China

Wednesday February 12, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday February 12, 2020

‘We don’t play games when people are sick’: China won’t release ‘two Michaels’ despite coronavirus help: experts

Ottawa shouldn’t expect Beijing to do it any favours and free the “two Michaels” in return for medical co-operation fighting the new coronavirus, experts say.

December 12, 2019

China’s ambassador to Canada hinted at that last week and Foreign Affairs Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne says he’s used every medical discussion with China to raise the plight of the two men.

Champagne told reporters in Ethiopia on Sunday that he’s had more access to his Chinese counterparts in recent weeks and he uses the occasions to push for the release of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, who have been in Chinese prisons without charge since December 2018.

They were arrested in what is widely seen as retaliation for Canada’s decision to arrest Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou on an extradition request from the United States.

David Mulroney, a former Canadian ambassador to China, says that while it is good for Champagne to keep pushing, Canada’s assistance on the coronavirus simply isn’t contingent on what China can do for Canada.

“Anything that opens up the channels of communication is a good thing, and we should use the conversation to raise all of our priorities,” he said.

January 30, 2020

“We don’t play games when people are sick, and we shouldn’t allow China to play games with us. Freeing the Michaels isn’t a favour or quid pro quo; it is what we expect of law-abiding states.”

Bessma Momani, an international-affairs expert at the University of Waterloo, says China wants only one thing — Meng released — and so-called health diplomacy will not change that.

“I hope I’m wrong,” she said.

“Why would Champagne say that? It’s kind of raising hope. So, it makes you wonder,” she said. “But at the same time, what would the Chinese get out of doing this? To them, Meng is a really important person … They don’t want to be seen as giving in.”

Meng is the daughter of Ren Zhengfei, the founder of Huawei.

Charles Burton, a former Canadian diplomat who has served in Beijing, said the Canadian efforts on the coronavirus might bear fruit.

“China is a gift giving culture. Any gift accepted creates reciprocal obligation in the recipient. So, I judge that China requesting medical aid from Canada could well lead to concessions in the negotiations over the release of Kovrig and Spavor,” said Burton, of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute think-tank in Ottawa. (National Post) 

 

Thursday January 30, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday January 30, 2020

U.K.’s plan to deal with Huawei 5G provides an uncertain course for Canada to consider

By cautiously allowing Huawei into only select parts of its 5G cellular networks, Britain is charting its own course in cybersecurity, while seeking to appease both China and the U.S.

December 12, 2018

But the unique nature of the British strategy means it is untested and could yet prove impossible to carry out.

And as Canada moves closer to its own decision on whether to allow the Chinese telecom manufacturer into this country’s 5G systems, Britain’s plan will serve as an example to either follow or avoid.

“They are putting together a policy for themselves which, on paper, is logical,” said Catherine Rosenberg, the Canada research chair in future internet at the University of Waterloo. “But is it going to work the way they want? It’s unclear.”

The U.K.’s announcement on Tuesday amounts to letting Huawei halfway in the system.

Identified as a “high-risk vendor” by British officials, the Shenzhen-based telco will only be allowed to provide equipment used in the outer layer of Britain’s 5G networks, such as transmission facilities. Huawei gear will be banned from the brains of the operation, known as the core components.

January 29, 2019

With current 4G technology, only the core equipment processes user information. The outer tier — known as the edge — beams cellular data between devices.

But here’s where it gets complicated — and potentially cumbersome for Britain. Higher-speed 5G is designed to cut down on latency by integrating some processing functions on the edge of the network, effectively blurring the line between core and edge.

Rosenberg said U.K. mobile networks could indeed choose to only purchase Huawei equipment to perform transmission functions in 5G networks.

But she questioned whether the plan would achieve its intended goal. The next-generation cellular technology is “more and more software-oriented” and “edge-based,” said Rosenberg, who also holds the Cisco research chair in 5G systems.

In vehicle terms, it’s like banning a certain manufacturer’s parts from being used in a car’s engine, only to buy tires from the same company. And with 5G, it’s as if engine parts are now being installed in the wheels.

June 17, 2017

The U.S. has long contended that China could access Huawei’s technology to spy on — or even shut down — foreign telecommunication services. China has always denied these claims.

