Brexit vote today on Theresa May's European Union withdrawal agreement could lead to no-deal or long delay - Live updates - CBS News

London -- Friday was meant to be the day Britain formally ceased to be a member of the European Union. But three years after the public referendum calling for the divorce, the two sides appeared no closer to agreeing an amicable separation. Even Britain has yet to figure out what it wants. 

British lawmakers have made it abundantly clear, however, what they don't want: the hard-won draft "Brexit" plan that Prime Minister Theresa May negotiated with the EU. On Friday afternoon, Parliament rejected -- for a third time -- May's withdrawal deal, or at least the most elemental part of it, the legal withdrawal agreement.  

The vote leaves the U.K. closer to a possible "crash out" of the European Union on April 12 with no deal in place -- risking a dramatic impact on the British economy. Or Britain could seek a much longer delay to the process from the EU.

May's government stripped out all of the "political agreement" aspect of her draft deal to bring it to a vote on Friday because she has been forbidden by the legislature from bringing the exact same deal back for a third vote.

Brexit, a comedy of errors

But it wasn't just that she needed to present an altered plan for a vote; she also knew that the devil was in the details.

So what's next?

Nobody really knows for sure. Lawmakers will gather again on Monday to hold another series of votes on a range of alternative plans to May's. But they tried that just days ago and not one of the eight options put forward gained majority backing from lawmakers.

As CBS News correspondent Mark Phillips reported from Parliament on Friday, there is no clear path to Brexit.

"I fear we are reaching the limits of this process in this house," May herself noted immediately after losing the vote, but she vowed to  "continue to press the case for an orderly Brexit."

Calls were made quickly, however, for May to step down, and the prospect of a new general election was also rising. 

There are still huge differences of opinion in London over key aspects of how any divorce should work, most notably how to keep goods and people flowing smoothly across the border between Northern Ireland (part of Britain) and Ireland (an independent nation and EU member). The small frontier is the only land border between the U.K. and the EU, and it has essentially been an invisible line for decades, since peace was restored after years of sectarian violence on the island;  "The Troubles."

On Wednesday, May even offered to resign the premiership if lawmakers backed her deal, but the concession didn't work. She lost by 58 votes.

The Prime Minister may now seek another, longer extension to Britain's exit from the EU, but it isn't clear if May will be allowed to remain in power long enough to continue driving the process -- not that a new general election would bring any near-term certainty to the Brexit fiasco.

There were also mounting calls after Friday's vote for an outright revocation of the "Article 50" measure that the U.K. filed under EU law, officially putting the Brexit process in motion. Some Members of Parliament want Article 50 revoked to give the British legislature more time to find a consensus plan. Others want it revoked to simply stop the process, and possible not resume it.

What the EU says

EU leaders said right after the vote that it had made a "no-deal" Brexit even more likely, and they reissued their call for Britain's lawmakers to decide on and then tell the other 27 members states what they want.

"The risk of a no-deal Brexit is very real," Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte told journalists right after the vote in London. "One of the two routes to an orderly Brexit seems now to be closed. This leaves only the other route, which is for the British to make clear what they want before April 12."

Poland's prime minister said before the vote that the European Union was open to further extending Britain's departure from the bloc. Premier Mateusz Morawiecki told reporters, after talks with EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier, that if May's bid in the House of Commons failed, the EU was "open to extending the departure process" on a motion from London, by "six or nine or 12 months, these options are available." But they only want to do that if it looks like such a delay will yield progress at breaking the deadlock in London.

In a statement released on Friday, the European Commission, said: "As per the European Council (Article 50) decision on 22 March, the period provided for in Article 50(3) is extended to 12 April. It will be for the UK to indicate the way forward before that date, for consideration by the European Council. A "no-deal" scenario on 12 April is now a likely scenario." 

Many Brexit backers in Britain, including in May's own Conservative Party, would be loathe to see the process dragged out much longer, fearing it could lead to death-by-delay of the mandate given by the public in the 2016 referendum.

Pro-Brexit protesters take part in the March to Leave demonstration, in London, March 29, 2019. REUTERS

Retired charity worker Mandy Childs, one of a band of hard-core Brexit supporters who walked across England to London under the slogan "Leave Means Leave," said she felt "heartbroken."

"We were told over a 100 times by a British prime minister that we would be leaving on the 29th of March, 2019," she said.

"To do that, promise the British people that and then say 'Actually, no, we need to just put it back' - absolute betrayal. And how dare she?" 

Opinion polls have shown that since the referendum, as the complexities of the divorce have become apparent and the "Vote Leave" campaign has come under mounting criticism for its tactics during the run-up to the public vote, the tide has likely turned, and a thin majority now appears to be against leaving the EU at all.

