Ren Zhengfei's Interview with CBS

February 19, 2019

Huawei's founder Ren Zhengfei sat down for an interview with CBS. The following is the full transcript (Ren's parts of the transcript were translated from Huawei's recording of the interview):

Q1: Thank you so much for sitting down with us. You rarely give interviews. Why have you decided to give one now?

Ren: For the most part I speak within the company. I speak with different teams almost every day, actually. I tend to pay more attention to internal management at Huawei, and I don't feel as though I should take on external communications. I think that should come from our rotating chairmen, people who actually do the work. I want to do more in terms of internal management, so I don't engage with the media all that often.

We're in a unique situation right now. Our public relations department thinks I have a lot of influence, so they've asked me to speak out more to help us communicate better with the outside world.

Q2: Your company's name is making a lot of headlines. There are a lot of charges and accusations against your company, specifically, your daughter, who is under house-arrest in Vancouver, charged with Iran sanctions violation. How was she doing?

Ren: In the past, Huawei was not a well-known company. We build telecoms networks, and our customers were only about 300 large companies around the world. When we started making consumer products, our name started to become known. Now a lot of people know us as a smartphone manufacturer. Of course, some people like our phones and some don't. Those who don't like our stuff don't pay that much attention to us. Now the US is bringing charges against us. They're an incredibly powerful country, and in a way they've made sure the entire world knows about Huawei. Of course, the US may not be able to tell whether or not Huawei is a good company for the time being, but it helped us get our name out. Now everyone knows about that company called Huawei, so we'd like to thank them for the advertising.

The charges made against us are not a verdict. They are only the first steps in a legal process. We can resolve these issues through legal proceedings. Let the courts decide. I believe the arrest of Meng Wanzhou in Canada was politically motivated. My daughter is a very nice person who studies hard and works hard. She was responsible for building Huawei's financial management system, which is one of the best in the world.

Wanzhou is also very brave. Right after the huge earthquake in Japan, the one with the tsunami and the nuclear crisis, she hopped on a plane from Hong Kong to Tokyo to help with the disaster relief work. There were only two passengers on that flight, and she was one of them. After Wanzhou was arrested in Canada, a young girl in Tokyo even wrote her a thank you letter, which was published in the Japanese media. Wanzhou is currently under house arrest, and is using this time to take multiple online courses to improve herself. She feels time is precious, and she doesn't want to waste it.

Sometimes we talk over the phone. Our calls aren't private, so we just shoot the breeze and joke around with each other. From what I can tell, she is in good spirits.

Q3: And I know she also had a birthday last week. It must be hard for you to miss your daughter's birthday.

Ren: I think this birthday is very meaningful for her. As an old Chinese saying goes, "Great men are made through hardship." These scars will ultimately give her thicker skin. The hardship she's going through right now will be a turning point. It will give her wings, and I think she'll come out of it more mature.

Wanzhou has been a very hard worker ever since she was a child, but she has never experienced any major setbacks. This setback will leave an indelible mark in her memory. It will make her more mature. It will make her stronger. In this sense, I think this is a very meaningful birthday for her.

Q4: You said that the charges against her are politically motivated. Obviously, she is facing extradition to the United States. These are serious charges leveled against her. If convicted, she could spend 30 years in jail in the United States. Why do you call these charges politically motivated?

Ren: The legal systems in the US and Canada are open, just, and equitable. They will ultimately disclose their evidence and remain transparent throughout the entire process. I'm afraid I will only be able to answer your questions once they've reached a verdict in court.

Q5: The indictment claimed that Huawei defrauded four large banks, including HSBC, into clearing transactions with Iran, and that of course would be in violation of international sanctions and that they did it through a subsidiary company called Skycom. What is your relationship with Skycom?

Ren: These issues are currently in legal proceedings. We're going to have to wait for a verdict before we can answer questions like this.

Q6: Do you have a statement as to whether or not Huawei violated international sanctions?

Ren: Again, that's for the courts to decide.

Q7: You said in the past that you felt guilty about your daughter's predicament, why?

Ren: I think I was not around enough when my children were young. I spent most of my time working.

Q8: You said that you felt guilty as a father, why?

Ren: I joined the military when my children were still very young, and I was not at home for 11 months out of the year. During the month I was at home, they had homework, they had school. I didn't have a lot of time with them. Their mother was mainly responsible for their education and upbringing. We weren't very close.

After I started Huawei, it was very difficult to ensure the company's survival. I had to do 16-hours days in the office, or working on other business activities. This meant I wasn't able to take care of my children when they were growing up and going to school. I was lacking in that respect.

Q9: It must be hard for you, not only as CEO possibly losing your CFO essentially, but also as a father to see your daughter facing extradition and potentially prison-time. How does that make you feel wearing both hats, as CEO and as a father?

