> “The U.S. government’s campaign against Huawei is inadvertently bolstering the company’s resilience, echoing the age-old adage that what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger,”
Then in the _very next_ paragraphs:
> State money was critical. [...] billions of dollars flowed from the Chinese government to Huawei through preferential buying contracts and subsidies
So what does the "age old adage" have to do with anything? It doesn't matter what US policy is if China has decided to make you a defacto state run company.
This is a bizarre and meandering analysis that doesn't convey anything useful.
1. This article's headline made me lose some trust in the WSJ, given that:
2. Huawei has gotten stronger in China and weaker elsewhere.
https://archive.ph/JgNQg/d40b9dd122f4675c47c29c9a4528bb60734...
Edit: Flagged? What rule does this comment break?
The US wanted them out of the US market and mostly succeeded there.
I’m always disappointed when the government’s response to worries about other people spying on us isn’t to enforce privacy. Instead they just say no to specific outsiders invading our privacy. Seems so broken.
https://archive.ph/JgNQg