Time for a `don't buy China' campaign

LIBERALS ARE AVID ENDORSERS OF GLOBAL DECLARATIONS.

— KELLY MCPARLAND

My New Year's resolution for 2021 was to avoid buying anything made in China. I see no reason to willingly send money to a country that practices hostage diplomacy, runs re-education camps for minorities, treats human rights with contempt and may be guilty of genocide and forced labour.

It takes a bit of effort, especially if you spend much time in Walmart or Costco, but it's not impossible. There are COVID masks made in the U.S., hand sanitizer made in Canada, televisions sets from Taiwan and lots of inexpensive clothing from India, Thailand or Vietnam. If you demand cheap, China is often cheapest, but the price gap for something slightly costlier, and often better made, isn't that great.

If an individual Canadian can live without Chinese imports the country could probably get by as well, but that would require a sea change in the mindset of the country's Liberal establishment. Nova Scotia Premier Stephen McNeil offered a prime example of that when he indicated the thrill of shipping a billion dollars a year of goods across the Pacific was more than enough to offset any sense of discomfort he might feel over the fate of the two Michaels — Spavor and Kovrig — now into their third year in Chinese cells on charges trumped up for political reasons. Nova Scotia sends China two 747 planeloads of lobster every week; that's one plane for each Michael.

McNeil sees no reason to question China's actions. “It's not our role to go in and tell someone else they're wrong,” he said while being feted by the Canada China Business Council. “Chinese people are proud to be Chinese. And they have a way of doing things. Let's go learn. Let's teach each other. And let us grow economic ties.”

He didn't say which quaint cultural practices might justify brutalizing minorities or threatening war with Taiwan, but sure, let's learn. Maybe we can be educated on the justice of forcibly detaining a million or so Uyghurs behind prison walls while they undergo political indoctrination, and then sending them off to work in factories, willing or otherwise. Here's an idea: let's kick in an occasional lobster to brighten their day.

As former Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd noted this week, lesser powers like Canada can't hope to take on a behemoth like China all on their own, and need to team up with allies to leverage their influence. That's the thinking behind The Declaration of Arbitrary Detention in State-to-State Relations, a “global initiative” unveiled by Foreign Minister Marc Garneau Monday. Bearing the signature of 58 states, it stipulates, in Garneau's words, that “taking people from their families and using them as bargaining chips is both illegal and immoral.”

Fair enough. One would have thought that was self-evident, but evidently not in China. Why that would be, is another lesson we'll have to learn.

The Liberals are avid endorsers of international declarations, even ones like Monday's that are non-binding and carry no penalties. They were quick to hail the Kyoto climate accord, the requirements of which they subsequently ignored. They remain keen on the United Nations declaration on Indigenous rights, though recent Canadian legislation only sets a three-year timetable to prepare an “action plan” on implementation.

Canada played a key role in the UN's adoption of the Responsibility to Protect, an international commitment meant to prevent war crimes and other atrocities. When a vicious civil war left millions of Syrians homeless, Liberals agreed to take in refugees but firmly rejected direct involvement in efforts to halt the slaughter.

That's the problem with toothless declarations: no matter how many supporters they attract, the powers they target generally remain unmoved by signatures or oratory, and carry on with whatever practices drew the world's attention in the first place. That is certainly true of China, which has developed a fine line in boorish diplomatic insults to hurl at any government it feels is intruding on its right to abuse people inside its borders and threaten those without. Ambassador to Canada Cong Peiwu predictably insists it is Ottawa, not Beijing, that is engaging in arbitrary measures.

In his very first official words to the country's press, Cong maintained Canada “abused its treaty of extradition between Canada and the United States, and arbitrarily detained (Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou), which violates her legitimate rights.” Kovrig and Spavor, he asserted, were “engaged in suspected activities endangering national security of China.”

“These two cases … are very much different in nature. Meng Wanzhou's case is arbitrary detention by the Canadian side. For those two Canadian citizens there is no arbitrary arrest at all. So that's my answer.”

It's an answer that's not likely to change, no matter how many more countries sign on to Ottawa's initiative. Liberals like McNeil continue to argue that democratic engagement and reasoned dialogue may yet change China's brutal practices, but three decades of effort in that regard show so sign of progress as yet.

Perhaps it's time for something more substantive. Taking a hint from Washington's “Buy America” campaign, it might be that a “Don't Buy China” program is due. If it works on an individual basis, it could be effective on a broader scale as well. Despite great initial reluctance, Canada's telecom giants — Bell, Telus and Rogers — all discovered they're able to build their new 5G networks just as successfully without equipment from Huawei. If a generation of Canadians can be raised to believe they don't need meat, oil or genders, certainly they can be persuaded life can go on without cheap toasters from Walmart or cut-rate shoes from Costco.