If China wants to be supportive of Canada, and to engage more fully with Canadian counterparts, Chinese diplomats must be patient, and must not aggressively push for a Free Trade Agreement until there is more clarity on the future of NAFTA.
Canada's national economy is currently at a critical stage, in which the Trump administration has forced the Canadian government, Canadian companies, and the people of Canada to wholly focus on securing a viable trade relationship with the United States. The strength of our relationship with the US has, for the last century, been a cornerstone of Canada's economic prosperity and security. However, a resurgent China is something Canada cannot ignore. The operating premise of bi-lateral commercial negotiations, with respect to a potential Canada-China FTA or alternatively an economic partnership agreement, must be to expand business co-operation, and not to spark polemics during this negotiation process that may restrict this cooperation.
With respect to trade, the Canada-China bi-lateral relationship should be based on two key principles: fairness and reciprocity. At a technical level, both countries are committed to a global trading system monitored under the rules and regulations of the WTO. It therefore, behooves both Canada and China to remove the deliberate anomalies in both domestic economies that the WTO censures. Business communities in both Canada and China require that either government treat the discussion of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) as a tangible outcome for a specific economic partnership, however such discussions will require delicacy and tact, particularly given that the terms of the agreement will be agreed to after the Canada-China trade relationship is already well-established.
The Trump Administration proved more antagonistic towards its bi-lateral trade relationship with China than the previous administration. Likewise, other key G-20 governments and business groups have recently expressed concerns about China's reciprocity of market access, and the Chinese central government should take note of these concerns. To be viable Canada-China FTA will both governments must operate on identical definitions of both the spirit and the explicit laws agreed to in all multi-lateral and bi-lateral trade agreements, and that that the commercial mechanics of business are equal for both Canadian and Chinese firms operating in each countries domestic economy.
While the Canada-China relationship is significantly different from the Sino-American relationship, we cannot help but be influenced by our southern neighbour. As a result, we run the risk of trivializing our economic and trade relationship with China, and to reducing the relationship to the level of imagery and chatter that social media (and Twitter in particular) thrives on. To avoid this trivialization, Canadian government officials should be cognizant of China's 5000 year history, and the ways in which this history informs their political and economic development. Likewise, Chinese officials should be mindful of Canada's parallel development with the United States, and our historically close political, economic, and social relationship with America. However, our relationship to the United States is not sufficient to grasp Canada's history: there are many forces, or to be accurate, peoples, who have come together to form the Canada of today. While Chinese history is a history discovered in the Annals of its leaders, Canada's history is discovered in the oral history of its people.
Indigenous peoples, French-speaking Canadians, English-speaking Canadians, Europeans with many different languages of origin, and wide variety of people from around the world that do not speak European languages, are all equally a part of Canada's complex history, and this includes the ethnic Chinese migrants that have immigrated to Canada over the last century. The common bond that ties Canada's diverse history, culture, languages, and rights together is the rule of law.
This rule of law is fostered by a national commitment to all Canadians by birth, or those that immigrate later on in their lives when they become citizens. In return, Canadians must contribute to the health of Canada's parliamentary democracy, national economy, and civil society. An unspoken part of Canada's pact with its citizens is the unwritten charter of obligations. This rule of law is stored (and restored) via the Charter Rights and Freedoms, and most clearly captured in the protection of religion, cultural heritage, freedom of expression and sexual equality. The ultimate purpose of our political process and society is to improve Canadian laws such that the rule of law is not only the most ethical path, but also the most pragmatic one.
Rule of law exemplifies one of the many political and historical similarities between the United States and Canada. Likewise, our common language has tied our two countries together for two centuries. Our common history and common ancestry with the United States has aided our close political relationship: it is also not widely known, but Nova Scotia and Quebec were positioned but declined to participate as the 14th and 15th colonies to rebel and become the 14th and 15th states of America.
Canadians generally have a stronger level of confidence in the value of (national) government role in comparison to our American neighbours, due in part to Canada's historic relationship with the United Kingdom. A divergent response to the common heritage of Canada and the United States has also resulted in a different form of political meritocracy and egalitarianism than our American friends. This nuanced political distinction also formed the basis for Canada's resistance to the American-style 'Manifest Destiny'. As part of Canada's 150 year formation since the American Revolution and its Confederation in 1867 it has learned to accept, manage, mitigate and also participate both the best and more challenging aspects of American political culture.
This interaction has benefitted Canada immensely, and in some key areas of public policy our American friends have also benefited from Canadian engagement: a former Regan Administration official and dear friend reminds me often that Canada's role is to be the conscience of America's future. This transpires by our domestic example, but also by internationally supporting the United States globally in areas of common agreement. Canada remains independent in foreign policy, and has criticized American involvement overseas on numerous occasions.
Canada and China's diplomatic relationship must function along the same terms. Both share common economic goals at a global and bi-lateral level. Both nations hold their right to ask for support, and consider each other's respective international goals; but also must exercise our mutual right to decline that support. In significant ways Canadians may openly reject that understanding with an alternative view of how many political, legal, economical, and social issues should be addressed. Our diplomatic relationship ideally, should focus on the utilitarian benefits of partnership and should aim to collaborate on global issues, rather than focus on bi-lateral flashpoints.
Global citizens are best served if their domestic governments focus on the best balance between corporate and individual's economic position, and provide direction to balance the positive and negative impacts of technology. Governments now have an equally important obligation to promote their goods globally, but also to regulate domestic technology champions like Google and Baidu so that worldwide consumer's economic rights and dignity are protected.
Canadian media is critical of all of the Canadian governments in office, and is presently very concerned and critical of the sitting US President. It should be expected that the Canadian media takes this same independent view in its coverage of China. Canadians and most Canadian elected officials embrace the importance of a free and responsible media. At an economic level, speed and accuracy of information are building blocks of competiveness, and this can only, in the long-term, aid the strength of Canada's political system. However, this ideally should not be a challenging aspect of the Canada-China relationship.
Another subject of importance to Canadians, especially our indigenous people, is our connection to nature. John Buchan captures our great north with words in his novel Sick Heart River and the Group of Seven does the same visually in painting. To earn the Canadian's public trust, China must sincerely demonstrate its commitment to the protection of the global commons. Humanity is fighting a two front war against climate change and the subsequent rapid loss of biodiversity. There is less leeway now, than at any previous point in history. Nature is our history. Pristine lakes and virgin forests are to Canadians psyche what the Great Wall is to Chinese. Canada needs China to prevent this destruction, just as China needs Canada.
China's return to its former position of economic dominance that it traditionally held, and China's potential to become the world's largest economy will require Canada and Canadians to prepare to accept, manage, mitigate and also participate in China's conception of the world order, whether we agree with that vision or not. In the past Canada has resisted American exceptionalism and in the future if warranted it will resist Chinese exceptionalism. This changing relationship with China will require the Chinese people, and its proxy the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to accept that the combined value of our partnership exceeds the losses due to our differences.
Canadian and Chinese respective forms of government, economic systems, and legal structures represent significant cultural differences. This still provides a platform to improve the lives of both of our citizens through the sharing of ideas and learning about our different approaches to problem solving.
Diplomats of both countries would do best to focus on what the American writer Susan Sontag called being an Ambassador for all the people or as Chairman Mao stated "The people, and the people alone, are the motive force in the making of world history". Sun Yat-Sen and Norman Bethune were both at odds with their own countries at one point in time and both are now revered. When a Canadian Ambassador recognizes the challenges that the Chinese government has to address the needs of its people he or she begins to understand the needs of the Chinese government, as they pertain to Canada, are both diverse and complex. When a Chinese Ambassador recognizes the challenges that the Canadian government has to address the needs of its people he or she begins to understand the needs of Canadian government as they pertain to China are similarly diverse and complex.
Partnerships between countries, such as Canada's long partnership with the United States and the formation of a different kind of partnership with China since 1970, are like marriages. Amity between two groups of citizens can be quickly undermined by one or both governments squabbling over areas of disagreement. Diplomacy that overlooks the benefits of the partnership will curtail prosperity. Our respective diplomatic processes must commit to updating this process of dialogue or it risks, to borrow a phrase from a negative period in Canada's own history, a deteriorating relationship living in Two Solitudes masked behind dated protocol.
Dialogue between Canada and China began when Canada's first representative to the People's Republic of China, Ambassador Collins, was posted. Our relationship further expanded with Ambassador Huang, the first Ambassador from the Peoples' Republic of China posted to Canada. This exchange occurred when neither country had a profound knowledge of or trust of the other. Coupled with the civility that both Ambassadors showed to their respective hosts, and supported by the intellectual curiosity of these two unique men, a strong basis for Canada-China diplomatic discourse was constructed. Both countries would do well to build upon this mutual respect.
John Gruetzner is Managing Director of Intercedent Limited, a business advisory firm focused on Asia. He is also one of the 24 founders of the China Policy Centre, currently being formed in Ottawa.
This is the written version of invited remarks made at a roundtable, organized in Beijing on November 16th by The China Institute at the University of Alberta and the Chinese People's Institute of Foreign Affairs.
Neither of the organizers should be held responsible as these comments only represent the view of the author.