Article content continued

The merits of the case, namely that Huawei violated Iran sanctions, are difficult to adjudicate based on the information currently in the public domain. Tellingly, China’s protests have featured a host of arguments, almost none of which has focused on the accusations Meng and Huawei face.

In a recent oped, Lu Shaye, the Chinese ambassador to Canada, failed to even mention Iran. Instead, he cast aspersions on Canada’s independent judiciary, blaming a “cold war mentality” for the suspicion many hold of Huawei. Unlike most Western democracies, China does not have an independent judiciary. Chinese courts are an extension of the ruling Communist Party and no high-profile arrest like Meng’s can be made without the state signing off. This is one of the most important distinctions between “open” and “closed” societies, so it is not difficult to imagine why the Chinese would have inherent suspicions about a governing system that enshrines the independence of its various branches.

Under normal circumstances, Ambassador Lu’s complaint could be dismissed on these merits alone. Unfortunately, Trump has given China’s arguments far more credence than they deserve.

In an interview with Reuters earlier this week, Trump told reporters that he would “certainly intervene” in Meng’s case if it could help him put a check mark on one of the most elusive goals of his presidency: a trade deal with China. As a result, America’s Justice Department, which coordinated the arrest with Canadian authorities, no longer appears to be quite as independent as advertised. With one off-the-cuff musing, the American president has muddied the waters between legal and political concerns. The effect here is obvious: China’s accusations no longer seem as far-fetched as they should.