The fifth-generation technology raises the stakes, as it’s not only expected to provide higher speeds on new 5G-enabled smartphones and other communication devices, it’s also set to form the basis for a deeper presence of the internet in everyday life. A 5G-enabled “internet of things” is meant to allow for more smart devices, self-driving vehicles, as well as tech-based solutions in health care and beyond.

Despite 5G’s projected ubiquity, the thinking behind Britain’s plan is this: if Huawei doesn’t supply core system components, then it won’t have access to sensitive data. But from country to country, the perception of the technological reality of 5G seems to vary based on political considerations. (Source: CBC) 

 

Thursday January 16, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday January 16, 2020

‘Canada should be worried’: Canadian exporters may become collateral damage of U.S-China trade deal

June 28, 2019

The signing of a “Phase One” U.S.-China trade deal this week is expected to create a brief respite from uncertainty for the global economy — but that’s unlikely to last as long as President Donald Trump is in the White House, analysts say.

What’s more, Canadian exporters could become collateral damage of a deal that will see China commit to purchasing vast amounts of U.S. agricultural products and other goods.

Top officials are slated to sign the pact in Washington on Wednesday following two years of trade strife in which the U.S. slapped tariffs on nearly two-thirds of Chinese imports and Beijing targeted more than half of all goods purchased from the U.S.

May 11, 2019

Though the official text of the deal has yet to be released, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer has said China will purchase an additional US$200 billion in American goods over the next two years, including US$40 to US$50 billion in agricultural products.

The upending of trade flows as a result of such a commitment could create painful headaches for Canadian agricultural producers.

“The reason Canada should be worried about this is what is China actually agreeing to do?” said Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. “Are they agreeing to open their market for everybody? Or are they agreeing to reorient their purchases away from everybody else and toward American purchases? That matters.”

Animated!

Indeed, Canadian canola producers are already experiencing the chill of lost sales to the powerful Chinese market — which once accepted 40 per cent of their exports — after Beijing blocked all purchases of the oilseed. Though officials cited pest concerns, the move was widely viewed as retaliation for the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver on a U.S. extradition request. Meantime, Canadian soybean producers, having experienced a brief but dramatic spike in sales after China placed tariffs on U.S. beans, also saw sales to the superpower bottom out after the Wanzhou arrest.

Though Lighthizer has said the pact will be compliant with World Trade Organization rules, the Chinese purchasing commitments have also raised concerns about discrimination against some markets in favour of the U.S. The WTO’s “most favoured nation” rule requires all trading partners to be treated equally unless a full free trade agreement is forged. The U.S.-China deal covers only a limited range of goods. (Financial Post) 

 

Thursday December 12, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday December 12, 2019

Two Canadians held for a year by China remain ‘resilient’

Michael Kovrig, a former diplomat, and Michael Spavor, a businessman, were both detained on 10 December 2018.

August 23, 2019

China has accused the pair of espionage.

The move by Beijing is widely viewed as “hostage diplomacy” – a tactic to put the pressure on Canada to release Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou.

Beijing denies the men’s cases are related to Ms Meng’s arrest in Canada last year, but supporters say the two are being used as pawns in a larger political dispute.

December 12, 2018

The Canadian government says neither man has had access to a lawyer and have been denied contact with their families and loved ones.

“Our heart goes out to the two Canadians detained in China unjustly,” said Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Monday.

“It’s difficult to even describe this cloud, or the weight that hangs over an organisation when your colleague, your friend has been in a Chinese prison for a year,” Brittany Brown, with the International Crisis Group, Mr Kovrig’s employer, told the BBC.

March 1, 2019

“Not a day goes by that someone in Crisis Group is doing something, engaging with someone, talking with someone, pushing certain points behind the scenes to try and support the Canadian [government] efforts,” she said.

Current and past presidents from the NGO published an open letter last week calling his detention “unjust and inhumane”.

Guy Saint-Jacques, a former Canadian ambassador to Beijing, said that during a recent consular visit, Mr Kovrig asked officials: “When are you going to get me out of this mess?”

“You need to have some hope,” says Mr Saint-Jacques, who once worked with the ex-diplomat. (BBC) 

 

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)