[azernik]

> But arresting foreign nationals in other countries for violating US sanctions?

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.

[zavi]

Worth mentioning that Canada has its own history of concerns with Huawei due to the Nortel debacle: https://www.afr.com/technology/web/security/how-chinese-hack...

[DyslexicAtheist]

it is all the FVEY countries that have issues with Huawei. UK, Australia & NZ have played a big role in disseminating US anti-China propaganda. I say this as somebody who has been criticizing Huawei for years. There is no denying their products are not only of poor quality (competing on price), that they bribed their way through Africa, and that the founders have strong ties to the military and party. Yet it would be hypocritical to not call this anything but a political move.

[dis-sys]

> There is no denying their products are not only of poor quality (competing on price)

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.

[DyslexicAtheist]

that is true but Huawei isn't just consumer products. Their radio and core network products absolutely suck. Their O&M plane is a disaster no NOC wants to put up with. And their Huawei cloud offering that positions itself as a carrier-grade cloud is worse than digital ocean. Operators choose Huawei because it's cheap not because their features and interoperability and acceptance tests were of better quality then another vendor. They're able to compete below price precisely because they are heavily government funded, and because they stole a lot of IP from the established players and could leapfrog many years of innovation done for them by competitors. Ericsson, Nokia have seen this coming long ago which lead to all these M&A's (starting in the late 90ies till just recently). The only players left now are Nokia, Ericsson, Huawei & ZTE. It doesn't look good for Nokia & Ericsson considering how lazy and half-arsed their presence is in standardization activities and how much of it is actually driven by CENELEC (the Chinese standards-compliance arm of ETSI).

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.

[dis-sys]

I just saw news that millions of mobile users in UK and Japan got kicked off the net by those high quality carrier-grade Ericsson carrier equipments.

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.