In a speech last week before a Toronto business audience, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said that while Canada will have “frank yet respectful” discussions with Beijing about human-rights issues, he nonetheless fully appreciated that “China is incredibly important to our future prosperity.” And just in case his business audience didn't appreciate the tectonic shift in Canadian foreign policy that they were about to hear, Baird strayed from his prepared text to add: “My government gets it, and, as Canada’s new minister of foreign affairs, I get it.”
Not surprisingly, Baird's approach has its cheerleaders. Don Guloien, chief executive officer of Manulife Financial Corp., called the speech “a pragmatic approach” that conveyed “warmth.”
Be careful what you wish for
But in their thirst for all things China, Canadian corporations may want to hit “pause” before cheering too loudly for increased business ties with China.
One obvious headache is Sino Forest, whose shares plummeted 80 per cent after the company was accused of overstating its sales and assets. The scandal has forced the Ontario Securities Commission to conduct what it calls a “targeted review” of Canadian-listed companies with operations in markets such as China.
In the U.S., “shares of at least 20 Chinese companies have been suspended or kicked off New York stock exchanges in the past year,” following accounting problems that included forged bank statements, fictional assets and customers, and undisclosed transactions.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Luis Aguilar, responding to the scandals, noted that, “while a vast majority of Chinese companies may be legitimate, a growing number have significant accounting deficiencies or are vessels of outright fraud.”
Each of these cases is further proof that corruption is no longer confined to China's borders, but now stretches to firms controlled by Chinese companies trading in Canada and the United States, thus putting the investments and pensions of Canadians at risk.
Human rights: Canada's afterthought in China relations
Despite Baird's “frank yet respectful” musings regarding human-rights issues, a double standard is emerging in Canada's foreign policy that has little to do with human-rights records, and everything to do with the “almighty dollar.”
Just consider Canada's language on human-rights issues: In Venezuela, Canada is committed to “closely monitoring” the impacts of the Bolivarian Revolution on “standards of democracy and human rights” and supporting “civil society organizations working in the areas of democracy and human rights.” Search the Foreign Affairs website for a fact sheet on “Canada’s Engagement on Human Rights in Colombia,” and a fact sheet will be found. But, when it comes to Canada’s engagement on human rights in China, there's no comparable fact sheet or frank words.
This conveys a worrisome message: that we will hold what Baird calls “respectful discussions” about human rights abuses with our most favoured trading partners, like China, but, when it comes to less economically important countries, Canada will demand a higher standard of conduct – presumably because we have less to lose if such countries are offended by our expectations that they meet international human-rights standards.
Trade versus human rights: Why not both?
If – as John Baird claims – the government “gets it,” so does China.
According to Statistics Canada, the value of Canadian exports to China rose by 18.7 per cent in 2010 to $13.2 billion; an impressive jump from $4 billion in 2002.
Yet it's a trading relationship skewed in China's favour, as Canadian imports exceeded $44 billion, costing us thousands of critically needed jobs in Canada's manufacturing belt. Of more concern, however, is the fact that our exports barely scratch the surface of Canadian skills or value-added technologies. In 2010, the top exports to China were wood pulp, coal, and other bituminous substances.
Putting human rights on an equal footing with Canada's business lobby won't jeopardize these exports, because China's thirst for resources will only grow, and Canada isn't short on markets for natural resources. But a foreign policy that relies on human rights issues for moments of selective outrage that are targeted for domestic political consumption serves no one, least of all China's thousands of political prisoners or reformers under house arrest.
While some, like the University of Alberta’s China Institute chair Wenran Jiang, may see Baird's speech as “an important first step,” such views have little to do with our country's global interests or reputation. Even if we accept Baird's pirouette, Canadians should be alarmed that he failed to detail bilateral policies regarding regional security, consumer safety, environmental protection, and water management – to name but a few outstanding issues with the Chinese communist government.
This is why Canada must insist on having an adult relationship with China where differences on human rights and other issues can be raised without the nattering of trade retaliation.
Sadly, Baird's speech is not a good start to such an approach.
1 comment