Ren: I'm actually okay, I think. Because I believe the legal system will respect the facts and evidence, and the courts will adhere to their principles of openness, justice, and fairness. I will wait for the courts' decision. It won't affect the company's work at all, because we operate based on a mature set of processes and systems. No single person can affect the operations of the whole company.

Q10: I want to go back to what you said earlier, calling your daughter's arrest politically motivated. I'm wondering if you consider the timing of her arrest, happening in the middle of trade negotiation, and a trade war potentially between China and the United States, do you feel that you, your company, or your daughter is used as a tool?

Ren: Both China and the US are major powers, like two massive wrecking balls. Huawei is more like a small tomato. If those two want to collide, how could we possibly stand in the way? It's just not possible. And trying to do so wouldn't create any value. Meng Wanzhou isn't a valuable tool in that equation. I would say that her case doesn't have much to do with the China-US trade war. The two countries need to adjust their relationship through politics, laws, and institutions. Individuals like us don't play a big role in matters like this.

Meanwhile, as the China-US trade war has grown more intense, Huawei saw much higher growth in January 2019 than we did in the same month last year. So the trade war hasn't had much impact on us. And there's no way that Huawei could possibly have an impact on the trade war, either.

Q11: President Trump reportedly said that he would consider intervening on your daughter's behalf and many believe that would be part of a larger trade deal. What was your reaction when you heard that from President Trump?

Ren: I didn't have a reaction to that. President Trump loves tweeting his thoughts. He is a straightforward president. But I still think that the situation with Meng Wanzhou should be handled by law.

Mr. Trump is a great president. He was able to cut US taxes in such a short period of time. This is difficult to do, especially in a democratic country. All democratic countries are big on debate: People debate and argue for a long time to reach a consensus. US taxes went from high to low, and they reached a consensus relatively quickly, forming it into law. This will be good for the US economy over the next one hundred years. When tax rates are lower, there's less of a burden on companies, so they can grow faster. This will prime society for a period of rapid growth. President Trump's approach [to taxes] is a great initiative.

I've been saying all along that China should cut taxes. This gives companies a breather so they can gather their strength and create more competition. Tax cuts are relatively slow in China. The country has a heavy burden. Many regions in China are still impoverished. The country needs quite a bit of money to help solve this, so they can't cut taxes all at once, only little by little. So what President Trump has done in this respect is pretty great.

There is something else I would like to say, though. If President Trump keeps on intimidating other countries and companies, and randomly grabbing people, it's going to scare off investors. And then how are they going to make up for lost tax revenue?

They cut taxes to encourage investment. Tax revenue from new investors can help fill that gap and the US will continue to thrive. I think the US should change its policies. It should be friendlier to businesses. If they're not, no one will want to invest because there's risk. It has an impact. Resolving this issue is also important for the US's image overseas.

Q12: Do you hope that President Trump would intervene on your daughter's behalf?

Ren: I don't know about this, because I don't know him. I've never had any contact with him, so I don't think I'm really in a position to comment on this one way or another. If he were my friend, I would be able to fully understand him. The fact is, I only know about him from his tweets and speeches. I think he made some good points in his recent State of the Union address. I read through it – it's good.

Q13: You speak very highly at President Trump, yet he's likely to issue an executive order banning your company from doing any business in the United States. How do you square the two?

Ren: To be honest, we haven't had too much business in the US over the years, but we've never given up on this country. We keep on trying, and this is because we respect the US. If they don't let us sell, then we won't sell.

However, some US politicians are saying that Huawei is a security threat. We barely have any equipment over there, how could we pose a security threat? If the US is secure without Huawei, maybe they can use this to convince other countries around the world. But are US networks really secure? Is their information secure?

If they can't manage security even when Huawei isn't there, it's wrong to believe that the US can secure itself just by keeping us out. Every country and every customer has the choice to work with us or not. We operate in a market economy, and we can accept that. We sell our products in many countries around the world, and plenty of operators don't buy our stuff. It's not like we hold it against them. There are many reasons not to buy from someone, and there's no way that Huawei can take hold of every single market. There are markets everywhere out there, but we don't have enough products to serve them all. If the US bans us, it means that US law doesn't allow us to sell there. And if that's the case, we won't sell there. And that's that.

But other companies might go to the US market, which is still good for the US economy. I believe that the new tax policy [of the US] is great. It's very difficult to achieve, but the US did it. It's difficult in any country. You have to balance tax cuts with other factors, including spending, the social safety net, and things like that. But the US made it happen. It's a great nation.

Q14: You talked about the big issue here, and that is the United States government and the security agencies believing that you provide a backdoor to Chinese intelligence. Can you refute that categorically?

Ren: As I have stated in previous interviews, we absolutely have not and will never do anything like that. One, we have never engaged in any form of espionage, and would never allow our employees to engage in that type of behavior. Two, we have not and will never install backdoors in our equipment.

Some ask, what if Chinese law requires you to install backdoors? I would categorically refuse. Absolutely I will not respond to any demands for us to install backdoors.

