China

Thursday September 19, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday September 19, 2019

Political smorgasbord doesn’t come free

Transactional politics are nothing new. That’s where a politician and/or a party offers goodies on the front end of the transaction, and the voter supports the politician/party on the back end.

September 12, 2019

It’s not unlike shopping and being drawn to sales or special deals that look especially appealing. That outfit looks good, but wait, the one next to it looks as good but it’s cheaper, or perhaps nicer in some small way. So the natural tendency is to take the one that seems better, even if the difference is marginal.

But what if the front of the special buy is fine, but you see flaws or differences once it’s unwrapped? What if you find out it needs special treatment when being cleaned, or it requires some sort of investment you weren’t expecting?

The analogy with the kind of transactional politics we’re experiencing during this election campaign isn’t perfect, but it serves the purpose. The political store has been bustling with promises, especially over the last several days, as the competing parties roll out their platforms — bit by bit — and try to be the outfit with that special something.

October 10, 2015

There’s nothing wrong with all this, to a point. It serves the purpose of offering measurable alternatives. If you don’t like the Conservative plan to expand RESPs, you can choose the Liberals because you like their plan about helping first-time home buyers. Or vice-versa. But it can be problematic when this sort of offer-of-the-day political play dominates the campaign to the exclusion of all else, and that is what’s happening right now.

It’s a veritable smorgasbord. Pick the party that has enough you like, and just vote for them? Of course, it’s not that easy. We know that not all promises are kept. Remember Justin Trudeau on electoral reform. We know that not all promises are fully explained. Andrew Scheer’s tax cuts are phased in so the maximum benefit comes only after three years. And the cost of that promise alone is $6 billion, which has to be paid for by someone — who might that be?

A big problem with many of the promises made to date is that the parties haven’t explained fully — in some cases not at all — how they will pay for their promises. That’s a critical part of understanding how parties will govern if elected. And it’s not always just about balanced budgets or deficits. It’s also about what things — like government services and support — get sacrificed in order for promises to be kept.

All smorgasbords end the same way. There’s a bill to pay. We can all stand to be reminded of that. (Hamilton Spectator) 

 

Saturday September 7, 2019

Saturday September 7, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday September 7, 2019

Trudeau snubs Munk, Maclean’s/Citytv debates but will attend commission debates

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is committing to taking part in two federal election debates and is willing to do a third — but will be a no-show for both the Munk and Maclean’s/Citytv debates, despite efforts to convince the Liberal leader to take part.

August 8, 2015

The two debates that Trudeau has committed to attending are being organized by the Leaders’ Debates Commission, which was established after the last election and is led by former governor general David Johnston.

“The commission was established after the last election where the governing party tried to game the system and make sure the fewest number of Canadians engaged in the debates. We think that’s wrong,” Daniel Lauzon, the Liberals’ director of communications and policy for the campaign, said in a statement.

“The commission debates will be widely distributed on television, radio, digital and social streaming platforms and reach the largest possible audience.”

The decision means that Trudeau will not be taking part in the Munk Debates on foreign policy, set for Oct. 1 — a debate Trudeau did take part in during the 2015 election.

It also means the prime minister will not participate in the Maclean’s/Citytv leaders debate scheduled to take place September 12.

September 19, 2015

So far, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May have all agreed to participate in the Munk and Maclean’s/Citytv debates.

A spokesperson for the Conservative Party said the debates are about Canadians, not the leaders, and Scheer would be attending all election debates.

“We know Justin Trudeau is a formidable debater, as he proved in the last election. The only reason he would have for not wanting to attend all the debates is that he’s afraid to defend his record,” Brock Harrison said in a statement.

During the 2015 election, then-prime minister Stephen Harper refused to participate in the English language debate being run by the consortium of broadcasters, the predecessor to the commission.

October 1, 2008

Harper instead agreed to participate in the Maclean’s/Citytv debate and the Globe and Mail debate, on top of the French language consortium debate, TVAs’ debate and the bilingual Munk debate on foreign policy.

The opposition at the time criticized Harper’s decision to snub the English language consortium debate in favour of smaller debates, some of which were only streamed online, as a move that prevented the largest possible audience from viewing the exchanges between party leaders.

Trudeau was keen to participate in multiple debates in 2015 — an election that saw the longest campaign period in modern Canadian history. But Trudeau’s critics now argue that he is cherry-picking debates for political reasons.

In the last election he was the third-party leader and had much to gain from engaging with other leaders at every opportunity. But as prime minister, Trudeau exposes himself to greater political risk by agreeing to additional debates. (CBC) 

 

Friday August 30, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday August 30, 2019

Trump floated the idea of using nuclear bombs to stop hurricanes headed for US

President Donald Trump has floated multiple times the idea of thwarting hurricanes headed for the US by bombing them, including by dropping nuclear bombs on hurricanes to disrupt their course, Axios reported Sunday, citing conversations with sources who heard Trump’s comments and were briefed on a National Security Council memo that recorded the comments.

September 23, 2005

In an early Monday tweet, Trump denied the Axios’ report, claiming that he “never said” what was in it. CNN has not been able to independently verify the report.

According to Axios, the President has suggested the idea several times to senior Homeland Security and national security officials that they look into the idea of using nuclear bombs to stop hurricanes from hitting the US. A source who was at a hurricane briefing at the White House told the outlet that the President once said of hurricanes, “I got it. I got it. Why don’t we nuke them?”

The source, who paraphrased Trump’s remarks to Axios, said that the President said, “They start forming off the coast of Africa, as they’re moving across the Atlantic, we drop a bomb inside the eye of the hurricane and it disrupts it. Why can’t we do that?” Asked by Axios how the briefer responded to the President’s suggestion, the source said he “said something to the effect of, ‘Sir, we’ll look into that.’”

