In the battle of the blonds, Boris Johnson is poised to take back control.
The U.K. prime minister will decide Tuesday whether to defy U.S. President Donald Trump's warnings about allowing Chinese tech giant Huawei to supply U.K. infrastructure when he convenes his national security council.
Officials in London have barely hidden their disdain for aggressive U.S. lobbying against the Chinese firm in recent weeks, challenging the U.S. to come up with other possible suppliers. Multiple reports suggest the prime minister is prepared to give the green light to the inclusion of at least some of the firm's technology in the U.K. telecoms network.
Britain's apparent refusal to back down has been met with some surprise. Huawei — along with other decisions such as whether to impose a digital tax and what to do about Iran — is often presented as a stark choice for the British prime minister: Fall into line behind the Americans or jeopardize the U.K.'s chances of landing a long-promised trade deal with the U.S. after Brexit.
But former ministers and officials who are familiar with the mind-set of Johnson and his top adviser Dominic Cummings say privately that modern tech infrastructure is much more important to the pair's vision for the U.K.'s future economy than trade with the U.S., welcome as a quick deal would be.
There were reports last year that U.S. negotiators had signaled the U.K.'s hopes of a post-Brexit trade deal could rest on its willingness to block Huawei.
"If you are Dom [Cummings] and the PM, you know in 10 years we want to be a high-tech Silicon Valley across the whole of the U.K. We need high speed internet across the country to do that," said one government official who has worked closely with both men but asked not to be named. "That is more important than getting slightly cheaper meat."
"While trade deals are a Tory MP obsession ... Dom would come from the school of thought that the point of trade deals and leaving the EU is to make your own domestic market more dynamic and more responsive," the official added.
In the week the U.K. exits the European Union, three years after the Brexit campaign promised to "take back control," there is also the added political benefit of a U.K. show of strength.
"The decision we make will be based upon our own sovereign right to choose. There are risks but we will make an informed decision based on the evidence and we will do so in an autonomous way,” one of Johnson's senior ministers, Justice Secretary Robert Buckland, told the BBC on Sunday.
"There are certain people who worry we are going a bit too far to prove a point [about taking back control]," another official familiar with government discussions about Huawei said. "The blunt truth is, we don't want to be seen as Trump's poodle — but we don't have an election for five years."
British shrug
Johnson's final decision on Huawei comes weeks before the U.K. is due to start negotiations on a comprehensive free-trade deal with the United States.
There were reports last year that U.S. negotiators had signaled the U.K.'s hopes of a post-Brexit trade deal could rest on its willingness to block Huawei, although public threats from the U.S. have focused on the two countries' ability to share intelligence rather than on future trade arrangements.
Downing Street insists it remains keen to talk trade with America, with some ministers hoping to use a quick U.S. deal as leverage while the U.K. simultaneously negotiates a comprehensive deal with the European Union.
But despite commentators' assumptions that a U.S. deal tops the to-do list for Britain after Brexit, ministers reportedly agreed to prioritize Japan for its first trade deal at a strategy meeting last Thursday.
A government official characterized the U.K.'s foreign policy objective as being an "effective bridge between the U.S. and EU position."
The first government official also acknowledged the difficulties of doing a U.S. trade deal in election year. "Every state is going to want their own thing in it."
Even on intelligence-sharing threats, ministers and officials in London appear relaxed.
Earlier this month a delegation of U.S. officials flew into the U.K. to present a fresh dossier of the security risks allegedly posed by Huawei, briefing that it would be “nothing short of madness” for Britain to allow Huawei to supply 5G mobile phone networks.
But Andrew Parker, head of MI5, told the FT he has “no reason to think” that the U.K.’s intelligence-sharing relationship with the U.S. would be hit if Britain adopted Huawei technology in its 5G mobile phone network.
"I think that so much rides on that relationship I am unsurprised they would want to put pressure on us, but I doubt if it would be a fatal flaw in the security relationship,” a former minister familiar with the Huawei debate said. "You can’t have a decision that is deciding, I think, to eliminate a specific country or specific company. There need to be objective rules, and if Huawei doesn’t make them, then too bad."
Another government official characterized the U.K.'s foreign policy objective as being an "effective bridge between the U.S. and EU position," something that, the official said, was played out in its response to the Iranian crisis earlier this month.
The official dismissed the idea that the so-called "special relationship" could be put under threat. "The [U.S.-U.K.] relationship is so strong that it will always endure regardless of what happens," they said. "This is centuries old cooperation."
Taking back control
However, concerns remain that the prime minister is being careless with the U.K.'s relationship with the U.S.
For other U.K. opponents of Huawei, Johnson's expected decision to allow the tech giant access to Britain's network is actually handing over control to Beijing.
Tom Tugendhat, a Tory MP who chairs the House of Commons foreign affairs committee, has long been a vocal opponent of the move, warning of security or back-door surveillance issues given Beijing’s approach to the rule of law and civil rights.
“It’s no good taking back control from Brussels only to hand it over to Beijing,” Tugendhat told the BBC on Monday. “And I’m sure that’s not what the government would want to do."
