The EU Council adopted conclusions on Tuesday 3 December on the importance of 5G for the European economy and the need to mitigate the security risks associated with 5G, while external pressure to do so has increased further in recent days. Despite Luxembourg's request, supported by several countries, no reference to health risks has been added.
The document, already detailed in our articles several weeks ago, underlines the importance of a risk-based comprehensive approach (see EUROPE 12350/9, 12373/9). It emphasizes the importance of keeping this security aspect in mind throughout the supply chain, from the choice of suppliers, through the production of network elements and throughout the entire operating life of the networks. As regards the choice of suppliers, the conclusions call for “non-technical factors” to be taken into account, implying the link between an actor and a non-Member State.
Pressure from both sides
These non-technical factors were already highlighted in the coordinated risk assessment published on 9 October by the European Commission (see EUROPE 12345/1). “There is a whole series of technical and non-technical risks to be addressed without naivety, but without a priori either”, said the new Commissioner for the Internal Market, Thierry Breton, during his introduction, before mentioning the technical means to certify the quality of a product or a network. “We are not fooled: we are all under pressure here for this or that position. It is important to define a European approach that reflects our common interests and safeguards our security”, he continued.
As for pressure, there is an op-ed published in the European press by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, with the following caption: “US message to EU allies: Don’t trust Chinese firms with critical networks”. An op-ed to which the Chinese firm Huawei immediately replied. An article published by Bloomberg also announces that the United States intends to “mobilize part of its 60 billion dollar budget to help companies and developing countries purchase equipment from other companies”.
Health concerns
During the round table at the Telecommunications Council, Luxembourg surprized its colleagues by proposing the addition of a reference to the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO). “These conclusions refer to economic and security issues. But let us not forget health issues”, said the Luxembourg representative, later supported by the Czech Republic, Denmark and Slovenia. Spain, on the other hand, opposed it, in view of the generic nature of the Luxembourg proposal and its last-minute presentation. As a result, the Finnish Presidency of the EU Council refused to include the Luxembourg proposal (which stressed in particular the importance of WHO standards and called for them to ‘at least’ be respected) in the text of the conclusions.
Also noteworthy are several significant interventions during the round table on conclusions, such as that of the Netherlands. Dutch Minister Mona Keijzer stressed the need to provide for “additional requirements for critical components of telecommunications networks”. And she stressed that the invitation to Member States and the Commission, with the support of the Cybersecurity Agency, to take “all necessary measures to ensure the security and integrity of networks” also implies legal measures.
Technological sovereignty again mentioned
Presented as a key objective of the new ‘von der Leyen’ Commission, technological sovereignty was once again mentioned by Thierry Breton. He reiterated his intention to present a communication on this subject and added: “The good news in this debate is that there are strong industry players. We have, in Europe, the technology. And these companies also sell in the United States, which means they are competitive both in terms of quality and price”. He then welcomed the large number of 5G patents already granted in Europe: “the largest number in the world”, he stressed. And he concluded by slipping a small reference to compliance with the rules by other actors, including “compliance with the State aid criterion”. Link to the conclusions: http://bit.ly/33TeW8h (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)