At the Munich Security Conference on February 16, 2019, Yang Jiechi, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and Director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the CPC Central Committee, made it very clear:

First: Chinese law does not require companies to install backdoors.

Second: The Chinese government always requires Chinese companies to abide by the international rules and laws and regulations of the countries where they operate.

The Chinese government has made itself clear, and I have made myself clear. Our message is the same: There are no backdoors.

Over the past 30 years, Huawei has served three billion people in more than 170 countries and regions. We have maintained a fantastic track record in cyber security for three decades now, and this attests to the fact that our equipment doesn't have backdoors. And it will stay that way for the next 30 years. We are unequivocal about this.

I can clearly state here: No one has ever instructed us to do this, and no one will. We have made ourselves very clear, and the Chinese government reiterated this at the Munich Security Conference.

Q15: You said you would never take any instruction like that from the Chinese government, even if they came to you. Wouldn't that put you out of business? How can you say no to the Chinese government?

Ren: As I just said, Yang Jiechi, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, stated expressly at the Munich Security Conference that no such requirements exist within Chinese law.

He is a senior official of the Community Party of China, and he speaks on behalf of the Chinese government. So when I say "no," that's in line with what the state requires. No security issues exist.

Q16: Your current chairman said that Huawei is being accused of lying, and unjust and immoral bullying. Do you believe that the United States is currently bullying Huawei?

Ren: I think it's normal for a country to question a company. But this needs to be done through a legal process and the US legal system. We need an open and just process to determine who's right and who's wrong.

Over the past 30 years, we have been involved in a number of lawsuits in the US, and we did not lose any of them. This at least shows that Huawei has done relatively well in this respect.

If we are able to use the courts to resolve issues like this, I think that our Chairman's comments will be proven correct. We should let the legal process take its due course, as the US is a country that follows the rule of law.

Q17: Do you believe that the United States is trying to put Huawei out of business?

Ren: Will Huawei go out of business? I don't think so. We're full of life. It's possible that pressure from the US is actually making us more motivated and driving us to work harder.

Someone once said, "The easiest way to collapse a fortress is to attack it from within." I want to say that external pressure will only make a fortress more united, resilient, and effective. How could it collapse?

Many of our customers have been working with us for over two decades. They know Huawei best and know what motivates us. Consumers make their own  decisions, and they won't decide to buy something or not just because someone else told them to. We are confident that we will continue to survive and thrive. This will not have a large impact on us.

Q18: I asked this because Vice President Pence and Secretary Pompeo were both in Europe last week, trying to persuade the US allies to not use Huawei as they roll out 5G technology. Vice President Pence at the Munich Security Conference said, "We cannot ensure the defense of the West if our allies grow dependent on the East." Do you view that as a threat?

Ren: First, I need to thank them. They are both taking on a great task for their country. I have seen Mike Pence's financial disclosures. He only has about 15,000 US dollars in personal savings, and 15,000 US dollars for his two children's education. As a government official, he is fighting for politics and his ideals. This, in my opinion, makes him great. Mike Pompeo is also a great man, with a PhD degree in political science from Harvard University.

They are advertising Huawei's 5G all over the world. Before, no one really knew what 5G was for. Now the entire world knows about 5G, and when they look into it more closely, they realize that only Huawei does 5G the best. Only our 5G is the best in the world. This has helped amplify our impact. We are seeing more contracts, not less. And we're getting them faster than before, including in Europe.

That's why I said I need to thank them for getting our name out there – and for free. So I am very grateful to them. Please give them my thanks.

Q19: That's a little bit of sarcasm there.

Ren: No, I'm not being sarcastic at all. Huawei is a company, and the US is a great nation. Our conflict with the US and its top officials has helped get our name out there.

Q20: I'm sure they will watch our interview and they can interpret that however they might. One of the concerns that they're trying to espouse to the allies in Europe is that Huawei's 5G is closely related to military technology. The US appears to be saying that they may reconsider sending US troops in certain European countries if they continue using Huawei technology. What is your response to that?

Ren: To start with, they seem to view 5G as a type of equipment for military control. 5G is not an atomic bomb. Atomic bombs hurt people and cause safety problems, but 5G brings benefits to people and offers us information channels and pipes. These channels and pipes are controlled by operators and governments. We provide equipment only, similar to water pipes and taps. They won't be a big threat to security. After all the hypes, people will ultimately calm down and see what our equipment is really like. We think that Europe will make their own assessment. I don't mean any sarcasm. I have never said otherwise to the media. We are happy to see the publicity they have done for us. In fact, many countries don't take Huawei very seriously, not even knowing who we are. This publicity has helped Huawei raise our profile and expand our markets. We are getting more contracts faster. Due to the recent events, the sales of our consumer products in January rose by 68%. So I believe that this will not be a big crisis for us and it will not greatly impact us.

