Canadians trapped in the epicentre of the coronavirus in China had to wait in line behind the United States, Japan, South Korea, Jordan, Britain, Portugal, Bangladesh, Egypt, Thailand, and Indonesia to even land a plan in the Wuhan airport.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 10, 2020.

OTTAWA—The wheels of justice grind too slowly in Canada.

Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou was arrested at the Vancouver International Airport back in 2018. She finally got her day in court last month, but the decision on her extradition case is expected to take several months.

Meanwhile, according to Canada’s new ambassador to China, relations between the two countries are grim.

Canadians trapped in the epicentre of the coronavirus in China had to wait in line behind the United States, Japan, South Korea, Jordan, Britain, Portugal, Bangladesh, Egypt, Thailand, and Indonesia to even land a plan in the Wuhan airport.

Our people were treated with a diffidence similar to that afforded citizens of Taiwan, who wanted to be evacuated but were delayed because the Chinese government considers them citizens of their country.

On a business level, Canadians have been privately encouraging the Canadian government to find a way out of the Huawei mess.

The appointment of former business Sinophile Dominic Barton to the post of Canadian ambassador to China was seen as a step in the right direction.

But the ambassador’s two-hour appearance before a parliamentary committee last week laid rest to the notion that his work will be accomplished in short order.

Barton described the frosty welcome he got during his first meeting with his counterparts in decidedly undiplomatic terms.

It’s not as though Barton is new to China. As a key private-sector player, he has been actively engaged at the highest levels for the past two decades.

But representing the government of Canada comes with a whole new set of challenges.

Canada built a strong and stable relationship with China after our country became one of the first in the world to recognize the establishment of the People’s Republic of China back in 1970. That was done under the direction of prime minister Pierre Trudeau, who had travelled the country as a young backpacker before he ever entered politics.

Canada also benefited from the relationship of Dr. Norman Bethune to the China’s revered founder Mao Zedong. The two were so close that Bethune is lionized in Chinese revolutionary history and is better known to most Chinese than he is in Canada. But those deep and strong links have been damaged because of the Wanzhou case.

Former Canadian foreign minister Chrystia Freeland presented the extradition case as a simple matter of the application of the rule of law.

However, foreign affairs experts affirm that the Canadian government would have been within its rights to inform China of the pending extradition request, and Wenzhou could have aborted her passage through Canada.

Instead, Canada is in the difficult position of doing America’s dirty work, while they get their planes to Wuhan and we are kept hanging.

Imagine how embarrassing it would be for Canada if one of our top business leaders was kept under house arrest for more than a year while the judicial extradition case lumbered along in China.

When Freeland departed the foreign ministry, many felt a new approach could end the impasse. But according to Barton, that is going to take some fancy footwork.

Barton told parliamentarians that both sides were literally spitting mad. Chinese are angered that the No. 2 in their country’s largest private company has been arrested at the request of a third country, the United States.

Canadians are equally upset that three Canadian citizens have been caught up in the judicial crossfire.

The “two Michaels,” as they are widely known were both arrested on the heels of the Meng Wanzhou’s detainment, with the Chinese government accusing them of being involved in state secrets.

The third Canadian referenced in committee, Robert Schellenberg, had already been convicted of drug smuggling in China, but his sentenced was increased from 19 years to death in the Meng fallout.

The best outcome of this mess would be a judicial decision in which the test for extradition has not been met.

Meng was alleged to have broken American law on sanctions against Iran but Canada does not apply the same sanctions, therefore an extradition could not be justified on that grounds.

Canadian lawyers made their extradition case on broader terms, claiming that a fraud could have been perpetrated on HSBC because of Meng’s actions.

We won’t know the answer to the judicial process for months to come.

Meanwhile, Canadians are paying the price in every walk of life, up to and including our right to evacuate countrymen from a coronavirus zone.

Time to find a solution to this mess.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

The best outcome would be to resolve the case, with Meng’s return to China before the summer. This would free Liberals to focus on electoral issues, not international irritants. If it takes a former prime minister to get us there, so be it.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 17, 2019.

OTTAWA—Only in Canada is it considered a weakness to recruit a former prime minister to help solve the Huawei problem.

Reaction to the news that Jean Chrétien was willing to act as an envoy to meet with the Chinese leadership in the Meng Wanzhou extradition case was muted.

The offer was floated privately months ago. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with Chrétien several weeks ago to discuss the Chinese deep freeze that has settled on Canada.

Former prime minister Brian Mulroney first publicly broached the idea of Chrétien’s involvement last week.

Both former leaders are getting feedback from the business community that this problem needs fixing.

Chrétien and Mulroney are unlikely allies. They spent a lifetime fighting each other in politics. But both have deep roots in Canadian business, which is anxiously searching for a way to heal this deepening Canada/China rift.

Some Liberal insiders are reticent to recruit a former prime minister, because they fear the optics of Chrétien coming in to fix a Trudeau problem.

These views were reflected in a Globe and Mail quote last week when former Canadian ambassador to China, Guy Saint-Jacques, said it would be a mistake if Chrétien “goes there and gets all the glory and Ms. Meng is free, well, it would give the impression that the prime minister is inexperienced and a neophyte and good old Mr. Chrétien is a reliable fixer.”

Saint-Jacques also said the opposition would pillory the government because the foreign minister and prime minister have repeatedly stated the courts should solve the issue.

The opposition will pillory the government, whatever the course of action.

But Conservatives did not mind when Trudeau recruited their former leader Rona Ambrose to work on free trade talks.

Nor did they complain when James Moore joined top New Democratic Party adviser Brian Topp on the same international trade advisory panel.

The last thing the Liberals need going into the election is to have Meng’s extradition overshadowing a positive economic story.

The Chinese have already taken aim at Canadian pork and canola production. Across the board, Canada-China business deals are being frozen out because of the extradition issue.

Saint-Jacques said the prime minister would risk the wrath of the Americans if the justice minister moved to end the extradition on condition the Huawei chief financial officer return to China.

But Americans have not been doing us any favours lately, and the president himself has publicly speculated that the Meng mess could be used as a bargaining chip in his free trade negotiations with China.

The bottom line is that Chrétien has deep and broad political and business ties with China. He is well-positioned to help extricate the Government of Canada from a mess that has not been of its own making.

Former Canadian ambassador to China John McCallum said early on that there were valid questions to be asked about the reasons behind the American request for extradition.

In McCallum’s words, Meng could make a very good court case against the extradition.

“One, political involvement by comments from Donald Trump in her case. Two, there’s an extraterritorial aspect to her case. And three, there’s the issue of Iran sanctions which are involved in her case, and Canada does not sign on to these Iran sanctions.”

“So I think she has some strong arguments that she can make before a judge.”

McCallum subsequently walked back his comments, saying he regretted saying what he did. But the next day he lost his job after telling a Vancouver reporter it would be “great for Canada” if the United States dropped their extradition request, repeating that any deal must include release of detained Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.

Since McCallum’s firing, Trudeau has left the ambassadorial post vacant. The solution is a political, not a diplomatic one.

So it makes perfect sense to enlist a former prime minister to broker a much-needed truce.

There is risk for Trudeau in aborting the extradition process. But the risk of doing nothing is even greater.

With the Chinese refusing to take meetings, the dossier is currently a lose-lose situation for Trudeau and Freeland.

The best outcome would be to resolve the case, with Meng’s return to China before the summer. This would free Liberals to focus on electoral issues, not international irritants.

If it takes a former prime minister to get us there, so be it.

Chinese respect for elders is something Canada could learn from.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.