Indeed hundreds of people did join the "March to Leave" rally that trooped through central London on Friday, but the numbers were dwarfed by a huge demonstration in the British capital over the weekend, demanding a second public vote, with many rejecting any Brexit at all.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brexit-vote-today-theresa-may-european-union-withdrawal-live-updates-29-03-2019/

2019-03-29 15:07:00Z
52780249686109

Britain's Brexit was meant to happen today. Instead everyone's confused. - NBC News

Breaking News Emails

Get breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings.

March 29, 2019, 10:50 AM GMT / Updated March 29, 2019, 12:01 PM GMT

By Alexander Smith

LONDON — Friday was meant to be the day when Britain's Brexit mayhem finally reached a moment of certainty.

For exactly two years, March 29, 2019, has been seared into British minds as the date their country would finally leave the European Union.

Instead, that milestone has been postponed. British lawmakers continue to disagree and dither, failing time and again to reach an agreement on how exactly this divorce should work. And in Europe — the other side of this dysfunctional relationship — the mood among many is bleak.

On Friday, having suffered two crushing defeats already, Prime Minister Theresa May is set to ask Parliament for a third time to support at least part of the plan she has negotiated with the E.U.

She will ask them to support just the withdrawal agreement element of her plan, which sets out the terms of divorce. All this week it was widely believed her attempts would fail again, but at the 11th hour there were signs the vote could be narrowing.

Several key opponents who have previously slammed May's tactics have now said they would reluctantly give her their support. Chief among them perhaps is Boris Johnson, the New York-born former foreign secretary.

Feb. 7, 201909:58

If her partial-deal passes, May will have achieved a remarkable turnaround. It would represent the first step to securing her plan, a glimmer of certainty in what many regard as Britain's gravest peacetime crisis. She would have until May 22, the new deadline, to ratify the deal into in law.

If it fails, there will be an extension until April 12 that could morph into a lengthy delay, raising the possibility of a general election, a second referendum or even no Brexit at all.

Unless there is some sort of intervention either way, Britain will crash out of Europe without a deal — something many consider a nightmare scenario.

Each day in London seems to bring a new vote or an increasingly complex proposal, championed by its backers as a possible key to the deadlock. So far none have succeeded.

Larissa Brunner, a policy analyst at the European Policy Centre, said many in the E.U.'s headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, were "completely dismayed at the political process in the U.K."

"They have no idea how this is going to end. Many have given up making predictions," she said.

The E.U. announced this week that it believes it is "increasingly likely" the U.K. will fail to reach any deal at all.

"They don't trust the U.K. political class not to screw up," Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform think tank, tweeted Thursday.

'A lose-lose situation'

A "no-deal Brexit" — as this outcome is known — does have its supporters. However most experts predict it would be a hammer blow for the British economy, and even threaten to destabilize some of the basic aspects of day-to-day life.

Before the U.K. voted to leave in June 2016, it was bound to the E.U. by more than four decades of shared laws and regulations. The relationship has become so close that Britain and the other 27 member states operate almost like a single country in many respects.

Crashing out without a deal would see these myriad agreements torn up overnight.

Some of the predictions are terrifying: shortages of food, medicine, and basic supplies such as toilet paper; suggestions farmers might be forced to slaughter and burn 10 million lambs because they can no longer sell them to Europe; and miles of tailbacks as haulage trucks encounter their first port checks for years.

The military has put 3,500 troops on standby and it already has a crisis team operating out of a subterranean nuclear bunker below the Ministry of Defense.

Perhaps more alarmingly, a no-deal Brexit could mean some form what is known as a "hard border" between Northern Ireland, which is part of the U.K., and the Irish Republic, which is a separate country and will remain in the E.U. after Brexit.

At the moment the border is all but invisible. Many fear a physical boundary would become a target for sectarian agitators, risking a return to violence rarely seen since The Troubles, a 30-year conflict that plagued the U.K. until 1998.

Protesters on either side have been camped outside Parliament for weeks.Peter Nicholls / Reuters

Hard-line Brexit supporters have argued that under this scenario the U.K. would be within its rights not to pay its divorce bill of around 39 billion pounds (around $51 billion). Legal experts say the E.U. could respond by simply suing the U.K. in an international court.

In all, the British economy could be 9 percent weaker over 15 years under no-deal than if it had stayed in the U.K., according to the government's own estimates.

The damaging ripples would likely not stop there.

No-deal could have dire implications for the economy of the Irish Republic, whose second largest export market is the U.K. In France, Belgium and the Netherlands, it would mean devoting large amounts of money, resources and personnel to check all goods coming from Britain.

