In this case, the other country in question is Canada, which has made its own sovereign decision to also sanction Iran.
Extradition treaties, including the US-Canada one, require that the conduct involved be a crime in both jurisdictions. If the Canadian courts decide that what she did is not a crime under Canadian law, she will get off. Simple as that.
Huawei Mate 20 Pro starts from 1049 Euro and Mate 20 start from 800 Euro, last time when I checked, 1049 Euro is almost $1200 USD, common sense tells that when an Android phone has a price tag of $1200 USD, it is anything but competing on price.
I have Mate 20/Mate 9/P8, the top ranking build quality has been repeatedly confirmed by numerous reviews world wide. I never ever had any issue with my Huawei Mate 20/10/P8. Labelling Huawei products as poor quality without proof is not helping on anything.
As for consumer products, yes of course they will have to get their money back somewhere. If you're running on one end a shady operation that is to cut the price to levels nobody can compete with and deliver shitty products only developing countries or banana republics want to afford, ... then you need to make up for this somewhere else in order not to expose the whole racket.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/6/18128720/o2-down-softbank...
> They're able to compete below price precisely because they are heavily government funded.
so you are arguing that rather than funding carefully selected new businesses with good potentials, or those state owned established companies with full government control in the same area such as ZTE, Chinese government is heavily funding the most profitable private high tech company Huawei?
sounds like the Chinese government is on a self destruction mission to me.
There is no indication that this arrest is related to U.S. policies to sanction foreign companies for selling to Iran.
Rather, the arrest is far more likely related to "US law [that] prohibits exports of certain US-origin technologies to certain countries" (from nytimes article). Huawei purchased certain technology from the US with the promise not to sell it to certain countries like Iran, and then proceeded to shamelessly violate the agreement.
Without laws like this, sanctions are far less powerful, because any foreign company not affected by the sanction can act as a middleman between the origin country and the sanctioned country.
What the UN International Court of Justice and European Union think about US sanctioning foreign companies that do business with Iran is completely irrelevant, since this arrest is not related to that policy.
>>LOL, kill thousands of its own citizens in protests? The Chinese government never did that (even the famous tank man was unharmed and was not arrested), the truth is, many soldiers got killed because they were not allowed to fire at citizens. Even the Chinese government did kill its own citizen they learnt from the US (1932 Bonus Army, 1970 Kent state massacre, Jesus that was only 48 years ago, not mentioning almost every day someone is being shot by the police somewhere in the US. The funny thing is one shot won't even make it to the newspaper now.)
>>In a word, you have been brainwashed by your media. I know it's hard to wake up someone who pretends to be asleep, but it's good for you.
Perhaps you or someone else knows more than we do about this on Hacker News, but in that case you should be telling us at [email protected] so we can look into it. That's in the guidelines as well. When there's real information, we take it very seriously. Unfortunately, though, this trope is driven mostly by imagination, not information.
this is really challenging as it is something I have been thinking about a long time and each idea I have I find a way that it would simply not work.
I've spent a lot of time looking into this. We are always open to new information and when we find evidence of abuse, we ban accounts and then some. We have low tolerance for actual abuse on HN.
But I can tell you with confidence that most people accusing "paid propagandists" are simply imagining the nastiest about those who happen to disagree with them. Both sides do this on divisive issues. That's not acceptable either.
That’s not a rip on you, the previous poster, or anyone. It’s just a statement that, yeah, sometimes it is important to highlight a poster’s potential bias. Why would you not want to?
Also, I’m curious: what technologies do you guys use to identify bad actors? Maybe if I understood the sophistication of your methods, I would have more trust. There are a lot of smart people here (much smarter than me) who may want to help.
"Sometimes it's important to highlight a poster's potential bias" is covered by the site guideline that asks you to send such concerns to [email protected] rather than posting them in the threads. In the vast majority of cases that I see, it's not hard to establish that the accusation of shillage is wrong and that the user was just expressing their personal view—unless you think the Chinese government planted people on HN years ago to establish posting histories about Julia or whatever.
