Slashdot Mirror


China's ZTE Pleads Guilty, Will Pay $1.19 Billion For Violating US Trade Sanctions (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Chinese telecom equipment maker ZTE Corp will plead guilty and pay $1.19 billion ($892 million in the Iran case) to settle allegations it violated U.S. laws that restrict the sale of American-made technology to Iran and North Korea, the company and U.S. government agencies said on Tuesday. ZTE entered into an agreement to plead guilty to conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, obstruction of justice and making a material false statement, the U.S. Justice Department said. The Commerce Department investigation followed reports by Reuters in 2012 that ZTE had signed contracts to ship millions of dollars worth of hardware and software from some of the best-known U.S. technology companies to Iran's largest telecoms carrier. Between January 2010 and January 2016, ZTE directly or indirectly shipped approximately $32 million of U.S.-origin items to Iran without obtaining the proper export licenses from the U.S. government. ZTE then lied to federal investigators during the investigation when it insisted that the shipments had stopped, Justice said. It also took actions involving 283 shipments of controlled items to North Korea, authorities said. Shipped items included routers, microprocessors and servers controlled under export regulations for security, encryption and anti-terrorism reasons.

50 comments

  1. offenders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so.. anyone going to jail? Surely a fine of $2B will have jail term attached to it?

    1. Re:offenders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And ZTE is not China -- it's a company. If it can't ship decent chips, software, etc. it's dead. No, these are not all available from firms outside of Silicon Valley.

    2. Re:offenders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      True, but China's government is probably aware that swooping in to protect ZTE and save $2B that can be bilked from holdings belonging to out of favor managers and directors is not worth the political capital and international goodwill they'd burn in the process.

    3. Re:offenders? by youngone · · Score: 3, Insightful
      ZTE was founded as Zhongxing Semiconductor Co. with money from China's Ministry of Aerospace.

      It was started as a "state-owned and private-operating" economic entity. None of this is a secret, it's easy to find on the Internet.

      No business in China gets as big as ZTE without input from the Chinese Government, that's how business is done over there.

      While they have not told the US to get stuffed this time, there might come a day when they will, and I wonder what will happen then?

    4. Re:offenders? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If ZTE simply didn't pay, there'd be no problem. The US would have to ask China to enforce the ruling. China wouldn't need to "swoop" to protect anything, simply respond slowly, or not at all to protect ZTE. All that goodwill China has with Trump? Trump China-bashes quite often. Both Trump and China would be happy if China didn't enforce the ruling. That would give both fodder to stir up the locals into a frenzy.

    5. Re: offenders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What political leaders say and do are two separate things. I wouldn't be surprised if Trump has a better relationship then you would think with China. He did veto TPP which is extremely beneficial to China.

    6. Re:offenders? by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention that ZTE is owned partially by the state and one of the listed owners is leadership of the PROC Army. The equivalent US example would be if the US Government created Cisco and provided all the investment money and one third of the company was owned by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

      ZTE is for all intents and purposes a Chinese state actor and should be viewed with suspicion.

    7. Re: offenders? by quenda · · Score: 1

      What political leaders say and do are two separate things.

      Generally, yes. But Trump has surprised a lot of us by actually trying to do some of the outlandish things he said he would. Hyperbole aside, his comments have not changed that much since getting elected.

      He did veto TPP which is extremely beneficial to China

      I'm still scratching my head on that one. The TPP was built to contain China.

    8. Re: offenders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trumps a businessman at heart. That comes first before his presidency and/or he made that decision to himself before he took office. The TPP was probably bad for him doing business in China.

    9. Re:offenders? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China's economy is too dependent on the US economy. They need to be careful and save their ire for bigger problems. The US could single handily demolish China's economy. China is already losing manufacturing jobs to other countries in SE Asia. And China does not produce a single thing the US cannot make domestically or obtain from other suppliers. And the US has an unpredictable President who might get a jump on things by raising tariffs on Chinese imports. And the US has needed an "unpredictable" President for some time. US responses to world events has been too predictable over the years which helps US adversaries take advantage of US policies.

    10. Re:offenders? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      There is LOTS of stuff the US can't readily produce. Or produce at a cost remotely comparable to what China can.

