Monday, October 29, 2012

Australia's National Plan for "Asia Century"

http://asiancentury.dpmc.gov.au/

Regulations on Communist Officials and Government Employees Fleeing the Country Tweet from @GordonGChang

@GordonGChang: Sign that the end is near: China sets up "Command Group to Fight Against Communist Officials and Government Employees Fleeing the Country"

Report on need for clearer foreign investment rules Charles Burton (@cburton001) 与你分享了一条 Twitter 消息

Charles Burton (@cburton001) 在 7:13 AM on 星期一, 10月 29, 2012 发布的推文:
Canada’s hazy takeover rules hurt everyone /via @globeandmail http://t.co/FYoIUB48
(https://twitter.com/cburton001/status/262874678538940417)

访问 https://twitter.com/download 下载官方 Twitter 应用


Tel: +1-905-228-2323
Fax: +1-209-231-4087
MSN, Yahoo, Google: cburton001
Skype: cburton002; QQ: 1323798084
Hushmail: Burton@hushmail.com (from Hush only)
http://charlesburton.webplus.net
http://spartan.ac.brocku.ca/~cburton

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Huawei in Canada-China Relations


On October 8, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the U.S. House of Representatives issued their "Investigative report on the U.S. National Security Issues posed by Chinese Telecommunications Companies Huawei and ZTE." It was based on a study carried out over 11 months at the behest of Huawei, the world's second-biggest maker of routers, switches and associated telecommunications. Huawei hoped the Congressional study would dispel persistent but unproven allegations that it is a heavily subsidized front company of the Chinese People's Liberation Army and the Chinese Ministry of State Security.

The Select Committee heard hearsay evidence of serious allegations of malfeasance by Huawei (which have been referred to the U.S. Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security), but it turned up nothing definitive - at least not in the unclassified part of the report.

However, because there was enough doubt that Huawei "cannot be trusted to be free of foreign state influence and thus pose a threat to the United States and to our systems," Congress imposed severe restrictions on Huawei's future business activities in the U.S.

This compelling report is of high interest in Canada, where Huawei, through highly competitive bids, has won contracts to supply sophisticated data networking equipment to at least Bell, Telus, Sasktel and Wind.

Competitors claim that Huawei can offer below-market pricing in its network installations thanks to secret funding it gets from the Chinese Government. Regardless of whether that is true, the Select Committee's report suggests that buying Huawei could be a very false economy for Canada.

Some observers were quick to downplay any implications the U.S. report could have for Canada. Telecom analyst Iain Grant has been quoted as saying he is "not sure that the technical judgment of the U.S. Congress is a yardstick that Canadian companies need to consider when making technical decisions. Canadian companies assess the attraction of Huawei gear on its merits, on function, on delivery and timeliness, on quality of what is delivered and on price. Paranoia is not a measure they find germane."

But clearly there are bases for concern about any Huawei equipment processing massive quantities of Canadian data. Certainly, the Government of Canada has already indicated Huawei will be excluded from bidding on a new government digital, telephone, data and e-mail network, on the basis that it is "too dicey to be included in constructing the network."

Among the unproven allegations in the Congressional report is that Huawei routers are able to activate "back door" software that sends data to "an elite cyber-warfare unit within the PLA." Similar routines hidden in millions of line of code could enable China to remotely shut down any Huawei-installed networks for strategic reasons. As technology progresses, the ability to carry out targeted mining of the huge data quantities passing through Huawei-installed Canadian routers and switches, using sophisticated computer algorithms, becomes a greater cause for concern. Moreover, the equipment will require maintenance and "software updates", opening up the possibility of further opportunities for cyber-espionage.

It all comes down to a question of trust. If the Canadian telecommunications project had been prepared to pay more for the Swedish Ericsson or French Alcatel Lucent installations instead, there would be less cause for alarm.

According to the U.S. report, Huawei admits the Chinese Communist Party maintains a Party Committee within the company, but won't explain how the committee functions or even reveal which individuals compose the committee, on the grounds that this information is a Chinese state secret and Huawei could be prosecuted in China if they came clear on this point.

Furthermore, since only People's Republic of China nationals are permitted to own shares in Huawei by company policy, it stands to reason that Huawei's senior management (also citizens) could not ignore a Chinese Party-State order to facilitate cyber-intelligence gathering or "back door" network processes, if couched in Chinese national security terms. (And it would certainly be virtually impossible for buyers of Huawei networks to detect.)