Before Western countries say Huawei poses a threat to the West, they should first assess Huawei's contributions to society. First, we provide services to three billion people in 170 countries and regions, and we have contributed greatly to bridging the digital divide, like giving poor countries access to information and education opportunities. China is ahead of many countries in terms of network development, and China is now seeing a decline in poverty. This is because people have access to new information, new technologies, new jobs, and new sales techniques. We bring benefits to humanity; we are not a threat to society, and would never cause it harm.

Second, we have more than 80,000 patents. These are our contribution to the foundation of the digital society. More than 11,500 of these core patents were granted by the US government, giving us legitimate rights. We are a big contributor to the US's information development, not a threat. 

As for the backdoor question, I have clarified many times that there are absolutely no backdoors in our equipment. We would never take that risk and do something that we shouldn't do.

Q21: Have you ever given any information to the Chinese government in any way, shape, or form from your clients, your customers, even if it's a local, domestic customer?

Ren: Over the past 30 years, Huawei has never done that. And I believe that we will never do this in the future. 

Q22: Could Huawei possibly have a backdoor without your knowledge?

Ren: It is impossible. All of our departments, from the top down, have emphasized that no backdoors are allowed. Huawei equipment contains no backdoors. If any backdoors did exist, the US would have discovered them long ago as they have such advanced technologies. 

Q23: Despite warnings from the United States, you had the intelligence agencies from the United Kingdom say that they can mitigate the risk and they will likely continue to do business with Huawei as they roll out 5G technology, and New Zealand also said that they will look at your agreement; they had once banned it. Do you view that as vindication against the accusations from the United States?

Ren: I don't think so. I think the US is reminding everyone that there may be some issues and that they need to assess them. We have established a cyber security evaluation centre in the UK where our source code is subject to inspection by the UK government. During our 10-year partnership with the UK, there has never been a security incident. Huawei has built very strong "walls". We have the world's best defense capacity. US company Cigital made an assessment, saying our systems are the strongest in terms of attack prevention. When the UK government checked our software in detail, they found that the code was not up to their standards. But why was this the case? Because we were a small company 30 years ago. The code we wrote in the past, is not up to today's standards. Now we are asked to make improvements on the code running on the live networks of the UK and restructure the networks using new software standards designed for the next 30 years. So we have decided to spend 2 billion dollars to improve the source code on these networks. The UK has concluded that the issue surrounding Huawei is manageable, since we've had ten years of partnership. The UK has made its point: People say there may be some issues surrounding Huawei, but they are manageable.

Moving forward, technology will only develop faster and information traffic will increase, requiring equipment with large capacity. We remain wary about this. In the past, one floor of a building was required to house the equipment that served 100,000 users. Now, a much smaller space like this would be enough to house the equipment that serve millions of users. We are also concerned about security incidents or faults caused by network technologies. A small incident can have a huge  impact, but there has not been any.

Recently, the networks of some companies have experienced outages in many countries. I don't think these companies deserve harsh blame. However, they need to accept what has happened and make improvements. No single company will always be successful in the network field, including Huawei. But we have well-designed systems in place to prevent and tackle network issues. Cyber security and information security are two different things. We sell network pipes, and we sell equipment to carriers who decide what passes through these pipes. It is not in our hands.

Q24: So then what is your response when you hear the director of CIA Gina Haspel say that she would never use a Huawei product because of the safety and intelligence concerns; the director of the NSA also said that he would not use your products, and former director of CIA Michael Hayden said he has enough evidence to persuade him that Huawei is spying for China?

Ren: These people may not directly use our equipment. However, the US government spends 85 billion US dollars on IT equipment every year, and numerous Huawei patents are used in the creation of this equipment. Huawei is a significant contributor to IT development, and we may be one of the top companies in terms of IT. 5G will be used widely worldwide, and 5G products, no matter where they are from, are built on the back of Huawei's contributions.

We think it's understandable if some customers say they won't use our products. The world is huge. We can't expect everyone to use our products, and we don't have the capacity to serve everyone, either. Their opinions are understandable, and we accept that people have different views regarding us. We only strive to serve customers well where the opportunity to do so exists, and will pull out where we face rejection.

Q25: They maybe find it hard to believe, as much that you deny, that China if ever approached you about using backdoor access to any customer information, that you would say no or would have any opportunity to say no.

Ren: A senior Chinese government official made a statement at the recent Munich Security Conference. These US politicians should trust in what the Chinese government has said. It's wrong to use assumptions as evidence for alleged crimes. Evidence should be something real. It's natural if someone refuses to use Huawei's products out of concerns. This is not really any different to choosing clothes in a shopping mall. You won't like all of the cloths out there, and if you don't like them, don't buy them.

Q26: We know for a fact that President Trump has not always believed the intelligence that his intelligence committee has provided him. Is there anything that you would want to tell President Trump to refute what his intelligence advisors are telling him now about Huawei?

Ren: First of all, Huawei's financial reports have been audited by KPMG, a US company, and this has been the case for the past several decades. These audit reports are available online and reveal Huawei's issues regarding finance and management.