Legit HN users have a right not to be dressed down or have their histories hauled out by a flash mob that doesn't like what they said. If you're concerned that someone is breaking the site guidelines or otherwise abusing HN, please contact us privately.
At worse you could argue that the poster is biased, but then in this types of geopolitical discussions who isn't? Certainly not me.
Yet sometimes it leads to a better outcome than just analysis of the argument alone. Context is real. Context matters. Automatically disregarding real information on the grounds of "maturity" ideology can lead to a worse outcome, so it doesn't seem like the best course.
>This is ridiculous equivocation between a democratic society with a rule of law and an authoritarian regime. You're kidding yourself if you don't think the Chinese government has an interest in data owned by foreign nationals that they could gain access to.
The test we apply is whether an account has crossed the line of using HN primarily for political battle. If that is the case, we ban the account, regardless of which politics or nation they're fighting for or against. That is because these battles have a way of consuming everything if allowed to, and therefore must not be allowed to.
Further explanations of how we moderate this are here for anyone who wants more: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme...
There's plenty of explanation of https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme... if you want to understand why we make a big deal about this on HN.
Edit: why did you censor yourself? At least own up to what you post.
No, it isn't. They're only equivalent if the American executive's company in question is selling, say, Huawei networking equipment (assuming it is banned; I don't know if it's the case) to businesses in Taiwan -- probably under an arrangement where the intention to sell to Taiwan was never made clear and likely actively concealed.
That's circumvention of export controls and likely fraud at the expense of the sanctioning country -- an entirely different beast than merely passive business between the sanctioned and a separate third-party.
>will undoubtedly cause a major international crisis.
It will, but it has less to do with any escalation by the US than it does with China's own, well, unique political environment. If a similar case occurred to CFO of e.g. Yandex, I have a hard time seeing Russians/Russia reacting nearly as strongly as I expect Chinese/China to.
> Since at least 2016, U.S. authorities have been reviewing Huawei’s alleged shipping of U.S.-origin products to Iran
Huawei is free to export all their Chinese origin products to Iran. The allegation here is that us-origin products are not following us export laws. This seems more like a case of "when in Rome, follow Roman laws".
[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-huawei/huawei-f...
That would resolve the question of whether she was arrested solely because of her role as CFO, or if it was also an attempt to send a personal message.
I assume that is what is being discussed.
You steal a car in Belgium. Belgium investigates, charges you and issues an arrest warrant. In some cases it goes to Interpol or EU-wide systems. You go to Germany for a vacation and your name is flagged. Yes, you are arrested by Germany for violating Belgian laws and the extradition process starts.
You can challenge the arrest on a few basis (such as "Iran wants to jail me for criticizing Mullahs") but other than that, countries do help each other catch criminals. "Violating US sanctions" is apparently a crime in USA and Canada more or less has the same view on major international relations so he is likely screwed. (I think the arrest is almost automatic everywhere, but then courts and justice dept decide on whether to extradite.)
I definitely feel anxious..
She works for the company in question.
This is supposed to be about Iran? Arresting the daugther of Huawei's founder definately makes it seem like there is more going on.
How is any significant American business man flying through Hong Kong airport supposed to feel right now?
They may be but US is on the right side of history on this one. And I say this as an European.
I hate Islamic Republic with every single cell in my body but you're just wrong.
* U.S. plain and simply fucked Iran up with a coup at 1953.
* Then helped Islamic Republic gain power in 1979. (This is up for debate though)
* Then helped Saddam Hussein attack Iran.
* Then sanctioned the country to the verge of bankruptcy.
* Then made a deal and backed out of it for no reason (Internal politics?)
The late 19th century was marked by occupation by Russia and the Ottoman empire. Following defeats in wars which Iran generally had provoked.
Once Iran became a constitutional monarchy in the early 20th century political instability reigned as forces loyal to the monarchy fought for power with those with a more democratic bent. Between 1947-1951 Iran had 6 different prime ministers. The coup itself was really a continuation of this political battle with the US helping the forces loyal to the monarchy.
