Is Canada Falling Short on Trade With China?

[capricorn]

According to Lawrence Cannon, the Tories are now trying like a hell to get their foot in the door.

Isn't that what you're calling for?

It could be too little too late, but I think more ties with China could encourage human rights, where sanctions failed.

Canada and other democratic countries have been trying for years to build ties with China.

Exactly when it became impossible for Ottawa and other Western governments to pretend their bilateral talks with China on HUMAN RIGHTS were anything more than a charade is difficult to pinpoint. But a good case can be made for June 4, 2005, the day a soft-spoken diplomat from the Chinese consulate general in Sydney hid away his wife and daughter, eluded Beijing's ever-vigilant minders and threw himself at the mercy of the government of Australia.

Chen Yonglin's defection from China was a moment of triumph - not to mention high atmospherics - for pro-democracy partisans living outside the country. That afternoon in Sydney, the bookish 37-year-old took the stage at a rally commemorating the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, and renounced his allegiance to a government that had provided him an enviable living. For too long, he told the rapturous crowd in Martin Place, Beijing has ruled its people at the end of a gun.

Neither Australia nor Canada nor 10 other democracies trying to make nice with China were inclined to celebrate, though. In the ensuing days, this affable, mid-ranking official produced a series of documents and anecdotes illuminating the two-faced nature of Chinese diplomacy over the past eight years, and by extension, the embarrassing depth of Western credulity. Even as Canberra, Washington, Ottawa and London were earnestly sending officials to closed-door meetings on human rights that began in 1997, Chen and his colleagues were stepping up spying and harassment activities against expatriates belonging to Falun Gong, the free-Tibet movement and pro-democracy groups. The idea, Chen told Maclean's in a recent interview, was to make life miserable for the dissidents' relatives back home. As for the bilateral dialogue: "We all knew it was meaningless. Everyone at the consulate general knew the talks were just a way to avoid international criticism. The notion that China would play a constructive role in international affairs was very deceptive."

Chen isn't the first to suggest China has spent the last decade playing Western governments for fools. His revelations count among a series from academics, journalists and other Chinese asylum-seekers indicating the so-called bilateral dialogues - in which individual countries air their human rights concerns to Chinese officials behind closed doors - have led to little in the way of reform. Until recently, it's been easy enough for Western governments to slough off these reports as anecdotal bumps on a longer road to reform.

But with the 10th anniversary of the beginning of the talks fast approaching, there are signs that the days of cordial conversation may be over - at least on Canada's side. Shortly before Parliament rose for the summer, an all-party Commons subcommittee heard numerous witnesses variously condemn the talks as an unproductive, naive and convenient cover for further Chinese abuses. Liberal MPs have blocked release of the subcommittee's report, arguing it will poison relations between the two countries. But a copy obtained by Maclean's shows that the panel affirms in plain language what NGOs and Chinese dissidents have been saying all along. "The subcommittee concludes that the existing bilateral human rights dialogue with China has not met its objectives," it says. "Perhaps, then, it is time for a more fundamental rethinking of the purpose of government-to-government meetings and of their role in a broader Canadian policy of engaging China on human rights."

(my emphasis)

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ind...s=M1ARTM0013115

I think Harper got it right when he said Canada would not sell out our values for the almighty dollar. IMO that's a sentiment many Canadians share.

Harper seemed to take the [Huseyin Celil] case personally, raising it with Chinese President Hu Jintao during an economic conference in Vietnam in November and tartly telling reporters: "I don't think Canadians want us to sell out to the almighty dollar." For that, he's won laurels from human rights NGOs, and from Chinese expatriate groups who have previously identified themselves as Liberals. "I've been very impressed," says Sheng Xue, Canadian chair of the Federation for a Democratic China. "I think a lot of Chinese have identified themselves as Liberals just because of the meaning of the word - freedom meant so much to us. But Liberal policy on rights over the past 13 years was confusing. For some of the Conservatives, I think freedom is truly their ideal."

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ind...s=M1ARTM0013115

As Argus pointed out, bribery by Chinese officials is not uncommon. They'll even take bribes in order to agree to discuss sensitive issues.

