The United States is encouraging NATO partners to allocate defense budgets for the replacement of Huawei.

      The US has discovered a new purpose for Europe's increasing defense budgets: eliminating Huawei. However, it remains uncertain if its allies are receptive to this suggestion.

      Joshua Young, the State Department’s China coordinator, informed officials in Brussels last month that NATO members should utilize defense-related funding, which contributes to the alliance's targets, to remove Huawei equipment and replace it with technology from other suppliers, according to Bloomberg.

      While Young did not specify any countries, one source indicated that his comments were directed at Germany. The response to his remarks was tepid.

      Young's comments came from a relatively low-ranking diplomat, and allies, accustomed to mixed signals from the Trump administration, did not provide immediate feedback, according to individuals familiar with the closed-door discussion. The State Department chose not to comment.

      The proposal relies on NATO's new financial arrangements. Almost all members agreed last year to increase defense spending to 5 percent of GDP, which includes 3.5 percent for core military needs and an additional 1.5 percent for defense-related areas, in response to a request from President Trump. A NATO official noted that this latter portion could indeed be utilized to safeguard networks, including replacing vendors, which is the opportunity Washington is trying to leverage.

      However, Europe is not unified on the issue. The European Commission has classified Huawei and ZTE as “high-risk suppliers” and is advocating for stricter oversight through a revision of its Cybersecurity Act. Nonetheless, Germany and Spain are at the forefront of opposing an EU-level ban, favoring national control and being cautious of potential retaliation from Beijing.

      Germany has already grappled with the financial implications, having considered compensating Deutsche Telekom and other providers with public funds to replace the Chinese technology.

      The magnitude of the task contributes to the hesitation. Chinese suppliers are estimated to account for 30 to 40 percent of Europe’s 5G infrastructure, and a complete removal would represent the largest mandated replacement of telecommunications equipment in European history. By categorizing this expense as defense spending, the US is providing allies with both a means to finance it and a justification for doing so.

      There is also disagreement regarding what qualifies as defense-related spending. American officials have criticized allies for broadening the 1.5 percent category to include items only loosely connected to defense; at one point, Italy suggested including a major bridge in Sicily before retracting the idea.

      Network security is a more recognizable justification, and this topic will be revisited when NATO leaders convene in Turkey next month.

      For the time being, it is merely a suggestion, not an established policy, proposed by a mid-level official and received with silence. However, it redefines the politically contentious cost of removing Chinese technology as something akin to a NATO responsibility. If this perspective gains traction, countries with significant Huawei presence may find it easier to rationalize the associated costs, even as discussions in Brussels continue regarding the fundamental issue.