What I'm wondering is why it was added to this restricted entity list in the first place (with much less vague explanations than the ones I have found so far) and how this conflict can be resolved. One article linked from this one: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48330310

Several countries have raised concerns that Huawei equipment could be used by China for surveillance, allegations the company has vehemently denied.

Do they not assume the networks will be surveiled? Shouldn't they be using encryption? Many agencies, like the NSA, already spy on citizens. What about those?

US chipmakers including Intel, Qualcomm and Broadcom are reported to have told their workers they will stop supplying Huawei, according to Bloomberg.

Intel would not to comment to the BBC.

Rosenblatt Securities analyst Ryan Koontz said Huawei would be "seriously crippled" if it did not have these "key US components", although the Chinese firm is believed to have stockpiles in place.

Important detail from the article. In addition to ARM, these companies are blocked too. This is very bad for Huawei.

Outside the US, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) is continuing to deliver to Huawei.

The Nikkei reported that TSMC had said it owned a "complicated and sophisticated export control compliance system" and "based on the data in the system we are not changing our shipping practice for the time being".

(another additional detail)

The latest move against Huawei marks an escalation in tensions between the firm and the US.

The company is facing almost two dozen criminal charges filed by US authorities. Washington is also seeking the extradition of Huawei executive Meng Wangzou from Canada, where she was arrested in December at the behest of American officials.

It comes as trade tensions between the US and China also appear to be rising.

How did this start again? I think it had to do with encouraging US business.

Anyway, could https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47046264 answer my question?

One of the world's biggest telecoms firms and its top executive are facing almost two dozen criminal charges filed by US authorities. The US is also seeking the extradition of Huawei executive Meng Wangzou from Canada, where she was arrested 1 December at the behest of American officials.

Which criminal charges? Are they valid?

To understand the significance of Meng Wanzhou's arrest, it helps to know that Huawei is one of the largest telecommunications equipment and services providers in the world - as well as a symbol of China's ambition and innovation.

…

So when a top executive - who also happens to be the daughter of the firm's founder - was arrested in Vancouver it sparked an immediate response.

When news broke that Ms Meng had been detained, China's embassy in Canada was quick to protest the arrest and demand her release.

Chinese officials have called her arrest a "serious mistake" and accused Canada of double standards and "Western egotism and white supremacy".

There were threats of "grave consequences" if Ms Meng was not released.

Not long after her arrest, two Canadians - former diplomat Michael Kovrig and businessman Michael Spavor - were detained in China on allegations of endangering Chinese national security.

…

What are the US charges?

Ah! The sauce?

The indictment alleges Huawei misled the US and a global bank about its relationship with two subsidiaries, Huawei Device USA and Skycom Tech, to conduct business with Iran.

Uhh… what laws do this break exactly? Why should I care?

A second indictment alleges Huawei stole technology from phone company T-Mobile used to test smartphone durability, as well as obstructed justice and committed wire fraud, which Huawei says was settled in a civil case filed in 2014.

What is the nature of this wire fraud? As for the "stolen" technology, I would personally prefer everyone to have access to any technology needed. There is still my other question: How can this situation be resolved? I have seen no solid demands on the part of the US government.

Chinese officials have called it a US attempt to "smear and suppress certain Chinese companies".

I'm leaning towards China's side on this issue ATM, as I see no solid demands or good reasoning to arrest a foreign citizen for US (?) laws.

Donald Trump…

has twice suggested he would intervene in the US Justice Department's case against Ms Meng if it would serve national security interests or help achieve a trade deal with China.

What I am wondering is which type of trade deal he is looking to achieve, as nothing about it is said or linked.