State Media: Sarah Kutulakos, executive director of the Canada-China Business Council, and other profit-incentivized facilitators of Communist Chinese investment in Canada and vice versa, think: "that as Canadians, we need to fight for what we think is right, but also fight for our own position in things."
What would this realpolitik, this pragmatism, amount to? What would fighting for what we think is right mean, if we believe the CCP's butchery of the Falun Gong, house Christians, the underground Catholic Church, and pro-democracy dissidents is wrong? If we believe that the CCP's aggression against the democratic island nation of Taiwan or other neighboring countries is condemnable? If we think its use of forced labor in Nepal, Tibet, and Xinjiang is abhorrent? If we think it unconscionable to do business with a terror state that intentionally accelerated the spread of the virus manufactured in the P4 lab in Wuhan and is actively liquidating the Uyghurs?
Fighting for what we think is right would mean decoupling with this communist-occupied terror state. It would mean forging new trade alliances, particularly with Latin American and African countries. It would mean standing up for human rights, instead of just waxing poetic about them.
What does our own position in things look like? It would mean not collaborating with genocidal bioterrorists. It would mean not inviting investment and ownership by the enemies of free people everywhere. It would mean not aiding the CCP in this final leg of its hundred-year marathon.
No, Canada does not need to engage with Communist-occupied China. Canada does, however, have to reexamine its place in the world, and consider--with Canadian sovereignty and security in mind--how best to proceed once cutting loose the greatest enemy of the good in the world today.
Opmerkingen