Beyond a doubt, Beijing has shown a strong proclivity to engage in cyber espionage. After the German Chancellery and three ministries were penetrated by hackers, evidently from China, and infected with spyware, Chancellor Angela Merkel stood in public next to Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and openly criticized his government for its attacks. Canadian government computers also suffered similar assaults just last year, causing considerable disruption to operations.

And what of private-sector customers of Canadian telecommunication companies that use Huawei equipment to carry their data? Should activists for Chinese human rights, or Canadian companies competing for business contracts in China, be concerned? Considering how unforthcoming and obscure Huawei was in its responses to the pertinent questions posed by the U.S. Congress, this is a valid concern.

Unfortunately it appears that, for Canada, it is already too late to second-guess our trust in the honesty and sincerity of this Chinese firm.

========
(An edited version of this text was published in Embassy on October 17.2012 under the title "Weighing Huawei in Canada")

Saturday, October 13, 2012

My Comment on "Chinese Drywall Lawsuits at a Turning Point" - NYTimes.com

Chinese Drywall Lawsuits at a Turning Point - NYTimes.com


The report says:
"In the years before the economic crisis, hundreds of millions of square feet of Chinese drywall was exported to the United States. But soon after the drywall was installed homeowners noticed a sulfurous smell. In addition, appliances like televisions and microwaves inexplicably failed, and silver and copper items were covered with black soot."

Comment: One would have expected that making drywall with such extraordinary destructive powers able to disable TVs and home appliances would cost more to manufacture, not less.

Monday, October 08, 2012

CBC.ca News - China tech firms pose security risk, U.S. panel warns

"Huawei denies being financed to undertake research and development for the Chinese military, but the committee says it has received internal Huawei documentation from former employees showing the company provides special network services to an entity alleged to be an elite cyber-warfare unit within the People's Liberation Army."

http://www.cbc.ca/m/rich/business/story/2012/10/08/china-tech-firms-security-risk.html

Saturday, October 06, 2012

Thursday, October 04, 2012

I am Speaking in Ottawa on October 17

I am speaking in Ottawa on October 17:  "Buying Canada: Strategic industries, state-owned enterprises and the national interest" | Canada 2020 - http://canada2020.ca/event/buying-canada/

Monday, October 01, 2012

Saturday, September 29, 2012

Text of Agreement Between Canada and China for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments

Agreement Between Canada and China for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments - http://goo.gl/ksCEt  Full Text

This has been tabled in the Parliament of Canada.  It also has to be ratified by the Chinese National People's Congress before coming into effect.

Friday, September 28, 2012

Bo's Expulsion is a Very Important Development

Bo Xilai's expulsion from the Party is very significant indeed. In contrast Deng Xiaoping retained his Party membership over 3 removals from office allowing for 3 comebacks to power. Bo will likely never be seen in public again.

It suggests that Bo will become the focus of a major Party-wide campaign. This has been the norm for high-profile people expelled from the Party in the past.  Expulsion of senior officials from the Party is a very serious and very rare political event. The fact that the Xinhua news release says Bo will be up for abuse of power and bribery suggests the possibility of very far reaching implications for others who are engaged in comparable corrupt practices.

So I take his expulsion as a promising development that could indicate that the 18th Party Congress may adopt meaningful reforms to bolster the Party's battered reputation with people in China and abroad.

Obviously it will infuriate many powerful people who will be exposed to serious charges. But the Party appears to be willing to risk instability instead of the continuing stagnation incurred by doing nothing meaningful and therefore suffering continuing corrosion of its legitimacy in the eyes of the people.

Thursday, September 27, 2012

Rough and ready translation by me of article in today's Ming Pao about CNOOC-Nexen Human Rights Concerns


A Call to Grasp the Opportunity of Chinese Capital Purchasing Canadian Energy Enterprises 
Group Urges Ottawa to Take Advantage and Push China to Improve Human Rights

(Ming Pao Report) The Chinese National Off-Shore Oil Corporation (CNOOC)'s intention to purchase the Canadian energy corporation, Nexen, is currently undergoing a political assessment process. "The Canadian Coalition for Human Rights in China" more than a month ago send a letter to the Federal Minister of Industry who is responsible for this assessment process. It calls on him, in addition to examining the economic benefits, to make human rights policy one of the factors under consideration. But up to know the Coalition has received no response to this letter.

