On December 10 Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor were arrested in China, clearly in retaliation for the December 1 arrest in Vancouver of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou on a US extradition warrant. Since then the Canada-China relationship has been frozen with minimal high-level contacts, save rare encounters on the margins of international meetings in third countries.
Positive views of China by Canadians have plunged to record lows, while China has made it clear that without a release of Ms. Meng there can be no normalization of bilateral relations. With Meng's case enmeshed in the Canadian judicial system prospects for an early resolution to the bilateral paralysis seem remote in even the medium term.
Several Canadians have suggested that a number of sanctions be applied to China given the ongoing detention of Mr. Kovrig and Mr. Spavor. It would be satisfying to many Canadians to strike back, but would it advance the freeing of our detainees? My experience of China is that the PRC Government responds poorly to sanctions, and there is a risk that no matter how tempting this course may be, the most probable result would be a prolonged stand-off, possibly lasting years, particularly given Ms. Meng's ready access to good lawyers and the slow-moving Canadian judicial appeal process.
Canada is among the most trade dependent countries on earth - more so than any other G-7 country except Germany. Our trade with China has held up surprisingly well, with 2019 Canadian exports, year-to-date, down only 12% versus 2018, although there has been a troubling 41% decline in October, 2019 exports compared to October, 2018 according to Statistics Canada.
While our detainees sit in prison, our fellow G-7 states have all sent to China high-level national leaders, or received high level Chinese officials. But the consequences are not just about trade, however important the Chinese market is to Atlantic fishers, Prairie farmers, or the forestry industry in BC. China is now by far the largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Issues that matter to Canadians from climate change to ocean plastics have no solution without an active Chinese involvement. French President Macron and German Chancellor Merkel in their Fall visits to China both highlighted climate change as a bilateral priority in their China policies, although Canada has been working with China on environmental issues far longer.
Critics of Chinese policies in Xinjiang, of which I am one, note that China has adopted discriminatory policies on a massive scale. President Xi has adopted tough policies that have impacted minorities with China, and has shown a greater willingness for China to use its growing national power.
But the values gap with China is hardly new. When Canada established diplomatic relations with China in 1970 all of China was in the grip of the cultural revolution. Following the 1989 Tiananmen violence Canada China relations plunged, but the policy response of the then Conservative Government took the long view that China was not going away and that its engagement was preferable to an attempt at isolation of China from the international community. Xi Jinping has taken a harder line on a range of issues than most of his immediate predecessors, but he has been General Secretary of the Communist Party for almost eight years. His harder line is not new. It should not surprise us that the China will do whatever it takes to suppress domestic opponents. That has been a constant since 1949. But do we then cease to trade with the second largest economy on earth when even our closest allies do not?
The Australian Prime Minister, whose country has serious concerns regarding political interference by the PRC, met the Chinese Premier last month, while Japan, whose citizens and government are wary of Beijing, will receive President Xi next April. Is it China that is isolated or Canada?
German Chancellor Bismark once remarked "Woe to the statesman whose arguments for entering a war are not as convincing at its end as they were at the beginning." We are not talking (fortunately) about a military conflict, but rather whether or not to deepen a diplomatic row. But, however satisfying it might be to impose sanctions on China, it is by no means certain that this will achieve Canadian goals. It is not those calling for such measures who are in a Chinese prison, but rather Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.
Far better to focus on a solution to the diplomatic imbroglio before us, working, with Washington, but also directly through face-to-face talks with Beijing.
Gordon Houlden,
Director