Critics have
denounced China's standards as a covert form
of protectionism for the country's high-tech sector,
replacing the import tariffs that the country dropped as
a condition for joining the World Trade Organization in
late 2001. Chinese officials retort that the critics are
hypocritical—that the United States protects its own
industries by imposing environmental standards on home
appliances and electronics.
There is a grain of truth in the charges of
protectionism, particularly when the Chinese government
acts to put the force of law behind its national
standards.
ILLUSTRATION: ERIC BOWMAN
|
As we will show, China is nothing like a
monopoly, nor are its policies monolithic. But first, we
need to explain the standards themselves and how China
is using them to shake up markets throughout Asia,
Europe, and the Americas.
No other example better illustrates the world's
reaction to China's recent forays into the standards
world than WAPI, its proposal for Wi-Fi security. This
initiative has sparked volley after volley of action,
reaction, and confrontation that has strained the necks
of many observers.
Chinese manufacturers developed WAPI in 2003 to
address security weaknesses in the original IEEE 802.11
protocols, on which Wi-Fi is based. The weaknesses
allowed almost any savvy individual within range to read
data packets out of the air. In 2000, the IEEE had begun
developing more reliable encryption methods. A new
protocol, 802.11i, would eventually be approved in 2004.
In November 2003 the Chinese government announced
that its WAPI protocol would have to be included in all
Wi-Fi products in China by June 2004, and that all such
products would be reviewed for compliance. Many
international companies—particularly those that are
members of the Wi-Fi Alliance, a global industry
consortium—reacted to the news with dismay, as they
believed that the review and approval process would be
biased in favor of domestic Chinese companies. The
authorities might, for instance, wave Chinese products
through while nit-picking foreign ones, or tell Chinese
firms what they need to do to pass inspection, while
making foreigners learn the lesson by trial and error.
In fact, the Chinese authorities declared the
necessary WAPI algorithms secret, and provided them to
just a select few Chinese companies, meaning that only
those so blessed could then license the new technology
(or not) and control the market by fiat. Such crude
favoritism harked back to China's old planned economy,
and it wouldn't wash with trade partners. Eventually,
through bilateral U.S.–China negotiations, the Chinese
agreed in April 2004 to "postpone indefinitely" their
WAPI compliance requirements.
Nonetheless, by February 2005, the WAPI dispute had
heated up again. A delegation of representatives from
China went to Germany to discuss the status of several
competing standards for wireless Internet
communications, including IEEE 802.11i. The meeting was
organized by the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO), in Geneva. The Chinese delegates
had hoped that WAPI would be fast-tracked for approval,
as 802.11i had been. However, after two days of
contentious negotiations, the Chinese walked out,
claiming that the ISO had treated them unfairly.
At the time, the Chinese press was rife with reports
that the ISO had favored rival groups to stymie China's
economic development. Some reports even stated that WAPI
would be implemented immediately in China. As it turned
out, that didn't happen, and it appears that the ISO
incident in Germany might in fact have been a political
move by a faction in China that wished to change the
government's decision to postpone WAPI's implementation.
At press time, the postponement is still the status quo.