"A no-deal Brexit would be a lose-lose situation for everybody," said Brunner at the European Policy Centre.

'Now we need a yes'

So much damage, psychologically at least, has already been done. Brexit has paralyzed large aspects of public and private life, carving unprecedented rifts within the major political parties, saturating news media, and sparking bitter arguments between family and friends the country over.

Many analysts feel that a general election — reshuffling the U.K.'s knife-edge parliamentary arithmetic — is now a real possibility in the coming months.

Accompanying the dismay emanating from Europe, there has also been a deep sense of frustration at what they see as Britain's chronic indecision.

E.U. negotiators spent years thrashing out a deal with May and her team, forging a hard-fought compromise that both parties found acceptable.

Aedis publishing house in Lempdes, France, has already begun printing maps showing Britain outside the E.U.Thierry Zoccolan / AFP - Getty Images

As well as the withdrawal agreement being voted on Friday, it also contains a short, non-binding document known as the political declaration, which sets out an outline of the future relationship.

As far as Europe is concerned, it has done its part. But British lawmakers have rejected May's deal twice — crushing it in the heaviest and fourth heaviest defeats in parliamentary history. On Wednesday they also rejected eight other alternatives ranging from an extreme no-deal Brexit to canceling Brexit altogether.

"We counted eight 'nos' last night," an exasperated European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas told reporters they next day. "Now we need a yes on the way forward."

Alexander Smith

Alexander Smith is a London-based senior reporter for NBC News Digital.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/brexit-referendum/britain-s-brexit-was-meant-happen-today-instead-everyone-s-n988731

2019-03-29 10:50:00Z
CAIiEH7HdImsOxBMn5Io3PZeLi8qGQgEKhAIACoHCAowvIaCCzDnxf4CMM2F8gU

Britain has been shaping the world for centuries. That won’t change with Brexit. - The Washington Post

Jeremy Hunt is Britain’s secretary of state for foreign and Commonwealth affairs.

LONDON

The 18th-century Scottish poet Robert Burns was perhaps the most gifted wordsmith of his age. Every foreign minister should ponder one of his lines: “Oh, would some Power give us the gift / To see ourselves as others see us!”

When I picture how others see Britain right now, I suspect old friends are shaking puzzled heads. The clash and thunder over Brexit is not an appealing spectacle. Some may feel that British politicians are acting out “ Monty Python ” sketches in real life.

So please put aside the doom-laden commentary and accept my assurance: We British are neither abandoning our neighbors nor retreating from the world. We have not taken leave of our senses.

True, our Parliament can be exasperating. But in a democracy, that is also its job. The mother of parliaments is proud, fiercely independent and sovereign. If the British government must fight for every vote on something as crucial as our country’s place in Europe, that is as it should be. If we lose sometimes, that, too, is democracy. For all the pressure it puts on me personally, I take pride in answering to a Parliament that is impossible to suborn.

In some countries, disputes of this kind might spill violently into the streets. In Britain, our national debate on Brexit has been contained within our democratic institutions. We have been through worse — the repeal of the Corn Laws, for instance, poisoned British politics for a generation after 1846. We have also shown resilience in the most supreme of tests — maintaining parliamentary democracy and removing a respected prime minister even as the country fought for its life during World War II. Having survived such tests, British institutions will overcome this one, too.

Look beneath the surface and Britain’s international position remains unchanged. The United Kingdom is a small archipelago, with rather less than 1 percent is of the world’s population. Alongside the United States, we have done more to shape the world we live in than any other country and remain in the global top five of most important leagues.

We have the fifth-largest economy in the world, the No. 1 financial center in our hemisphere and the second-largest military budget in NATO.

We reliably supply three of the world’s top 10 universities in surveys and are often ranked at or near the top for “soft power.” When it comes to innovation, we are fourth in the global league, according to an annual index compiled by organizations including Cornell University and the World Intellectual Property Organization. And we continue to rank the highest or near it for business-friendliness.

Don’t forget that Britain also possesses a nuclear deterrent, globally deployable armed forces and two new aircraft carriers. We like to believe we are the most capable ally that the United States has. We’ve been with the United States in Afghanistan from the beginning in 2001; our servicemen and women have helped you to take apart the Islamic State in the Middle East.

And we do more for European security than any of our neighbors. Right now, British soldiers make up the single largest contingent of NATO’s deployment in Poland and the Baltic states.

It might seem odd that we are protecting these European Union members in the middle of Brexit negotiations. In truth, it’s entirely logical. Britain is leaving the structures of the E.U., which we joined as recently as 1973, as that organization moves from economic cooperation to political union. But our unconditional commitment to the security of our continent long predates our E.U. membership and will not waver after we leave.