Second, Huawei is a member of more than 300 standards bodies, and has submitted tens of thousands of proposals. These memberships and submissions attest to what we have done and what we have contributed to these organizations. Mr. Trump doesn't have to ask me what Huawei is like. He only needs to talk to major companies and scientists in the US. They are more familiar with Huawei than US politicians are because they have engaged with Huawei for several decades. This is the best way to find the right examples to make correct judgments about Huawei. Mr. Trump could even invite Huawei's competitors for a cup of coffee, and learn what they think of Huawei. Huawei is like an open book, and being open is not an easy task.

Q27: Your competition in the past however has accused you of stealing intellectual property and technology, in particular T-Mobile. You settled a lawsuit with the company when they accused you of stealing an arm of its robot called Tappy. You said this was the work of a few agents, but there is evidence that FBI found, they found internal e-mail suggesting that the company rewarded stealing intellectual property. Is that the case?

Ren: We have made it very clear that we have not and do not reward employees for any misconduct. We will take disciplinary action against anyone with this type of behavior. The T-Mobile and San Diego cases are already in legal proceedings, so we need to wait for the court's decisions.

Q28: Let's just be clear. You never authorized internal e-mails that rewarded employees who stole intellectual property from competitors?

Ren: We would definitely take disciplinary action against employees who do this. Any employees who engage in this type of misconduct must be dealt with. If this type of behavior were to go unpunished, our company wouldn't be able to survive in this world.

Huawei is a large company. We have more than 180,000 employees, and our sales revenue is more than 100 billion US dollars. If we condoned misconduct, we'd have a lot more problems ahead of us, not just one or two lawsuits. We wouldn't be able to keep our doors open. That's why we would never reward this type of behavior. There's no way.

We have a lot of respect for intellectual property. We are pushing for the Chinese government to strengthen its protection of intellectual property rights, and I think China needs to continue protecting these rights. China can only become an innovative country if it protects intellectual property rights in the same way as it protects other property rights.

The US has risen to be the world's most powerful nation in just over 200 years. This is attributable to its strong protection of intellectual property rights. We need to respect the US for that and learn from them.

Q29: And you're quickly following suit and catching up; [you're] the second largest economy now. It's very impressive, the scale and size of Huawei, you're in 170 countries, and you're a privately owned company. Do you currently or have you in the past received or relied on any subsidies from the Chinese government?

Ren: Huawei doesn't receive subsidies from the Chinese government, except for a few that support scientific research. These are clearly listed in our KPMG-audited annual report. For the most part, though, we don't accept any subsidies from the government subsidies. We do accept some for basic research, national standards research projects, or other things the country's working on, but they are very few in number. Again, you can see those in our financial report. We also received some subsidies from European governments for basic research.

Q30: The allegation is that there is not a level-playing field for your competitors, and in fact, Huawei is guaranteed at least a third of China's 5G network contracts, foreign competitors are not. Is that fair in your opinion?

Ren: No one is guaranteed a market share like this. All companies have to compete for it.

Q31: Why not? I'm curious, let's go down this road. Why shouldn't Huawei and ZTE be compared?

Ren: Because Huawei and ZTE are completely different companies. I don't know much about ZTE. Why is everyone always lumping Huawei and ZTE together? I don't really know what kind of company they are. We actually engage more with Ericsson and Nokia. A company's market share is determined through competition, and our market share outside China is larger than it is in China. We have mostly focused on our business overseas.

Q32: Do you think there's a level-playing field for competitors in China right now?

Ren: I think we compete based on who makes the best products. History will prove that. In the 1980s when China began to implement the reform and opening-up policy, nearly all products in the Chinese market were from foreign companies. It's no longer up to the government to decide where people get their products from. All procurement today follows market-economy rules. Bids are evaluated openly and fairly. I don't think there's any special treatment for domestic vendors here.

Q33: Do you think that's the policy that President Xi espouses to?

Ren: I think that China is advocating more openness in its policy. You may have heard some of President Xi Jinping's remarks at the China International Import Expo. He said that China would allow foreign capital in the financial sector, gradually lower the tariffs for the automobile sector over the next five years, approve fully foreign-owned automobile companies, and open up all manufacturing sectors. We'll have the exact same policies for both Chinese and foreign companies. The expo is a good example of China's openness in policy.

Last December, during the celebration of China's 40th anniversary of reform and opening up, the country showed greater consideration for private companies, so they could receive fairer treatment. In the past three decades, foreign companies have been treated as "VIPs", state-owned enterprises have been treated as "sons", and private enterprises as "nephews". We're lower on the totem pole than you guys. I wish we were in the same position as foreign companies. However, this focus on foreign companies has actually helped China grow out of poverty and begin to develop. In addition, the inflow of foreign companies has also stimulated China's industrial progress and development. Chinese companies have realized how strong their foreign counterparts are and have learned a lot from them.

