Lu Shaye is the Chinese ambassador to Canada.
After the groundless detention of Meng Wanzhou, the CFO of Huawei Technologies Company Ltd., by the Canadian side at the request of the United States, a lot of comments emerged in Canadian media. We are gratified to see that many Canadian people were imbued with a sense of justice, criticizing the Canadian government for its unreasonable behaviour. However, some have defended Canada’s actions, largely arguing that either Huawei poses threats to national security of Western countries or that Canada has an independent judicial system that should be completely independent from any political interference of the government.
Huawei, with many partners around the world, has a great reputation globally. It has publicly stated, on many occasions, that its global operations are in strict compliance with local laws and regulations. Nevertheless, members of the Five Eyes countries – the United States, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada – have accused Huawei of threatening their national security while providing no evidence. With such speculation, they have sown fear and misled people. If Huawei’s telecom equipment poses a security risk, so do the devices produced by Western telecom equipment manufacturers, since they use the same science and technology. To find out who poses the biggest threat to the security of other countries, please refer to the United States' PRISM program. Those who criticize China’s Huawei should exam themselves in the mirror.
It all comes down to the fact that many still have a stale cold-war mentality, believing that China – a socialist country led by the Communist Party of China – is an abnormal country. They are worried that China is catching up to Western countries too quickly, and that it will surpass them in terms of the economy as well as science and technology. That’s why they crack down on Chinese enterprises and impede China’s development under the pretext of national security.
The detention of Ms. Meng is not a mere judicial case, but a premeditated political action in which the United States wields its regime power to witch-hunt a Chinese high-tech company out of political consideration. The so-called long-arm jurisdiction of the United States, however, has no legal basis in international law. The reason behind all the bullying behaviours of the United States is that it pursues power politics against other countries relying on its huge advantage in national strength. Just imagine how the United States would react if an American company suffered from such unfair treatment in a foreign country.
The Canadian side detained Ms. Meng in an unreasonable way given she has not received any charges according to Canadian laws, which is clearly not judicial independence but a miscarriage of justice. While Canada has continued to stress its judicial independence, did it insist on that independence when facing the United State’s unreasonable request? The Canadian side has not made its judgement independently, otherwise it would not have arrested Ms. Meng. The Canadian government has asserted that it was fulfilling the international obligation to the United States, but did it fulfill the international obligation of protecting the lawful and legitimate rights and interests of a Chinese citizen? Ms. Meng was abrasively arrested just as she transferred at the Vancouver International Airport.
Those who accuse China of detaining some person in retaliation for the arrest of Ms. Meng should first reflect on the actions of the Canadian side. It is both ignominious and hypocritical to revile China with double standards.
As a Canadian reader of The Globe and Mail wrote: “I am ashamed our government would participate in the kidnap and ransom of a leader of a foreign company.” In the past few days, many Canadians have made phone calls to the Chinese Embassy or posted their views online, expressing their indignation at the unfair treatment of Huawei, especially at the detention of Ms. Meng by Canadians.
The Chinese people used to have a favourable impression of Canada. But Canada’s behaviour this time has chilled their feelings.