Canada-China Brief: G7 unity on China, interference inquiry ruled out & more

This week's edition of IPD's Canada-China Brief covers the?G7 summit's China agenda?in Hiroshima,?Special Rapporteur on David Johnston's decision to rule out a?public inquiry?on foreign interference,?and more.??

First, here's the latest from IPD:

IPD'S?ROUNDUP

Le Devoir — S’éloigner de la Chine pour s’arrimer aux états-Unis?

Jocelyn Coulon, conseiller de l'IPD, dans Le Devoir : ? La question de nos relations avec la Chine ne peut se penser à partir d’absolus comme rompre les liens, ériger des murs ou se réfugier dans les bras des Américains. à travers la stratégie indo-pacifique, le gouvernement Trudeau et la ministre des Affaires étrangères, Mélanie Joly, en particulier, l’ont compris. Il faut aller plus loin. ?

L'Echo — La crise diplomatique entre le Canada et la Chine s'intensifie

Jeremy Paltiel, Senior Fellow de l'IPD, dans L'Echo : ? La Chine a tenté d'exercer son influence sur la scène politique canadienne, surtout dans les circonscriptions où les populations d'origine chinoise sont importantes.??

Roundtable — Reimagining China Studies in North America: Current Conditions and Prospects

Senior Fellow Jeremy Paltiel will join an expert roundtable at York University on May 27 to discuss China studies in North America amid geopolitical tension and its implications for the?Canadian context in anticipation of future?challenges and the role of inclusion in the field.

TOP STORIES

G7 Summit in Japan Expands?Spotlight on China

Last weekend marked the completion of the latest G7 summit held in Hiroshima with members paying?significant?attention to?Beijing. The main communiqué released mentioned China 20 times — the most in recent years.

United?on China?— The communiqué?voiced?a unified stance from constructive engagement to?human rights?and calls for China's support on various global issues:?

1. Constructive and stable relations: Stating members are "prepared to build constructive and stable relations" alongside candid expressions of concern, the G7 noted it was "necessary to cooperate with China."
2. Cooperation on global challenges:?With a "call on China to engage with us,"?members highlighted the need for joint efforts on?debt sustainability, global health, macroeconomic stability,?climate change and biodiversity, specifying?the?Kunming-Montreal Agreements.
3. Interests vs. resilience: Clarifying that "our policy approaches are not designed to harm China nor do we seek to thwart China’s economic progress and development," the G7 stressed China's adherence?to international rules while de-risking and diversifying their own economies and reducing "excessive dependencies."
4. Trade and economic coercion: Tackling "China's non-market policies and practices that distort the global economy," the G7 sought?to foster resilience against economic coercion while protecting advanced technologies that may "threaten our national security."
5. Regional flashpoints:?Underscoring concern over the East and South China Seas and Taiwan Strait stability with "no change in the basic positions of the G7 members on Taiwan," the G7 also noted?human rights in Tibet, forced labour in Xinjiang, and Hong Kong autonomy.
6. Security and interference:?G7 states called on China to fulfill its obligations under diplomatic and consular conventions and halt interference into the "safety of our communities, the integrity of our democratic institutions and our economic prosperity."
7. Support for Ukraine: Members also called on China to "press Russia to stop its military aggression"?and to "support a comprehensive, just and lasting peace," encouraging Beijing's?direct dialogue with Ukraine.

Bilateral ties in focus?— Prior to the summit,?Justin Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland?reiterated?Canada's China policy:

• In a press conference, Trudeau said that Canada will be "clear-eyed" about where it will cooperate as "we need to know where we're going to compete with China on economic grounds and where we need to challenge China on human rights and other issues."
• Following a G7 finance ministerial meeting, Freeland shared that the group aims to?"differentiate our economies to make our supply chains more resilient" as its members?"work together to respond to economic coercion by authoritarian regimes."
• In a new?report?surveying Chinese public opinion, the University of Alberta's China Institute found that "Canada’s close relations with the U.S. received the highest score shaping Canada and China relations," surpassing differences in values.

Beijing's response?— The Chinese foreign ministry sternly?criticized?what it called the "hype" that China received during the G7 meetings:?