      If you want everything to be "Made in USA", be prepared to do without a LOT of stuff. A lot of things just won't be in stores, and a bunch of other stuff will get much more expensive.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    11. Re:offenders? by someone1234 · · Score: 1

      Both economies would suffer, but none will be demolished.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    12. Re:offenders? by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      This also seems highly political. The old ITAR controls, whose current form is what ZTE were prosecuted under, are so overbroad and vague that virtually any piece of technology is a controlled item. Some years ago we ran a Dell equipment catalogue up against them and found that roughly 50% of everything in there was covered by one or more export controls. Almost everyone taking a laptop out of the country was an illegal arms dealer because of how overbroad, and in many cases out of date, the regulations were. For example technical restrictions meant to cover export of flight simulators/trainers meant that anything more powerful than about a GeForce2 was controlled, that's how out-of-date the requirements were . So this isn't "ZTE violates export controls", it's "ZTE does business with a country the US doesn't like".

      Having said that, I don't understand why ZTE didn't just tell the US to take a running jump.

  2. And next time, they'll just ship it from China. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why involve a middleman? Direct exportation from the source. No fuss, no muss.

    But hey, at least they didn't send it to Cuba.

    1. Re:And next time, they'll just ship it from China. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently, not everything is made in China. Eg, most of the software you are currently using...

    2. Re:And next time, they'll just ship it from China. by turkeydance · · Score: 1

      use middlemen because of tradition. they are called "factors".

    3. Re:And next time, they'll just ship it from China. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what they want you to believe.

  3. war machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes, can't have them turrists using modern phones. Much easier to hack and spy the older ones...like our president uses.

    1. Re:war machine by quonset · · Score: 1

      yes, can't have them turrists using modern phones. Much easier to hack and spy the older ones...like our president uses.

      This goes along with him doing business with an Iranian bank which funds terrorists or his dealings with Cuba while that country was under sanctions.

      No big deal. It's only Trump.

  4. Why restrict this at all? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you work 40 hours per week to afford rice, a mud hut, and a pail to go fetch water from the river, you're poor. In the US, we work 40 hours per week and spend a tiny fraction of our income on food (12% of the median household's consumer spending) and running hot water (lol, $45/month here); and only represent about a third of our expenses with large houses with insulation, glass windows, running electricity, and heated space.

    The difference is technology. When you do something in a developed country, you use machines and advanced techniques to invest very little human labor and produce enormous output. If 10 people all work together to produce 1,000 units of a thing in an hour with the median-income wage of $27/hr, that's $270 / 1,000 or $0.27 per thing--which might sound meaningful in its own right, but essentially boils down to that thing selling for a price no less than 36 seconds of the median earner's labor. If those 10 people were only able to produce 10 units of that thing with their combined labor, then it's going to cost $27 or 1 hour (3,600 seconds!) of the median earner's labor.

    How stable do you think North Korea's government would be in an environment that had to support higher technology? North Korea can bring advanced weapons against us in a war if we sell them advanced weapons; it can't produce advanced weapons. To produce advanced weapons, North Korea needs technologically-advanced factories, which means they need a highly-educated population skilled in all forms of engineering, business management, logistics, and a broad array of the sciences. That's not enough: they need to be able to support the population which provides these things, meaning they need to apply technology in the private sector so as to improve access to food, running water, and so forth, reducing the amount of labor they expend on keeping their population alive and freeing that labor for their military machine.

    Does that sound like the kind of blind, raving, fanatical population that would tolerate Kim Jong-Un?

    By the time any of these people developed an economy which could support their war effort, they'd have an educated population used to a high standard-of-living and utterly disinterested in their political bullshit. They'd face military coups if nothing else, because their government support structure would also need sufficient education to raise their country to a state capable of supporting the kind of war we're afraid they'd bring to us--and then their intelligence community and their military power centers would quickly recognize the tactical instability brought by the existing government, and tear it down in any way expedient.

    They can't become a threat to us without acquiring a steady stream of ready-to-go weapons from a highly-developed third party seeking to wage war without the political consequences of war or simply collapsing internally along the way as the political basis of a developed country fails to support mindless and self-destructive war-mongering.

    Economic sanctions are an ineffective and dangerous way to handle undeveloped ratholes.