In fact, one of the few things that unites British politicians of all parties and our European counterparts is that we plan to work hand-in-glove on foreign and security policy after Brexit. Our vital interests and values are going to stay aligned, just as they will with the United States.

So once Brexit has happened, be in no doubt that Britain will retain all the capabilities of a global power. The United States may be the superpower, but our worldwide network of alliances and friendships places Britain among the handful of countries with genuinely global reach. We want to put it at the service of the democratic values both our countries share.

As the country steps up to its global destiny, I follow in a remarkable tradition. The first foreign secretary, Charles James Fox, abolished the slave trade. Another, George Canning, reshaped South America by helping its countries to achieve independence.

Outside my office stands a bust of Ernest Bevin, who was an architect of NATO exactly 70 years ago and arguably did as much for European security as any other postwar European politician. Bevin also ensured that Britain stayed out of the supranational body that came before the E.U. He saw no contradiction between those two positions — and he was right.

Britain has been shaping the world for centuries, and we’re here to stay.

Read more: The Post’s View: Britain stands at the brink of chaos Megan McArdle: What the political storms over the Mueller report and Brexit have in common Anne Applebaum: Theresa May isn’t the adult in the room. She’s part of the problem. Nick Cohen: The quest for Brexit has killed Britain

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/britain-has-been-shaping-the-world-for-centuries-that-wont-change-with-brexit/2019/03/28/98767866-5194-11e9-88a1-ed346f0ec94f_story.html

2019-03-28 22:45:40Z
CAIiEGoKTvaQzuLbJcJ7UK54c1oqGAgEKg8IACoHCAowjtSUCjC30XQwzqe5AQ

Brexit vote: What are MPs doing on Friday? - BBC News

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Friday should have been the day the UK officially left the EU.

But Parliament still hasn't come to an agreement on the best way forward for Brexit.

On Thursday, the Commons Leader, Andrea Leadsom, revealed the government would give MPs another vote on Friday.

But what on this time?

Here is what we know...

What is the plan?

The government has tabled a motion to be debated in the Commons on Friday about Brexit.

But unlike previous occasions, where MPs have been talking about the entirety of Theresa May's deal, this time it is just the one of two elements.

Part one is the withdrawal agreement - the legally binding document that sets out the terms of the UK's departure from the EU. This includes a settlement, details of a transition period for after we leave and protections for citizens' rights. It also includes the controversial backstop, or the insurance policy that aims to prevent a hard border returning to the island of Ireland.

Part two is the political declaration - non-legally binding document that outlines plans for the future relationship between the UK and the bloc after exit day.

The government will only put part one - the withdrawal agreement - to the Commons for a vote.

Please upgrade your browser

Your guide to Brexit jargon

Use the list below or select a button

Why has this plan come about now?

Mrs May has put her whole deal to Parliament twice in what were called "meaningful votes" to secure her deal, but both times her plan has been voted down by historic margins.

After it became clear the government would not be able to pass the deal and complete all the legislation by the original Brexit date of 29 March - this Friday - Mrs May asked the EU for an extension.

They said that if the withdrawal agreement was agreed by MPs by 29 March, the UK could then have until 22 May to sort out the paperwork.

If not, the UK would only have until 12 April to come up with an alternative or face leaving the EU without a deal.

Then the Speaker, John Bercow, warned the government they could not bring back the deal for a third meaningful vote unless it had changed substantially - seen by some as torpedoing a quick return to the Commons.

Ministers have been trying to win MPs over to back the deal and this culminated in Mrs May offering to resign to allow someone else to lead the next set of negotiations with the EU - on the proviso they voted for it when it came back to the House.

By splitting the withdrawal agreement from the political declaration, the government would adhere to the rules set out by the EU of agreeing that section by the 29 March - meaning the extension of 22 May would stand.

How would the day in Parliament work?

MPs only sit on a Friday to debate private members' bills - but they more usually use the day to carry out work in their constituencies.

But the government tabled a motion to ask MPs to sit for the extra day.

If they approve it, the Leader of the House, Andrea Leadsom, has said the day would run between 09:30 GMT and 14:30 GMT.

The government has now tabled a motion on the withdrawal agreement to allow MPs to debate it.

It is an amendable motion, which allows MPs to put forward their own changes to it.

It will be up to the Speaker if he accepts any of the amendments, and he will announce them at the start of the debate.

Once the debate is finished, MPs will then get a chance to vote on any amendments and then the motion itself.

What could be the outcome?

If MPs approve the withdrawal agreement on Friday, they will have met the requirements to push exit day back to 22 May.

But under current law, it would not be enough to ratify the deal because only one part would be approved.

The government would either have to pass part two of the deal - the political declaration on the future relationship - at a later date, or change the law so that it is not needed to ratify the treaty.

