
China Warns Canada of ‘Heavy Price’ Over Huawei Arrest - vaultcool
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/09/technology/canada-china-huawei-meng-wanzhou.html
======
frabbit
I still do not know why Canada is carrying water for the USA on this. Trudeau
just spent several billion of taxpayers money to build a pipeline to export
dirty Canadian tarsands to the Chinese.

What is the USA doing for Canada apart from tearing up existing trade deals?

~~~
Waterluvian
Not suggesting I have the answer, but here's a thought.

Canada has prospered from sharing a land border with the U.S. We are the
largest trading partner because of this geography. For better or worse, we are
tied to the U.S. by umbilical cord. I get a sense that no matter what the mood
of the day is about our relations, we _need_ to find a way to cooperate as
much as possible.

Trump will come and go. China will probably keep growing in economic power and
relevance. But Canada won't ever physically find itself not in North America.

~~~
anoncoward111
There is no need to physically detain and deport someone over what amounts to
"illegally" selling routers to Iranians.

Do you know how many weapons the US has sold to Taiwan, and no CFOs have been
arrested by China?

~~~
DeonPenny
Yes you should detain someone. Rule of law is something that separate
countries that prosper and those who don't. Letting the rich do whatever they
want is a very bad thing to do.

Also, of course, the US can sell weapons to Taiwan. Theres no international
sanctions on Taiwan, and not only that they've been peaceful for years.

~~~
anoncoward111
>Taiwan has been peaceful for years

China literally has laid claim to their island and they defend it by force

~~~
DeonPenny
Yeh because it's there island. The war is over give it up. No internationally
agrees with china. Therefore it's not there island. Also you forgot the
important word there. Defend, They are defending not attacking anyone.

------
robert_foss
Norway was heavily punished for the Nobel Peace prize being awarded to an
incarcerated Chinese human rights activist[1].

[1]

~~~
perlpimp
liberty is a use it or lose it proposition, good for norway. And good for
Canada, theft from Canadian companies should not be ignored when executed by
state actors. "how Huawei's rise was at the expense of Nortel." \--
[https://www.networkworld.com/article/2223272/cisco-
subnet/60...](https://www.networkworld.com/article/2223272/cisco-
subnet/60-minutes-torpedoes-huawei-in-less-than-15-minutes.html)

~~~
slededit
They capitulated in the end. It was extremely humiliating and not strongly
covered in the west.

This is not what standing up for freedom of expression looks like:

“The Norwegian Government reiterates its commitment to the one China policy,
fully respects China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, attaches high
importance to China’s core interests and major concerns, will not support
actions that undermine them, and will do its best to avoid any future damage
to the bilateral relations.”

------
intrasight
What I'm curious to know is if she is "Chinese" in this situation - meaning
was she traveling under a Chinese passport.

~~~
tonylinn80
She's traveling under either a normal Chinese passport or a Hong Kong passport

~~~
intrasight
Thanks for clarifying. I had read that she probably wasn't traveling with a
Chinese passport. I didn't know about the Hong Kong passport until now.

[http://shanghaiist.com/2014/07/01/why_hong_kongs_passport_mi...](http://shanghaiist.com/2014/07/01/why_hong_kongs_passport_might_be_th/)

"After the handover to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, Hong Kong continued to
maintain its own passport separate from that of the standard PRC issue.
Replacing the erstwhile British National (Overseas) passport, the HKSAR
passport inherited much of the privileges afforded to UK passport holders:
free access to commonwealth nations such as Canada and New Zealand as well as
the European Schengen area."

------
yalogin
The world leaders should refer to China as a dictatorship. It has abandoned
all of the communist principles except for the rule by one. So it’s a
dictatorship by all means and so should Ben called as such.

~~~
fermienrico
Here is a list [1] of current authoritarian regimes. There is a pattern or
rather multiple patterns. They're poor, hostile and struggling in all aspects
(pick your favorite ranking metric) with only one exception - Singapore. The
world doesn't need authoritarianism. Human psyche, at the top and at the
bottom of the societal hierarchy is fragile and barbaric without education,
science and free thought.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism)

~~~
paraditedc
> They're poor, hostile and struggling in all aspects (pick your favorite
> ranking metric) with only one exception - Singapore.

What about Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and more notably Russia and China? I don't
think any of them qualify as poor and struggling?

Also, causation and correlation. Poverty might be related to authoritarian,
but not necessarily caused by it. For example, many counties are poor because
of colonialism and the political vacuum left over when they gained
independence.

In addition, looking at stats in this way is prone to sampling bias. If you
take a look at the list of non authoritarian counties, many of them might not
be necessarily doing better.

~~~
throwawayepgpp
Saudi Arabia and Qatar have a notable underclass that's pretty much for all
intents and purpose slave labor. Russia's living conditions improved but
you're still in for a big surprise once you step outside of Moscow or St-
Petersburg. The average (or more accurately, median) Russian or Chinese is not
an affluent middle-class urban dweller posting loftily about the downfall of
the West, they're a rural worker living under what would be considered
miserable conditions in any Western country.

