” and “judicial independence” in the West was shattered (the domestically known beauty powder represented by the Law Party in China would be like a death test).
At this moment, as a Chinese, although there is not much hope for the final victory, it is still an unshirkable duty to firmly support Huawei’s bold prosecution of the US government. Because at this moment, we are all Huawei. !
However, Huawei sues the US government for unconstitutionality. Regardless of the outcome, in fact, the symbolic meaning is still greater than the actual meaning, because the probability of winning is small; the second is that the effective time available is too short, the lawsuit may not have been pronounced yet, and the Meng case is still not satisfied. The outcome of the “Finance and Defence Authorization Act of FY 2019” will be abolished. How will the lawsuit be carried out at that time? After all, the new “FY2020 National Defense Authorization Act” has to come into effect again. If the new bill still contains the restricted-sales Huawei clause, it is still suspected of being unconstitutional. Is it necessary for Huawei to file a constitutional lawsuit against the 2020 fiscal year national defense authorization law? ? If the lawsuit is still unsuccessful for two years, the “French National Defense Authorization Act of 2021″ is coming again. Is Huawei going to continue prosecution? If so, is the US government happy?
Therefore, we must also be highly vigilant. Huawei’s prosecution of the US government is very likely to be part of the trap and conspiracy of the United States to suppress Huawei. It is the wishful thinking of the United States that China may be in the midst of this.
It’s hard to say that the United States may just want Huawei to fall into the various judicial suits set up by the United States to invite the people to join in, to attract fish, to go through the lengthy and complicated judicial process, to help the Huawei, and to let the Huawei out. Huawei, in the end, Huawei was forced to sign an alliance under the city (such as pleading guilty and paying a huge fine), or a fine to take advantage of the opportunity to dispel Huawei, thereby achieving the strategic goal of both suppressing Huawei and achieving the US’s suppression of the rise of Chinese high-tech enterprises.
Therefore, we have to be vigilant and have to be prepared. At the same time as litigation, we must make various response plans in advance, leaving enough backhands. At the crucial moment, we must rely on the strength of the state to take a multi-pronged approach and beware of passive beatings. Situation, otherwise, Huawei is very likely to fall into the trap of the United States.
This is not an alarmist, but a foresight. Before the United States succeeded in making the Alstom company fall into the US judicial trap, it was completely unable to extricate itself. Finally, Alstom was completely dismembered. The United States is the largest in the power field. The competitors have disappeared since then, ensuring the United States’ leading position in this field.
The United States accused Alstom of bribing $75 million in the sale of gas turbines to countries such as Indonesia and Saudi Arabia, which resulted in improperly obtaining orders of $4 billion. Pierucci was informed of a commercial corruption case in Indonesia in the early 2000s, because Alstom’s e-mail on bribery was copied to him and was obtained by the United States through illegal means of hacking. evidence”.
The United States put him into a prison of equal punishment with murderers and gangs, was not allowed to bail, and threatened the sentence of 15-19 years. He was told that the preparation for the trial would take three years and cost millions of dollars unless he chose to cooperate with the US Department of Justice – plead guilty.
Pieruqi has no choice but to cooperate with the US Department of Justice. In July 2013, Pieruqi was forced to plead guilty. However, the story did not end here. This is just the beginning of the climax of the big drama. Because “the husband is not guilty and guilty of his crimes”, the goal of the United States is not that Pierucci is denying sin, but whether his Alstom company is employed. Just like it.
The US Department of Justice accused Alstom and Pieruqi of alleged commercial bribery, when investors worried that the fine could exceed $1 billion, which would not only seriously affect the company’s balance sheet, but could also force it to sell assets.
In order to pressure Alstom to force the company to cooperate with the US Department of Justice, the US authorities have arrested three Alstom executives, former colleagues of Pieruci.
On April 23, 2014, Lawrence Hoskins, vice president of Asia, was arrested. He was the fourth and last arrested executive of Alstom. He was arrested in the US Virgin Islands.
According to Alstom executives at the time, Alstom was forced to trade with General Electric for the first time shortly after Pielucci pleaded guilty in July 2013. After the possibility of a deal, the legal pressures faced by Alstom and Pieruqi seem to have eased.
Sure enough, after Bloomberg broke the news that General Electric was negotiating to acquire Alstom, Alstom officially opened a negotiation model for selling assets, and accordingly the US Department of Justice stopped the intensive arrest mode for Alstom executives.
On June 20th, the Alstom Board of Directors “consensus” agreed with the acquisition. Alstom’s Thermal Power, Renewable Energy Power and Grid business unit, which is Pierucci’s global power business segment, was acquired by the industry’s main competitor, General Electric.
