Back to news

December 20, 2018 | International, C4ISR

How 5G Will Shape Innovation and Security

Executive Summary

  • The fifth generation of mobile network technologies, known as “5G,” promises greater speed, security, and capacity. 5G will underpin the internet economy and provide the backbone for the next generation of digital technologies. So, it is unsurprising that there is intense competition among companies and countries for 5G leadership.
  • 5G will determine the direction the internet will take and where nations will face new risks and vulnerabilities. Who makes 5G technologies will affect security and innovation in an increasingly competitive technological environment. Decisions made today about 5G will affect national security and economic performance for decades to come.
  • This is a competition among companies and groups of companies but also a competition between market-based and state-directed decisionmaking. The United States has relied on the former, China on the latter, and Europe falls somewhere in between.
  • American technology remains essential for 5G mobile telecommunications. American companies have been strong performers in developing 5G technologies, but the United States and its allies face a fundamental challenge from China. The focus of competition is over 5G's intellectual property, standards, and patents. Huawei, for example, has research programs to develop alternatives to American suppliers, and U.S. trade restrictions have accelerated China's efforts to develop its own 5G industry.
  • While American companies lead in making essential 5G technologies, there are no longer any U.S. manufacturers of core telecommunications network equipment. Four companies dominate the market for the core network technologies needed for 5G networks. None of these companies are American. 1The choices are between European security partners (Ericsson and Nokia) and China (Huawei and ZTE).
  • Telecom is a strategic industry and having two companies with close ties to a hostile power creates risk for the United States and its allies. A secure supply chain for 5G closes off dangerous areas of risk for national security in terms of espionage and the potential disruption to critical infrastructures. China's aggressive global campaign of cyber espionage makes it certain that it will exploit the opportunities it gains as a 5G supplier.
  • One way to envision this is to imagine that the person who built your house decides to burgle it. They know the layout, the power system, the access points, may have kept a key, and perhaps even built in a way to gain surreptitious entry. Major telecom “backbone” equipment connects to the manufacturer over a dedicated channel, reporting back on equipment status and receiving updates and software patches as needed, usually without the operator's knowledge. Equipment could be sold and installed in perfectly secure condition, and a month later, the manufacture could send a software update to create vulnerabilities or disrupt service. The operator and its customers would have no knowledge of this change.
  • The United States can manage 5G risk using two sets of policies. The first is to ensure that American companies can continue to innovate and produce advanced technologies and face fair competition overseas. American and “like-minded” companies routinely outspend their Chinese competitors in 5G R&D and hold 10 times as many 5G patents. Chinese companies still depend on the western companies for the most advanced 5G components.
  • The second is to work with like-minded nations to develop a common approach to 5G security. The United States cannot meet the 5G challenge on its own. When the United States successfully challenged Chinese industrial policy in the past, it has been done in concert with allies.
  • Another task will be to find ways to encourage undecided countries to spend on 5G security. Huawei's telecom networks cost between 20 to 30 percent less than competing products. Huawei also offers foreign customers generous terms for leasing or loans. It can do this because of its access to government funds. Beijing supports Huawei for both strategic and commercial reasons. Many countries will be tempted by the steep discount. Not buying Huawei means paying a “premium” for security to which economic ministries are likely to object. The United States will need to encourage others to pay this security premium while at the same time preparing for a world where the United States unavoidably connects to Huawei-supplied networks and determine how to securely connect and communicate over telecom networks in countries using Chinese network equipment.
  • The United States does not need to copy China's government-centric model for 5G, but it does need to invest in research and adopt a comprehensive approach to combatting non-tariff barriers to trade. 5G leadership requires a broader technology competition policy in the United States that builds the engineering and tech workforce and supports both private and public R&D. The United States also needs to ensure that U.S. companies do not face obstacles from antitrust or patent infringement investigations undertaken by other countries to obtain competitive advantage.
  • In the twentieth century, steel, coal, automobiles, aircraft, ships, and the ability to produce things in mass quantity were the sources of national power. The foundations of security and power are different today. The ability to create and use new technologies is the source of economic strength and military security. Technology, and the capacity to create new technologies, are the basis of information age power. 5G as the cornerstone of a new digital environment is the focal point for the new competition, where the United States is well-positioned to lead but neither success nor security are guaranteed without action.

