- 255 Posts
- 90 Comments
11·12 days agoIn the meantime there are multiple reports on it. It’s a shame, particularly for the governments in China and Zambia.
… Access Now said in a statement that the 2026 edition of RightsCon - a long-running conference devoted to digital rights due to kick off in the Zambian capital of Lusaka on Tuesday - was canceled after Chinese diplomats pressured Zambia’s government over the presence of Taiwanese civil society figures due to attend the conference …
… The Chinese Embassy in Washington did not immediately return messages seeking comment. Calls rang unanswered at the Zambian Embassy in Washington …
… The conference has been running for more than a decade and organizers have made efforts to host it in non-Western countries. The Zambia gathering was meant to be RightsCon’s debut in southern Africa. Organizers said they would not be deterred by what they described as “violations of the fundamental freedoms of peaceful assembly and association.”
“RightsCon may not happen in Zambia, but we will come together again,” the statement said in part.
54·16 days agoBeing an adult with a functioning brain gives me the capacity for critical analysis.
Aha.
I am not posting often in ‘Canada’, but isn’t the Financial Post a US-owned media company that is often criticized as unreliable by tankies? Or is it good if the article aligns to a desired narrative?
Thank you for your sophisticated and polite comment.
Publishing such a story and criticizing Canada for its defense spending while not even mentioning the wider threat landscape is disingenuous and fails to paint a realistic picture.
In 2025, the U.S. - again - spent the highest amount for defense.
Adjusted for purchasing power, China has the world’s second largest military budget. According to the World Bank, it spent 1.7% of its GDP for military in 2024 (compared to 1.3% in Canada). Beijing’s share of regional spending in the Indo-Pacific continues to increase as growth in Beijing’s military budget outpaces the wider region.
Although growth in Russia’s military expenditure moderated compared to previous years, it grew 3% in real terms in 2025, compared with 56.9% (!) in 2024. Nonetheless, expenditure still consumed over 7.3% of Russia’s GDP.
Peace is fine only if your adversaries pursue the same path. Unfortunately, this is not the case if we look at the world’s top-3 in military spending.
A year ago, during an election campaign in April 2025, Carney called China “Canada’s biggest security threat”. Now China is a “strategic partner”.
Canada called out China over forced labour practices (for which there is ample evidence), Now Carney says forced labour is a ‘global issue’ with parts of China are ‘at higher risk’. Carney and his finance minister Champagne recently avoided to address the fact that Chinese EV makers BYD has been found to use forced labour in its factories in Hungary and Brazil.
The Canadian military flew seven surveillance missions over waters near China in the past month to enforce North Korean sanctions, but the Department of National Defence is no longer confirming whether Chinese aircraft intercepted those flights, as it has in years past.
These are a few examples. It hurts Canada imho. It can soon hurt Canadians as soon as China attempts to take advantage over its new ‘partnerhips’ by coercing the Canadian government for political gains (there is ample evidence that Beijing has been doing so with other countries in the past).
You may find another term than bowing, but this is what it is imo. It’s certainly true that the US isn’t a reliable partner anymore, but this doesn’t make China better. It’s the dictatorship it has ever been, and as such it is even worse than the US.
This article is ridiculously weird. The global conflict has already arrived. Russia has invaded Ukraine. China’s war games around Taiwan and the rest of the Indo-Pacific, the US/Israel war in Iran … It’s important that Canada invests in its own defense industry and those of its allies, as someone has already said, rather than in buying from the US or China. But Canada has no other choice than investing in its defense.
And this is why he is bowing to China? Are the China ties strength?
Yes, it shows what’s really behind the Chinese government’s engagement. It’s about political and economic influence, making African countries dependent, while China Ignores Climate Change with African Oil Pipeline, as another article published already in 2023 has warned back then:
The $1 trillion ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ (BRI) has been poorly executed and with such lack of transparency, that it is hard to imagine the extent of the damage caused by lending vast sums of money to developing nations. A case in point is the African continent and its energy-rich potential.