Iran also didn't help itself during WW2 by choosing to technically remain neutral while allowing a large German presence and German utilization of the oil fields. This led to a joint British and Russian occupation to drive the Germans out.
Even today Iran's economic woes although made worse by sanctions is mostly rooted in economic policy decisions and large scale corruption which feeds money to those backed by the revolutionary guard at the expense of the people.
But it is easier to blame the big bad West for all your woes rather than take an introspective look at your own culpability.
We've had our moments that we were getting close. Now those moments are quite fragile. Every single time the U.S. has kicked us in the nuts in those moments.
Examples are this very same moment, where the economic sanctions and the reformists finally convinced the hardliners to talk to the U.S.
Supreme Leader finally gave it a thumbs up. And he raised his concerns back then that the U.S. cannot be trusted but if that's what people want it's OK to do it.
He was right. The U.S. could not be trusted. Now reformists have lost all credibility. In 2 years we have another election and for sure a batshit crazy like Ahmadinejad is going to be elected.
Same happened around 9/11. We had a really strong reformist movement and government. Then, out of nowhere, president Bush named Iran a part of "axis of evil". That gave the hardliners enough of a reason to push back against major reforms.
Jack Straw (British foreign minister of the time) has good notes on this if you're more interested.
1953's coup was another moment like that. Actually that's probably the closest we've ever been.
Now, if Iran is moving towards democracy, and at the most important moments, you kick it in the nuts, you "are" part of the problem.
The humanitarian toll of US policies is hard to fathom.
I am so deeply ashamed by how the US treats the people of Iran.
As a European I wish the US would take all the refugees their actions cause.
The same kind of hardships that also radicalized Trump voters, it lead them to vote a populist fascist into power.
Of course if Iran or Iranians cause trouble in the future, you'd use these as an excuse to say "Trump did the right thing, see what they did, they deserved those sanctions!", ignoring cause and effect: without the sanctions, they wouldn't be that pissed off to cause these troubles.
What the US is doing is a form of terrorism. It completely nullifies any inspiring or positive influence that the narratives about the US founding principles might evoke in those abroad, and it is only possible due to the idea of American Exceptionalism, which is patently false to anyone who observes without bias US actions.
I agree the horrible policy is bipartisan.
Please clarify the nature of your disagreement with my comment. Not sure I fully understand.
> you have just been brainwashed into hating your country.
That's a very large assumption from a few lines of text, I'll classify this as a cheap baseless attack/dismissal.
> The last president and Secretary of State are directly responsible for open slave markets in libya.
So I guess Bush and Cheney are "directly responsible" for a lot of thousand dead Iraqis and Afghanis. Or were those military interventions justified in your eyes? At least Obama has admitted "the aftermath" is his biggest regret.
This isn't Reddit, but the argumentative tone of this thread certainly reminds me of Reddit. Sensitive people make me sad :(
As anopther European, the US is most certainly on the wrong side of history with this shit. They're still salty that their pet dictator got ousted all those years ago.
You are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to ask you for the arguments behind your opinion. You are of course entitled to respond angrily. However, it doesn't make for great discussion and you won't persuade many people with this approach.
Keep in mind that US sanctions against foreign companies doing business with Iran are opposed by:
The United Nations International Court of Justice, which ordered the US to withdraw sanctions, to which the US responded by pulling out of international agreements.
The European Union, which has attempted to block its companies from complying with US sanctions.
With that said, the US is free to sanction anyone for its own interests, that's its right as a sovereign state. It is also its right as a sovereign state to refuse market access and trade to any company that violates its sanctions.
But arresting foreign nationals in other countries for violating US sanctions? That's the equivalent of Russia arresting American business executives and extraditing them to China for violating Chinese sanctions against Taiwan - and yes, there are sanctions against Taiwan, which are regularly ignored by the US, of course. This is a massive escalation and will undoubtedly cause a major international crisis. Stay tuned.