- 1.06K Posts
- 640 Comments
2·4 天前I don’t see what this has to do with the linked article. The only country that has halted its Ukraine support is Trump’s U.S., and it is Trump who has said he intends to invite Putin to Miami. It is up to the host country whom to invite.
Carney prepared to tell Putin to ‘get out of Ukraine’ if Russia welcomed to G20 summit
Prime Minister Mark Carney says he will keep any conversation with Vladimir Putin short if he comes face-to-face with the Russian president at the G20 summit later this year …
Carney was asked about what he might discuss with Putin should he attend the summit in December. “The message will be simple: ‘Get out of Ukraine, give back all of Ukraine to Ukraine, end this war which is killing more than 30,000 of your people every single month,’ and I’d leave it at that to be honest,” Carney said …
3·5 天前Having heavily relied on China and the United States, Volkswagen has been squeezed by drastic changes in both markets …
Profits from Volkswagen’s China businesses and joint ventures - once key drivers of the company’s results - have plunged more than 80% over the past decade.
It’s a good media outlet with high credibility in my opinion, but here it’s more important what the ambassador says. It’s not different from European officials’ statements (and those of my friends and colleagues in Europe and North America if I may say so).
[Edit typo.]
I have never been on Reddit. This is the platform where this “tankies” have been banned some time ago, right?
Yeah, they are trolling all the time … :-)
Kolosiuk says Ukraine is looking to Canada for a more secure supply chain. He says the two countries could build a scalable, non-Chinese supply chain serving both the Canadian and Ukrainian militaries.
This tech could be used to reforest, clean pollution, and do any number of marvels, instead it will be used to kill civilians in the global South and probably the East.
This tech is to be used for defense, in case hostile governments attack a country such as Russia does in Ukraine and China has been threatening against Taiwan …
4·7 天前This article is a nothing burger delivered by Springer media in my opinion. It cites three unnamed sources, and the announcement of a closer EU-Canada relationship can’t be a ‘surprise’ for EU member states as Carney’s government spent the last year mapping out possible new forms of relationship with the EU (and across the globel).
Canada will not become a full member in the near future, nor will it take part in the single European market nor a member of the Schengen area. Things like these take years. But these is not necessary now as Canada and the EU can collaborate far beyond the current CETA, e.g., with fastt-track travel access, a free® movement of people (as the EU agreed with Australia, allowing its citizens 4-year visas that doesn’t require a job offer),
Canada and Europe can cooperate in defense (Ottawa wants into Britain’s rapid-response defence club, as it has said), and align its regulatory regimes (it would be good for Canada’s privacy laws as we can assume), alinging standards (pharmaceutical, financial services, …), collaboration in critical minerals, energy, and so forth. There’s a lot room imho, and its good that there are clear steps in this direction.
This article is a nothing burger delivered by Springer media in my opinion. It cites three unnamed sources, and the announcement of a closer EU-Canada relationship can’t be a ‘surprise’ for EU member states as Carney’s government spent the last year mapping out possible new forms of relationship with the EU (and across the globel).
Canada will not become a full member in the near future, nor will it take part in the single European market nor a member of the Schengen area. Things like these take years. But these is not necessary now as Canada and the EU can collaborate far beyond the current CETA, e.g., with fastt-track travel access, a free® movement of people (as the EU agreed with Australia, allowing its citizens 4-year visas that doesn’t require a job offer),
Canada and Europe can cooperate in defense (Ottawa wants into Britain’s rapid-response defence club, as it has said), and align its regulatory regimes (it would be good for Canada’s privacy laws as we can assume), alinging standards (pharmaceutical, financial services, …), collaboration in critical minerals, energy, and so forth. There’s a lot room imho, and its good that there are clear steps in this direction.
As an addition to this there is an release by the Canadian government. Beijing’s Political Warfare in Canada: Tracking the Footprints of the United Front Work Department (Archived), reads,
… In the winter of 1998 the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) published an externally-commissioned report entitled Beijing’s United Front Strategy in Hong Kong, and it was a provocative document in the context of the time. This was just a few months after the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty after 156 years of British rule. There was still a lot of euphoria in the air, joy at the end of colonial rule, and delight at the return to the embrace of the motherland.
As we know now, the hangover and grim dawn of reality were just around the corner. But in those brief months of bright optimism, the paper set out in detail how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) had used its main agency of political warfare, the United Front Work Department (UFWD), to seduce Hongkongers into believing the handover was going to be the beginning of a bright new age for the territory. The message was that Beijing would allow Hong Kong to rule itself with “a high degree of autonomy” and to purposefully progress to full democracy in the territory.
