As the results of a survey last month showed, Canadians are feeling quite bubbly about their country's prospects this year, with 81 percent saying the year would be good for Canada. Only 52 percent, however, said the year would bring positive tidings for the planet as a whole.
On the heels of those results, Ottawa announced that Canadian Trade Minister David Emerson would visit China and Mongolia from Sunday through this Friday to pursue trade and investment opportunities. Emerson is the first top Canadian official to visit Mongolia in a decade and the first senior trade official from Canada to visit China since the October meeting in Ottawa between Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Dalai Lama, a morsel that didn't go down too well in Beijing.
Nothing could be more indicative of Canada's -- and by extension, the world's -- schizophrenic relationship with Beijing. While the left hand welcomes a spiritual leader resented by Beijing, the right hand moves to expand the US$42 billion two-way trade relationship between the countries. Nothing is said about human rights in China, or, for that matter, about news over the weekend that Chinese authorities had forced Tibetans to sign a document, under duress, stating that the Dalai Lama should never be allowed to come back to Tibet. Ottawa has also been mute on the unwarranted postponement of universal suffrage in Hong Kong, which Emerson will also be visiting for trade chatter.
Certainly not alone in this, Canada has adopted the facile road of symbolism: Allowing a leader like the Dalai Lama to visit a capital, or conferring medals of honor upon such individuals -- though commendable -- is easy and relatively risk-free. Beijing may be vociferous in expressing its anger, but given time the boiling subsides and it is once again ready to talk money.
As for the Mongolia leg of Emerson's journey to the East, Canadians should be aware that Canada is the second-largest foreign investor in Mongolia, mostly in the mining sector. While some blithely quip that many Mongolians see Canada as a "potential savior of the economy," the reality, as the UN Development Program said in a report, is that heavy mining in Mongolia has devastated the environment and the profits from the sector have failed to trickle down to the general population, which remains largely impoverished.
As Amnesty International put it in its most recent report on Mongolia, no compensation has been paid to the many herdsmen who have been displaced and had their livelihoods destroyed by mining, or the more than 57,000 people in one region alone who are now without drinking water -- also the result of heavy mining.
Freedom of expression, meanwhile, remains a problem in Mongolia, where the state retains an authoritarian grip on the media. Last year, about 40 reporters critical of the government were threatened, investigated, arrested or beaten.
In one trip alone, Canada's trade minister will be visiting three locations where the human rights situation leaves much to be desired. Sadly, all that trade talk will not be accompanied by concomitant discussions on improving the lot of those who suffer under undemocratic rule, with losses ranging from their basic rights to the environment they live in.
Without doubt, raising those issues would be much more onerous than shaking hands with the Dalai Lama in Ottawa. But a responsible government would nevertheless seek to tackle them.
Cheers for the great optimism in the island of tranquility that is Canada. But pessimists about the odds of the rest of the world having a good year could perhaps ask their government to do something about it.
In a Facebook post on Wednesday last week, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) wrote: “The KMT must fall for Taiwan to improve.’ Allow me to ask the question again: Is this really true?” It matters not how many times Hsu asks the question, my answer will always be the same: “Yes, the KMT must be toppled for Taiwan to improve.” In the lengthy Facebook post, titled “What were those born in the 1980s guilty of?” Hsu harked back to the idealistic aspirations of the 2014 Sunflower movement before heaping opprobrium on the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP)
The scuffle between Chinese embassy staffers in Fiji and a Taiwanese diplomat at a Republic of China (ROC) Double Ten National Day celebration has turned into a public relations opportunity for the government, Beijing and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Although the incident occurred on Oct. 8, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) downplayed it, only for the story to be picked up by the foreign media, forcing the ministry to respond. The public and opposition parties asked why the government had failed to remonstrate more strongly in the first instance. It is still unclear whether the ministry missed a trick
US President Donald Trump and his Democratic rival, former US vice president Joe Biden, are holding their final debate tonight. In their foreign policy debate, China is sure to be a major issue of contention for the two candidates. Here are several questions the moderator should pose to the candidates: For both: In the first televised US presidential debates in 1960, then-Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy and his Republican counterpart, Richard Nixon, were asked whether the US should intervene if communist China attacked Taiwan’s outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu. Kennedy said no, unless the main island of Taiwan was also attacked.
For most of us, the colorful, otherworldly marinescapes of coral reefs are as remote as the alien landscapes of the moon. We rarely, if ever, experience these underwater wonderlands for ourselves — we are, after all, air-breathing, terrestrial creatures mostly cocooned in cities. It is easy not to notice the perilous state they are in: We have lost 50 percent of coral reefs in the past 20 years and more than 90 percent are expected to die by 2050, a presentation at the Ocean Sciences Meeting in San Diego, California, earlier this year showed. As the oceans heat further and