Minister Joly in Beijing: IPD Experts Weigh In
Joly meets Chinese counterpart in Beijing as first foreign minister to visit in years, NATO declaration expands vision to combat China's 'systemic challenge', and more.
This week's edition of IPD's Canada-China Brief covers Minister Mélanie Joly’s bilateral talks with Wang Yi in Beijing, featuring exclusive commentary from several IPD experts on the significance and implications of these discussions. Additionally, the newsletter addresses the most recent NATO summit’s focus on China as the alliance draws closer to the Indo-Pacific and deems Beijing a significant issue for collective defence.
From Our Experts
On Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly’s talks in Beijing:
Minister Joly's visit to China has been anticipated since the spring visit of the Foreign Affairs Deputy David Morrison. The visit is consistent with Joly's stated preference for pragmatic diplomacy, and her aversion to the "empty chair" approach to bilateral relations. While Canadian public opinion regarding China remains negative following the 2018 detention of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor as well as allegations regarding election interference, it is still important to have regular official communications to attempt to sort out bilateral irritants and pursue issues of common concern such as climate change and trade disputes. Ideally the visit will pave the way for further dialogue on other files.
– Susan Gregson, Advisor, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy
Despite many fundamental policy differences that exist between Canada and China, including Canadian concerns regarding unacceptable interference by China in the Canadian political process, bilateral dialogue at senior levels is essential to deal with these differences. Canada has been absent from a high level dialogue with China while many of our allies, such as the U.S., Germany, France, Spain and Australia have engaged directly with Beijing either through visits to China or by receiving senior Chinese officials. The opening of direct dialogue is an essential first step and the willingness of both Canada and China to proceed with this visit demonstrates a desire to address issues that are impeding the resumption of more normal relations.
That said, there are some significant irritants that are not going to be wished away by one visit, but the visit shows that both sides want to move beyond the current stasis. Much will depend on what mechanisms are set up to deal with the range of current issues. The political climate is challenging but dialogue begins with finding areas of common interest.
– Hugh Stephens, Advisor, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy
Canada remains the only G7 country that has not been able to maintain high-level engagements with China in recent years, a situation that is not in Canada’s long-term national interests. Joly’s visit to China is a positive sign of bilateral efforts in improving relations. Despite all the rhetoric of treating China as Canada’s enemy, Ottawa’s official Indo-Pacific Strategy has not labeled Beijing as such. Canada and China share more common interests than differences, and whatever the differences, they should be managed with continuous engagement at the highest levels.
Despite political tensions, bilateral trade has been breaking new records, and better management of overall relations and the resumption of summit meetings between the leaders of the two countries will create more opportunities of collaboration that will create jobs and boost economic growth for Canada. With the Trans-Mountain pipeline expansion now complete, and the LNG Canada’s first phase production near completion, China is potentially the largest market for Canada’s newest energy export destination. Close cooperation on energy security and climate change is one of the safest areas for Ottawa and Beijing to explore as concrete steps of improving ties.
– Wenran Jiang, Advisor, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy
Minister Joly deserves significant credit for her courageous decision to visit China at a time when Sinophobia prevails in Canadian political circles. While ongoing challenges in Canada-China relations persist, it is in neither country's interest to prolong the political freeze that has defined their bilateral relations since 2019. China is a critical player in the Indo-Pacific, an area of high strategic importance for Canada. Ottawa will undoubtedly benefit from reestablishing cordial and functional relations with Beijing.
– Jeffrey Reeves, Senior Washington Fellow, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy
Cette visite arrive à point nommé pour relancer nos relations avec la Chine. J'espère qu'elle pavera la voie à une visite de Justin Trudeau, un des rares chefs d'État du monde occidental à ne pas s'être déplacé à Pékin. Il est fondamental de rehausser le dialogue avec la deuxième économie mondiale.
[This visit is timely to revive our relations with China. I hope it will pave the way for a visit by Justin Trudeau, one of the few Western leaders who has not visited Beijing. It is essential to enhance dialogue with the world's second-largest economy.]
– Jocelyn Coulon, Advisor, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy
If the purpose of Minster Joly’s visit to Beijing is to repair, to the extent possible, the bilateral economic and diplomatic relations that have been so strained in recent years, then whatever time she spends with her Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, will be time well spent. But if Minister Joly really believes that any time she spends discussing “complex global and regional security issues” will be time similarly well spent, well, that would be borderline delusional. Why? Because Canada is not, and is not likely to become any time soon, a consequential regional security player in the Indo-Pacific – that is to say, Canada is not now and likely never will be, a “middle power” in the current sense of a regional great power in that part of the world.
This being the case, nothing Minister Joly says to Minister Wang on the topic is likely to have any impact on China’s regional security posture. Things might be different, of course, if Ottawa wielded outsized influence in Washington and Beijing approached its relationship with Ottawa with that in mind. And once upon a time Canada did wield such influence. But those days are long gone.
