China likely to escape scot-free in persecution of two Canadians

From the MacDonald Laurier Institute

By Charles Burton

Beijing propagandists are already using recent claims to vindicate the appalling treatment of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor

There is a deep sadness to reports that Michael Spavor feels he was badly wronged by his fellow former political prisoner Michael Kovrig and, by extension, political officers at Canada’s embassy in Beijing and their masters in Ottawa.

Spavor reportedly wants millions in compensation from the Canadian government for its alleged complicity in his detention in his Chinese prison ordeal. If this ends up in court, Kovrig and his superiors would have an opportunity to defend themselves against these allegations, but Beijing propagandists are already using them to vindicate the appalling treatment of Kovrig and Spavor — a gross violation of international law — by a ruthless regime that arrested them to pressure Canada into releasing Chinese Communist Party figure Meng Wanzhou from house arrest in Vancouver.

While few specifics are known about Spavor’s claims, media reports depict a connection to Kovrig’s former job at Canada’s embassy in Beijing, and later with the International Crisis Group think tank, roles in which he would allegedly meet with people in China, engage them in his fluent Mandarin, and mine the conversations for nuggets of insight into China’s political or economic affairs.

Chinese authorities, of course, don’t like such activities. One expects that Kovrig and his superiors, both in government and the ICG, would have been well aware that this type of work would irritate Beijing, thus the danger of arbitrary detention on trumped-up charges was always there whenever he visited China without the protection of a diplomatic passport. And so it was.

One particularly troubling aspect of this sort of activity is the risk it presents to people who might unknowingly be sources for these information-gathering practices. Apparently Spavor and Kovrig routinely got together for drinks and sessions of good-humoured conversation. But friendships with diplomats imply that observations shared in a bar can end up the next morning in a report to Ottawa, and on to the Five Eyes. Was this possibility lost on Spavor? Was Kovrig perhaps not as forthcoming as he could have been about the full dimensions of their chats?

And there is always the possibility that China’s Ministry of State Security has access to Canadian diplomatic communications, which led them to open a file on the two.

Spavor ran a business, Paektu Cultural Exchange, that facilitated sports, cultural, tourism and business exchanges with North Korea. These pricey tours necessitated the transfer of badly-needed foreign currency into North Korea, arguably helping to enable the repressive Pyongyang regime. Perhaps more intriguing, in the course of his work Spavor developed an unlikely rapport with the third-generation Kim family dictator, Kim Jong Un, and was photographed jet-skiing and drinking cocktails with him on a private yacht. It is very plausible that China strongly disapproved of their junior proxy Korean communist dictator cavorting with non-Chinese foreign friends, hence his arrest.

Troublingly, Canadians — who were transfixed and infuriated by the two Michaels’ incarceration — have had little news about Kovrig and Spavor’s China nightmare since their sudden release in September 2021, just hours after Canada released Meng. One wonders if Ottawa really did enough to incentivize China’s Communist authorities to send them home sooner, or if there were other factors in Canada’s murky relationship with Beijing that took priority over what was perhaps downplayed behind closed doors as just another consular matter, one of many that are de facto subordinated to trade and political interests.

We may never see any Global Affairs Canada officials or former diplomats giving public evidence in a Canadian court to defend against Spavor’s accusation. To be sure, much of what goes on between Canada and China — indeed, within our own government internally — is kept from us by the secretive walls of the Security of Information Act.

Perhaps Spavor will be given a big whack of taxpayer money in an out-of-court settlement laced with ironclad nondisclosure provisions. One thing is for sure though. The Chinese authorities who so brutally persecuted him will, as usual, get off scot-free.

Charles Burton is a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, non-resident senior fellow of the European Values Center for Security Policy in Prague, and former diplomat at Canada’s embassy in Beijing.

Up Next

Why Canada should get carbon credits for LNG exports

Don't Miss

BC healthcare workers prevented from returning to work despite understaffing

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Is There Any Canadian Province More Proud of their Premier Today…

Business / 5 hours ago

Trump signs executive order banning government censorship

International / 5 hours ago

Trump orders U.S. withdrawal from World Health Organization

Business

Trump signs executive order banning government censorship

Published on January 20, 2025

Todayville

From The Center Square

By Dan McCaleb

President Donald Trump on Monday signed an executive order banning the federal government from taking any action to restrict Americans free speech rights.