• Addressing the communiqué,?spokesperson Wang Wenbin noted a gap between G7 rhetoric and actual policy, saying it "smeared and attacked China" and demonstrated "how little international credibility means to the G7."
• He stressed that China will never accept the "so-called rules imposed by the few" and that "the international community?will not accept the G7-dominated Western rules?that seek to divide the world based on ideologies and values."
• Wang urged the?G7 to "focus on addressing the various issues they have at home, stop ganging up to form exclusive blocs, stop containing and bludgeoning other countries, stop creating and stoking bloc confrontation, and get back to the right path."
• Vice Foreign Minister Sun Weidong?summoned?Japanese Ambassador to China Hideo Tarumi to urge the G7 to "follow the trend of openness and inclusiveness, stop forming closed and exclusive 'small circles', stop containing and suppressing other countries, and stop creating and inciting division and confrontation."

What commentators?think?—??G7 alignment on economic security and areas for permissible cooperation towards China have elicited reactions:?

• Andrew Small,?Senior Fellow at the German Marshall Fund,?highlighted?"major debates" around the extent of de-risking but there is?"clear and explicit framing around how the economic relationships with China among the advanced economies need to be rebalanced."
• Van Jackson, Distinguished Fellow at the Asia Pacific Foundation?of Canada,?argued?that "statements being issued from the White House are consistently not reflecting what's actually happening in world politics...?the G-7 communique is an extension of this problem."
• John Kirton, director of the G7 research group at the University of Toronto,?suggested?the communiqué's language on cooperation is "more extensive than before" because “the G7 thinks it is winning and is taking a chance on co-operation as a result.”

The view from China?—?Scholars across China?have interpreted the summit with general pessimism:?

• Da Zhigang, Director of the?Institute of Northeast Asian Studies at the Heilongjiang Provincial Academy of Social Sciences,?stated?that "G7 countries also recognize that it is unrealistic to completely 'disconnect' from China, so they can only emphasize 'de-risking'."
• Shen Yi, Director of the BRICS Studies Center at Fudan University,?observed?that the G7 wants to "emphasize the threat of China and Russia and point out that China is a more serious threat, but also want to avoid building an image of China as an 'even match'?for the U.S."
• Li Haidong, a professor at China Foreign Affairs University,?suggested?that Washington's framing of China and Russia at the G7 as well as its approach?towards Japan and South Korea are indicative as "the U.S. strategy is to deepen divisions among Asian countries."

Johnston Rules Out Public Inquiry on Chinese Interference?

Former Governor General of Canada and government-appointed Special Rapporteur David Johnston?officially?recommended?against calling a public inquiry into foreign interference with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stating that?the government will follow it accordingly.

Why not? —?In a press conference,?Johnston?discussed?the reasons behind his decision to not call a public inquiry:

• “When I began this process. I thought I would come to the same conclusion — that I would recommend a public inquiry. While it would have been an easy choice, it would not be the correct one.”
• “What allowed me to determine whether there had actually been interference cannot be disclosed in public. A public review of classified intelligence simply cannot be done for that reason."
• "A public inquiry will simply not deliver the level of transparency and urgency Canadians expect. The intelligence that I have reviewed is and must remain secret. As a result, the reality is any credible public inquiry would not be public at all."
• “In contrast, by conducting a thorough review of my conclusions and recommendations, our intelligence oversight committees… have the opportunity and the duty to help restore Canadians’ trust in our democratic institutions.”

Key findings?—?Johnston's report also?shared?his conclusions from?several of the allegations that have surfaced over the past months:

• He had "not found instances of the government knowingly ignoring intelligence, advice or recommendations on foreign interference, or making decisions based on partisan considerations," but that there were "significant"?problems with how intelligence is shared.
• Johnston argued that media outlets reporting on the leaks misconstrued intelligence, drafting a?classified annex of what he believed actually happened for review by the?National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians?and the National Security and Intelligence Review Committee.
• Noting that "it appears from limited intelligence that the PRC intended for funds to be sent" to?2019 election candidates across party lines, Johnston highlighted that "there is no intelligence suggesting any federal candidates received these funds."
• Johnston discovered minimal support behind former Conservative Party Leader Erin O'Toole's claim?that Chinese interference directly led to election defeats, stating "it is hard to accept this assertion, which has been rejected" by previous investigations.
• Lastly, he "did not find evidence that [Han] Dong was aware of irregularities or the PRC Consulate’s potential involvement" in his nomination and that the allegation that Dong called for the extended detention of the Two Michaels was "false" and had "very adverse effects on Mr. Dong."

