Canada’s Reset With China – An Unwise Insurance Policy

By Ariana Gic

—

Dear Prime Minister Carney,

I must renew my anger and concern about Canada’s new ‘strategic partnership” with authoritarian, genocidal China.

You present the choice to reset relations with China – an evil, genocidal, highly repressive authoritarian regime, which is a party to Russian aggression and genocide against Ukraine – as a pragmatic choice for the good of the Canadian economy. But I fear that it will come at a cost to our national security, and at an even greater cost to our principles.

Economic diversification and growth is not supposed to come at the cost of a partnership with the devil which is out to harm us and the order we cherish. Germans learned this lesson the hard way through the disastrous consequences of Merkel’s “Wandel durch Handel” policy of buying Russian gas.

Prime Minister Mark Carney, I not only voted Liberal in the last federal election, but I canvassed for the liberal candidate in my riding who, much to my relief, won. I did not wish to see Canada governed by the Conservative party headed by an extremist who enjoyed obvious support from the machinery of the Kremlin.

Know that my criticism of your policy choice is not the reflexive criticism and outrage of a die-hard Conservative of any policy of a Liberal PM, but as a Canadian who chose the party that would prioritize Canada’s national security, not undermine it.

Your claim that the Canada-China partnership “will not only deepen our bilateral ties to the benefit of our peoples, but will also – from our judgement – help improve the multilateral system – a system that, in recent years, has come under great strain,” was upsetting and worrying on more than one front.

First, the citizens of China will not enjoy any democratic benefit. The economic benefit to China will be used to finance the ever-growing repression of its citizens. The Uyghurs will not enjoy freedom from genocide. We will not have contributed to stopping genocide. Canadians buying Chinese EV (heavily laden with spyware connected to the regime itself) so China will buy Canadian agricultural products is of no a benefit to Canadians beyond the immediate economic one.

Second, the “multilateral system” which Xi pursues is not a system where democracies enjoy a balance of power in foreign relations and international affairs which will see the United States lose some of its “super power” status. Xi’s “multilateral system” is one he pursues with his “partner without limits” Putin. Xi and Putin seek to upend the western-led, international rules-based order with one of “might makes right” with the world carved into spheres of influence led by evil, anti-democratic regimes China and Russia. This is the same multilateral system which Trump pursues, with the United States controlling the western hemisphere, Russia controlling Europe, and China controlling Asia.

Thirdly, any degree of “multilateralism’ in the world has been strained not merely by the United States, but to a large degree, by China and Russia. Partnering with any of them will help enable the dangerous Eastern-led system they are pursuing – not the contrary.

Just as Russia was not dissuaded from attacks on NATO nations in Europe through gas deals and partnership, China will not be dissuaded from its plans to attack Canada. Perhaps you will have bought a delay in such an attack, but not an abandonment of that goal. Beijing is heavily invested in controlling the Arctic, and a new economic partnership that will help enrich it will not cause them to change course. We are helping fund future aggression against ourselves.

And on the topic of aggression, I am truly at a loss as to how you have managed to ignore that helping China economically while it is a party to Russian aggression and genocide of Ukrainians is counterproductive to our policy of supporting Ukraine.

A richer China will not be democratic, more peaceful, abandon imperialist ambitions (which include the Canadian Arctic), or stop supporting Russian war against Ukraine (which, as is well-acknowledged as this point, is a war not only against Ukraine, but against the entirety of the rules-based international order). On the contrary, a richer China will be MORE repressive, MORE authoritarian, BETTER poised to pursue its imperialist ambitions, BETTER positioned to support Russia’s war against the free world in order to achieve the goal of a Great Leader of one of the three spheres of influence of Might Makes Right.

You may have secured deals that will provide quick economic benefit, but the cost of this economic boost is high. Our national security and the rules-based order are of paramount importance. That Canada needs to diversify its economic and other partnerships beyond the increasingly fascist Trump regime is clear. But the solution is not to deepen ties – and thereby strengthen – another evil authoritarian regime. Canadian policy should not be, “Partnership with anyone – including the evil authoritarians who mean us and the rules-based order harm – to diversity economic ties beyond the United States and to grow more prosperous.” This is immoral, self-defeating, and dangerous. And this is not what I voted for.

Yes, you are correct that we must take the world “as it is” and that we cannot operate in a non-existent world which we wish for, but your pragmatism and realism will never allow us to get to the world order we aspire to, but drag us into the one which the world is being dragged in to, principally by Russia, China and the United States.

Just as Nord Stream 2 was NOT “just a commercial deal” as then Chancellor Merkel wanted us to believe, this reset with China is not just an economic arrangement. Your statement that this new Canada-China relationship “sets us up well for the new world order” suggests this is clear to Ottawa as well.

It seems to me that the Prime Minister’s Office has determined that in the new world order where the United States has declared economic war on Canada and has expressed clear intentions to annex the country, and where Greenland may be in the hands of Washington in the coming months, China and Canada have shared interests arising from the U.S. being an adversary.

Putting aside all my criticism of any renewed relations with China aside, I cannot help but worry that this “reset” with China is the result of disappointing results with the United Kingdom and the European Union. It is difficult not think that your trip to China makes clear that the UK and EU did not agree to provide support Canada could confidently rely on should we face an attack by the United States.

Is it the assessment of the Prime Minister’s Office that the threat to Canada from the Trump administration is of such an imminent nature that there was no time for long talks and negotiations with the EU that we had to pivot to authoritarian China? Is the situation in fact so dire that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” is the principle upon which foreign policy is now made?

Prime Minister, you have long hinted that a new world order is being established, but you had never made it clear that in this new world order, China is closer to Canadian interests than the United States.

You should specifically articulate the reasoning behind your choice. If I am correct in my assessment that Ottawa has determined that the threat to Canada from the United States is so dire, and that we cannot have confidence in our NATO partners in the European Union, that we need renewed relations with China as a kind of “insurance policy,” then you owe Canadians this explanation.

But we should not pretend that deals with the devil will yield good returns. When democracies partner with repressive, authoritarian regimes whose ambitions include global domination with other anti-democratic regimes, the outcome is not that evil diminishes, only grows.

—

About author

Ariana Gic, Canadian political and legal analyst, Director, Direct Initiative International Centre for Ukraine. Sanctioned by the Russian Federation according to the Statement of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the Personal Sanctions against the citizens of Canada, dated November 14, 2022
Facebook | Twitter