Being open is key to China's future. And only through reforms will Chinese companies prosper. I firmly believe that. I have never supported the idea of excluding foreign companies. Even when some foreign companies were trying to give us a hard time, at Huawei, we never saw them as our enemies. Instead, we called them peers, which in Chinese, literally means our business friends. We don't treat them badly, and this has won us respect from our customers. Maybe our market share is a bit higher because of this. But if we take too much, I'd feel bad. There's no reason to take that much. We need to leave some of the market for others.

Q34: Is this a view that you've shared with President Xi?

Ren: I didn't have the opportunity to share these points with President Xi. These are some of our thoughts drawn from our experience lawfully doing business in China. I wouldn't have the opportunity to share our views, and even if I did, they may not listen.

Q35: Because there is a view in the West that he's taking more of a nationalist turn in controlling state enterprises as opposed to leaving companies more independent. Do you think that's hurting your brand, your name, and your view points?

Ren: We need to look to what President Xi has said to better understand his ideas. At the Boao Forum for Asia, he announced many policies for opening up. Then in November last year, at the China International Import Expo, he announced many measures China will take to open its market to the West. In December, during the celebration of China's 40th anniversary of reform and opening up, he announced that China will enhance the reformation of state-owned enterprises. These are all nothing more than reforms and opening up. In my opinion, China will become more open, not close its door to the world. Viewing China as a foreigner, you probably can't feel that. But we were born here and grew up in China, so we know how the environment has been gradually changing over the past 30 years.

When China just started opening up, it was very difficult for us to get a loan of $10,000 US dollars (about CNY80,000). We did everything we could but we still couldn't get a loan as big as we needed. Later, we were able to get loans like this, and things gradually changed. So I don't think China will take a path that centers on state-owned enterprises. The biggest weakness of state-owned enterprise is their inefficiency, which leads to high operating costs. China hasn't built a complete system of resource taxes yet, so state-owned enterprises may have advantages in some resource-related industries. But in industries of open and free trade, state-owned enterprises will face much greater pressure.

Q36: Many Americans are just hearing about your company and your name recently. What would you like the American public to know about Huawei, and what Huawei brings with 5G?

Ren: First of all, I would like to express my thanks to the US government. Without their high-profile campaign, most people wouldn't have any idea who Huawei is. We basically have few sales in the US, and our market presence there is very small, so consumers don't know much about Huawei.

The message we want to convey to the American people is that we can work together and share the success. An information society is different from an industrial society. In an industrial society, a country could close up its doors and make sewing machines all on its own, for example. They could do it themselves without the help of other countries. The same is true of tractors, cars, trains, and even ships.

But we're in an information society now. Everyone has to work together and build a global network, piece by piece. No single country can do it alone. All countries around the world need to work together to build a society for the future.

What contributions can we make to benefit the American people? Our networks are great, so some of our equipment might be suitable for the US. It's up to the US to decide whether or not to use our networks. If they choose not to use them, we can provide our products to other markets, and then come back to the US at a later date. Sooner or later we will be able to make our contributions to the US.

Q37: There are two more questions for you. Thank you so much for your time. This is more about you personally. I read your biography, I know you came from one of the poorest provinces in the country, your parents were teachers, and your grandfather cured pork. How did somebody who came from so little become one of the richest men in the country?

Ren: I grew up in a remote mountainous region of Guizhou Province, which is a poor region of China. Both of my parents were school teachers, and devoted their lives to rural education because they believed that teaching children in rural areas was the only way our country would become prosperous.

I had many siblings, and my parents struggled financially. They could not spend much time with us, so we were naughty children. They gave us more freedom, and let us fly high and free, leading us to develop strong characters. Today, most children in China are only children. Their parents have high expectations of them, and people in general are much better off now, so they tend to overprotect their children. When our generation was young, nobody controlled us. We grew up in a carefree environment, which allowed us to fully develop our unique characters. We may not have studied that much, but we were under less pressure.

Once we grew up, we knew that we had to work hard to earn a place in society. That's exactly what we did.

I studied every night until 1 a.m. in the morning every day for almost 50 years. Many people think that I've stopped learning, but that's not true. I would be unable to run Huawei if I stopped learning. Decades ago, I was somewhat left behind by the fast-moving times. When I left the military, computers had been widely adopted in society, but I didn't know what a computer was. About 30 or 40 years ago, many of my friends went to study in the US or Canada. When they returned and shared their stories with us and told us about things like supermarkets, I didn't have a clue what they were talking about. They said that in a supermarket you just took the things you wanted from shelves. How did that work? I really didn't understand the concept.

Take another example. We didn't understand how a bathroom was attached to the bedroom. Was that even possible? Didn't it smell? I couldn't imagine this sort of bathroom. That's what it was like when I was young. Back then, China was somewhat closed off from the rest of the world, and we did not know the US was so advanced.

