Editor's note: Tom Harper is a doctoral researcher at the University of Surrey. The article reflects the author's opinion and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

As 5G and the "Internet of Things" move closer to reality, China is set to play a significant role in realizing this future, thanks to its flagship telecommunications firm, Huawei. The company has been awarded 91 contracts globally, the most for any 5G vendor, which flies in the face of a determined campaign waged by the Trump administration to pressure its allies into banning the firm from constructing their 5G infrastructure. While it appears that a single company defying a strong campaign waged by a superpower's government is a seemingly unlikely outcome, such a campaign could only end in failure due to several core mistakes. 

Undiplomatic diplomacy

One of the key failings in the Trump administration's war against Huawei has been in its combative approach to diplomacy, which relies heavily on coercion and threats, and gives little in the way of incentives to follow Washington's lead. While this may play well to a domestic audience, the same cannot be said for international audiences, who have seemingly been asked to jeopardize their prosperity for no obvious benefit.

Among the many officials who have led the charge against Huawei in threatening to sever intelligence ties with nations who do not ban the firm, the epitome of this approach could be seen in the administration's ambassador to Germany, Richard Grenell. Grenell's threats over Huawei echo similar warnings over Germany's Nord Stream 2 pipeline with Russia, threatening to sanction the project should it go ahead.  Both these cases show how Berlin has been asked to forego its economic interests in favor of Washington's geostrategic moves. 

Ultimately, such an approach has won few friends, with some German politicians, such as Wolfgang Kubicki, the leader of the opposition Free Democratic Party, likening Grenell to a "high commissioner of an occupying power" and calling for his expulsion.

The main problem with this approach to diplomacy is that it is all stick and no carrot. However, this was not the only mistake made in the campaign against Huawei. 

Do as I say, not what I do

The latest phase of the campaign came in the charges leveled against Huawei by the administration's attorney general, William Barr, which coincided with the Crypto AG scandal. It was revealed that the Swiss encryption firm was secretly owned by the NSA, who used it to intercept communications from governments who used the firm's services. This was reminiscent of earlier revelations from the Snowden leaks, which revealed that the NSA had also hacked the telephone of Angela Merkel, the German chancellor.

Accusations that Huawei is an arm of the Chinese government and installs back doors into its products has been one of the biggest ironies of the campaign, as U.S. governmental bodies are guilty of the very charges administration officials have leveled at Huawei. While this rendered American concerns over the company as being largely hypocritical, it also raises questions over whether these concerns are truly benign, with the perception that the primary objection to Huawei is that it is more difficult to hack nations that use their infrastructure. It is this aspect that likely played a role in Berlin ignoring American objections over Huawei.

No smoking gun 

Similarly, while American officials have frequently leveled accusations of Huawei being a national security threat and an untrustworthy vendor, they have provided little in the way of convincing evidence to support these accusations. It is this unwillingness or inability to provide a "smoking gun" that hindered their crusade against Huawei, with many nations being unwilling to sacrifice their economic prosperity or technological abilities based on flimsy evidence.

As a result, an endeavor that relied on the constant refrain of Huawei being a security threat with little to support, it was destined to end in failure, just as "Project Fear" had failed the Remain campaign during the 2016 referendum on British membership of the European Union.

If not Huawei, then who? 

Huawei's lead in the pursuit of 5G also provided another stumbling block in the administration's mission as well as demonstrating China's technological prowess. While this is a slap in the face to the common prejudice that China is incapable of innovation and can only steal technology from others, it has also made Huawei the only firm that can offer 5G infrastructure that is both advanced and economical. This also revealed a key American weakness in that none of Huawei's American counterparts were capable of 5G, which hindered the moves of the administration.

This weakness became apparent in a meeting between the British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, and several American diplomats who were trying to persuade the British government to ban Huawei.  Their inability to answer Johnson's question over a possible alternative to Huawei further underlined how flawed the attempts to ban the company had been.  

The greater competition

Overall, the failure of the Trump administration's crusade has shown the flaws in American diplomacy under the administration as well as the limitations of American influence, with staunch American allies refusing to comply with Washington's wishes for them to ban Huawei. This also underlines the reality of China's global influence, and that unlike the Cold War, nations are far less willing to take sides as they had once been before. 

While it is still unclear who will prevail in the wider competition for technological supremacy, what is clear is that China has won the battle for 5G, which puts Beijing in a better position to prevail in the long run.       

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)