This was expected. Huawei now presents a serious competition to the likes of Apple, so the 'free market' in the U.S. responds by...shutting down the competition.
Now I know the counterargument is about Chinese protectionism, but it is the U.S. who has always championed free market capitalism and led interventions in order to forcibly open other markets to its exports.
As this shows however, this belief in the free market is anything but principled.
It seems like the exact opposite is true. China in some sense doesn't abide by free market or free trade principles, and this can be seen as a principled stand against that.
Except China has not locked U.S. smartphone makers like Apple anywhere near to the degree that the U.S. is targeting Huawei.
Also, China does not necessarily claim to be as free-market as the U.S. does and as far as I am aware, has not let interventionist wars in order to open up a foreign market to its companies.
What I am talking here is principle. The U.S. claims to have free speech for example, China does not. But in that instance the U.S. sticks by its principles and maintains its free speech protections, despite China not having them.
Why is this different when it comes to the free market? A concept the U.S. has in recent history definitely fought harder worldwide than the pursuit of free speech.
Now I know the counterargument is about Chinese protectionism, but it is the U.S. who has always championed free market capitalism and led interventions in order to forcibly open other markets to its exports.
As this shows however, this belief in the free market is anything but principled.