Skip to main content

The Chinese government appears to be distancing itself from remarks made by its ambassador to Canada, saying Beijing has no plans to retaliate against Ottawa if it blocks the installation of fifth-generation cellular technology made by Huawei.

It is not true that “China wants to interfere with relevant decisions made by the Canadian government,” foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said Monday.

Instead, she said, Canada stands to lose only Huawei’s expertise and technological sophistication if it bans the company, whose Chinese roots have raised concern among several Western democracies that its technology can be used by Beijing for espionage.

Story continues below advertisement

“We all know that Huawei is an outstanding 5G provider on the global level. If you don’t co-operate with it, from whom else can you get this service?” Ms. Hua asked.

Her comments differed substantially from a threat issued last week by Lu Shaye, China’s chief representative in Ottawa, who told reporters that he hopes ”the Canadian government and the relevant authorities could make a wise decision” on allowing Huawei 5G equipment onto Canadian networks.

If Canada bans Huawei, Mr. Lu warned, “I surely believe there will be consequences.”

Mr. Lu’s remark sparked broad concern about China’s willingness to use its substantial economic clout and rising diplomatic influence to punish countries for refusing the goods sold by its companies. Such a reprisal would have global consequences, given the broad reach of Chinese-made goods.

But Ms. Hua, who over the past week has publicly lashed out at Canadian leadership, made no such threat on Monday. Instead, she bristled at the idea that China would seek to intimidate other countries, saying those “who keep talking about ‘threats’ are Canadian officials, not Chinese.’”

She repeated her attacks on what she called Canadian “megaphone diplomacy,” saying Canada’s leader — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau -- is not “solving the problem at all” by raising the tenor of the debate.

The Canadian government has sought to marshal international criticism against China for its actions following the arrest in Vancouver of Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou. In the weeks that followed, Chinese state security detained two Canadians — Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor — and sentenced a third, Robert Schellenberg, to death after a hasty retrial for international drug trafficking. He had been sentenced to 15 years in prison in November at his first trial.

Story continues below advertisement

Western critics have accused China of “hostage diplomacy.”

Ms. Hua, however, criticized Canada for “making an empty show of strength” — a Chinese idiom translated by an interpreter as “bravado.”

On his way into Liberal caucus meeting Monday, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale did not comment directly on Beijing’s non-reprisal comments, but stressed Canada will make a decision on whether to ban Huawei from participating in 5G mobile networks based on “our own analysis and expertise.”

“This is technology the world has never had before so we’ve got to make sure we do it right,” he told reporters. “Obviously, we listen very carefully to what our allies think and have to say. That’s what an alliance is for, but ultimately, we’re a sovereign country. We’ll make our own decisions.”

Huawei is seen as a Chinese national champion, a pillar in Beijing’s efforts to become a global leader in technological innovation. The company has said it is committed to privacy, with founder Ren Zhengfei saying last week, “we will never harm any nation or any individual.

But Western intelligence leaders have warned that Huawei’s technology poses a security risk, since Chinese law obliges companies to co-operate with the country’s intelligence agencies. As a result, governments and telecommunication providers in the U.S., Britain, Australia, Japan and Germany have all either expressed concern over Huawei equipment, or imposed outright bans.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies