Ambassador Lu Shaye published a signed article

2019/01/10

The Hill Times published a signed article by Ambassador Lu Shaye titled "Why the double standard on justice for Canadians, Chinese?" Here is the full text:

Recently, China's competent authorities took compulsory measures in accordance with the law against two Canadian nationals who are suspected of engaging in activities that endanger China's national security. Some Canadians and some in the Canadian news media, in disregard of China's judicial sovereignty, accused China of arbitrary detention and demanded their immediate release.

However, on the prior groundless detention of Chinese citizen Meng Wanzhou by Canada at the behest of the United States, these same people made utterly different comments. They insisted that Canada's detention of a Chinese citizen who was transferring planes at the airport was "acting in accordance with law," though Meng has not been charged with any violation of Canadian law.

It's understandable that these Canadians are concerned about their own citizens. But have they shown any concern or sympathy for Meng after she was illegally detained and deprived of freedom?

Without violating any Canadian law, Meng was arrested last month and put in handcuffs just as she was changing planes at the Vancouver International Airport. It seems that, to some people, only Canadian citizens shall be treated in a humanitarian manner and their freedom deemed valuable, while Chinese people do not deserve that.

When China called on the Canadian side to release Meng and ensure her legal and legitimate rights and interests, those elites claimed in the media that Canada is a country of rule of law and has an independent judiciary, and therefore it must comply with the judicial proceeding. However, in the case of detention of Canadian citizens in China who violated China's law, those elites completely dismissed China's law and presumptuously urged China to immediately release their citizens. It seems that, to those people, the laws of Canada or other Western countries are laws and must be observed, while China's laws are not and shouldn't be respected.

Some people in Canada, without any evidence, have been hyping the idea that Huawei is controlled by the Chinese government and poses security threats to Canada and other Western countries, and that Chinese law requires China's enterprises to collaborate with the government in espionage activities. However, these same people have conveniently ignored the PRISM Program, Equation Group, and Echelon-global spying networks operated by some countries that have been engaging in large-scale and organized cyber stealing, and spying and surveillance activities on foreign governments, enterprises, and individuals. These people also took a laissez-faire attitude toward a country that infringes on its citizens' privacy rights through the Patriot Act. They shouted for a ban by the Five Eyes alliance countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States) on the use of Huawei equipment by these countries' own enterprises, which is literally a government-controlled action.

When making laws for national security and intelligence, China has drawn references from the relevant laws of the U.S., Canada, and other Western countries. Something is considered as "safeguarding national security" when it is done by Western countries. But it is termed "conducting espionage" when done by China. What's the logic?

Canada, pulling a few individual countries such as the U.S. and the U.K. on its side, pressed China in the name of "the international community" to release its citizens. Do a handful of Western countries really represent the whole international community? To those would-be representatives of the international community, non-Western countries are not members of the international community and only their countries can call the shots on international affairs.

I have recently heard a word repeatedly pronounced by some Canadians: bullying. They said that by arresting two Canadian citizens as retaliation for Canada's detention of Meng, China was bullying Canada. To those people, China's self-defence is an offence to Canada. If someone slaps you on your left cheek, give him your right cheek, they told us. But I have never seen them doing as they said.

The reason why some people are used to arrogantly adopting double standards is due to Western egotism and white supremacy. In such a context, the rule of law is nothing but a tool for their political ends and a fig leaf for their practising hegemony in the international arena. What they have been doing is not showing respect for the rule of law, but mocking and trampling the rule of law.