    1. Re:Why restrict this at all? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Why restrict this at all?

      Because North Korea is a cult and we've technically been at ware for then for many many decades.

      The difference is technology.

      Do you really think they are buying all this technology for their people and not for military use? If you do, you don't know North Korea.

      Does that sound like the kind of blind, raving, fanatical population that would tolerate Kim Jong-Un?

      So apparently you don't understand how cults work. Besides, you only need a few smart people in each sector to organize the other people.

      Economic sanctions are an ineffective and dangerous way to handle undeveloped ratholes.

      I agree. However, North Korea was actually quite modern before Kim II Sung declared war and created his cult nation.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:Why restrict this at all? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Iran isn't some low tech third world country though. And unlike NK, it's really just the US and Israel that won't deal with them.

      My company has sold high tech equipment to them in the past, and these days they buy the same stuff from our distributors in neighbouring countries.

      Thanks for not competing.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Why restrict this at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're developing and building the weaponry by importing technology, so they don't need an advanced infrastructure to build the technology. The elite and educated in NK are kept in line through intimidation and imported luxuries, which is why there are sanctions on technology and luxuries. Without the tech, they can't build the weapons, and without the luxuries, the elite get restless.

    4. Re:Why restrict this at all? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Meh, if they are a pain in the arse to deal with, simply tightly, isolate them, nothing in and nothing out, as far as you are concerned. Leave them alone to wallow in the own mire. If problems leak out from the regions aggressively plug those leaks. Providing them technology when they don't want to use it properly, just gives them technology to use improperly. The reason they have unstable violent societies is because that is all they are capable of producing at this time Stop fucking with them and they will leave you pretty much alone but the isolation should be really tight, nothing in and nothing out, except refugees in close to border refugee camps, these camps funded globally and from those camps based upon sound and proper vetting practices (no criminals and no psychopaths and no low intelligence, that must be able to make a positive contribution), select some immigrants to reduce pressures on the refugee camps, those refugees to return to their country of origin as soon as it is safe for them to do so. They have a job of work to do, make their country a better country, their failure and their responsibility, they are adults.

      If we stop fucking with them to steal their resources buying it with junk, we will not have a problem. If it takes a thousand years for them to stumble out of their primitiveness or even 10,000 years, so bet it, their choice, we have no right to deny them that choice or to scam them into slave labour, or steal the resources or fuck around with rebellions or appoint stooges or what ever the crazy fuck shit the CIA gets into. Does not work well with others, then shut them the fuck off and stay the fuck out (except to plug exports of violence).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    5. Re:Why restrict this at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you think they're just misunderstood, right?

    6. Re: Why restrict this at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As far as I can tell American sanctions against Iran are because of Iranian hostage crisis, which happened because the USA interfered in Iran.

    7. Re:Why restrict this at all? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Stop fucking with them and they will leave you pretty much alone but the isolation should be really tight, nothing in and nothing out, except refugees in close to border refugee camps,

      That's just not realistic without gross human rights violations, and it's not actually necessary. All you really have to do is prevent them from doing any empire-building outside their borders, and don't fuck with them too much, don't blow them up or compromise their government. Eventually they'll want what you've got and start asking for it, or reimplementing it themselves. But we like to go around tampering with things we barely understand politically and then watch them explode, presumably just to keep the region from uniting against us. Except just look at how well we're doing... ha ha

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Why restrict this at all? by Trickster+Paean · · Score: 1

      Perhaps economic sanctions are an ineffective way to handle undeveloped countries. But the largest violations by ZTE were with regards to Iran, which is pretty developed. And it was a conscious decision by ZTE to use US made telecom equipment to win Iranian government contracts. It was pervasive and ongoing behavior in violation of U.S. law. And the sanctions in Iran's case helped drive Iran to the bargaining table with regards to its nuclear program, both in terms of abandoning any immediate plans for nuclear weapons building or testing, and allowing nuclear inspections.

      As for North Korea, the banned items are dual-use items: things like routers, microprocessors, servers, things that can be used in ordinary products, but also military products, like long-ranged ballistic missiles. And those products weren't going there to be used for the North Korean internet.

      These aren't basic economic sanctions: in North Korea's case, the banned items are dual-use military items, and in Iran's case, it isn't undeveloped.

