- Days until the trial of the century: 92
- Days until somebody says, "national security"
- Days until somebody produces evidence: TBD
There are now only 92 days until the U.S. government's criminal case, against Huawei begins at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in Brooklyn. If you can't already tell, I'm counting down to the first knock of the gavel like a four-year-old at Christmas.
Huawei stands accused of three main crimes in this criminal — not civil, which is an important distinction—trial. Notably, it is not facing the big charge everyone originally expected: espionage.
The first charge is evading sanctions against Iran.
If proven, this charge places Huawei in a decidedly non-exclusive club. It already includes Amazon and Microsoft, Huawei's direct competitors, as well as PayPal, Halliburton, Schlumberger and a variety of other Western firms that discovered sanctions compliance is far more complicated than their lawyers initially suggested.
Honestly, of the three charges, this one is kind of a nothingburger. I might just skip court this day and head over to Gleason's Boxing Gym — only a brisk 15-minute walk from Cadman Plaza — to be punched in the face for a bit instead.
The second charge is racketeering.
This is a charge which many sensible people would agree is pretty rich coming from the current administration.
The third charge is trade-secret theft.
Now this one is interesting.
Huawei has spent years being portrayed as the Darth Vader of intellectual-property disputes. The actual picture is considerably more nuanced. According to Lex Machina's patent-litigation data, Huawei doesn't even medal in the table of worst offenders, ranking seventh among companies most frequently accused of patent infringement in the United States, behind Apple, Amazon, Samsung, Google, Microsoft and Meta.
Yet somehow Huawei is the only company standing trial in a criminal court in Brooklyn.
Curious.
Again.
For me, that glaring asymmetry is difficult to reconcile with the foundational notion of equal treatment under the law. If the largest alleged offenders get a pass in civil court, it raises a lot of questions about why this case is handled so differently.
Perhaps there is a compelling legal explanation for this treatment. Or perhaps Huawei's true offense was not the theft of intellectual property, but the theft of market share from American corporate giants.
That would be deeply concerning. Lady Justice is supposed to be blindfolded, not draped in a flag soiled by protectionism, corporate lobbying, and geopolitical convenience.
After two decades of investigations, sanctions, hearings, speeches, reports, and allegations, the burden of proof is no longer trivial. The ultimate question is whether the U.S. government can actually prove its case. Has it got the cards, as our POTUS likes to say? Or is this a spectacular, World Cup-style own goal like America's historic campaign in Iran? (Abridged version: continuously punch yourself in the face while shouting, "Take that! And that!")
The failure to produce a smoking gun — or a digital Bigfoot — to back up 15 years of state-sponsored spycraft accusations is a rough start. Furthermore, the FBI's willingness to travel 3,500 miles to Cornwall in search of an industry anecdote dated, checks notes, from 2006 doesn't exactly hint at an open-and-shut case. To use Donald Trump's card-dealing analogy, that feels like drawing two cards from the bottom of the pack.
I am not entirely convinced Washington has fully weighed the possibility of a loss.
Should the prosecution fail, questions will be asked. Long-held assumptions will be fiercely revisited. Suddenly, an inconsistent U.S. narrative that has dominated Western technology policy for two decades will become much harder to sustain.
It's all very exciting.
So why not join me on the steps of the Brooklyn courthouse this September? I'll be the one chewing an everything bagel with schmear from Shelsky's — "Nu, you're not hungry? Eat something, meshuggener!"
I may — or may not — also be selling memorial T-shirts featuring slogans like "Ask Me About Rare Earth Dependency" and "Twelve New Yorkers? Good Luck With That."
As for the frequently asked questions, let's keep this simple.
Is this serious journalism or satire?
Yes.
Am I rooting for Huawei?
I am rooting for evidence. But who doesn't enjoy annoying U.S. government suits? Thankfully, that is still allowed. Just.
What happens if the government wins?
The verdict will almost certainly be used to justify sweeping new restrictions on Huawei across the globe.
What happens if the government loses?
That is like asking what is on the other side of a black hole. Let's just say that the creaky saloon swing-door of American justice swings both ways. If the government loses, a great many uncomfortable questions about the U.S. government's narrative suddenly become unavoidable, including but not limited to: why does the world need to ban Huawei equipment if there is no case to answer on national-security grounds?
Another fun by-product of taking a loss: Richard P. Donoghue, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York; Brian A. Benczkowski, Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department's Criminal Division; John C. Demers, Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department's National Security Division; and Christopher A. Wray, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, all get to sit at the naughty table of American justice wearing their cones of shame.
See you in Brooklyn.
I'll bring the bagels.
You bring the evidence.
Stephen M. Saunders MBE is a communications analyst and USPTO-registered inventor examining how digital infrastructure — 5G, cloud, and AI — is reshaping industry, power and society, as well as underpinning the emerging, ubiquitous global digital economy. As anchor of FNTV and a longtime industry insider, he focuses less on growth narratives and more on execution, risk and how hyperscale technology is distorting markets, governance and society at scale.
Opinion pieces from industry experts, analysts or our editorial staff do not represent the opinions of Fierce Network.