If the rights advocates within the party have any advantage, it's China's astounding ability to generate toxic publicity. Earlier this month, Charles Burton, a Brock University professor who compiled a report for the Commons subcommittee, stunned observers by reporting that Chinese foreign affairs officials sought "goodwill" payments from Canada in exchange for discussing particularly sensitive human rights topics. During interviews conducted by Burton in 2005, the diplomats suggested a $60,000 donation for impoverished counties in Yunnan, he said in his report; alternatively, Ottawa could provide funding for Chinese diplomats to obtain graduate degrees at Canadian universities.

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ind...s=M1ARTM0013115

All the facts as we know them require a new approach in dealing with China, be it on trade or other issues. What was tried in the past did not achieve the desired objectives.

[blueblood]

Oh well, if China doesn't shape up, India can cash in on our business.

[Argus]

And yet Peter Mackay allowed them to 'copy' one of our Canadian knives and bought a boatload of the knockoffs for our military. Now the soldiers they claim to love are complaining that the handles are falling off.

We do need China but our military should be supplied with our goods whenever possible. We ask them to make the ultimate sacrifice, and yet their safety is driven by profit.

More Conservative Hypopcrisy.

How can you lefties snivel endlessly about wanting us to be China's best friends, and how we should ignore their human rights abuses, and stop complaining about the slave labour camps and the mass executions - and then whine about our buying cheap knives? Isn't that hypocrisy?

[Argus]

OK. First of all Emerson's recent comments are found in a report by the Fraser Institute, a 'think tank' funded by the oil companies who prop up the Conservatives.

Funny, I thought the Conservatives were supported, politically and economically, by the tens of thousands of people who donate time and money to their party.

Maybe if your party could find anyone willing to do the same you wouldn't be on the edge of bankruptcy.

[Argus]

And you know this, how?

Anyone who has any interest in human rights knows this.

Your sole interest in human rights, apparently, concerns what evil things the Israelis might be doing at any given time.

[capricorn]

I have no reason to help kill another Chinese Worker for the profits of your dollar store and Walmart suppliers.

Good post, madmax. Neither should profits take precedence over the fair treatment of Canadian citizens caught in China's nightmarish justice system.

Harper seemed to take the case [Huseyin Celil] personally, raising it with Chinese President Hu Jintao during an economic conference in Vietnam in November and tartly telling reporters: "I don't think Canadians want us to sell out to the almighty dollar."

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/ind...s=M1ARTM0013115

In November 2006 Prime Minister Harper, President of the People's Republic of China Hu Jintao, and 21 other national leaders attended the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in Hanoi, Vietnam. Harper discussed Celil's case with President Hu and said, "When a Canadian citizen is taken from a third country and imprisoned in China, this is a serious concern to this country."[16] Dan Dugas, spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay, told The Globe and Mail that MacKay called the Canadian embassy in Beijing. Dugas said, "The Chinese government is not co-operating with the Canadian mission in China and we aren't going to stop asking them for what's happening with Mr. Celil. I can tell you [Minister MacKay] is not happy either. He's asking for answers. He wants to know what is being done and what the next steps are going to be."[16]

The dispute between the two governments escalated when He Yafei, China's assistant minister of foreign affairs for North America, told the Globe and Mail in an interview that the "economic relationship goes hand in hand with the political relationship. We need to have a sound political basis of mutual trust for the economic relationship to flourish. That's why we need to work harder to improve mutual trust." Harper responded by telling reporters in Halifax he would "point out to any Chinese official that just as a matter of fact, China had a huge trade surplus with this country, so it would be in the interest of the Chinese government to make sure any dealings on trade are fair and above board."[21]

Harper also criticized the Canadian political opposition for its position on Celil's case, saying, "There are those in the Opposition who will say, 'You know, China is an important country, so we shouldn't really protest these things . . . so maybe someday we'll be able to sell more goods there.' I think that's irresponsible. I think the government of Canada, when a Canadian citizen is ill-treated and when the rights of a Canadian citizen need to be defended, I think it's always the obligation of the government of Canada to vocally and publicly stand up for that Canadian citizen. That is what we will continue to do."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huseyincan_Ce...onment_in_China

[Moonbox]

Anyone who has any interest in human rights knows this.