    9. Re:Why restrict this at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iran isn't some low tech third world country though. And unlike NK, it's really just the US and Israel that won't deal with them.

      That has only been the case for the last 6 months or so. This case is about activities taking place in 2012 when Iran was under UN sanctions, which in theory apply even in China when no US goods are involved.

    10. Re:Why restrict this at all? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying ZTE didn't break the law; I'm saying ZTE's actions aren't inherently harmful and would seem to lead toward a desirable end goal for all parties aside from unstable government administrations.

      Iran isn't very "developed" if CISCO routers are high tech. What are we talking about? 1940s United States?

    11. Re:Why restrict this at all? by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Do you really think they are buying all this technology for their people and not for military use? If you do, you don't know North Korea.

      I'm saying a high-tech military machine cannot sustain itself on top of a low-tech, undeveloped economy..

      So apparently you don't understand how cults work. Besides, you only need a few smart people in each sector to organize the other people.

      ...and the economic basis to maintain "a few smart people" and get the other people technically-literate enough to organize is also fairly critical.

      You can't have a few smart people and a shitload of serfs in backwater west Africa support a high-tech, industrialized military machine. It doesn't work. You need an industrialized economy to support an industrialized government.

      North Korea was actually quite modern before Kim II Sung declared war and created his cult nation.

      It's de-modernized now why? Was it too hard to control the population of a developed, wealthier nation? If they have to make the people wealthier and more-independent again to produce a barely-functional industrialized military, how well is that going to work for the cult of Jong-Un?

    12. Re:Why restrict this at all? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      I'm saying a high-tech military machine cannot sustain itself on top of a low-tech, undeveloped economy..

      They can if someone else provides them with the technology. It's exactly why there is an embargo!

      You can't have a few smart people and a shitload of serfs in backwater west Africa support a high-tech, industrialized military machine

      Umm... how many people do you think are technically inclined in your own nation's military? Sure, they can use the technology but they aren't anywhere at the level of actually developing it.

      It's de-modernized now why?

      It's not de-modernized, it just failed to keep up with modern technology because they've been embargoed. China cut themselves off from the world for a hundred years and they fell behind too despite having many highly intelligent people.

      I do not believe you fully grasp the consequences of the indoctrination of otherwise intelligent individuals.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    13. Re:Why restrict this at all? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The core human right is to be allowed to be as self destructive as you wish, should you wish to spread the destructiveness, you should be isolated in the least costly way possible, that cost not just of your citizens pockets but of their lives as well. How many of your own citizens are you willing to sacrifice to feed your urge for questionable human rights, not measured by those in question nor the citizens you are willing to sacrifice but by your own definition.

      A human has the right to exist as a wild human, should they so choose, with all the negativity and primitiveness that it implies, including them hunting and killing each other, as long as that is contained within wild human zones. You grant humans less rights than other wild animals and that is a gross deceit and a theft of their rights. Should they choose to live wild, than so be it, as long as that wildness is contained. You have no right to deny them wildness and if they do not submit dying in prison, you are the violator in your need to feed you sensibilities.

      Let them live and wild, violent and primitive as they choose as long as the keep to themselves within their own wild zones. As for the lowest animals so it should be fair for humans, it is obscene to grant animals rights and then deny those rights to humans, as if they are lower beings only entitled to labour for others or spend their lives in prisons.

      Now that fully recognises human rights, even if those humans want to hunt, kill and eat each other, no different to any other wild animal.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    14. Re:Why restrict this at all? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The core human right is to be allowed to be as self destructive as you wish,

      The core human right is to imagine that there are such things as inherent rights.

      If you accept that human rights are things we invent, then the right to travel is up there with the right to free association.

      How many of your own citizens are you willing to sacrifice

      That's the thing, those are humans you're talking about letting be disposed of for convenience's sake.

      Now that fully recognises human rights, even if those humans want to hunt, kill and eat each other, no different to any other wild animal.

