LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Bell Canada announced on Tuesday that its 5G network partner would be Swedish telecommunications giant Ericsson.

While some people will shrug with indifference at this news, they really shouldn't.  Bell just turned down (or snubbed, if you wish) a significant financial partnership with China's Huawei Technologies, a larger, more influential organization in the telecommunications industry.

It's also a clear indication the frosty Canada-China relationship of late has just entered a period of significant deep freeze.

To be sure, Canada has had some mitigating issues with Huawei for several years.  This is related to the extradition hearings involving Meng Wanzhou, deputy chairwoman of the board and chief financial officer of the South China-based telecommunication giant.

Her company is one of the world's largest 5G network providers.  Huawei employs over 194,000 people, and reported revenues of $121.72 billion in 2019.  It's been the biggest telecommunications equipment manufacturer internationally since 2012 leapfrogging Ericsson, as it happens and overtook Apple in 2018 to become the second-largest manufacturer of smartphones behind Samsung.

Nevertheless, long-standing concerns among North American-based surveillance and intelligence agencies have existed about Huawei due to its historically close ties with China's Communist government.  Its advanced technology could potentially be used to spy Canadian and U.S. companies through their employees's hand-held devices, and none would be the wiser.

That's something Washington wasn't going to stand for, and understandably so.

U.S. President Donald Trump's Aug. 13, 2018 defence spending bill included a provision that banned the purchase of equipment from several Chinese-based companies, including Huawei.  The U.S. Commerce Department added Huawei to the nation's entity list, or trade blacklist, where it has remained ever since.

Tensions further escalated when Meng was arrested by the RCMP in Vancouver on Dec. 1, 2018.  This was done at the request of U.S. authorities for her alleged role in violating trade sanctions against Iran, along with charges of "conspiracy to defraud multiple international institutions."  Then-U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen later included charges of bank and wire fraud, and conspiracies to commit same.

Meng was released on $10 million bail to her Vancouver residence.  She then moved into a larger gated family home, where she could travel freely in the city (other than the airport).  She reportedly wears a GPS ankle bracelet, has 24 hour, in-person security monitoring daily, and follows an 11 pm curfew.

Meanwhile, two Canadians Michael Spavor, a businessman who previously worked in North Korea, and Michael Kovrig, a former diplomat were both arrested in China shortly after Meng was detained.  They were charged with endangering state security by Communist officials, and are detained in death camps.

The two Michaels, as they're often called in Canada, have fiercely maintained their innocence.  Their fate is likely tied to Meng's fate.

Several prominent ex-Liberals, including former Foreign Affairs Minister John McCallum, former Finance Minister John Manley and former Prime Minister Jean Chretien's chief of staff Eddie Goldenberg, have attempted to intervene.  In particular, Manley and Goldenberg have separately suggested the idea of a prisoner exchange between Meng and the two Michaels to resolve this matter.

To Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's credit, he hasn't wavered in his position to honour the U.S. request for extradition.  "We are a country of the rule of law and we will abide by the rule of law," he told the media in mid-January.  Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland echoed this sentiment, "Our government has been clear that we are a rule of law country and that we honour our extradition treaty commitments.  That is what we need to do and that is what we will do."

Nothing changed during Meng's application to dismiss her extradition hearing, either.

Her counsel attempted to argue that under the guise of double criminality, succinctly defined by York University law professor Sharon A. Williams in a 1991 Nova Law Review paper as being "based upon a reciprocal characterization of the offenses and a type of mutuality of obligations between states," her case could not be properly tried.  The B.C. Supreme Court ruled against this on May 27, with Justice Heather Holmes directly stating double criminality "is capable of being met in this case."

Canadian businesses have likely followed this matter with great interest.  When you combine Meng's extradition hearing with the two Michaels's terrible ordeal, dealing with China isn't terribly desirable.  When you throw in other contentious issues, including China's questionable history and statistics with respect to the coronavirus pandemic and the repression of Hong Kong, it's even less so.

This may help explain why Bell chose Ericsson over Huawei.  If so, good for them.

Photo Credit: Yahoo News

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Is America great again yet?

The obvious answer to that question is no, no, not at all.  So far, over 107,000 Americans have died from COVID-19, and counting.  That is over a quarter of all of the world's casualties.  Protests and riots have erupted across the country, first caused by the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers, but then because of the violent police response.

Trump's response to the coronavirus was not only inadequate, it was downright irresponsible.  His recklessness has caused the deaths of many Americans.  He downplayed the coronavirus at every turn, using Twitter as a weapon to encourage Americans to ignore the risks.

And now, as Rome is burning, Trump is still fiddling on Twitter.  He is the LAW & ORDER President and he will restore order.  Martial law is basically being imposed on the American people, with the Army being mobilized.  Three months ago, I was wondering on Twitter if there was a chance Trump would do that.

Truth be told, I actually didn't expect this to happen.  And I was mostly thinking of it happening in the context of the pandemic.  But here we are today.

Police are charging peaceful protesters, beating up journalists, tear gassing at will.  The National Guard is being deployed, the Army is being mobilized.  Plans are being made for the American soldiers to be in the streets of American cities.  Soldiers with guns.  To "dominate the streets", as Trump put it.

On CNN, commentator Don Lemon wondered if President Trump had "declared war on Americans?", adding that the United States was "teetering on a dictatorship."  Are the conditions set for Trump to lose the election?  It seems obvious to most foreign observers.

At times, it does seem that Trump is actually trying to incite violence, hoping people storm the White House.

But why?

One only needs to look at the end game.  NOVEMBER 3RD!, Trump tweeted a few days ago.  His target?  He couldn't be clearer:

The silent majority.  The same silent majority Republican candidate Richard Nixon was counting on during the 1968 election, so much so in fact that he basically made the term part of the political lexicon.

1968 was tumultuous; it was marked by the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr, which was followed by racial riots across the country.  American youths were protesting across university campuses.  There was unrest everywhere, and police violence was only exacerbating everything.

Richard Nixon ran on a campaign that promised to restore law and order in the cities.  His "Southern strategy" was designed to win and motivate southern white voters, some who had traditionally supported the Democrats but were sensitive to law and order arguments and not very supportive of the civil rights movement.

Sound familiar?

Make no mistake: Nixon's increased political support among white voters in the South by appealing and exploiting the underlying racism against African Americans.  And that playbook is being used once again.  Trump relied on angry white voters last time around to get out and vote against Hillary Clinton, who was representing the establishment, which had enriched themselves while midtown Americans were losing their jobs.  Once again, Trump wants angry white voters to come out in droves.

Mad at the confinement measures, angered by the riots, which are driven by "leftist extremists" and "Antifa terrorists", they will be motivated.  Trump is making sure they will show up for him, no matter the collateral damage being caused.

Photo Credit: The Star

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.