The Canadian Coalition on Human Rights in China, which represents 15 organizations concerned about human rights in China sent this letter to the office of the Minister of Industry, Christian Paradis on August 16. The letter makes reference to Article 20 "Factors Influencing Investment Assessment" of the "Canada Investment Act" whose content expresses the Coalition's stance: "Human rights should be a factor strongly weighted in the foreign investment assessment process."

The Coalition encourages the Government of Canada to grasp the opportunity presented by the deep interest by China to invest in Canada's energy enterprises, to at this time demand that China improve its addressing of human rights issues that have emerged at every level of Chinese society. The letter also makes reference to reports exposing CNOOC's oil extraction operations in Burma which have not been approved by local residents and which have caused very great damage to local villages. Those villagers who have participated in opposition to the oil extraction have been arrested by the Burmese military and put on trial. [I am using "Burma" here, but there is no distinction in Chinese between "Burma" and "Myanmar." In pinyin the name of that country has consistently been "Miandian."]

This letter was sent simultaneously to the office of Prime Minister Harper. But after more than a month it has not elicited any response from the PMO either. The Coalition decided the day before yesterday to make the letter public.. It very rapidly received a reaction from Jason Kenney, the Minister of Immigration: "Our Government has very clearly expressed that Canada-China relations require balanced development, to carry forward our common interests, such as trade and business, as well as our values, such as the importance that we place on human rights."

Kenney made the above statement the day before yesterday at a press conference in response to a reporter's question. He indicated that he is assured that Harper for a long time has expressed the same opinion on issue of balanced development. According to information obtained by the "Toronto Star," Harper is the key person in making the final decision on whether this transaction will be approved or not.

The Chairman of one organization that is part of the "The Canadian Coalition for Human Rights in China," "The Toronto Association for Support of the Democracy Movement in China," Guan Zhuo [Cheuk Kwan], yesterday indicated to this newspaper that Nexen has an excellent human rights record. It was one of the earliest Canadian companies to write a human rights policy. Therefore in assessing whether or not to sell it to the Chinese state-owned CNOOC, whether or not CNOOC has an excellent human rights record, and whether it can fully implement a human rights policy in future management of the enterprise should become a factor that is given significant weight in considerations.

Guan Zhuo indicated that he can understand that the Ministry of Industry will approach its assessment of this transaction from a commercial benefit perspective. But he believes that the Government should not only look at the money benefits. It should also include Canada's human rights values perspective in the assessment, "although the Chinese side has indicated that it will strictly respect Canadian law after it makes the purchase, but the Ambassador of China indicated the day before yesterday that human rights should not be brought into this commercial transaction." Therefore Guan Zhuo feels that in approving this transaction the Government of Canada must ensure that that a human rights policy will be very well implemented in future operations of Nexen.

The original Chinese report can be found here: http://www.mingpaotor.com/htm/News/20120927/tbc1.htm?m=0

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

New ambassador to China pledges frank dialogue on security, human rights

New ambassador to China pledges frank dialogue on security, human rights


"He'll have close links right to the top, both with me and the prime minister, senior leadership of the public service and business communities here in Canada," Baird told reporters in his office on Parliament Hill, where the two posed for a photo-op.
The minister called the posting "an important political and security position in that part of the world."

Saturday, September 22, 2012

My Thoughts on the Chinese Ambassador's Interview on Front Page of Today's Globe and Mail

The interview is entitled "Canada-China free-trade pact touted" (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/china-calls-for-free-trade-deal-with-canada-within-a-decade/article4561149/)

My observation: After 18 years of negotiations to achieve a Canada-China Foreign Investment Protection Agreement, the Chinese Ambassador now indicates that for Canada to obtain "guarantees that its companies will get greater access to investment and markets in China" that we now actually need to negotiate a comprehensive free trade agreement which "might take a few years, but less than a decade." Presumably in the meantime China intends to continue to widen its 4X trade disparity with Canada while interminable negotiations work to "address" Canada's concerns. And according to the Ambassador over this period Canada's concerns over allegations of widespread human rights abuse in China will also work themselves out through "improvement and development."

After 30 years of Chinese officials urging Western patience over trade and human rights concerns, this line of argument is starting to wear a bit thin. But clearly the Ambassador hopes to continue to play to Canadian naivete and gullibility for as long as it can be sustained.

Liberace-like the Chinese regime appears to be "laughing all the way to the bank."



An edited version of the above text appeared as letter to the Globe and Mail entitled "It's wearing thin" published on September 25: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/letters/sept-25-rue-britannia-and-other-letters-to-the-editor/article4565456/