April 6, 2017

The President then asked how many hurricanes the US may be able to stop and reiterated his suggestions, according to the source, which caused the briefer to be “knocked back on his heels.”

“You could hear a gnat fart in that meeting. People were astonished. After the meeting ended, we thought, ‘What the f—? What do we do with this?'” the source told Axios.

According to the outlet, Trump also raised the idea of using bombs to stop hurricanes during a 2017 conversation with a senior administration official. A source briefed on a NSC memo describing that conversation told Axios that the document does not contain the word “nuclear.” According to sources the outlet spoke to about that conversation, despite Trump’s interest in the idea, it “went nowhere and never entered a formal policy process.”

April 11, 2017

The idea of using nuclear bombs “to counteract convection currents” was floated during the Eisenhower administration, Axios reported, and has continued to resurface even though government scientists have said it will not work.

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in an online fact sheet titled “Tropical Cyclone Myths Page, detonating a nuclear weapon over a hurricane “might not even alter the storm,” and the idea “neglects the problem that the released radioactive fallout would fairly quickly move with the tradewinds to affect land areas and cause devastating environmental problems.” (CNN)  

 

Friday August 23, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday August 23, 2019

During Ottawa visit, Pompeo attacks China for detaining 2 Canadians

May 8, 2019

Canada will have the support of the United States until the two Canadians detained in China “are returned to their families,” U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo promised Thursday while on a visit to Ottawa.

Pompeo, a high-profile member of the Trump administration, met with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his counterpart Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland ahead of the G7 summit in France this weekend.

December 12, 2018

Canada has been soliciting help from foreign allies in the ongoing dispute with China to secure the release of businessman Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, a former diplomat on leave. The two were detained in China late last year after Canadian officials arrested Chinese telecom executive Meng Wanzhou at the Vancouver airport to face possible extradition to the United States.

“Our team is focused on helping those two Canadians be released. China needs to honour the commitments it’s made to the world, and it is our expectation they’ll do so, and we’re working on it diligently,” said Pompeo during a brief photo opportunity Thursday morning.

Pompeo also made a point of insisting that the cases of Kovrig and Spavor shouldn’t be compared to Meng’s extradition case.

“[China] wants to talk about these two as if they are equivalent, as if they are morally similar, which they fundamentally are not,” he said during a media availability on Thursday afternoon.

“These are fundamentally different matters than the Canadian decision to use their due process and the rule of law to behave in a way that’s deeply consistent with the way decent nations work.”

The U.S., through a one-on-one conversation between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping and “other diplomatic activity,” has told Beijing directly the arrest of the two Canadians was inappropriate, said Pompeo.

“We’ll continue to do that until such time as they’re home and returned to their families,” he said. (CBC)  

 

Thursday July 25, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday July 25, 2019

History the best teacher on dealing with China

While everyone’s attention has recently been focused on events of 50 years ago —i.e., the Apollo 11 mission —the world has continued to turn. Canada’s problems with China have not gone away.

October 2, 1999

So it might be wise to focus less on the moon than on more recent historic events. In May 1999, during the heat of the war in the former Yugoslavia, NATO accidentally bombed the Chinese Embassy there. Tensions between China and the U.S. escalated, negotiations to get China into the World Trade Organization failed, and it took some time for diplomacy to right itself. China joined the WTO in 2001.

The finance minister of Singapore at the time, Heng Swee Keat, took Bill Clinton’s secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, aside and offered a few words of wisdom. It was not in the best interest of the United States to adopt an adversarial stance with China. Heng had more significant pearls to offer Beijing: Tap western markets, western technology and western capital and develop your own economy.

March 24, 2008

Twenty years is not a long time, particularly not when dealing with China, which has always played a long game. But Beijing took Heng’s advice and we are watching that long game unfold. Over several decades now, China has made inroads in the West —in technology specifically — and dumped a lot of capital in the developing African countries.

China’s “Belt and Road Initiative,” launched in 2013, is yet another example of the country’s strategic goals: A trade infrastructure costing anywhere between $1 trillion and $8 trillion and involving 70 countries that will tie China to Europe and other Asian nations through a “belt” tying together China, Eurasia and Russia, and a maritime “road,” across several oceans and seas to the Suez Canal and up into Europe.

June 17, 2017

The plan is to end Chinese dependence on the United States. After decades of accumulating capital and technological knowledge, China is in a position to fundamentally alter the way global trade works.

Canada will, inevitably, be affected, especially if, as predicted, China expects the road part of its initiative to include an Arctic pass. This new Silk Road will not be the stuff of Marco Polo, which benefited the West immensely, but will be a huge boon to China and the allies it creates through the initiative.

All the more reason, then, that Canada must resolve its strained relationship with China sooner than later.

December 12, 2018

The present conflict stems from the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, a senior executive of Huawei, China’s big tech firm. She is wanted in the United States on fraud charges and, under a U.S.-Canadian extradition treaty, she is under house arrest here. China subsequently imprisoned two Canadian citizens and threatens to execute a third already in prison. How we got to this point matters less than how we get out of it.

International pressure, and a wider agreement involving the United States, could free the Canadians, get Meng out of Canada, and resolve this issue. That pressure can also see Canada, as a participant in dialogue with the 10 members of the ASEAN, using diplomacy within the organization to work with China on an amicable solution.

December 5, 2017

Canada must follow the advice of Singapore in 1999 and not adopt an adversarial stance with China, but at the same time it cannot be so naive as to think that an economic solution — like the U.S. imposition of tariffs — will work either.

China saw that move coming a long time ago and has been defending itself against it. Prosperity did not lead to a more politically liberal China. Ask the pro-democracy protesters right now in Hong Kong.

“A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step,” Lao-Tze wrote 2,500 years ago. Canada must be careful not to trip. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial)