Which Side are We On?

Two days ago Cong Peiuwu, China’s ambassador to Canada, published an op-ed in the Globe and Mail, Canada’s oldest national newspaper, in which he accused Canadian politicians of blatantly interfering in China’s internal affairs and poisoning the relationship between Canada and the People’s Republic of China. The next day Michael Spavor was put on trial for espionage in the Chinese city of Dandong. Michael Spavor is one of the “two Michaels” who have been held in Chinese prisons for over eight hundred days as hostages in retaliation for the arrest in Vancouver of Huawei executive, Meng Wanzhou, on an extradition warrant from the United States .

The trial was closed and even representatives of the Canadian embassy in China were refused access on the spurious grounds it dealt with Chinese national security which, by the way, violates the treaty signed by China that gives consular rights precedence over any internal Chinese rules. Neither Michael Spavor nor his legal counsel were permitted to see the evidence against him. The trial lasted less than two hours and a verdict will be issued in the future.

On the following Monday Michael Kovrig, the second of “the two Michaels”, was put on trial in Beijing, also on charges of espionage and also in a closed proceeding that Canadian consular officials were barred from. And, as with last week’s trial, no verdict was given. There is virtually no doubt the courts will find both Michaels guilty of the charges which carry sentences of up to life imprisonment.

Cong Peiuwu made no mention of the two Michaels in his opinion piece, complaining instead about Canada considering granting accelerated access for refugees from Hong Kong, as well as Canada’s criticism of China’s genocide against its Uyghur population, Canada blocking the purchase of Canadian companies by Chinese state controlled companies, and national security concerns raised in Canada by its purchase of Chinese equipment for border security.

Most of the opinion piece trumpeted the growth in Canada/China trade and offered the possibility of significant economic gains IF Canada plays by Chinese rules. I suppose this could be seen as an iron fist in a velvet glove so let’s take a look at the iron fist. For most of the past forty years we in the west have laboured under the illusion that as China became more prosperous, as more of its citizens moved into the middle class, and as it became more integrated into global trading systems and political institutions, it would liberalize and move from a communist autocracy to something more in keeping with western views of democracy. In fact, we took comfort from the transition towards democracy of other countries in the region, specifically Taiwan, South Korea, the Philippines and Indonesia. And all the while we repeated the mantra that, given its history, China would never harbour territorial ambitions beyond its borders.

And we were wrong.

It has taken years and countless examples of rogue behaviour by China for us to finally confront the reality of a soon to be global super power that wants to impose its values, its system and its interests upon everyone else. In China’s view, the accepted norms of international behaviour don’t apply to it except when they benefit China. In fact, given its recent behaviour, I would question the value of any treaty commitments made by China. Of late the Chinese have been explicit that the prevailing international norms reflect a western and particularly American view of the world that is not shared by it nor, in its view, much of the rest of humanity.

There’s no point lamenting this change or blaming ourselves for our misplaced beliefs and trust. It is what it is and now we must decide where we, as western nations, will fit in this new world order.

The contest between tyranny and democracy is as old as mankind and, in the western world, can be traced all the way back to classical Greece where tyrants battled democrats and where the seminal ideas of western democracy sprung to life rooted in the central position of the individual. And, despite their well documented failings, these ideas benefited mankind enormously, particularly in the fields of science and medicine. There is no better testament to that than the near miraculous development of effective vaccines against COVID 19 less than a year after the deadly virus first appeared.

And it’s not just in the material world that the western idea has flourished. In a democracy we all have opinions that can be expressed freely and we are able to choose our own governments and systems of governance as the vigorous debate of the agora animates our lives and provides a continuous petri dish for innovation. These too are part of the gift of the west as, by the way, is capitalism.

China seems to believe it can pick and choose amongst the western ideas, that it can transform capitalism into a kind of state capitalism and build a middle class without the worrisome challenges of dissent and free debate. Its paramount objectives are stability and a monopoly on power by a single political party, all enforced by a system of surveillance and control that not even George Orwell could have imagined. And that might be okay for people who are rooted in a very different tradition than our own, but it is certainly not okay for the inheritors of the western idea.

In his opinion piece, Cong Peiuwu offers Canada a choice. Although he doesn’t state it in quite these terms, it is a choice between being subservient to an anti democratic statist society and enjoying great economic benefits as a result, and refusing that subservience with the attendant economic losses. Ultimately he is asking us to be someone we are not and never will be so no matter how much we equivocate, there is really no choice at all.

Canada has a well deserved reputation for muddling through; for trying to please everyone; for straddling the fence even after everyone else has chosen a side. And so we are again. The federal Liberal government’s approach to China not only lacks clarity, it has been manifestly unsuccessful when it comes to issues like freeing the two Michaels or responding to China’s continuing disregard for the norms of international behaviour. I suspect this is partly because of the deeply embedded conflicts of interest of many of the government’s supporters when it comes to China, with them hoping when the two Michaels affair is over we can just return to the status quo. But that isn’t an option. We all know the old saying: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” And Canada is way past that fool me twice moment.

The next few decades are going to see a bifurcated world with the non democratic countries clustered around China. The democracies will, at least initially, form around the United States and there will be fierce competition between the two, competition that might, but needn’t, lead to armed conflict.

Whether we like it or not, Canada has to decide which side it is on in this new world order. That shouldn’t be a hard choice given our history and geography and yet the federal government continues to twist itself into contortions to somehow have it both ways.

Siding firmly with the democracies doesn’t mean Canada should lead the charge against China whenever and however. But it does begin with a clear understanding of what we are dealing with, including knowing China will upend international conventions, norms and institutions if they don’t advance its own goals. In other words, the rules based order Canada has prospered under will be in flux for some time and when it finally settles may not serve our interests as well as its predecessor.

Canada will continue to have economic engagement with China but, going forward, must ensure that doesn’t turn into dependency as has occurred in the past. In other words, future decisions on economic development should never be dependent upon China acting in accordance with its agreements.

Canada must also rediscover its voice when it comes to calling out behaviour by China that, with any other country, would have led to instant condemnation. And, no matter how ludicrous its statements, we should get used to being lectured by China in response.

It’s going to be a brave new world out there and Canada will have to play its cards carefully but always consistent with its core beliefs in democracy, human rights and a rules based international order.

Just sayin

G

Please share this blog. If you would like to be notified each time I post a blog click on the “follow” button that will appear at the bottom right hand side of your screen when you open the blog.