      No. You're just granting their most powerful people the right to do those things, and you're going to help them do it by preventing the people they're murdering (etc.) from fleeing. You're ready and willing to help humans hunt, kill and eat each other.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:Why restrict this at all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if they can develop 180nm semiconductor lithography, or something much cruder still. In fact the cruder, the easier radiation-hardened.
      The funny thing is even if they'll do 70s/80s technology, they'll have 2000s/2010s technology to help develop it.
      E.g. a computer with 64GB RAM, maybe that cost 10 million dollars in the late 90s, now maybe $1K will suffice and with no clustering, no NUMA etc. : a single-system 64GB in cheap consumer hardware (including those named "Xeon" if you wish), running the latest pirated or open source software. Heck, to max out a few government computers : have border guards "fail to notice" you crossing the river, sell a few dozen grams of heroin to somebody in the Chinese town, and go back to DPRK with your DDR3 or DDR4 DIMMs and So-DIMMs.

      Now, congrats : you have a 64GB computer, CAD software, 2010s versions of compilers etc., access to the last three decades of English language scientific papers and technical papers. You don't need to invent computer languages or CPU instruction sets etc.
      Think how people do stupid things like video playback on C64 or IBM PC (not XT), or 3D printers made from crappy 1980s printer parts rescued from garbage. Or your Raspberry garage opener, which is really low tech garbage, using the world's most overpowered microcontroller because that's all what you have.

  5. And not one penny will change the fact by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    that selling that technology to bad actors makes them more dangerous.

    This is truly nearly pointless. Even crushing fines that result in bankruptcy and failure only move the corporate assets to another, more devious, and more ingenious entity, harder to detect.

    There is no compensatory punishment for such acts. We are left with enemies of their own choosing, more able to harm us, and more costly to repel or defeat.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  6. This. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find it very disturbing.

    You may think Iran is the source of all evil, and of course everybody is entitled to an opinion. For me, it is not evil at all.

    It's just another country in a region which seriously lacks proper control and is subject to interference from a lot of external parties.

    The only responsible action to take would be to defuse the conflicts, and start vital negotiations to achieve peace and stability there, but instead many stakeholders prefer to keep the wound open, as wolves attacking cattle.

    Of course, I'm not here to defend any terrorist, but we cannot equate extremism to nations (because it's dumb, that is).

    Nobody wants Iran to have weapons of mass destruction, but some knowledge is used to do good; I also am not thrilled that Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons -- and for that matter, neither am I happy about the USA, Russia and China having them.

    The US should provide the equipment to Iran instead of denying it; they will get it from elsewhere and that will be a lost opportunity to make friends there.

    And FYI I have no relation to that region, no relatives there, nor can I speak their language, not Muslim... nada. I'm just pissed off at how a child's life there is worth less than candy. I'm talking mainly about Syria at the moment, but it could be Iraq yesterday or Iran tomorrow.

    Finally, do you know I don't buy cars made by US companies? Guess what, American cars were once the best, but the world has caught up -- I have plenty of non-American options.

    And what about IT equipment? Do the math.

    We can make peace under risk of war -- or war without any chance for peace.

  7. a fine is simply not adequate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    zte is partially state-owned. so basically, the chinese government was (perhaps not so indirectly) acting as a middleman to ship u.s. made products, with export restrictions, to a country on that export-ban list.

    a measly billion won't do a damn thing.. not even the equal of a slap on the wrist with a limp orange noodle.

  8. So the company that ships malware by default by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    also double deals and sells technology where it shouldn't. Big surprise. Trouble is, they are getting off too light.

  9. The USA is the greater evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in this drama. And many others like it.

  10. russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait - I thought the russians were what we had to worry about...

  11. Waiting for HTC's turn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Same timeframe. Iran.

  12. So... ZTE software updates? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any idea how software updates for existing ZTE phones will be affected? One billion dollars is probably more than just a drop in the bucket for them, so I'd imagine they'll make a few cuts somewhere. I'm just wondering if my recent purchase of an Axon 7 Mini is now effectively doomed, as they have yet to release the Android 7 update for it.

    1. Re:So... ZTE software updates? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      China has an embargo on software updates to stunt the West and the US's intellectual interest for computer security.
      The plan is working perfectly, as people not only trust the Internet of Shit, they're asking and lining up to be raped by it.

  13. Sanctions don't work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sanctions just move things a little harder to be done but don't stop them. for example we have some businesses in Iran for bypassing sanctions in purchasing from american companies like amazon and ebay. One of this sites is charsooq that does it well! We already have purchased too many researching tools from America.

    1. Re:Sanctions don't work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh! Awesome!! :-D