The European Commission is preparing a tougher step against Chinese network providers. According to various reports, Brussels is working to force Member States to phase out Huawei and ZTE equipment of mobile—and also fixed—infrastructures, turning what until now was a political recommendation (the well-known 5G toolbox) into a mandate. The movement seeks to close the cracks that have left different speeds and criteria between countries.
The debate is not new, but it has gained intensity in recent weeks. While some capitals have already banned these manufacturers from the core of their networks, others have continued to coexist with part of the equipment, especially in the radio access network. This has generated an unequal panorama that European Commission seeks to unify.
What exactly is Brussels planning?
The idea that is being considered in the European Commission (EC) goes through transform the “5G Toolbox” guidelines —a set of security measures recommended since 2020— in legal obligations. That would imply deadlines for replacing high-risk equipment in the core and, in certain cases, also in the access network. Furthermore, they study supervision and sanctions mechanisms for countries that do not comply or for operators that maintain restricted equipment in sensitive services.
Although a definitive text or an official calendar has not yet been published, the drafts point to a tiered approachwith limited exceptions and impact assessments to minimize costs and service disruptions. In parallel, Brussels seeks to align this strategy with other regulations such as NIS 2 (Network and Information Systems Security Directive) and with the connectivity objectives of the Digital Decade.
How it would affect Spain and the operators
Spain has applied selective restrictions on 5G corebut not a total veto. Operators like Telephone have gone reducing dependence on Huaweicombining European suppliers for critical networks and maintaining some Chinese equipment in commercial segments. A community mandate would accelerate the migration to Nokia and Ericsson in more layers of the 5G network and would force deployments and modernizations with a clear schedule. Taking into account that Nvidia has also invested a millionaire amount in Nokia to boost AI in networks. An additional factor that reinforces this strategy.
This would have an impact on costs of CAPEX (capital expenditure) and OPEX (operating expense)in radio planning and in the supply chain, although it could also standardize security and simplify audits. For the end user in Spain, should not translate into worse coverage or speed if planned well, but it could put pressure on the deadlines of some construction projects. Advanced 5G and 5G SA (autonomous access).
The European context: Germany sets the tone, China responds
Several countries have hardened their stance. Germany set a phased withdrawal of Chinese components from the 5G core before 2026 and of RAN (radio access network) before 2029sending an important signal to the industry. Both, China has restricted contracts with Nokia and Ericsson in its market, showing that decoupling has responses in both directions. If the EC turns the veto into law, we will see more regulatory symmetry within the European Union.
For manufacturers, the scenario opens up opportunities and risks: Nokia and Ericsson would gain weight in Europe, while Huawei and ZTE They would retreat to markets where they retain contracts. Interest could also grow in Open RAN (open access network)although its degree of maturity varies depending on the country and the use case.
A key move, but unknowns remain
If Brussels moves forward, the question is as: deadlines, exact scope (core, transportation, access), specific exemptions and replacement aid. We will also have to see how it is coordinated with European funds and with coverage goals Gigabit. In any case, the message to operators is clear: prepare to accelerate the dismantling of high-risk equipment throughout the region.
Do you think Spain should adopt a faster equipment replacement schedule or maintain a gradual approach to avoid cost overruns?
