Casi dos meses tras las elecciones presidenciales en Venezuela, que dieron como resultado una victoria aplastante por parte de Edmundo González, el narco-dictador Nicolás Maduro mantiene su pretensión ilegítima de haber ganado los comicios. Desde las elecciones, la...
Almost two months after the presidential election in Venezuela, which resulted in the landslide victory of Edmundo Gonzalez, narco-dictator Nicolás Maduro maintains his illegitimate claim to winning the election. Since the election, the dictator has arbitrarily...
Dr. Gulshan Abbas, the sister of staunch international Uyghur advocate, Rushan Abbas, remains detained in a Chinese prison. U.S. Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and colleagues released a joint statement ahead of the six-year anniversary of Dr....
“Made in China 2025” initiative, nearing Beijing’s target, threatens U.S. U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) September 10, 2024 Washington Post …[I]n May 2015, Beijing went public with a 10-year plan to dominate high-value, high-technology sectors…. [W]ith the decade...
U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) released a report titled “The World China Made: ‘Made in China 2025’ Nine Years Later,” which reviews the successes and failures of Communist China’s “Made in China 2025” industrial policy. It is the sequel to Rubio’s 2019 report titled...
U.S. Senator Marco Rubio’s (R-FL) office will host in-person Mobile Office Hours next week to assist constituents with federal casework issues in their respective local communities. These office hours offer constituents who do not live close to one of Senator Rubio’s...
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) joined Senators Ben Sasse (R-NE) and Tom Cotton (R-AR), members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, in urging Secretary of Defense Mark Esper to seek answers regarding reports that the Department of Defense objected to Department of Commerce regulations that would have made it more difficult for U.S. companies to sell to Huawei.
“Huawei is an arm of the Chinese Communist Party and should be treated as such,” the senators wrote. “It is difficult to imagine that, at the height of the Cold War, the Department of Defense would condone American companies contracting with KGB subsidiaries because Moscow offered a discount. We are concerned that the Defense Department is not appropriately weighing the risks.”
The full text of the letter is below.
Dear Secretary Esper,
We write regarding recent public reports that the Defense Department objected to a proposed change to Commerce Department regulations that would have made it more difficult for U.S. companies to sell to Huawei from their overseas facilities. Given the national security risks surrounding Huawei’s technology and operations, concerns which resulted in the addition of Huawei and its affiliates to the Department of Commerce’s Entity List in May 2019, we respectfully ask for a member-level briefing on the Department’s rationale for its reported objection.
Huawei is an arm of the Chinese Communist Party and should be treated as such. It is difficult to imagine that, at the height of the Cold War, the Department of Defense would condone American companies contracting with KGB subsidiaries because Moscow offered a discount. We are concerned that the Defense Department is not appropriately weighing the risks.
Based on public reporting, pursuant to a Department of Commerce proposal, the Office of Management and Budget circulated a proposed rule change that would reduce the maximum percentage of U.S.-origin content, from 25 percent to 10 percent, in permitted sales to Huawei. This change to the De Minimis Rule for sales to Huawei would have effectively disrupted the supply chain of the Chinese Communist Party’s tech puppet, which depends on valuable contracts with American companies. The Department reportedly objected over concerns about how the rule would affect U.S. companies’ competitiveness and their ability to continue to invest in research and development which allows the United States to maintain a technological edge over our adversaries.
We respectfully request that within 60 days you provide a briefing to discuss the following:
1. Whether the Department issued a nonconcurrence to the proposed change as publicly reported.
2. The rationale for the reported nonconcurrence, including an assessment of the benefits and costs of the Commerce Department proposal on our ability to maintain a technological edge over our adversaries as outlined in either official memoranda and interagency discussion.
3. How the Department’s reported nonconcurrence affects the Department’s simultaneous attempts to persuade allies and partners to bar Huawei from their networks.
Additionally, we respectfully ask that you produce or summarize, either in classified or unclassified form, the conclusions in the official memoranda that informed the Administration’s consideration of this course of action.
Thank you for your consideration of our request and we look forward to this briefing.
Sincerely,