You are free to call it whatever you like. This is just how it appeared to me.
Even if I agree with much of it, yes Canada was acting on behalf of the US (the Trump admin for that matter) and for American self-serving purposes, the parts that describe “establishment Canadian media has an egg on its face” and talking about how “Meng did nothing wrong, let her go with a quiet whisper not to come back” is just as silly an attitude as “China bad”. If Canada would defy the US here, we should do so openly, with integrity and don’t pretend we’re powerless and Meng ‘just happened’ to slip away.
“Meng did nothing wrong, let her go with a quiet whisper not to come back”
That was absolutely not my read on it here. It’s describing a realpolitik situation where Canada is on shaky legal grounds since they are not a signatory to a foreign embargo, and thus overreach their strict legal obligations to please an ally. The suggestion of letting Meng go isn’t about her being right or wrong; it’s about what’s the savviest move Canada could have made here that would have neither pissed off China nor the U.S.
Simply refusing to act on behest of the Trump Administration and giving plausible deniability why isn’t defying them. It’s a neutral political move. The consequence of not doing so is what we’ve since experienced: deteriorating relations with a major foreign power with no gains in return with the ally we tried to suck up to.
You are free to call it whatever you like. This is just how it appeared to me.
Even if I agree with much of it, yes Canada was acting on behalf of the US (the Trump admin for that matter) and for American self-serving purposes, the parts that describe “establishment Canadian media has an egg on its face” and talking about how “Meng did nothing wrong, let her go with a quiet whisper not to come back” is just as silly an attitude as “China bad”. If Canada would defy the US here, we should do so openly, with integrity and don’t pretend we’re powerless and Meng ‘just happened’ to slip away.
That was absolutely not my read on it here. It’s describing a realpolitik situation where Canada is on shaky legal grounds since they are not a signatory to a foreign embargo, and thus overreach their strict legal obligations to please an ally. The suggestion of letting Meng go isn’t about her being right or wrong; it’s about what’s the savviest move Canada could have made here that would have neither pissed off China nor the U.S.
Simply refusing to act on behest of the Trump Administration and giving plausible deniability why isn’t defying them. It’s a neutral political move. The consequence of not doing so is what we’ve since experienced: deteriorating relations with a major foreign power with no gains in return with the ally we tried to suck up to.