Reactions from all sides?—?Opposition parties in the House of Commons?expressed?disapproval of Johnston's recommendations:

• Tory Leader Pierre Poilevre claimed the?decision was a "whitewash attempt" of the Liberal Party and that he would push for a foreign influence registry that "exposes anyone who does paid work on behalf of foreign dictatorship to manipulate our politics."
• Also expressing disappointment, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh promised that his party?"will keep pushing for an independent, public inquiry that gets people the answers they deserve and fully restores trust in our elections."
• Justin Trudeau responded by asking colleagues to be "grounded in an understanding of?the true facts and not choose to risk weakening Canadians' confidence in our institutions by building partisan attacks on things that are patently untrue.”
• The Chinese Embassy in Ottawa, in response to Johnston,?restated?that the allegations of Beijing-backed interference "are purely groundless," claiming that it has been proven "time and again that none of these accusations are based on facts."

Foreign registry petition —?A potential?registry has given rise to a public petition and further debate calling on Ottawa to reconsider:

• The petition?notes?that signatories are "loyal Canadians who oppose foreign interference" but are "not persuaded that a foreign influence registry will meaningfully address foreign interference, the meagre benefits of a registry could outweigh its harms."
• Leah West, an Assistant Professor of National Security Law at Carleton University,?submitted?to public consultations that "a foreign agent registry will invariably impose prior restraint on the freedom of expression of Canadians" under the?Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

What commentators think?—?Many security analysts have also weighed in?on Johnston's recommendations:

• Arthur Wilczynski, a former assistant deputy minister at CSE,?said?the lack of a public?inquiry has "perpetuate[d] the deeply partisan divide that’s out there... which in my view is even more damaging to Canadian democratic institutions than anything else."
• Richard Fadden, former Director of CSIS, previously?commented?that "traditionally this country used public inquiries to review materials and subjects of controversy, I really have difficulty understanding why the government is so reluctant."
• Wesley Wark, Senior Fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation,?suggested?there are those who are "naive about what that public inquiry could look at," warning of "potential dangers involved in overexposing classified intelligence."

WHAT THEY'RE SAYING

It had been the case prior to the taking of hostages that China was interested — as it has been interested in Europe — perhaps using Canada to drive a wedge between North American partners. That appears to be off the table now. Canadians are, if?anything, more alarmed than Americans about the meaning of Chinese power for their country.?

—?Robert Daly,?Director, Kissinger Institute on China & the United States

We would like to see the relationship back on track, but it’s up to the Canadian side to make sure that they will correct mistakes and not to be engaged in any further provocation or confrontation...?We hope today that people will continue to approach this relationship from the larger picture and from the overall interest of our two peoples – and not to be swayed, bounded by the influence, the policy from the south.

—?Cong Peiwu, Chinese Ambassador to Canada

Being reliant on global markets means exposure to China’s impact beyond direct bi-lateral trade.?China is the world’s first or second-largest economy?depending on the definition, and the largest global consumer and producer for much of what Canada exports. Its influence on global markets impacts Canadian exports regardless of whether they are in the Chinese market. Diversification from China often means entering markets where China is a dominant economic force. As we’ve learned in Western Canada, even if you run out of China, you still run into China.

—?Carlo Dade, Director, Centre for Trade & Investment, Canada West Foundation

Thank you for reading?IPD's Canada-China Brief!

If you enjoy our work, please consider contributing:

DONATE HERE

NEWSLETTER BY?PETER HUANG?&?JOHNSEN ROMERO

IMAGE CREDIT:?Office of the Prime Minister?|?Office of the Prime Minister?|?White House?|?Office of the Prime Minister?|?Office of the Prime Minister