Labour MP and chair of the Brexit Select Committee, Hilary Benn, warned it could also mean the UK could not apply for a longer extension, which might be needed in a number of scenarios - such as to hold a general election or a further referendum.

He asked Attorney General Geoffrey Cox if this would be the case, but Mr Cox replied by saying he would answer the question on Friday morning during his statement to the House.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-47739143

2019-03-28 17:24:42Z
CBMiLWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy91ay1wb2xpdGljcy00NzczOTE0M9IBdWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LWJiYy1jb20uY2RuLmFtcHByb2plY3Qub3JnL3Yvcy93d3cuYmJjLmNvbS9uZXdzL2FtcC91ay1wb2xpdGljcy00NzczOTE0Mz9hbXBfanNfdj0wLjEjd2Vidmlldz0xJmNhcD1zd2lwZQ

Huawei Equipment Has Major Security Flaws, U.K. Says - The Wall Street Journal

A Huawei smartphone launch event in London in 2016. Photo: CHRIS RATCLIFFE/BLOOMBERG NEWS

By

Stu Woo

Stu Woo
The Wall Street Journal
• Biography
• @stuwoo
• stuwoo
• Stu.Woo@wsj.com

March 28, 2019 5:30 a.m. ET

LONDON—British officials accused Huawei Technologies Co. of repeatedly failing to address security flaws in its products and said the company hasn’t demonstrated a commitment to fixing them.

The findings, contained in a report published Thursday, subject the Chinese telecom-equipment giant to fresh international scrutiny as it tries to fend off American accusations that its gear poses a cybersecurity threat.

In the report, U.K. officials said they were particularly concerned that Huawei hasn’t implemented companywide cybersecurity practices that it vowed to put in place in 2012, the same year a report from the U.S. Congress labeled Huawei a national security threat.

The congressional report effectively banned Huawei from the U.S. But many other foreign markets, like the U.K., embraced Huawei, the world’s largest maker of telecommunications equipment used by wireless carriers.

The U.S. government has based its recent campaign to blacklist Huawei world-wide on the claim that Beijing could order the company to spy or disrupt communications. Washington has pressured its allies to join its ban, but many countries—like Germany—haven’t followed suit, seeking specific proof that Huawei is a cybersecurity threat.

The U.K. report doesn’t offer any proof along those lines. But it makes a separate claim: that the company hasn’t made cybersecurity a priority and that its products might have security flaws that anyone, not just the Chinese government, could exploit.

Why It’s Almost Impossible to Extract Huawei From Telecom Networks

Allies are under U.S. pressure to shun Huawei. But the company’s prevalence in existing telecom networks and dominance in 5G technology make that nearly impossible. Illustration: Crystal Tai

British officials said Huawei’s “poor software engineering” is the problem, adding that they don’t believe “the defects identified are a result of Chinese state interference.”

The findings could have global ramifications. Wireless carriers world-wide are on the verge of upgrading to 5G, the cellular technology that could enable driverless cars and internet-connected factory components. Britain, with one of the world’s most respected cybersecurity agencies, has also had some of the most extensive experience among Western nations in testing Huawei gear.

A Huawei spokesman said “we understand these concerns and take them very seriously.” He reiterated that Huawei has committed $2 billion over five years to overhauling its engineering processes and that “a high-level plan for the program has been developed and we will continue to work with U.K. operators” and British cybersecurity authorities during implementation.

In 2012, John Suffolk, Huawei’s global security and privacy officer and the U.K.’s former information-security chief, said company processes that ensure cybersecurity was “part of our DNA.” Huawei officials have often pointed to his 24-page report as a sign of Huawei’s commitment to security.

U.K. officials said in their Thursday report that Huawei didn’t follow through on its 2012 pledges and as a result, they aren’t confident about the company’s recent promises to overhaul its cybersecurity practices. “Strongly worded commitments from Huawei in the past haven't brought about any discernible improvements,” the report said.

The report, written by the U.K.’s National Cyber Security Centre, is an annual update on a Huawei-run lab near Oxford, England, that examines the Chinese company’s products used in British networks. It identified several specific, technical issues with Huawei’s products and said the company hasn’t fixed many of them.

The report said that given Huawei’s record, it is probable that the lab would find more vulnerabilities in the future, especially with new products which may include 5G equipment.

“It is highly likely that security risk management of products that are new to the U.K. or new major releases of software for products currently in the U.K. will be more difficult,” the report said.

