LONDON—On Monday, the Chinese technology giant, Huwaei, stood before the members of British Parliament, defending the company’s security practices, in efforts to avoid a global-wide ban on its devices.

Huawei, the world’s largest-maker of telecommunications equipment, has been making some of the biggest waves, legally and economically, in the wireless industry right now. As the world’s largest telecommunications supplier, and second largest smartphone maker, it’s also considered to be an outcast in several countries, most notably, the United States.

It was even rumored that the FBI reportedly set up a sting of the company at CES back in January of this year, according to a report by Bloomberg.

Why Parliament Has No Love for Huwaei

The main issue surrounding the technology giant, surrounds its close ties with the Chinese government, where the U.S., along with several countries, believe the company’s equipment could be used to spy on other countries and companies. This is why the U.S. banned companies from using Huawei networking equipment back in 2012. It was then added to the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security Entity List on May 15, following an executive order from President Donald Trump, effectively banning Huawei devices from U.S. communication networks.

Back in May, U.K. Defense Secretary, Gavin Williamson, had been fired for allegedly leaking the news that Huawei would be allowed into the country’s 5G network, although Williamson has continued to deny any involvement with the leak.

The leaked debate came from the U.K.’s secret National Security Council meeting, which prompted a political backlash and strained relationships between the U.K. and the United States. Penny Mordaunt is now in office, replacing Williamson.

However, the storm is far from calm. British leaders are now facing pressure from the Trump administration to follow America’s lead in banning Huawei products.

“You’re Too Close to the Chinese Government”

The U.S. has argued that Huawei’s stronghold to the Chinese government, poses a grave national security threat and should not be allowed to help build the high-speed, next generation networks known as 5G that has started to pop up in certain areas like Nashville and other major cities.

However, the company says it’s separate and apart from such regimes, focused solely on the legality of operations, not moral considerations.

John Suffolk, Huawei’s global cybersecurity and privacy officer, appeared at Monday’s hearing in the House of Commons, speaking to the safety of the UK’s telecommunications infrastructure.

“There are no laws in China that obligate us to work with the Chinese government,” Suffolk said during questioning. He claims the company is completely independent from the Chinese government and would never undermine the safety of its equipment, simply to oblige to demands from Beijing.

“We stand naked in front of the world,” he added. “It may not be a pretty sight all the time, but we would prefer to do that.” Mr. Suffolk claims that Huawei is fully devoted to transparency and to fixing the problems outlined in the March report.

“[March’s] concerning report reveals an unacceptably slow response from Huawei in the face of important criticism of the company’s approach to cybersecurity,” said Norman Lamb MP, the Chair of the Science and Technology Select Committee.

“These concerns make the Government’s review of telecommunications suppliers all the more important, and urgent, and I call upon the Government to publish its full report as soon as possible. It is imperative and remains vital for our national interest that we get some cohesive answers on this extremely worrying issue.”

“You’re a Moral Vacuum”

While Huwaei’s equipment is already being used in Britain, the country is currently weighing whether to allow it to play a role in its new 5G networks. Adding to the plate of troubles, the U.S. has previously threatened to restrict intelligence it shares with countries that allow Huawei in its 5G networks, becoming a central piece of the trade dispute between the United States and China.

Vodafone is one company that believes the risk can be managed, rather than blacklisting the company altogether. According to Scott Petty, the chief technology officer at Vodafone, the company uses Huwaei only in less critical parts of its network.

In response to the U.S. government blacklisting Huawei, Beijing has moved to retaliate against American companies. This past week, Chinese authorities have threatened major international tech companies if they cooperated with the U.S. ban on Huawei sales. Makes you wonder here, doesn’t it?

The hearing grew even more uncomfortable when members of Parliament asked Mr. Suffolk if the company had made moral considerations before selling its equipment to oppressive governments with a history of human rights abuse.

“I don’t think it’s for us to make such judgments,” Suffolk responded. “The question is whether it’s legal in the country where we operate.”

“You’re a moral vacuum,” a member of Parliament responded angrily.

Mr. Suffolk immediately countered stating he did not believe that to be the case.

For a full timeline of the Huawei battle, check out CNET.