This report is made possible by general support to CSIS. No direct sponsorship contributed to this report.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-5g-will-shape-innovation-and-security

On the same subject

  • Point Blank throws hat in ring to design US Army’s Bradley replacement

    April 29, 2021 | International, Land

    Point Blank throws hat in ring to design US Army’s Bradley replacement

    Here's a look at the latest nontraditional business to emerge as a competitor to build the U.S. Army's optionally manned fighting vehicle.

  • The UK is ready to kick off an effort to revamp military training

    October 17, 2019 | International, Land

    The UK is ready to kick off an effort to revamp military training

    By: Andrew Chuter LONDON — The British Army is rethinking how it conducts a key element of its training, tapping industry to help deliver the first phase of what the military says will be a “surrogate for warfare” by the time the upgrade is complete. Requests for information (RFI) are scheduled to be released by the Ministry of Defence Nov. 1, formally launching an industry competition to secure the first phase of a major training overhaul: the Collective Training Transformation Programme (CTTP). “Collective training will become a surrogate for warfare; driving adaptation, generating combat ethos, empowering commanders, and delivering tactical innovation,” said the British Army in response to questions from Defense News. “From now to 2025, collective training will be transformed to prepare the Army. Critically, that will be through delivering trained force elements at readiness, but also through contributing to maintenance for the dynamic and complex future operating environments faced in an era of constant confrontation,” said the Army. The Phase 1 RFI is expected to attract responses from at least three of the top British and U.S. defense contractors interested in the sector here. Spokespeople for Babcock International, Lockheed Martin UK and Raytheon UK all confirmed their interest in the program. Its the second time in a few months the three companies have found themselves head-to-head in a competition for a significant military training deal in the U.K. They are also vying for a potentially major deal to train Royal Navy recruits. Babcock and Lockheed Martin already have significant land forces training businesses here, while Raytheon's main training activity in the U.K. is in the commercial sector. A spokeswomen for the U.S.-based SAIC said the company was “not actively pursuing a bid at this time,“ despite murmurings to the contrary. CTTP involves training groups or units up to divisional level. The program is part of the British Army's new Future Collective Training System. The transformation program has been sparked by the need to adapt to the rapid change in the nature of warfare and the re-emergence of state-on-state threats from potential adversaries like Russia and China. For much of the last two decades the British have been engaged in counter insurgency campaigns against terrorist forces in Afghanistan and Iraq operating with comparatively low technology. The need to ramp up the effort to counter complex peer or near peer threats has left some British training facilities and processes short of today's requirements. The British believe collective training needs to be more challenging and conducted in more complex environments, if its formations and units are to maintain battle readiness. Urban operations and information maneuver are among the key skills the British want to improve, said an industry executive who asked not to be named. The benefits of the program go beyond training. The Army said it is also looking to generate more strategic effect and deterrence in the future by conducting collective training in key parts of the world. “The British Army will train in regions of the world that cement our joint and international partnerships and reassure our friends and deter potential adversaries,” said the Army. The British already train in Europe, Canada, Oman, Kenya and Belize. It's possible that list could be expanded. The Phase 1 RFI was supposed to be released at the start of October, but was marginally slowed by various issues. Responses are due Nov. 29.The intention is to follow up Phase 1 with the release of the Phase 2 RFI on Jan. 20, with industry responding no later than Feb. 14. The Army declined to give expected industry contract dates for either phase of the transformation, but the Future Collective Training System is planned to achieve full operating capability in 2025. Upgraded urban training facilities, additional virtual training at Army bases and potential use of innovative synthetic training capabilities are among the potential improvements, said the industry executive. The second phase is expected to build on the work conducted in the first phase, involving a number of services and capabilities that together deliver the full Future Collective Training System. Together the two phases could be worth in excess of £600 million ($770 million), although more precise figures depend upon final requirements, which be driven in part by affordability. The British currently spends about £1 billion annually on collective training. Most, if not all, the companies involved will likely be leading industry teams in some form of partnership with the Army. The commercial model the MoD wants to adopt for the industry alliance with the Army is as yet unclear. CTTP officials are known to have looked at five or six possible options including appointing a strategic delivery partner, a contractural alliance and even private finance. https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/10/16/the-uk-is-ready-to-kick-off-an-effort-to-revamp-military-training/

  • Space Force sees SATCOM awards surging to $20 billion this fiscal year

    October 26, 2023 | International, Aerospace

    Space Force sees SATCOM awards surging to $20 billion this fiscal year

    The total value of the contracts to be awarded is a significant jump from the $1.6 billion issued across the portfolio in FY23.

All news