cross-posted from: https://scribe.disroot.org/post/5086288

Archived link

Michael Kovrig is Executive Director, StrategicEffects and Chief Executive, Kovrig Group SL, and a Canadian former diplomat.

China’s officials are sweet-talking Canadians. Its Ambassador, Wang Di, has given smiling interviews calling for the two countries to “have a correct perception of each other.” His other catchphrases include “mutual respect,” “win-win cooperation,” and “positive energy.” Appearing recently on CTV’s Question Period, he assured that current trade disputes would disappear if only Canada would drop its tariffs. Article content

After enduring several years of China’s abusive “wolf warrior” diplomacy, Canadians — particularly Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand, who is visiting Beijing this week — may be tempted to look for comfort in this syrupy language. But they should be wary, because while the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its envoys have altered their tone, their hostile intentions and harmful policies remain unchanged. Their goals are to enhance economic ties selectively while sowing political divisions, both among Canadians and between Canada and its allies.

When Chinese officials talk, Canadians should listen closely — and then decode the real implications of their words. Case in point: when Premier Li Qiang met Prime Minister Carney in September, he reiterated Ambassador Wang’s call for Canada to show a “correct perception of China” to “cement the political foundation for bilateral ties.”

The key phrase “correct perception” encompasses political demands rooted in decades of Communist Party discourse: never question the legitimacy of its authoritarian rule; respect “core interests” like the CCP’s entitlement to rule Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang, and Taiwan; ... and stop framing the Party-state as a national security threat, systemic rival and violator of international treaties.

This is the language of diplomatic gatekeeping, not reconciliation. You want a meeting with General Secretary Xi Jinping? There’s a price. You know what you need to do.

When Ambassador Wang complains, as he did in March, of “smearing and attacking on China” about its treatment of Xinjiang, Tibet and Taiwan, and “attacking and hyping up” of its political interference, espionage, and transnational repression directed at Canadians, and goes on to protest that this harms the foundations of friendship, and indeed “hurts the feelings of the Chinese people” — he’s gaslighting Canadians for objecting to injustice, bullying and massive abuses of human rights.

This is rhetorical entrapment, not friendship based on mutual understanding. It’s an attempt to redefine the baseline of the relationship so that criticism is betrayal and the price of cooperation is silence and acquiescence.

Chinese diplomats routinely deploy such coded language. Their well-rehearsed calls for “pragmatic cooperation” and “seeking common ground while maintaining differences” are not a proposal to politely disagree. They mean Canadians should ignore differences on values and national security concerns and prioritize business deals and market access, further entrapping Canada in economic dependency and elite complicity.

When Ambassador Wang says our two countries have “no fundamental conflicts of interest,” he’s insisting we forget about China’s decisive enabling of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, support for Iran and North Korea, and adversarial behaviour toward other democracies.

Negotiating tip: when Chinese officials declare that two sides “need each other,” it usually signals that the CCP needs something. This year, it’s market access to dump its overproduction of electric vehicles, aluminum and steel.

These nuggets of Party-speak are also being dispensed to audiences in Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and European countries. By portraying China’s government as a responsible pillar of international order and blaming all problems on Washington, Chinese officials hope to benefit from America’s belligerent turn and lull other countries into complacency about their own drive for geopolitical primacy.

The message is that partnership with China requires accepting your place in a Beijing-centric global hierarchy. Unmentioned is that much of Donald Trump’s ire with the global trading system stems from the massive distortions forced upon it by China’s mercantilist, state-guided economic policies. Those same distortions are behind its dispute with Canada.

In his Oct. 12 CTV interview, Ambassador Wang even redeployed the old Chinese proverb, “the one who tied the knot should be the one who unties it,” to argue that “China is not the one to blame.” In his narrative, Canada is the wrongdoer because it imposed tariffs and hurt China’s producers, and Beijing is fairly and righteously defending itself by blocking canola and other agri-food.

It’s more diplomatic gaslighting: invert blame, pose as the aggrieved party, and hold out the prospect of reconciliation. In reality, Canada’s tariffs are a necessary alignment with Washington to preserve an integrated automotive industry and foster nascent domestic EV production. They’re also more than justified by the need to counteract industrial policies that may add up to a staggering four per cent of China’s GDP, have warped its economy and are now engineering its overwhelming dominance in advanced technologies and global manufacturing supply chains. The CCP has tied all of us in this knot.

As Anita Anand takes her first trip to China as foreign minister, her interlocutors may try to sell her another Chinese proverb: “get on the train first, buy the ticket later.” We can have immediate pain relief if Ottawa drops tariffs, while the hidden costs to the country’s manufacturing base and sovereignty pile up slowly during other politicians’ watches. Don’t be surprised if the Chinese then come back looking for more concessions.

If Beijing really wants to repair the relationship, it should begin by untangling its own knots: stop using coercion, exporting economic distortions, interfering in Canada’s politics and society, helping Russia kill Ukrainians, and demanding ideological and systemic acquiescence.

Since China is unlikely to do any of those things, what should Canadians do? Don’t get stuck in the syrup. Decode the slogans. Remember that the CCP’s charm can turn to menace in a heartbeat. Don’t relinquish leverage. Increase efforts to articulate our own core values, strengthen our sovereignty, and diversify and deepen relations with more reliable partners. Only then can we maintain our freedom to form our own “correct” perceptions.