Behind these commitments, the United Front waged a more detailed charm offensive. Dozens of local groups, organisations, and individuals in Hong Kong, ranging from business tycoons to Triad criminal gangs, were neutralised by money or flattering privileged access to PRC institutions …
Near the top of the commissioned report was the following statement: “The significance of United Front work cannot be overstated. To assess the ramifications of United Front work, it is necessary to understand its nature, the institutions supporting its ventures, its targets, and finally, its expected outcomes. In this context, Canada cannot claim disassociation from the phenomenon, if only because of the sheer size of its Chinese community”. The report ended by speculating that after having re-acquired Hong Kong, the CCP would turn its attention to Taiwan. “As the divide and rule tactics that characterise United Front work will form the basis of this campaign, Canada must exercise vigilance to ensure that the rights and freedoms of Chinese-Canadians are not threatened,” it said …
Sadly and unforgivably, Canada and Canadian institutions have largely failed to take to heart the warning at the end of the report. We face a situation today where United Front groups have managed to get themselves and their agents of influence deeply entrenched in Canadian society. They are not only a daily danger to the rights and freedoms of Canadians of ethnic Chinese heritage and others over whom China claims a governing/political stake, such as Tibetan and Uyghur Canadians, but they are also increasingly a distorting presence in Canadian public life as a whole …
In addition to United Front international organisations’ branches in Canada, there are a number of home-grown groups the Front has either suborned or whose influence it has promoted. The two most important of these organisations are the Chinese Benevolent Association of Vancouver, and the Confederation of Toronto Chinese Canadian Organisations …
The whole report makes a good read.
It’s not only Gulf billionaires but also the Chinese dictatorship as Chinese state-backed investors join Carney’s summit
… Both China International Capital Corp. (CICC) and China Investment Corp. − China’s sovereign wealth fund − are attending Mr. Carney’s summit. CICC is roughly 40-per-cent owned by Central Huijin Investment, a subsidiary of China Investment Corp.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority, which manages investments for the territory’s Exchange Fund, is also a participant …
Canada has a history of barring Chinese investment, as the linked article says, and we must hope that Carney strengthen this tradition.
EU chief backs plan for Canada to become ‘associate member’
The president of the European Commission has backed proposals for Canada to become the EU’s first “associate member”.
Ursula von der Leyen told the European Parliament on Wednesday she wanted to work on “opening the door” for Canada, which would involve closer ties on various key sectors …
Looks good I would say :-)
Western media? United States, Russia, and China have been pushing for this ecosystem, especially China of late, including their media.
Canada should be an icebreaking superpower. Geography alone demands it, but the geopolitical threat is equally urgent, as Russia expands its military presence across the Arctic and China pushes deeper into the region. The threat now includes the United States, under an aggressively annexationist president, who may turn again to challenging Canada’s claim to the Northwest Passage.
Edit:
The Chinese party-state officially published its first official Arctic policy -framed as the “Polar Silk Road” as part of the Belt and Road Initiative - in 2018 when it declared itself a “near-Arctic state.”
Many analysts have also noted the development of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) capabilities that could extend to the Arctic.
Concerns by scientists and environmental groups who say using the Arctic passage will have a devastating impact on the fragile Arctic environment has frequently been denied or ignored by China.
Dude, just go and touch some grass.
@freagle
Yeah, I forgot that it’s only colonialism if the West does it (/s, just to be safe).
The next weird Trump move. It’s telling how similar autocrats act across the globe. China has been playing the same ‘name games’ with its neighbours and in the wider Indo-Pacific Region for decades, and Xi Jinping has been increasing such activities in recent years.
A recent example: China has just officially mapped Russian Far East sites with Chinese names. It’s another sign that Beijing isn’t a reliable partner - not even for a like- minded dictatorship.
They are reliable.
No, they aren’t. China even imposed tariffs on Canadian pea starch in back in June (so you statement is wrong in this), and this is by far not the worst. The Chinese government’s coercive tactics are well-known across the globe, and so are its human rights violations.
This is the same cheap propaganda that is so widespread here. China is a dictatorship where people can’t openly say their opinion about democracy nor anything else, at least not if the opinion differs from the Communist Party’s narrative. And Beijing’s human rights violations have been evident for decades.
Edit:
I remembered a study I read some time ago and could now find it. It’s from 2024, and it essentially says that when Chinese citizens are surveyed anonymously, support for party and government plummets:
Most public opinion research in China uses direct questions to measure support for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and government policies. These direct question surveys routinely find that over 90 per cent of Chinese citizens support the government. From this, scholars conclude that the CCP enjoys genuine legitimacy. In this paper, we present results from two survey experiments in contemporary China that make clear that citizens conceal their opposition to the CCP for fear of repression. When respondents are asked directly, we find, like other scholars, approval ratings for the CCP that exceed 90 per cent. When respondents are asked in the form of list experiments, which confer a greater sense of anonymity, CCP support hovers between 50 per cent and 70 per cent. This represents an upper bound, however, since list experiments may not fully mitigate incentives for preference falsification. The list experiments also suggest that fear of government repression discourages some 40 per cent of Chinese citizens from participating in anti-regime protests. Most broadly, this paper suggests that scholars should stop using direct question surveys to measure political opinions in China.
This is just one among many studies that show that ‘perception’ of democracy isn’t that simple to illustrate just by something like a diagram as propagandists make it seem. It should be clear that directly asking citizens who live under a dictatorial regime what they think about their government will provide no useful answers in my opinion.
Canada must seek closer ties with like-minded democracies (what it does already). The ‘Chinese path’ is - at best - a short-term convenience, but in the long run a lost game for Canadians and the free world in general. Beijing and other dictatorial regimes aren’t reliable partners, no matter what happens in the U.S.
It’s not only the U.S. that is interfering.
The Russian Money Behind Alberta’s Separatist Movement