Canada selling out Human Rights for a few scraps at the table, while we reject the American system of democracy as being “harsh”. We are not only looking at free trade but also an expansive extradition agreement in which we will send back to China any citizen who comes to Canada. Whether they are seeking safety from harm or a persecuted citizen.
I’ve always found non extradition policies to be kind of weird in the first place. Why should I be defending some random person who came into my country, unwanted, likely from one of my trading partners?
I mean if I say “I’m not going to expend my resources to hunt your criminals down”, fine. But “No, I’m gonna protect your citizen”. Why exactly?
I get it in places like Iran where we had trading embargoes. It’s like a big F-you to the host country. But between allies? I don’t get it.
I call it support of liberty. You might not be able to save everyone, but there are some I believe you have to extend a hand to. I remember we had an owner in the NHL of the Maple Leafs named Harold Ballard, he had a Czech player on the team in the late 70s, early 80’s. He had defected to Canada. A few years into his career he wasn’t doing too well as a player, might not even have been worthy of staying on the team, but he suggested something to the effect “anyone with the guts to leave behind Communism will always have a place on my team”. It was a clear line between freedom of the West and the Evil Empires of the East.
China is not an ally, they are a serial abuser of human rights and are a communist regime. I am dismayed by how easily some nations are in embracing them. I do not want an extradition agreement except in very rare cases.
Consider the direction Reagan took. Do you think he would have tossed back to East Germany or Russia a defector who ran from Communism? Not a chance.
Because America was founded upon an ideology recognizing the intrinsic worth & prerogative of individual persons, stating no rights may be stripped of anyone without due process.
If a citizen from Bahrain or Vietnam or Uganda comes here fleeing persecution, and we determine that this in fact what is going on, why should we turn them away?
> I get it in places like Iran where we had trading embargoes. It’s like a big F-you to the host country. But between allies? I don’t get it.
Trading partners/= allies. And even certain Allies coughSaudia Arabiacough , shouldn’t always be indulged.
This more clearly outlines American objectives. This is the reason the world loves the U.S and dictators hate you, from the U.S department of State website:
The protection of fundamental human rights was a foundation stone in the establishment of the United States over 200 years ago. Since then, a central goal of U.S. foreign policy has been the promotion of respect for human rights, as embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United States understands that the existence of human rights helps secure the peace, deter aggression, promote the rule of law, combat crime and corruption, strengthen democracies, and prevent humanitarian crises.
Because the promotion of human rights is an important national interest, the United States seeks to:
Hold governments accountable to their obligations under universal human rights norms and international human rights instruments;
Promote greater respect for human rights, including freedom from torture, freedom of expression, press freedom, women’s rights, children’s rights, and the protection of minorities;
Promote the rule of law, seek accountability, and change cultures of impunity;
Assist efforts to reform and strengthen the institutional capacity of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Commission on Human Rights; and
Coordinate human rights activities with important allies, including the EU, and regional organizations.
Then why are you trading with the host country?\
They have most favored nation status in trade with us. That is an ally.
And when exactly did Reagan propose setting up favorable trade deals with the Soviets?
China doesn’t have the most favoured nation status, that is found in free trade agreements. Something we don’t have with China, nor want I suspect though our PM is considering the option. He will probably be bounced in one term if he goes this route.
Who suggest Reagan set up favourable trade deals with the Soviets? I am arguing just the opposite. He stood up to the Soviets and Communism unlike any in history. He called it out for what it was also. Yes, he lifted the grain embargo which wasn’t hurting Russia very much anyways, but he also responded to cut backs in trade of certain protected industries whenever the Russians engaged in human right abuses.
I’m saying that if you believe they’re abusing human rights and will take their asylum seekers, you shouldn’t be trading with them. That was consistent with Reagan’s stance on the Soviets. It is not consistent with how trade is handled with China.
Edit: Just looked it up. China is your second biggest trade partner after America. That’s certainly an ally.
Theoretically I agree with you. At least I want the ability to place tariffs and equalizers. Trade happens among all nations with some differences in society, whether Saudi Arabia or China, but free trade is a different animal altogether.
This has been an issue for me for some time, politicians, and frankly businesses throwing character and principle out the window in search of the bottom line. There should be some patriotic duty to society beyond simple dollars and cents, and consumers should be more demanding of businesses to uphold these principles as well.
In the end, the consumers will always decide. This is especially tough when citizens dollars are tight as they are in some jurisdictions and thus the lowest priced product will always win the day.