Here is an Invidious link for a video (34min) and the original YT link.
Beijing is seeking to court Canadians with trade deals. But it is simultaneously punishing Canada for adopting anti-Chinese trade laws, which – as the Chinese are quick to point out – were implemented by Canada in response to American pressure to crack down on unfair Chinese trade practices.
Now, we’re seeing growing numbers of Canadians twisting the logic of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” They’re taking this to mean that the enemy of Canada is the United States, and by that logic, the People’s Republic of China must be Canada’s friend.
To offer his perspective on how Canadians should view these developments, Dr. Stephen Nagy joins Inside Policy Talks. Nagy is a professor at Tokyo’s International Christian University, and a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. He’s studied and written extensively about China and its influence operations in the West.
On the podcast, he tells Jamie Tronnes, executive director of the Center for North American Prosperity and Security (CNAPS), that the Chinese government has “invested very heavily” in a strategy of “elite capture” focused on political and business leaders, “giving them preferred access to the Chinese market.”
“This is to lock them into a kind of dependent relationship,” says Nagy. “And I think that this has made Canada have tremendous challenges in terms of confronting a country that really wants to change the global order in a way that is contrary to Canadian interests.”
Among Dr. Nagy’s analyses is, As US-Canada ties unravel, Beijing pulls the threads:
While current Canada-US tensions create immediate policy challenges, the documented pattern of Chinese influence operations reveals a systematic effort to exploit these frictions for long-term strategic advantage.
Nice narrative you got there.
Only it doesn’t respond or correspond to what I said. I didn’t name call you. I didn’t “whatabout” anything. My post agrees that that dragon over there is a scary dragon, it just prioritizes the eagle right here as a higher priority. I also specifically explained why I approach the issue with suspicion. I actually named the key words here: suspicion and credibility. I attacked the credibility of the conservative perspective in being an insufficient position from which to criticize China. I gave you a specific positionality from which I accept red-flag waving about China: do it from a place of consistency and I’m with you.
So I don’t know what the fuck you’re whining about.
Ps. The tracker actually reinforces what I’m saying: China is highly insufficient, the US is critically insufficient, i.e., worse. And the second order derivative matters quite a lot. One is emerging as a leader in renewables, the other is strong arming everyone to accelerate fossil fuels.