Chinese telecommunications and consumer electronics manufacturer Huawei has found itself at the centre of a long list of controversies in recent months. Far and away the leader in 5G network infrastructure, the company’s business units have performed spectacularly, but as America continues to pursue bellicose trade policies with China, the firm’s relationship with Europe and the countries in the ‘Five Eyes’ alliance with the USA – Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia – has been strained.

Are the latest accusations warranted – or fair? See our extensive timeline below for the long list of controversies pinned on the company.

2001

December – Indian security services accuse Huawei of aiding Taliban

As far as we can tell, this is the most prominent early example of security fears levied at the country. Reports from India’s intelligence agencies, said EETimes, led to the placing of Huawei’s India operations on a watch list for “alleged business dealings with the Taliban, Pakistan and Iraq”.

At the time, the Cabinet Committee on Security in India was considering whether or not to deport 178 Chinese engineers working at the Bangalore R&D centre.

The accusations were described by a spokesperson as untrue and that the company’s global business “is in compliance with the United Nations’ standards and regulations”.

2003

January – Cisco sues Huawei

While not overtly a national security issue, Cisco filed a lawsuit against Huawei alleging that the latter had unlawfully copied intellectual property from the American networking infrastructure firm. It said this related to the unlawful copying of Cisco IOS software, which included source code, as well as documentation and other materials, plus infringements of Cicso patents.

Mark Chandler, general counsel at the time for Cisco, said then: “Huawei has unlawfully copied Cisco’s intellectual property and refused Cisco’s numerous attempts to resolve these issues. As a result, Cisco has no choice but to protect its technology and the interests of its shareholders through legal action.”

However, according to NetworkWorld, a spokesperson for Huawei rebuked that it had “always respected intellectual property rights” and had “attached importance to safeguarding its own property rights”.

The lawsuit was settled out of court in 2014, in exchange for a promise from Huawei to modify its product, the Register reported at the time.

While Cisco reported this as a “victory for the protection of intellectual property rights”, Huawei claimed that it meant Cisco “cannot bring another lawsuit against Huawei in the future asserting the same or substantially similar claims,” as the American courts had dismissed Cisco’s claim “with prejudice” after a third-party review.

Huawei did say that an employee had inadvertently used two percent of the 1.5 million lines of copied code that Cisco had alleged, but that it was provided by someone who wasn’t a Cisco or a Huawei employee – and was instead on a disk passed from one Huawei to another, CNET reported.

2005

August – Marconi under fire for Huawei, ZTE talks

Beleaguered British manufacturing firm Marconi, which before its collapse in 2006 still employed thousands of people in the UK, was in talks with Huawei as well as rival manufacturer ZTE for “potential business combinations”.

Peter Skyte, national officer for the now-defunct Amicus trade union, suggested at the time that if Marconi was to be sold “whether it is to the Chinese or someone else” that the union would “expect the government to look very closely at that under the mergers and acquisitions framework. Despite its troubles it’s still a key company in terms of research and development in the UK.”

Ultimately financial difficulties led to the collapse of Marconi in 2006, when much of the business was sold to the Swedish telco infrastructure company Ericsson.

2007

October – Bush administration warned on Huawei-3Com deal

Following a joint venture between Cisco rival 3Com and Huawei in China called H3C Technology, Bain Capital agreed to buy 3Com in its entirety for more than $2 billion with minority equity financing from Huawei in 2007, translating to a 16.5 percent stake in the overall business.

It was this that prompted US lawmakers to complain to George H W Bush that the deal should not be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which is an inter-agency panel that examines contracts with non-US companies.

According to Reuters, Florida Republican representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen led the calls. She said it would “be a grave error for US regulators to approve a deal that permits minority ownership in 3Com by one of the least transparent companies operating in China, a firm with shadowy ties to Chinese army and intelligence services.”

The deal failed, with Hewlett Packard ultimately picking up 3Com in late 2009.