The order ensures “that no Federal Government officer, employee, or agent engages in or facilitates any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.”

It also ensures “that no taxpayer resources are used to engage in or facilitate any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen” and “identify and take appropriate action to correct past misconduct by the Federal Government related to censorship of protected speech.”

Meta earlier this month ended its practice of censoring posts on Facebook, Instagram and Threads after CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted that the Biden administration pressured the company to remove posts related to COVID-19, the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections – including suppressing the New York Post’s explosive story on Hunter Biden’s laptop – and other matters.

“We started building social media to give people a voice,” Zuckerberg said in announcing the decision. “What started as a movement to be more inclusive has increasingly been used to shut down opinions and shut out people with different ideas, and it’s gone too far.”

Twitter, now X, also removed posts under pressure from the Biden administration before Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk bought the social media platform in 2022.

Trump’s executive order also instructs the U.S. Attorney General to investigate past cases of government censorship.

“The Attorney General, in consultation with the heads of executive departments and agencies, shall investigate the activities of the Federal Government over the last 4 years that are inconsistent with the purposes and policies of this order and prepare a report to be submitted to the President, through the Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, with recommendations for appropriate remedial actions to be taken based on the findings of the report,” the order states.

Dan McCaleb is the executive editor of The Center Square. He welcomes your comments. Contact Dan at [email protected].

Dan McCaleb

Executive Editor

Business

Liberals to increase CBC funding to nearly $2 billion per year

Published on January 20, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The Department of Canadian Heritage promised funding to offset the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s nearly 10 percent drop in ad revenue last year despite an audience share of 1.7 percent, meaning over 98 percent of the country is not watching the network.

The Liberal government has promised to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to compensate CBC-TV for ads that the network cannot sell.

According to information released January 20 by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Liberal-run Department of Canadian Heritage will give CBC millions more, bringing the network’s total parliamentary grant near $2 billion a year.

“The CBC has been grappling with a range of financial pressures that are challenging its ability to maintain programming and service levels,” Liberals argued, adding that their department will be “providing additional funding to make it less reliant on private advertising with a goal of eliminating advertising during news and other public affairs shows.”

“The CBC is a pillar of Canada’s creative economy, a key provider of programming made by and for Canadians and a significant source of trusted news and information,” Liberals claimed.

“This government is committed to ensuring the sustainability of the CBC so that it can continue to create public value and adapt to the needs and expectations of Canadians,” the department continued.

The increased government subsidies come after an October report found that CBC’s advertising revenue dropped nearly 10 percent last year.

Furthermore, CBC’s own quarterly report found that its network audience share is only 1.7%, meaning more than 98% of Canadians are not watching CBC.

However, Liberals have chosen to ignore the fact that Canadians are not watching CBC, instead spending millions of dollars to prop up the failing outlet.

Beginning in 2019, Parliament changed the Income Tax Act to give yearly rebates of 25 percent for each news employee in cabinet-approved media outlets earning up to $55,000 a year to a maximum of $13,750.

Last November, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau again announced increased payouts for legacy media outlets that coincide with the leadup to the 2025 election. The subsidies are expected to cost taxpayers $129 million over the next five years.

That amount to the CBC is in addition to massive media payouts that already make up roughly 70 percent of its operating budget and total more than $1 billion annually.

However, many have pointed out that the obscene amount of money thrown at CBC by Liberals is a ploy to buy the outlet’s loyalty.

Furthermore, in October, Canadian Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge’s department admitted that federally funded media outlets buy “social cohesion.”

Additionally, in September, House leader Karina Gould directed mainstream media reporters to “scrutinize” Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, who has repeatedly condemned government-funded media as an arm of the Liberals.

Gould’s comments were in reference to Poilievre’s promise to defund the CBC if elected prime minister. Poilievre is a longtime critic of government-funded media, especially the CBC.