Chinese infrastructure projects have not typically had a happy outcome in the recent past. After heavily indebted countries feared their international credit rating would be damaged, China lent to African countries through shell companies …
The impact of China’s involvement gave rise to concerns about how exactly resettlement will be handled, much like climate and environmental disasters, human rights abuses during the construction of the pipeline and job losses in agriculture, tourism, clean energy and other sectors. The destruction of plateaus and wetlands as well as the potential pollution of Lake Victoria is another concern that was raised before the implementation of the project …
The EU and the US both have very strong laws banning impirts of goods made by forced labour. Not good enough imho, but, unfortunately, Canadian laws regarding forced labour are much weaker. Canadian PM Carney wants to make the world believe otherwise. He has been widely criticized for this of late.
Oh, no, there is ample evidence for China being a severe security threat. It’s published in the mainstream Western sources that you read, according to you, “of course”. Just read it. China isn’t a reliable partner, but wumaos have different view.
Reading comprehension is an issue, just read my comment above. Here again:
Batteries, wind turbines, solar panels, EVs - all these are no longer just mechanical assets but rather connected systems. These connectivities create new exposure for consumers and governments in democratic states.
As one report, It’s Time to Treat China’s Connected Energy Systems As a National Security Risk, says,
Foreign automakers and energy operators relying on Chinese batteries are not just importing physical components; they are importing foreign-controlled code that dictates how critical assets operate, and that may be updated based on a vendor’s schedules, through vendor platforms, and under vendor policies.
There is ample evidence that China poses a threat to other states’ security, as well as many examples that China uses leverage for economic and political coercion.
So letting others control your energy is bad unless it’s controlled by China? That’s apparently bad faith posts and comments, @yogthos@lemmygrad.ml
Oh, what a carefully selected sample.
The vast majority of these sources provide a very critical picture of China, so if you really read these ‘mainstream Western sources of course’ you must have a very critical picture of China. It doesn’t reflect your propaganda-like posts and comments in this and your alt accounts. But at least here in this thread you have so far refrained from personal insults.
As most of your linked articles refer to Chinese investments in the Global South, there is a very good study from 2025 by the Economic Policy Institute in Kiel, Germany, about that.
Our findings reveal a previously undocumented pattern of revenue ring-fencing, where a significant share of commodity export receipts never reaches the exporting countries. Revenues routed overseas secure priority repayment for the creditor; they remain out of public sight and largely beyond the borrower’s reach until the secured debts are repaid. These findings raise new concerns about debt transparency, fiscal management, fiscal autonomy, and the quality of macroeconomic surveillance, particularly in commodity-exporting EMDEs [emerging market and developing economies].
Interesting investigation that provides new insights how exactly China takes leverage over emerging economies at Beijing’s benefit and Beijing’s benefit alone.
Addition: And, of course, Canada should not buy renewable tech, EVs, and other tech from China. The price of letting others control you energy and you tech is too high. What is true for the U.S. is also true for China. Canada should definitely seek collaboration with democratic states rather than dictatorships.
What sources regarding China do you read?
Batteries, wind turbines, solar panels, EVs - all these are no longer just mechanical assets but rather connected systems. These connectivities create new exposure for consumers and governments in democratic states.
As one report, It’s Time to Treat China’s Connected Energy Systems As a National Security Risk, says,
Foreign automakers and energy operators relying on Chinese batteries are not just importing physical components; they are importing foreign-controlled code that dictates how critical assets operate, and that may be updated based on a vendor’s schedules, through vendor platforms, and under vendor policies.
There is ample evidence that China poses a threat to other states’ security, as well as many examples that China uses leverage for economic and political coercion.
It’s also important to note the risk of forced labour in Chinese suppky chains.
The Iran war shows how risky reliance on oil is.
The same is certainly true for renewables and all other critical parts of the economy.
It’s good that Canada started to build supply chains for critical minerals with democratic allies, for example. The dependence on China here is a threat to Canada’s (and all other allied states’) national security.
[Edit typo.]
The government’s repression and killing is still going on, and it will continue until the regime falls.
Thank you for this sophisticated comment. [/s, just to be safe].
Elon Musk pledges Tesla to China’s ‘core socialist values’ to avert EV price war (July 2023)