{"id":243339,"date":"2020-01-28T23:22:17","date_gmt":"2020-01-29T04:22:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=243339"},"modified":"2020-01-28T23:22:17","modified_gmt":"2020-01-29T04:22:17","slug":"following-u-k-on-huawei-an-easy-out-for-canada-says-ex-china-envoy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2020\/01\/28\/following-u-k-on-huawei-an-easy-out-for-canada-says-ex-china-envoy\/","title":{"rendered":"Following U.K. on Huawei an ‘easy out’ for Canada, says ex-China envoy"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>
David Mulroney said that would be a bad decision that would amount to Ottawa caving to more than a year of Beijing bullying. (File photo<\/a>: David_Mulroney\/Twitter<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

OTTAWA \u2014 Industry Minister Navdeep Bains says the government is studying Britain’s decision to grant Chinese telecom company Huawei partial access to its next-generation 5G network, but has yet to make its own decision.<\/p>\n

The update, or lack thereof, comes after Britain said Tuesday it would attempt to limit \u201chigh-risk\u201d vendors’ access to the new upgraded network \u2014 coded language for Huawei.<\/p>\n

The Liberal government has said the safety and security of Canadians is its top concern, a talking point Bains reiterated without offering any timeline on when the government will decide.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey (Britain) are an ally; we’re engaged with them,\u201d Bains said in Ottawa. \u201cSo, of course, we’re looking at what decisions they’ve made and how they plan to implement those decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n

A former Canadian envoy to China warned Tuesday that Britain’s decision gives the Trudeau government an \u201ceasy out\u201d to make the same choice.<\/p>\n

David Mulroney said that would be a bad decision that would amount to Ottawa caving to more than a year of Beijing bullying.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is just the latest, albeit one of the most consequential, in a series of bad decisions and false compromises that western governments have made in respect to China,\u201d said Mulroney, who served as the Canadian ambassador to China from 2009 to 2012.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe result is that Chinese technology, and with its potential Chinese influence, is embedded ever more deeply in the governance structures of the West.\u201d<\/p>\n

The political pressure stems from China’s ongoing imprisonment of two Canadians, who were detained on spying charges more than a year ago after Canada arrested Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou on a U.S. extradition warrant.<\/p>\n

Like Britain, Canada has been under pressure by the United States to ban the Chinese company as a threat to U.S. national security \u2014 a charge the company denies.<\/p>\n

The Trump administration has said that China’s 2017 national intelligence law means communist leaders could force Huawei to conduct cyberespionage on behalf of the country’s communist government.<\/p>\n

Mulroney said what the British decision \u201cdoes is provide an easy out for those in government who are seeking one\u201d because they can now \u201cpretend that we can ‘manage’ the China risk\u201d at the 5G level.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat is surreal about this is that we have experienced more than a year of Chinese bullying and coercion, all because of legal action taken by Canada against a Huawei executive,\u201d Mulroney said.<\/p>\n

\u201cHave we learned nothing?\u201d<\/p>\n

Ottawa is carrying out a comprehensive review of 5G that involves Public Safety Canada, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Communications Security Establishment, Global Affairs, and Innovation, Science and Economic Development.<\/p>\n

\u201cOf course there is a political dimension to it,\u201d Bains said.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe’re not going to make a decision based on one particular jurisdiction; we’re going to look at what’s in Canadians’ interest.\u201d<\/p>\n

Canada faces the exact same set of calculations that Britain did around economic impact, geopolitics and security, said Wesley Wark, a security expert and visiting professor at the University of Ottawa who has followed the issue closely.<\/p>\n

\u201cMy hope is that in Canada, as in the U.K., the government will listen to its security professionals and adopt a made-in-Canada version of a risk-mitigation strategy, avoiding the imposition of a ban on Huawei.\u201d<\/p>\n

The government’s decision will in part depend on what happens next with the U.S. pressure campaign against allies, he said.<\/p>\n

\u201cCanadian officials will watch this intently, and watch for a renewed pressure campaign targeting Canada directly, before coming out with our own decision.\u201d<\/p>\n

Cong Peiwu, China’s ambassador to Canada, has dismissed the notion that Huawei could compromise users’ security as a \u201cgroundless accusation.\u201d<\/p>\n

Late last year, he said he hoped Canada would provide \u201ca fair, just and non-discriminatory business environment for Chinese companies, including Huawei.\u201d<\/p>\n

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Jan. 28, 2020.<\/p>\n

\u2014 with files from Jim Bronskill in Ottawa<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

OTTAWA \u2014 Industry Minister Navdeep Bains says the government is studying Britain’s decision to grant Chinese telecom company Huawei partial …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":44,"featured_media":243341,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-243339","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news-ca","category-news","mauthors-the-canadian-press"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243339","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/44"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=243339"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243339\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":243342,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243339\/revisions\/243342"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/243341"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=243339"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=243339"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=243339"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}