Please note that at this time, from June 7th, 2010, Alstom completed the acquisition of the transmission business of the global top 500 nuclear industry company Areva Transmission and Distribution Company, and formed Alstom’s global power grid business in just 4 years. Time (two weeks left).
In the same week that Alstom agreed to be acquired, Pieruci’s bail application was finally approved, but he had been in prison for 14 months. He said that he had not seen the sun for more than 250 days, nor did he breathe the air outside the cell. When he was arrested, he thought that he would soon be released or released on bail, because he thought that it was only a small problem in legal affairs, and would not affect his plan to return to China on weekends (is it very similar to the arrest of Meng Xizhou, originally also He thought that he was not questioned because of routine customs inspections, etc., so he did not tell his family about his arrest in the first four days.
From June 2014 to October 2017, he experienced another three years of bail; he then returned to the US prison for a year until September 2018 when he was released from prison. Because at this time Alstom’s general trend has gone, and the food has been completely stopped, the US Department of Justice has no worries anymore. It is inevitable that he will continue to hold Pierucci, and he will inevitably take care of him to eat and drink, and consume the money of American taxpayers. Since the big event is over here, what is the use for him? It’s good to let him go where he is from, so he is free from prison.
Before his free time in May 2018, Alstom finally agreed to withdraw from the three joint ventures with GE, and will sell shares of the three companies on September 4-10, Alstom on October 2 Transfer all benefits to GE to complete the final step in the exit energy field.
But on December 22, 2014, before Alston was completely dismembered, that is, Pierucci was arrested for 1 year and 8 months, pleaded guilty for 1 year and 5 months, and Alstom received a general purchase request. Eight months later, Alstom was forced to enter into a plea agreement with the US Department of Justice and was fined $772 million.
What is certain is that the US Department of Justice’s penalty did bring enormous financial pressure to Alstom, which objectively accelerated the process of Alstom’s sale of assets. The company’s FY2014-2015 power business sales of 13.33 billion euros, net profit of 104 million euros; transportation business sales of 6.139 billion euros, a net loss of 823 million euros. Under this fiscal state, it is imaginable to pay a fine of $772 million to the company.
Sure enough, in just a few months, Alstom’s board of directors sold their quality assets (and most of the assets) very “coolly”. Many people don’t understand this very much. Pieruchi pointed out in the book that the reason is very simple, because the US Department of Justice’s investigation of Alstom has put a lot of pressure on the French company, so that they face GE. The acquisition could not be parried.
The successor of Montpel is the current French President Mark Long. On March 11, 2015, the then Minister of Economy, Mark Long, attended the hearing of the French National Assembly Economic Committee, saying that “I personally believe that (the US Department of Justice) this investigation and (Alstom CEO) Mr. Krone (Patrick Kron) The decision has a causal relationship (de cause à effet).
Although Alstom’s FY2014/2015 financial report showed that Alstom’s business performance was indeed seriously declining, the US Department of Justice’s penalty was clearly “the last knife” and the last straw to crush the camel.
First, in December 2014, after Alstom was fined $772 million, the fine should be paid within 10 days. However, it was not until September 2015 that Alstom paid. Why is the US Department of Justice so “tolerant” and graceful for so long? Pieruchi said that it was because the US wanted to wait until the relevant departments of France and the European Union approved GE’s acquisition of Alstom’s power department, and then imposed a fine to avoid extra-budgets.
Second, during the acquisition negotiations, Alstom had proposed to allow GE to pay fines after the completion of the acquisition. GM also expressed its willingness, because according to business rules, the acquisition was acquired by debt and debt. But the US Department of Justice has forced a fine to be paid by Alstom’s unsold portion, so Alstom has to pay the US government’s $772 million fine by accelerating the sale of assets to raise cash.
The US’s rhythm of arrest, bail, release, and fines for Alstom’s fines and payment time in the United States is in complete agreement with GE’s acquisition of Alstom’s beat. The pace is highly consistent. Can it be said that this is coincidence and coincidence? Can the Alstom case be a simple judicial independence case without political factors? Can say Als Is the acquisition a simple business merger? Without the assistance and assistance of the US Department of Justice, Alstom was so dismembered so smoothly that he was forced to completely withdraw from the once-leading energy field? And the key is that the acquirer turned out to be an American company.
Alstom was originally a large French multinational company with two major businesses, power and transportation. The company’s 2013-2014 financial report shows that its power sector (thermal power, renewable energy, power grid – now common to the United States) assets totaled 19.403 billion euros, accounting for 61.35% of total assets; and transportation sector assets of 6.648 billion euros, The proportion is 21.02%.