Your sole interest in human rights, apparently, concerns what evil things the Israelis might be doing at any given time.

I wonder what her beloved Ignatieff's position is on Israel.

[Argus]

I wonder what her beloved Ignatieff's position is on Israel.

So far as I know, Ignatieff is pro-Israel, but he hasn't done much to enunciate that as yet, possibly because there are a lot of anti-Semites in the Liberal Party at the moment, and there may be more political gain to be had by playing up to Muslim-Canadians and other Israel haters than to Jewish-Canadians.

Edited February 24, 2009 by Argus

[Progressive Tory]

Should the Government open the door to Chinese ownership of Canadian Resources?

You tell me. I believe they're looking at all possibilities. It's a huge market and why shouldn't we go after some of that market share?

Emerson claims that it's Conservative ideology that is holding us back. The Conservatives deny that, saying that they are aggressively wooing China.

I'm not suggesting Chinese ownership of Canadian Resources, but wouldn't oppose the sale of resources to China. Do you think Alberta will want to dismiss this customer base?

[Progressive Tory]

Funny, I thought the Conservatives were supported, politically and economically, by the tens of thousands of people who donate time and money to their party.

I said they funded the Fraser Institute. Do you need a list of donors? Many of the same people fund the Conservative party and the Fraser Institute is definitely a Conservative 'think tank'. This is not a mystery to anyone.

[Progressive Tory]

Good post, madmax. Neither should profits take precedence over the fair treatment of Canadian citizens caught in China's nightmarish justice system.

Hmmm. I guess he changed his mind about that whole almighty dollar thing.

"The Conservative government is bolstering Canada's trade ties with China as it tries to beat back the protectionist threat that could slow the flow of goods with the U.S."

"But as Harper worked to raise Canada's profile in the U.S., key Conservative ministers unveiled plans to open six new trade offices in China "very shortly." "We will be indeed not only increasing our presence in China, but we will also be increasing our presence in Asia," said Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon.

Trade Minister Stockwell Day is planning a trade mission to Beijing designed to open doors to new trade and build on a $2-billion investment on the Asia-Pacific Gateway."

This wishy washy, constantly changing his mind is not going unnoticed.

[Argus]

Hmmm. I guess he changed his mind about that whole almighty dollar thing.

"The Conservative government is bolstering Canada's trade ties with China as it tries to beat back the protectionist threat that could slow the flow of goods with the U.S."

"But as Harper worked to raise Canada's profile in the U.S., key Conservative ministers unveiled plans to open six new trade offices in China "very shortly." "We will be indeed not only increasing our presence in China, but we will also be increasing our presence in Asia," said Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon.

Trade Minister Stockwell Day is planning a trade mission to Beijing designed to open doors to new trade and build on a $2-billion investment on the Asia-Pacific Gateway."

This wishy washy, constantly changing his mind is not going unnoticed.

The Tories are going with the flow, as on this, as on everything else: big budgets, sucking up to Quebec, whatever it takes. No principals left any more. Just do whatever you think might get you good publicity with the rubes.

As to looking to Asia at this time - good luck, from what I understand Asia is worse off than any of us, and likely to get worse still.

[Argus]

I said they funded the Fraser Institute. Do you need a list of donors? Many of the same people fund the Conservative party and the Fraser Institute is definitely a Conservative 'think tank'. This is not a mystery to anyone.

You said a 'think tank' funded by the oil companies who prop up the Conservatives.

The Conservatives are funded by about 250,000 individual donors, none of whom is an oil company.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

You said a 'think tank' funded by the oil companies who prop up the Conservatives.

The Conservatives are funded by about 250,000 individual donors, none of whom is an oil company.

You suggest that the Conservatives do not have any corporate donors. I suggest that you are attempting to mislead people with a statement like that.

[Smallc]

You suggest that the Conservatives do not have any corporate donors.

No political party has corporate donors.