When did I start getting to know the US better? It was during the Cultural Revolution, when China sent a military delegation to visit West Point. After that, the way West Point was run was covered in China. This broadened my horizons for the first time. I was greatly impressed by the management style. We originally thought US soldiers were spoiled and soft. They even drank coffee during the war in Korea, while we didn't even have water. I realized that much of what I understood about the US was incorrect.

It took a long time for us to shift from a closed-off era to an open one. Before my first visit to the US, I thought everything would be extremely expensive there, and we might not be able to afford many things. As we did not have any credit cards, we took a lot of cash with us. After arriving in the US, we found that it was impossible for us to spend all of the cash we had brought with us because things were actually very affordable. It was unbelievable. We didn't understand how the market economy helped greatly reduce prices, and saw many new things that we had never seen before.

The prosperity in the US wasn't taken, it was built. It can be attributed to the hard work of numerous outstanding people. Many talented individuals around the world have come to the US to make inventions and create wealth.

What should Huawei learn from the US? We need to be open-minded and attract the best people to come and contribute to the company's growth. The company's not about creating wealth for me or my family. Nobody can get wealthy if the company isn't profitable. This allowed us to unite many people who worked hard together and gradually made Huawei into what it is today.

My life is actually very simple. My wife often criticizes me and says that I don't have many friends or hobbies. I reply that I do have hobbies: reading and writing documents. I especially enjoy working on documents. I come to work every morning after having breakfast at 7:30. I find I am most efficient between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m., and I always choose to review and sign documents during this period. I'm also in high spirits between 9 a.m. and noon, and often attend meetings or listen to work reports. In the afternoons, I'm not that energetic, so I grab a cup of coffee and talk with colleagues to hear their thoughts, including any critical comments.

I've seen a lot of criticism of Huawei and myself on our Xinsheng Community. If I think a critical comment makes sense, I want to sit down with that person and listen to what they have to say. If someone is really great at criticizing, I would probably ask the HR department to do some research and find out whether that individual is performing well in their own job, as they are so good at criticism.

If they've done great in the past few years, and they've also given some great criticism, then they're clearly an outstanding employee and we should fast-track their promotion.

When I recommend fast-tracking people, our other executives might not agree, but mentioning it has an impact. They may start paying more attention to that person, and eventually some of our people are fast-tracked.

We have a really great employee in a small country in Africa. When my wife and I visited him, he told me, "Boss, this year I was promoted by three grades." But later the president of his regional office told me that this guy was actually promoted by four grades.

Why the discrepancy? The general manager of his country office said that they had already decided to promote him again in December, but they hadn't told him yet.

This guy is only 26 years old, but he is already managing a country office at Huawei. When it comes to making the most of talent, we don't limit ourselves to a super rigid system. We're like the US in that respect.

The US is a great country. Many great minds like Brzezinski, Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, and George Soros all come from Eastern Europe, but they have managed to serve in important positions in the US government. They have made great contributions to the US. This is a result of US openness. We need to learn from the US, and be more open. This will make us stronger, and that's the direction we're working towards.

Me, I have a very narrow focus. It's in my personality. So our company has a narrow focus too. We're not interested in things like real estate, and we will never reach beyond our focus to make easy money in other areas. We do the things that are the most difficult and the least profitable, because others aren't willing to do them. The most difficult and least profitable thing is telecoms. It's 5G. We are currently rolling out 5G, and soon we'll see 6G too.

Soon we'll have some new equipment that is a great fit for the US. For example we're leading the industry in both 5G and microwave. We are creating millimeter wave equipment, and our antennas are as small as a dinner plate. We have combined both 5G and microwave to deliver ultra-broadband services for spread-out neighborhoods. Microwave can support 100 Gbps, and a 5G base station can support 10 Gbps. Combined, these two can provide ultra-broadband services for the upscale villa districts in the US.

Why can't these villa districts enjoy broadband services now? Because the land in the US is privately owned. There would be complex negotiations over laying fiber lines through the land of every household. Without fiber, many wealthy people in the US can't enjoy 8K TV. Right now we have 4K TV in China, but the US doesn't have it yet. The Japanese have access to 8K right now. Our equipment will only need an iron pole, and we can cover all of the houses within a few kilometers. No other country or company can do it. But we can, and we are more than happy to sell it to the US in the future if they welcome us.

Sooner or later, the US will get to know us and find that they actually like us. How does the saying go? "No discord, no concord." We might fight a bit, but the more we fight, the more they'll come to realize that we're not that bad after all. I think we can become good friends. Then we can shake hands, and we'll be solid. You don't have to worry about Huawei posing a threat. What threats can we possibly pose to the world? A world in peace benefits everyone. Why in the world would we want to get involved in any of that bad stuff?

There is no fundamental conflict of interest between China and the US. With the Boxer Indemnity program, the US has started providing funding to Tsinghua University, helping develop talent in China. During World War II, many US citizens sacrificed their lives to halt the spread of fascism. These are great contributions to humanity.

