Our Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been on a trade mission in China this past week. His first since 2009 when he was chided for not visiting sooner. This trip, from all accounts, including the Prime Minister himself on CBC’s The House, has been successful. But is it successful for the wrong reasons? Would it have been a success if, say, the Prime Minister brought up some of the pressing issues facing that country and, more importantly, its citizens?
For a country that supposedly prides itself of its Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its generous immigration and refugee policy isn’t it our job—even if no one else will step up—to ask the tough questions of foreign powers?
CBC’s annual book competition, Canada Reads, aired this week and among the celebrity panelists was Alan Thicke. The Canadian-born actor now lives in the United States and it was some of his comments that started me thinking about our commitments, as a country. Among other things, Thicke described the Canadian he knew was a peace-loving country, a champion of human rights and of the immigrant, a global player interested in freedom for all, everywhere. But Thicke is an outsider and it left me wondering, does the Canada that Thicke might have in mind actually exist? Is the Canada that Thicke sees from the outside, that he’s proud to call his place of birth, a reality?
If the Canada that Thicke was thinking of existed, would we be entertaining the idea of free trade with a country that openly oppresses its citizens rights? If we were truly a champion of human rights, truly a nation of peacekeepers, wouldn’t we be involved, in a real way, in the dispute between China and Tibet? Israel and Pakistan? Syria? The Congo?
I can think of two ways to approach the question of China.
First, is our current approach. The idea that opening up trade routes will, in some way, promote Canadian values.
This is a meek approach. An approach that seems possibly more like sunshine and rainbows than actually reality. An approach that has questionable results. Certainly, taking a long-term view of things, China has been progressive in its treatment of its citizens and its perspective on human rights. But this is the long view. Considering the fast-paced, break-neck speed of the Arab Spring where decades of atrocities and injustice can be undone in the matter of a few weeks progress in China seems pathetic.
Certainly, China is opening itself up but opening itself up to what? iPhones and iMacs, not freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Is mentioning human rights on a once-every-few-years trade mission enough to make it count? Or are we merely exporting products, not philosophies?
This first approach assumes some kind of osmosis; that China will adopt our social values just by us being us. But as China grows in stature, in economic and military clout, in power, isn’t there the real possibility that China will simply grow to be too big to influence? That we’ll become too small to influence their policies?
The other approach to China would be to take a principled approach. To ask, what would happen if Canada stood up to China on the world’s stage and said, “No.”? What would happen if Canada demanded that human rights be respected? What if our country and our government chose, as a whole, to move towards a principled policy?
Alan Thicke’s perspective on Canada is under threat and has been under threat for quite some time. In reality, we aren’t the peacekeepers anymore, even if we did invent to concept (and we did). We aren’t this mecca for immigration and refugees, we are closing our borders and turning refugees away. We have our own Charter of Rights and Freedoms but are we doing enough to promote human rights around the world? Are we doing enough to speak truth to power?
What would happen if we took a principled approach?
I don’t think we know. But is that enough to keep us from standing up for what we believe?
In the end, the result of our Prime Minister’s visit to China is a refreshed, reinvigorated relationship with the Asian super-power, new talk of a free-trade agreement, and a couple of pandas coming over to Canada on loan. It’s being hailed as a big success. On the other hand, I wrestle with a lot of difficult questions. After all, as recently as a couple of weeks ago it was China (and Russia) that blocked the UN resolution to do something with the conflict in Syria. I have a hard time celebrating it as a success… the fact that we’ve deepened our relationship with a country like this.
We want better human rights in China, we want change, social justice and progress. I know, we’re a very small and mild-mannered country but is this really the Canadian approach?
Leave a Reply