Among them, the total sales of the power sector was 14.811 billion euros, accounting for 73.07%, and the profit before tax was 1.047 billion euros, accounting for 88.06%. The transportation sector sold a total of 5.458 billion euros and the profit before tax was only 287 million euros.
Obviously, Alstom’s power sector at that time occupied more assets, generating most of the sales and pre-tax profits, and its cash flow was mainly brought about by the power sector. This is a hen of the Alstom Group who will lay golden eggs and is a quality asset.
But in the end, the hens who only lay golden eggs can only be sold to the US General Electric Company, and finally they can get rid of the US Department of Justice’s pursuit. The arrested executives have once again regained their freedom.
At this point, the US Department of Justice has completely exposed the true face of the large multinational company Alstom. Alstom’s skinny camel, which was forced to the corner, couldn’t stand up and was completely dismembered.
Although Alstom continues to exist in France, the scale of losing the most profitable core power business has become very small, and it has become insignificant and no longer has a competitive advantage for American companies.
Looking back at the Huawei case and the Alstom case, it is not difficult to find that although the United States has striking similarities in dealing with Huawei and Alstom, there is no big difference in its fundamental purpose, but Huawei and Alstom The company and their respective environments are very different, and the final outcome is very likely.
At that time, although Alstom was not weak, its power sector was also a good asset and profit, but the entire Alstom Group was in a downturn, the profit margin was very low, the days were not good, and the prospects were worrisome. In fact, it has become a seller. Produced by self-help, it has long been eyeing; and Huawei is the opposite, is in a prosperous upward trend, scale, profit, prospects and other aspects are very good, which determines Alstom In the face of the pursuit of the US Department of Justice, the long-armed jurisdiction over the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the United States is almost incapable of fighting and powerless, only to recognize the plant; while Huawei bravely raised the judicial weapons, determined to compete with the US government, apparently unwilling to recognize When you are a big man, you refuse to follow Alstom’s footsteps, at least let the United States converge and not do too much.
Another important difference is the position and attitude of the Chinese and French governments and the difference in national strength between the two countries. In the balance between domestic enterprises and the US government, China is obviously much heavier than France. This is also the confidence and confidence of Huawei to fight back. Where.
As Wang Yi said, the United States “acts against specific Chinese enterprises and individuals is not a simple judicial case, but a deliberate political suppression. We have and will continue to take all necessary measures to resolutely safeguard Chinese enterprises and citizens. It is the unshirkable duty of the Chinese government. At the same time, we also support related companies and individuals to take legal weapons to protect their rights and interests, not to be ‘silent lambs’.”
Although the Chinese government did not directly counter the United States as many netizens expected, it will certainly not stand by and let Huawei be arbitrarily arbitrarily, because only Huawei’s private enterprise has the strength to fight against the US government’s power to fight the country. Undoubtedly the thickness of the egg to the stone. However, with the “all necessary measures” of the Chinese government’s “indispensable”, Huawei will not be “one person is fighting”, and its counterattack will not be isolated again, at least not falling to the same as Alstom. The extent to which sellers can produce themselves.
At that time, the United States had not raised the banner of trade protectionism, making it easy for people to think that it was only a simple judicial case. Without political factors, the United States is absolutely the embodiment of justice, the defender of fairness and order; today The United States attacked on all sides, set off a number of trade wars, shouted the slogan of “US priority”, moved against the trend of the times, and engaged in trade protectionism. Its selfishness, self-interest and self-interest have no cover, and it has no connection with fairness and justice. The people finally understood what medicines were sold in the American gourd, and finally saw the original appearance of the United States. At this time, the United States has re-applied its skills, and it is hard to believe that this is a simple and simple judicial case rather than a political pressure. This makes the United States no longer occupy the paradox and moral advantage. Therefore, Huawei’s counterattack has even been confirmed by many American traditional allies. The US defense against Huawei’s defense has already shown signs of collapse in the absence of lawsuits from both sides. From this point of view, the US’s attempt to clean up Huawei’s high-tech enterprises will be bankrupt, and there will be no suspense.
At present, Huawei has been forced to be involved in four judicial proceedings around the Meng Xiazhou case. The prosecution of the US government lawsuit is a very important part of it. As for the results, there are no more than three situations, losing, winning, and reconciling.
I think it is difficult to win the case. Although it is reasonable to say that the victory is justified in terms of evidence, after all, the US National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 is unconstitutional. Is the United States not a country under the rule of law that is known as “judicial independence”? ? Is it not a model of constitutionalism? Is there a constitutional spirit in the United States? Whether the US justice is truly independent, this lawsuit is a good touchstone, and it is also an excellent demon mirror!
As for the personal fate of Meng Zhouzhou and the final outcome of the entire Huawei case, I feel that the two sides are more likely to compromise and reconcile. Of course, the settlement is most likely a package of reconciliations, that is, 23 allegations made by the United States against Huawei and Meng Zhouzhou (these allegations include theft of trade secrets, wire fraud, obstruction of justice, etc.) and Huawei accused the US government of unconstitutionality and demanded permanent restrictions. The implementation of the Huawei terms is combined and resolved.
Because reconciliation may be both Huawei’s appeal, but it is also an attempt by the United States to attract fish to the hook and to fight for help. Is the Alstom case finally settled by means of reconciliation? Isn’t the Zhongxing case also settled?
In fact, the United States accused Meng Xizhou and made an extradition request. In fact, he still wanted to force Huawei to cooperate with the US Department of Justice, forcing Huawei to weaken and suppress Huawei by pleading guilty, punishing punishment, and stopping commercial activities. This is exactly the same as what the United States arrested Pieruqi wants to achieve. He led the snake out of the hole, and surrounded the aids. The Pierucci and Meng Zhouzhou were playing Alstom and Huawei.
Although the United States may not have expected that Huawei would counterclaim the unconstitutionality of the US government, it would be a consistent practice in the United States to induce or force foreign companies to file legal proceedings in the US judicial system and fall into the judicial traps laid out by the United States. And wishful thinking. Because the United States has thoroughly understood the psychology of these multinational corporations, in order to avoid a greater blow and pay a higher price, it will eventually choose to compromise with the US government to plead guilty and accept punishment, in exchange for the punishment that is considered to be minor. The right to take it lightly. Therefore, the US government may not be surprised by Huawei’s litigation, and it may not be afraid.
Of course, the companies surveyed and punished by the United States are not only China’s ZTE Huawei, but Japan and South Korea do not say that the European companies that have been punished by US investigations are far more than the Alstom family. As early as 2008, German industrial giant Siemens was accused of commercial bribery by the US Department of Justice and sentenced to $450 million. In the book, Pieruci also pointed out that since 2008, a total of 26 companies have been sued by the US Department of Justice and eventually paid more than 100 million US dollars, including 14 European companies, accounting for half of the country. The payment of fines exceeds $6 billion. In contrast, only five US companies were fined and fined $2 billion. Pieruzi believes that this shows that the US judiciary is clearly biased towards US companies.
Therefore, let Huawei fall into the trap of judicial proceedings in the United States, let Huawei carry a heavy burden, disperse Huawei’s energy, curb Huawei’s development and progress, until it dismembers and even kills Huawei, at least let Huawei pay a heavy price for one night. Before returning to liberation, and warning other Chinese technology companies not to think of the American company’s cheese, this is the United States’ wave of borrowing from the country, using the so-called judicial litigation form, implementing long-armed jurisdiction to clean up, including Chinese companies, The reason for all the multinational companies that have a greater competitive advantage in the United States is the long-standing and unsuccessful trick of the US government. We should be highly vigilant.
However, I believe that in Huawei, the past wishful thinking of the United States may not be able to start this time. Because the opponents have changed, China’s determination to resist the long arm of the United States and its ability to block the United States from killing Chinese high-tech enterprises will never make the United States happy. The abacus is easy to succeed. The extraterritoriality of the United States cannot be reinstated in China anyway. The concession must not enter China again in the invisible. This is the key and core of the problem.
“More wins, less countless”, as long as we have an abacus in advance, and then move, it will not be too passive, the ending should not be too bad. Therefore, I am cautiously optimistic about the Huawei case, even if the United States is taking the trap of catching fish and fighting around, because this is not a competition between Huawei and the United States, but the competition between China and the United States. The collision of the National Games, on the road to the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, has no reason or indication that we need to be negative or pessimistic about this.Following the prosecution of the Canadian government, the Canadian Border Services Agency and the Royal Mounted Police (collectively the prosecution of the Canadian government) on March 4, on March 7, Huawei launched a counterattack, high-profile announcement of the US Defense Act of 2019. The constitutionality of Section 889 filed a lawsuit in the US Federal Court, requesting the court to determine that the sales restriction clause against Huawei was unconstitutional and ordered the permanent prohibition of the implementation of the restriction clause (this case is commonly referred to as the US government). Within a week, Huawei’s actions continued, and the US and Canadian governments were successively prosecuted, apparently because the Meng Xiazhou case was forced to take remedial measures because it had entered the substantive judicial process of extradition. If the prosecution of the Canadian government is still directed against the Meng Xiazhou case itself, then the prose...