Related Coverage

• Battling Bans, China’s Huawei Goes on an Advertising Offensive
• U.S. Campaign Against Huawei Runs Aground in an Exploding Tech Market
• U.S. Push Against Huawei Gear Hits an Obstacle: Carriers That Love It
• Washington Asks Allies to Drop Huawei
• How Huawei Took Over the World

British officials said Huawei was slow to address problems identified in a previous review. Last summer, officials identified engineering shortfalls that they said led to discrepancies between Huawei software examined in the lab and software used in British networks. It found that Huawei’s engineering processes couldn’t re-create the same software from scratch twice—a key prerequisite for an adequate test of Huawei gear.

Because the inspectors in the lab can’t replicate the software used in British networks, they can’t determine if Huawei’s equipment has security flaws.

In recent months, U.K. officials grew impatient with Huawei for not rolling a fix out more quickly. The Thursday report said the $2 billion investment promised from Huawei, “while welcome, is currently no more than a proposed initial budget for as yet unspecified activities.”

Newsletter Sign-up

British cybersecurity officials continue “to be able to provide only limited assurance that the long-term security risks can be managed in the Huawei equipment currently deployed in the U.K,” the report said.

Britain, where Huawei gear is popular with all of the country’s major telecom carriers, is in the middle of a review of its telecom supply chain. That review is separate from the report issued Thursday. Officials have publicly suggested they won’t ban Huawei outright, but could recommend partial restrictions.

Huawei has launched a counteroffensive to the U.S. campaign. Huawei’s founder and CEO has said the company has never spied for the Chinese government and never would. The company has also sought to soothe worries about the security of it products by setting up labs in Britain, Germany and Belgium, all designed to let government officials inspect Huawei’s hardware and software.

The lab in Britain, Huawei’s oldest and most important major Western market, was the first to open, in 2010. It employs Huawei employees, all British nationals with top-secret security clearance, and is overseen by board with officials from both the government and Huawei, as well as representatives from British carriers.

The report from British cybersecurity officials said its findings aren’t a statement about the security of Britain’s networks. The report doesn’t dictate policy, but rather highlights problems and recommends how the government and telecom providers can address them.

From December: Why China’s Huawei Matters

Chinese telecom giant Huawei has long caused tension between Washington and Beijing. WSJ’s Shelby Holliday explains what the company does and why it’s significant. (Photo: Aly Song/Reuters)

U.K. officials have said they share American concerns that Beijing could order Huawei to spy or conduct cyberattacks, but believe they can minimize those risks with security measures—such as the lab near Oxford—and by requiring wireless providers to use equipment from multiple suppliers in their networks. Huawei has two major rivals, Finland’s Nokia Corp. and Sweden’s Ericsson AB.

Write to Stu Woo at Stu.Woo@wsj.com

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-k-says-huawei-gear-has-major-security-flaws-11553765403

2019-03-28 10:30:00Z
CAIiELAhDECP-Hya4xzuQCn0rDUqFwgEKg8IACoHCAow1tzJATDnyxUwx4YY

Britain rebukes Huawei over security failings, discloses more flaws - Reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain publicly chastised China’s Huawei Technologies for failing to fix long-standing security flaws in its mobile network equipment and revealed new “significant technical issues,” increasing pressure on the company as it battles Western allegations that Beijing could use its gear for spying.

The Huawei logo is pictured outside its Huawei's factory campus in Dongguan, Guangdong province, China March 25, 2019. Picture taken March 25, 2019. REUTERS/Tyrone Siu

In a report published on Thursday, the government-led board that oversees vetting of Huawei gear in Britain said continued problems with the company’s software development had brought “significantly increased risk to UK operators.”

The board – which includes officials from Britain’s GCHQ communications intelligence agency – said in the report that the company had made “no material progress” addressing security flaws and it didn’t have confidence in Huawei’s capacity to deliver on proposed measures to address “underlying defects.”

The unusually direct criticism is a fresh blow to the world’s largest maker of mobile network equipment, which has been under intense scrutiny in recent months.

Officials in the United States and elsewhere have been increasingly public in voicing concerns that Huawei’s equipment could be used by Beijing for spying or sabotage, particularly as operators move to the next generation of mobile networks, known as 5G.

Shenzhen-based Huawei said in a statement it took the oversight board’s concerns “very seriously” and that the issues identified in the report “provide vital input for the ongoing transformation of our software engineering capabilities”.

Huawei pledged last year to spend more than $2 billion as part of efforts to address problems previously identified by Britain, but has also warned it could take up to five years to see results.

British security officials previously said they believed any risks posed by Huawei could be managed.

In the report, the government-led board said: “These findings are about basic engineering competence and cyber security hygiene that give rise to vulnerabilities that are capable of being exploited by a range of actors.”

“NCSC (National Cyber Security Centre) does not believe that the defects identified are a result of state interference,” it added.