It's almost as if authoritarian rule was inefficient and wasteful in resources
due to having to spend most of its energy staying in power and favoring
corruption and political favoritism at the expense of good policies. Sure you
may offset that with incredible amounts of natural resources (oil and large
territory) but inequality does not go away. Also, sooner or later natural
resources run out.

------
abc-xyz
History is repeating itself. The world leaders were too slow to deal with
Hitler, just like they'll be too slow to deal with Xi Jinping. Trauma of past
wars, fear for the economy, and underestimation of their true intentions.

~~~
EGreg
China does have some parallels to the socialists of old. USSR and Nazi
Germany.

The regimes helped raise a lot of people from grinding poverty through central
planning. But also have very heavy-handed approaches to social issues. For
example:

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Falun_Gong](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Falun_Gong)

[https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/6/chinas-
chris...](https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jun/6/chinas-christian-
persecution-highest-level-mao/)

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliviaenos/2018/03/28/growing-r...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliviaenos/2018/03/28/growing-
religious-persecution-in-china-a-symptom-of-xis-consolidation-of-power/)

~~~
lovich
Side note, but I've been seeing this propaganda pop up the past few weeks all
over, and now I'm starting to see it come from people I don't think are
spreading propaganda, like yourself.

The Nazis were no socialists. Socialism isn't part of naziism. Yes it was in
their name, but republic is in China's official name, and north korea is know
as the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea. We wouldn't claim either
country is a democracy.

By throwing in Nazis and socialism in the same pot, you are equating those two
ideas in people's minds when they are absolutely not

~~~
abc-xyz
How deeply you wish to read Hitler and Xi Jinping or China and Nazi Germany
comparison is up to you. The two dictators and countries share a lot of
similarities.

The key point is that they're both hungry for power, evil and brutal, wish to
force their ideology upon the world, and most importantly, are in a position
where it's possible for them to achieve their goals. Do I believe that
Hitler/Xi Jinping were/are the most evil people on earth? No, but unlike
others, they're both in a position where they can conquer the world (no matter
how much we want to pretend otherwise) and cause great suffering to people
outside their own borders. To dismiss the comparison because one put jews in
concentration camps while the other is putting muslims, or whatever
ideological difference you can find, is missing the point.

~~~
lovich
I find that the comparison between them as dictators has merit. No question
there. Same on the camps they are putting specific ethnic "others" into, to
get their people to rally behind them.

My point specifically was about equating Nazis to socialists. There's been a
concentrated campaign the past few weeks to say that Nazis were socialists, so
socialists today are the real Nazis and not the guys with SS tattoos who are
advocating for ethnic purity.

If you don't like socialists for whatever reason, that's a position you can
hold. I just don't like this muddying of waters for political reasons.

Also again, I don't think you are spreading this on purpose. I've seen it
start on alt right influenced subreddits and seen it spread the past few
weeks, to the point that I am now seeing it casually mentioned in neutral
forums as an offhand fact.

~~~
EGreg
Just to be clear, I thought the propaganda you were referring to was comparing
China to pre WW2 Nazi Germany, like Steve Bannon did in his book. I had
written a long post about the similarities but thought better of it - the more
I analyed them (eg Tibet) the more I realied China is closer to the USSR.

So I scrapped the whole thing and wrote the post above. No, they were all in
fact socialists. You may not like it, and I do make a YUGE distinction between
socialism and social democracy. For example Bernie is wrong, he is a social
democrat and not a “democratic socialist”. Scandinavian countries are social
democracies.

Having said that, I admit that there are other TYPES of socialism that are not
acknowledged. Like Kibbutzes and the Public Stock Market. Socialism is just
collective ownership of the means of production.

But when most people say socialism, they mean State Socialism.

~~~
lovich
Please explain how Nazis were socialists. It wasn't ownership by the people
it's was ownership by the party

~~~
EGreg
Well, state socialism is ownership by “the people” through the state.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksgemeinschaft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksgemeinschaft)

Take Volkswagen for example: the people’s car. Isn’t it similar to China’s
initiatives to build electric cars and buses, or to own the corporations?

The problem wasn’t the socialism but the nationalization of everything:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_People%27s_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_People%27s_Welfare)

------
riskneutral
Bring it.

------
evolve2k
I hear very little of Western CEO’s being detained or arrested.

People aware of the concept of Orientalism?

This is a great 3 min summary -
[https://youtu.be/1aNwMpV6bVs](https://youtu.be/1aNwMpV6bVs)

~~~
stupidcar
Never heard of Jeff Skilling? Bernie Madoff? Martha Stewart?

Plenty of western CEOs have been arrested, convicted and jailed. I guess the
difference is that they don't benefit from their government threatening severe
consequences unless the rule of law is suspended.

~~~
WalterBright
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Holmes#Criminal_char...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Holmes#Criminal_charges)