Since the reform and opening-up policy was launched by Deng Xiaoping, China and the US began talking again. China has grown from a backward country into what it is today. There is no fundamental conflict of interest between Huawei and the US.

Even if the US came to us and said, "Hey, we're opening our market to Huawei," we might not be able to handle it. The US is huge. It's highly developed, and has massive demand. We might not be able to keep up.

See, we've got problems with supply. I guess our planning system is outdated. A lot of people yell at our consumer group. They say our phones are out of stock, so they come to me for help. But I can't get my hands on them either! You have to buy them online, and our website has no idea who I am. Why would it help me jump the line?

We're still developing, step by step. One day, I trust we will be able to make our contribution to the US.

Q38: So, final question: To anybody who says the United States and China are inevitably headed for a collision course in cyber warfare, you say what?

Ren: I hope never to see collisions between countries. Peaceful coexistence should be our ultimate goal, and I don't support an arms race. By spending less on the military, countries can spend more to make living conditions better for their people.

There shouldn't be a fight for cyberspace. Huawei has licensed our intellectual property rights to both Apple and Qualcomm. We have signed non-disclosure agreements, so I can't disclose business secrets. We have signed IPR licensing agreements with numerous US companies. We peacefully coexist with them, and there are no disagreements between Huawei and these companies.

At social levels, there shouldn't be any collisions either. If I assume that you are my imaginary enemy, and you hold the same view of me, then we might end up becoming true enemies. But if I assume that you are my friend, I might be nicer to you. You might invite me for a cup of coffee, and I might take you for a steak meal. Such interactions can strengthen our friendship.

China and the US should safeguard world peace. This is a great responsibility for both countries. China is still far behind the US, and many products made in China are of low value and fill some of the gaps [left by US players]. Many products made in the US are technologically sophisticated and have huge value. This means both countries can trade their products. Some US politicians said that the US should not sell chips to China. I find this ridiculous. Why wouldn't you sell your products if you can earn money? If you don't sell your product to a company, you are actually forcing it to make a similar product one day, and you will not be able to sell your product any longer.

Our world should be a convergent world. The Internet shouldn't be a battleground. Why should there should be cyberwar? I don't think such a thing will ever happen, and if it did happen, I would never engage in it.

Huawei's products are like water pipes, and water – or data, so to speak – flows through them. Our 5G base stations are like water taps that control the flow of water. We don't have any control over network equipment. Only telecom operators have such control. They manage their equipment through Huawei products, and ultimate authority still resides with the countries where the equipment is used.

We don't support any potential [cyber] war. Every country wants to possess more intellectual property rights and do more things, but they are also worried about paying too much for the IPRs of others. Apple and Qualcomm are filling against each because Apple wants to pay less while Qualcomm wants to earn more. This is a conflict of commercial interests, not a political conflict, and I believe it will be solved in a way that creates benefits for society.

Our ideal is to work for the greater good of all humanity. Otherwise, we wouldn't have climbed 6,500 meters to install base stations on Mount Everest. We had to lug all that equipment 6,500 meters up in the air. It was enormously difficult. I have been to some of the base stations at the base camp of Mount Everest. That's 5,200 meters above sea level. Everyone told me I couldn't go. I said if I was too afraid to risk my neck, how could we ask our engineers to? Even in war-torn countries, you can see Huawei people. Because without properly functioning networks, there would be even more casualties.

Huawei people remained at their posts in malaria-stricken African countries. When the earthquake hit Japan, there was nuclear disaster. Everyone was worried about the radiation. They called me. I asked how bad it was. When the first atomic bomb was tested in China, many Chinese people went to watch. They had no idea what nuclear radiation was, but they went out to hoot and holler about it. At the time it caused very few health issues. So when Japanese people were being evacuated, our engineers were going in the opposite direction. They restored more than 600 base stations. The Japanese government saw what we did, and they praised us. They said "Huawei is a Japanese company". This is one of the reasons why we have been doing well in Japan all these years.

The tsunami in Indonesia claimed tens of thousands of lives. Our team, which was only a few dozen of people, managed to get their networks up and running again within just a few days. My wife and I also went to visit our staff on a Bolivia plateau at an altitude of more than 4,000 meters. There were several thousand base stations there.

To be honest, we didn't make a lot doing this kind of work in underdeveloped countries. A lot of times we can't exchange the money we get for US dollars. In Sudan, for example, there's plenty of money that we're never going to see again. It's the same in many countries. But we work for our ideals, we work to serve mankind's needs. If we were a listed company, a capital-driven company, we would only work in lucrative countries, not the ones where we can't make any money. If this was the case, many countries would be left with poor network coverage. This is not how we operate. We work to serve people's needs. It's fine if we earn less. In fact, we didn't earn less. You just said that I am a wealthy person. You are right, I am.

(Closing) Ren: Thank you. I'd like to take this opportunity to say hello to the American people. Through their hard work, they have set a good example for the rest of the world over the past few centuries. We greatly admire their down-to-earth spirit. We should all learn from them.