ENOUGH IS ENOUGH — PAY THE RANSOM
Saving lives more important than contrived policies, Gar Pardy says.
It is now more than 620 days since Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor were locked inside the prisons of China. Come Dec. 10, it will be two years.
Their continued disappearance is the result of an unwillingness by Ottawa to accept its contrived policy is a failure. The blind adherence to the use of the rule of law and no ransom ensures that Kovrig and Spavor will remain forgotten within Chinese prisons for the foreseeable future.
In a crisis involving kidnapped Canadians, the first and only rule is the protection of their lives using all available means. This the government has failed to do. Instead, there is an unwillingness to accept there is action needed that goes beyond diplomatic norms.
Rescue operations, payment of ransoms and suspension of these norms may be needed. It is not a time for consideration of the problems inherent in the Trolley Problem, as one commentator would have. Lives are in danger.
Canadian and other governments have faced this before. Unusual situations require unusual action by government and often this involves going beyond the norms of diplomatic niceties if lives are not needlessly lost.
The payment of ransoms has been a constant in human interactions since we came down from the Acacias. Equally, the patina of respectability and civilized behaviour we have given ourselves through the soft comfort provided by the rule of law means the two often find themselves in conflict. But they should never become a barrier in saving the lives of our fellow citizens. Little has been lost in our ethics or morality when the overriding concern for the saving of lives comes to the fore.
For the Canadian government, the time has come to reorder its priorities and accept that saving the lives of two Canadians is more than worthy of sacrificing some of the assumed gloss surrounding the rigid application of the rule of law.
The writers of our laws foresaw the need for doing so when criminal matters such as extradition are concerned. It is just not our adherence to the rule of law that is important, it is also its use or misuse by another country.
Now it is time for our government to understand the dilemma and change its policy before Kovrig and Spavor begin their third year of imprisonment.
In doing so, the government will find more success than its blind adherence to a policy that has us wandering around in a fog not of our making. The offering of Meng Wanzhou in exchange for Kovrig and Spavor is the only answer.
Another aspect of the matter is the willingness of many Canadians to rush to large conclusions concerning China. The urge to condemn is natural, but the rush for policies that might lead to changed behaviour by Beijing resembles lemmings looking for a new habitat.
There is no shortage of countries deserving of criticism and concern, and China has been on that list for many years. Nevertheless, the idea that China is a country like all others is no more valid than when the same test is applied to the United States, Russia, India or ourselves. We are all products of our history and to believe that a few public statements by Ottawa, even within the company of others, will influence much is a dream that never dies.
We were a contributor to the emergence of China back on the world stage when in 1968 we began negotiations for the re-establishment of diplomatic relations. We did so for a variety of reasons, the least of which was not the opportunity for trade on a scale of some value to us.
It is important to remember that in 1968, China was in convulsions with its misnamed Cultural Revolution. It was not culture that was under attack but the lives of millions of Chinese.
China emerged from that period of self-indulgent frenzy and chaos and has been a large contributor to the economic success of the world ever since. We still await its political contribution.
In the days ahead, as we seek the release of two Canadians from the prisons of China, we should not become self-indulgent or self-injurious.
Rather, it is time for clarity of purpose based on the moral principle that the protection of lives matter.