[Progressive Tory]

As to looking to Asia at this time - good luck, from what I understand Asia is worse off than any of us, and likely to get worse still.

I think Japan may be but from what I read, China is expected to rebound before anyone else.

You're right about the Conservatives though. I knew once the Fraser Institute weighed in they were softening up their base for something.

I don't think Harper has a single principle left, other than the 'please don't fire me, I'll do anything' principle. I don't even know who they are now. They tore up their constitution and set fire to their platform. They're now just making it up as they go along.

[Progressive Tory]

Oh well, if China doesn't shape up, India can cash in on our business.

I think they're lagging there too. Maybe they should pick a team soon before all the good players are gone.

“I do not believe that Ottawa is doing enough to make India the priority it claims that it is,” Ryan Touhey, an expert on India-Canada relations, told IANS."

[Jerry J. Fortin]

No political party has corporate donors.

Really?

No corporations donate money in any way shape or form to political parties? Corporations sponsor no events or fund raisers? No corporation pays for any hundred dollar a plate dinners? No corporation pays lobbyists to attract media attention? All these things represent a form of support with a monetary cost associated with it. I can understand why some folks would deny it, but that doesn't mean there is no truth to it now does it?

[M.Dancer]

No corporation pays lobbyists to attract media attention?

Now there's a stretch....all lobbiest operate transparently ...if they did what you are fishing about for, it would be known.

Corporations sponsor no events or fund raisers?

None that I'm aware of.

No corporation pays for any hundred dollar a plate dinners?

Not if they don't want to be surnt at the stake.....people who attend those can:

1) afford them

2) use the tax receipts

All these things represent a form of support with a monetary cost associated with it. I can understand why some folks would deny it, but that doesn't mean there is no truth to it now does it?

Sure...but at this point they represent only your fevered imagination. If you have proof....

[bjre]

Actually, I never felt human right in China is worse than Canada.

Yes, in China, media does not report something that Canadian media enjoy reporting. In Canada, it is just same. Some reports we can read in China we can not find here. It is also same in the US and UK.

I felt quite free to say anything when I was in China; while in Canada, this is not true. People will face charge if they say something by mistake. (Like someone will face "hate crime" charge). Cops and Lawyers are waiting for chance to earn money. And the expansive justices sometimes are not affordable for people who have not enough money here in Canada.

The reason why some people think Chinese are "rude" is because the society there has more tolerance. At least they can THINK anything need not worry about be charged for hate.

[Smallc]

Later that day, in reality land....

Yeah right.

Reporters Without Borders - press Freedom index

United Nations Development Program - HDI

Carleton University - Country Ranking Tables

Edited February 25, 2009 by Smallc

[bjre]

I don’t know how to describe my feeling on Canadian style of human rights. Canada seems like to encourage lawyers to prove many people did something wrong and sent them to prison and give them a criminal record, and ask everyone in the country spend $400 a year to support the prisons. And they don’t like to warm-heartedly use some positive thinking to affect the problem people and educate them and give them chance and trust to become nice people. Like some people crime just because poverty, Why not just give them a job and let them make living themselves. (Like if any company hire a person that yearly income is below a number, some percentage of salary can be paid by government in order to lower the cost of the justice system). Some people just want to use drug, why not give them respect and let them feel them self are important.

The human rights are also used to protect foreign criminals. Like Lai ChangXin and others.

It seems that the human right issues are just spend tax payer’s money and for politicians to get some more votes.

[bjre]

Later that day, in reality land....

Yeah right.

Reporters Without Borders - press Freedom index

United Nations Development Program - HDI

Carleton University - Country Ranking Tables

Those are all west country's rule of west country's game for their politician's needs.

It never count how many Iraq people and Afghanistan people died after US enter those countries. They would not die if US did not invade their countries.

Do the all civilians dead has human rights?

[bjre]

Later that day, in reality land....

Yeah right.

Reporters Without Borders - press Freedom index

United Nations Development Program - HDI

Carleton University - Country Ranking Tables

Thank you for the rank list, I just found Iceland's human rights is so good that they are nearly bankrupt.

[Smallc]

I guess reality land happens to be too far away for some.