The work of the oversight board and its findings will help inform future government policy on network security, officials say, but the final decision lies with ministers.

British officials now need to see evidence of significant change, the report said, adding that Huawei had failed to follow through on security commitments made as far back as 2012.

“The evidence of sustained change is especially important as similar strongly worded commitments from Huawei in the past have not brought about any discernible improvements,” it said.

“MAJOR DEFECTS”

The 40-plus-page report identified several new technical issues with Huawei equipment and revealed that the problems were at a greater scale than previously publicly acknowledged.

These include concerns related to a product called eNodeB, which provides a connection between the network and a user’s mobile phone.

According to the report, the oversight board looked at updated versions of software that were intended to incorporate security improvements but found “the general software engineering and cyber security quality of the product continues to demonstrate a significant number of major defects.”

The report also said the lab had reported to UK operators “several hundred vulnerabilities and issues” during 2018. 

The board added that overall, the problems reveal “serious and systematic defects in Huawei’s software engineering and cyber security competence”.

And, as a result, the board could still only provide limited assurances that the security risks posed by Huawei equipment could be managed long term.

It added: “The oversight board advises that it will be difficult to appropriately risk manage future products in the context of UK deployments, until the underlying defects in Huawei’s software engineering and cyber security processes are remediated.”

The board first downgraded its level of assurance in its last report, published in July 2018. In addition to top British government officials, the board includes senior representatives from British telecom operators and Huawei executives.

Editing by Edmund Blair

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-huawei-security-britain/britain-rebukes-huawei-over-security-failings-discloses-more-flaws-idUSKCN1R90ZC

2019-03-28 09:38:00Z
CBMiiwFodHRwczovL3d3dy5yZXV0ZXJzLmNvbS9hcnRpY2xlL3VzLWh1YXdlaS1zZWN1cml0eS1icml0YWluL2JyaXRhaW4tcmVidWtlcy1odWF3ZWktb3Zlci1zZWN1cml0eS1mYWlsaW5ncy1kaXNjbG9zZXMtbW9yZS1mbGF3cy1pZFVTS0NOMVI5MFpD0gF_aHR0cHM6Ly9tb2JpbGUtcmV1dGVycy1jb20uY2RuLmFtcHByb2plY3Qub3JnL3Yvcy9tb2JpbGUucmV1dGVycy5jb20vYXJ0aWNsZS9hbXAvaWRVU0tDTjFSOTBaQz9hbXBfanNfdj0wLjEjd2Vidmlldz0xJmNhcD1zd2lwZQ

Alternate Brexit Plans Rejected; Theresa May Offers to Step Down - The New York Times

Advertisement

Supported by

Alternate Brexit Plans Rejected; Theresa May Offers to Step Down

Image

Prime Minister Theresa May in Parliament in London on Monday. The Brexit agreement that she negotiated has twice been rejected by lawmakers.CreditCreditMark Duffy/UK Parliament, via Reuters

By Stephen Castle

• March 27, 2019

LONDON — In a last-ditch effort to try to get Parliament to pass her plan for Britain to leave the European Union, Prime Minister Theresa May on Wednesday offered to step down and allow another prime minister who has the confidence of her party and lawmakers to negotiate the final details.

Mrs. May’s stunning overture to her fellow Conservatives came just as Parliament tried to sideline her and come up with its own plan for Brexit, as the process of leaving the bloc is known.

But when lawmakers held a series of nonbinding votes on Wednesday night on eight different options for Britain’s future relationship with the European Union, none mustered a majority.

Mrs. May is so unpopular and has lost so much authority within her party that her offer to step down, if her plan is approved, was greeted with relief by Tory lawmakers.

“I have heard very clearly the mood of the parliamentary party,” Mrs. May told Conservative lawmakers gathered in a meeting room in Parliament. “I know there is a desire for a new approach, and new leadership, in the second phase of the Brexit negotiations, and I won’t stand in the way of that.”

Image

A European Union flag and a Union Jack fluttering outside Parliament on Wednesday.CreditTolga Akmen/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Several past critics, including Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary, said they would now back Mrs. May’s plan, which Parliament has already overwhelmingly rejected twice. But it still faces long odds.

A number of hard-line Brexit supporters were holding out, and more important, so was the Conservatives’ ally, the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland.

If lawmakers seem unified around the idea of Mrs. May’s departure, nothing else is certain.

In the nonbinding votes, the most popular options were motions to stay in a customs union with the bloc and to hold a referendum on any Brexit deal that is finally hammered out.

Mrs. May’s plan would maintain customs and trade arrangements with the European Union until at least the end of 2020, and ultimately envisions cutting most of those ties.

But it does not detail what would replace them, leaving open the vital question of Britain’s relationship to the European Union.

