US Says Chinese Firm Broke Export Rules in ZTE, Iran Contracts

A US agency dealing with national security said Far East Cable violated American export-control rules by signing contracts with Chinese networking giant ZTE and Iranian businesses to sell US-origin equipment to Iran. From a report: From September 2014 to January 2016, Far East Cable "served as a cutout" between ZTE -- which was under investigation by the US for export-rule violations at the time -- and Iranian telecommunications companies, the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security said in a statement Monday. Far East Cable's actions are "part of an effort to conceal and obfuscate ZTE's Iranian business from US investigators," the BIS said in a July 29 letter to the company made available Monday. The agency is charging the cable maker with 18 violations of its export administration regulations.

Re:

[Fly Swatter]

Your doctrine applies to in-country citizens, this is out of country so falls under export rules and sanctions, and in that world the final destination of a product matters.

Re:US law applies to Chinese firm's business in Ir

[phantomfive]

You're not a lawyer, why are you acting like one?

The lawyers who wrote the sanctions wrote them in a way that deals with first-sale doctrine.

Re:

[clovis]

It's not about US criminal law. It's about import-export rules.

Almost every country has some trade rules.
The rule is this: If you want to trade with companies within the US, you have to agree to abide by US import-export rules.
If you don't agree to those rules, then you don't trade with the US, and you can feel free to ignore the US rules.

One of the US rules regards selling military supplies to hostile countries. If you sell certain military supplies to hostile countries, then you get cutoff from the US mar

Re:

[youngone]

That makes sense, except for the bit where the US still has sanctions against Iran.
I would have thought that eventually America would just apologize to Iran for that coup in 1953 and move on.

Re:

[phantomfive]

I would have thought that eventually America would just apologize to Iran for that coup in 1953

They have, multiple times [nytimes.com]. Iran wants more.

Practically speaking, no one cares about something that happened in 1953. Iran is upset currently at America because America is impeding their goals. No amount of apologizing will change that.

Re:

[youngone]

It is both hilarious and sad that you think Iran are the problem in that relationship.

Re:

[phantomfive]

In this situation, it doesn't matter who the problem is.

Iran has made enemies of most of its neighbors, mainly by supplying weapons to separatists. The Yemen war, for example, is a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. As a result, the countries in the region are forming military alliances against Iran which will sooner or later solve the problem. It is not America's deal, the US is on the periphery.

Now, you seem to have turned your brain off and blame the US for all the world's problems. You need to tur

Re: US law applies to Chinese firm's business in I

[BytePusher]

Phew, good thing the US isn't supplying weapons to anyone, especially separatists, in the Middle East over that exact same time period. . .

Re:

[phantomfive]

Would you rather be supplied weapons by the US, or by Iran? That alone will tell you the future.

Re:

[youngone]

Would you rather be supplied weapons by the US, or by Iran?

You should ask the Cubans that. Or maybe the Nicaraguans or the Guatemalans, or the Chileans or the Venezuelans or the Iraqis or any of the other countries whose governments have been overthrown by America recently.
Not that any of those people got a choice. As soon as they elected the wrong people they were in big trouble.
I get it though. Support the troops and all that.

Re:

[phantomfive]

I don't see what you are trying to say. Is your point, "The US did bad things, so Iran should be allowed to do bad things too." Is that your point? Because that doesn't make sense.

Re:

[youngone]

I know you don't. That is entirely the problem.

Re:

[phantomfive]

I don't think you have a point, tbh. You should go think more deeply about the situation, gather some facts, and come up with a more solid view of the matter.

Re:

[youngone]

You should spend a little more time away from the propaganda your government forces upon you constantly.

Re:

[phantomfive]

I don't know where you live, but that's not how it works here.

Re:

[youngone]

It is very sad that you think that is true.

Re:

[phantomfive]

Go away, think some more, and we can talk again.

Re: US law applies to Chinese firm's business in

[BytePusher]

You aren't even assimilating the available information from the extremely biased sources. You just read a headline and make up the story. So, as you "go away and think" the results are useless. As they say, "garbage in, garbage out."

Re:

[youngone]

Are you just going to pretend the Iraq War never happened then?

Re:

[phantomfive]

I don't see what difference it makes.

Re:

[youngone]

I'm aware that you don't.

You would never think for a moment about what your country might do if a bigger, stronger power that has a history of aggression towards you invaded and occupied your neighbour.

I don't expect you to start now either because of all the propaganda you've absorbed.

Re: US law applies to Chinese firm's business in I

[BytePusher]

Nothing you claimed is supported in the article. In fact, one of Iran's demands was an apology, which the US never offered. All the US offered was "normalization," which probably would look a bit like what happened in Yugoslavia under Clinton.

Re:

[phantomfive]

You know nothing of Yugoslavia.

However, I'm really interested, answer honestly. Do you believe that if the US issued a written apology, in the exact format that Iran demanded, that Iran would no longer be upset at America? Do you think that they would stop chanting, "Death to America"? Answer honestly.

China broke rules???

[cayenne8]

In other news today..."Water is Wet".

Film at 11.

Re:

[phantomfive]

I don't like countries trying to impose things on other countries, but ZTE does business in USA so they should follow USA laws.

Re:

[clovis]

I don't like countries trying to impose things on other countries, but ZTE does business in USA so they should follow USA laws.

Exactly, and that's the whole point.
ZTE can sell anything they want to Iran and the US has no say in it.
In fact, any foreign company can tell the US to take a hike and sell anything they want to anyone else.
But the US has everything to say about who can sell within the US market. And who cannot.

Re:

[BardBollocks]

well, compared to the Rules the U.S. breaks... water droplet is wet.

Do you think China cares

[p51d007]

Or Iran cares? Right now, the USA is "weak" and other nations can pretty much do whatever they want. When you CONTROL the bulk of global manufacturing and supply, you can pretty much dictate whatever you want.