The phones have access to the raw data. The towers shouldn't have access to the raw data, because presumably it's encrypted. If it isn't, it's game over anyways. Not really comparable.
You could make an argument about metadata, which is much more questionable from the get-go.
I think the parent comment wasn't talking about intercepting traffic and being able to know what your enemy is talking about.
The parent comment was talking about being able to take advantage of the situation by making the enemy use your devices and then incapacitating their infrastructure at the perfect moment by activating the killswitch on those devices.
The solution for that isn't to boycott Huawei, it's to have multiple networks with many providers.
A country using Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei is much better protected to such an attack than a company using only Nokia or only Huawei or only Ericsson, or both Nokia and Ericsson but not Huawei.
Sure, I am not arguing one way or another regarding whether this ban is good or not. I am just saying that the cold war analogy had nothing to do with encryption, unlike what the post I am replying to is attempting to imply.
You could make an argument about metadata, which is much more questionable from the get-go.