If Mrs. May’s plan is approved, the battle over the details of Brexit will be fought first in a leadership struggle in the Conservative Party and then by all the other parties and factions that have scrapped with one another throughout the last two years.

What Is Brexit? A Simple Guide to Why It Matters and What Happens Next

The basics of Brexit, the troubled plan for Britain to quit the European Union.

The prime minister did not specify when she would step down. But the European Union has approved an extension in the Brexit process to May 22, if her plan gained approval, and that date could become the start of the leadership contest, which has been unofficially underway for some time already.

The eight options that lawmakers voted on were selected by the Speaker of the House, John Bercow, including several that would keep Britain closely tied to the European Union, in a so-called soft Brexit.

All of this is unfolding before an increasingly frustrated and cynical public that is asking questions about British democracy and the political elite, and whether either is capable of governing in the national interest. In the meantime, the world looks on at Britain’s follies in bewilderment.

“If you compared Britain to a sphinx, the sphinx would be an open book by comparison,” Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, told the European Parliament on Wednesday at a meeting in Strasbourg, France. “Let’s see how that book speaks over the next week or so.”

Since becoming prime minister in 2016 with ambitions to tackle social divisions, Mrs. May has been dragged down by the Brexit quagmire and, after losing her parliamentary majority in a 2017 election, has seen her authority ebb away.

Her advisers had urged her to offer to step down as the only way to garner enough votes to force her plan through Parliament. Many Conservative lawmakers have lost confidence in her leadership, and the strongly pro-Brexit faction wants one of its own to oversee the next, critical round in negotiations with the European Union.

Image

Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, said on Wednesday that the European Union was expecting Britain “to indicate a way forward.”CreditFrederick Florin/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Lawmakers have already twice rejected the Brexit agreement that Mrs. May painstakingly negotiated with the European Union, each time by large margins.

Last week, European Union leaders agreed to Britain’s request to delay its departure, which had been set to take effect on Friday, to avoid a chaotic exit without a deal in place.

But time is short, and Europe has grown frustrated with the deadlock. Under the terms of the postponement, if Parliament does not accept Mrs. May’s deal, the new deadline will be April 12.

The European Union is “expecting the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward,” Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, said at the meeting in Strasbourg.

But European leaders reiterated that they were still open to a long Brexit delay — perhaps two years — if, as Mr. Tusk said, “the U.K. wishes to rethink its Brexit strategy.”

That delay would have to be agreed to by the April 12 deadline.

Mrs. May’s plan could return to Parliament later this week if she gets more pledges of support like that of Mr. Johnson’s.

Image

Jacob Rees-Mogg is among the hard-line pro-Brexit lawmakers who have indicated that they might now support Mrs. May’s plan, despite previous objections.CreditToby Melville/Reuters

But most important for the plan’s fortunes is the opinion of the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland, or D.U.P., whose 10 lawmakers usually support the government but currently oppose Mrs. May’s Brexit blueprint.

Her plan contains a “backstop” to ensure against a hard Irish border that the party has vehemently resisted, saying it would lead to the dissolution of the United Kingdom and the unification of Ireland.

One influential Brexit hard-liner, Jacob Rees-Mogg, said on Tuesday that he would back Mrs. May’s plan if the D.U.P. went along. With that seeming increasingly unlikely, on Wednesday he said he would vote in favor if the party merely abstained.

On Wednesday, the leader of the House of Commons, Andrea Leadsom, a Conservative lawmaker, told the BBC there was a “real possibility” that Mrs. May’s plan could return for a vote as soon as Thursday.

Still, a third effort to pass it would be a very tall order. Mrs. May would need to win the support of about 70 lawmakers who have already voted against it twice.

If she managed that, she would almost certainly have quashed Parliament’s rebellion and ensured that at least some form of Brexit would take place relatively soon.

Wednesday’s votes were never expected to yield a firm result. There is a better chance of that happening on Monday, when Parliament is expected to vote again on the most popular options from Wednesday’s voting.

If that happens, lawmakers will then seek to forge a proposal that a majority can at least live with, and answer critics who complain that while Parliament knows what it doesn’t like, it has been incapable of saying what it does.

Richard Pérez-Peña contributed reporting from London.

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: To Save Her Plan, Britain’s Leader Is Willing to Exit. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Related Coverage

E.U. Officials Agree to Brexit Delay, but With Conditions

March 20, 2019

Image

Where Does Brexit Go From Here?

March 22, 2019

Image

Parliament Grabs Control of Brexit From a Wounded Theresa May

March 25, 2019

Image

Advertisement

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/27/world/europe/theresa-may-resignation.html

2019-03-27 23:19:18Z
52780249686109