Bottom line: Minister Joly should devote all of her time in Beijing to addressing key bilateral issues related to Canada’s narrow national interests. Specifically, that means she should focus her attention on addressing both bilateral trade issues and the diplomatic fallout from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s findings that Beijing had interfered in Canadian elections and the subsequent public inquiry that confirmed those findings – actions that angered the Chinese government and contributed to the fracturing of Sino-Canadian relations that has so disproportionately harmed Canada.
– Andrew Latham, Senior Washington Fellow, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy
Top Stories
Joly Visits Beijing in First Official Trip in Over Half a Decade
Mélanie Joly became the first Canadian foreign minister in seven years to visit the Chinese capital, undertaking the unannounced two-day mission to conduct bilateral talks with her counterpart Wang Yi.
Up for discussion — Global Affairs Canada stated that the meeting would discuss international challenges, with Beijing revealing this included Ukraine and Palestine:
GAC previewed that the two would address “complex global and regional security issues” and “possible avenues for collaboration on common challenges” in addition to spending time to “exchange views on concrete ways to enhance the already deep ties between the people of Canada and China.”
Joly herself stated that “as the world faces increasingly complex and intersecting global issues, Canada is committed to engaging pragmatically with a wide range of countries to advance our national interests,” underscoring that ”we must maintain open lines of communication and use diplomacy to challenge where we ought to, while seeking cooperation in areas that matter most to Canadians.”
China’s readout of the meeting highlighted that Wang reiterated that “there are no fundamental conflicts of interest between China and Canada” and that Beijing “values Canada's repeated statements of willingness to handle and promote bilateral relations with a positive, pragmatic, and constructive attitude.”
Noting next year’s 20th anniversary of their 'strategic partnership’, Wang said “both sides should return to their original intentions, reflect on the past, grasp the correct direction, learn from history, and earnestly adhere to the commitment made” as the two also spoke on global security including Ukraine and Israel.
Beijing noted Joly’s willingness to "improve and develop relations with China in an active and pragmatic manner” and to strengthen cooperation in “economy and trade, tourism, climate change, environmental protection, people-to-people exchanges, and drug control, achieving mutually beneficial development.”
Trudeau to follow? — Official sources have reported to the media that many in Ottawa see the visit as significantly overdue with uncertainty for follow-up remaining:
A senior official speaking anonymously to CBC stated that it was a "big step in the right direction" that came together "over the course of a couple of weeks" without assistance from other international partners in the hopes of paving the way for other ministerial visits in the future.
They added that the potential for a visit to China by Prime Minister Trudeau was a "big question mark" and that "at the core, [Joly] will defend Canada's national interests, while keeping… the door open for further collaboration on common interests” as she continues to “set the tone for the relationship through dialogue."
However, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland declared in an interview this week that “geopolitics and geoeconomics is back. That means that Western countries — and very much the U.S. — is putting a premium on secure supply chains… that means that Canada plays an even more important role for the U.S.”
“I see that Leninist precept in Chinese economic policy — of dominating the commanding heights of the global economy and of acting quite intentionally to undermine and cut out Western competitors. I think it’s high time for us to be clear-eyed about that.”
The word in Beijing — Chinese officials and policy experts have roundly viewed the talks as an opportunity to shift gears in ties:
The Chinese Embassy in Ottawa went public with comments expressing “hope that this visit will be a smooth and successful one [that will] inject vitality to the improvement and development of China-Canada relations and enhance the friendship between the two peoples.”
Liu Dan, Research Fellow at the Center for Canadian Studies at Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, stated that “open discussion is crucial for the improvement of China-Canada relations, especially considering the limited dialogue that has taken place at various levels in recent years,"
China’s Ambassador to Canada Wang Di penned a commentary in The Hill Times arguing that the two countries’ cooperation in producing the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework was a model and that both sides should “step up to our historical responsibilities” in shepherding relations forward.
Separately, Wang asked “do we want to leave [the future] a Canada-China relationship that is fraught with conflict, or with a lot of benefits that they can enjoy from the co-operation we conduct today? We need to leave a relationship where our future generations can enjoy dividends of our co-operation today.”
In a full interview transcript, he questioned “why Canada, a big champion of free trade and a country ready to take the leadership in combating climate change, would want to raise tariffs on Chinese EVs… a clear violation of the WTO rules and also the spirit of free trade. In fact, China has sold only around 70 EVs to Canada.”
In D.C., Canada Joins NATO in Criticizing China for Aiding Russia
As NATO leaders wrapped up their annual summit in Washington, D.C. this month, alliance members agreed to expand language designating China as a decisive supporter of Russia’s war efforts in Ukraine and as a greater challenge for NATO as a whole.
‘Systemic challenge’ — For the first time, the alliance jointly labelled China as a supporter of Russia's war against Ukraine in its Washington Summit Declaration:
The statement, approved by the 32 leaders of NATO on July 10th, accused China of becoming “a decisive enabler of Russia’s war against Ukraine,” and called on China to “cease all material and political support to Russia’s war effort,” including dual-use materials such as weapons components.
To warn China that its support for Russia will come at a cost, it specified that “China cannot enable the largest war in Europe in recent history without this negatively impacting its interests and reputation,” particularly pointing out “its large-scale support for Russia’s defense industrial base.”
The declaration further stated that “the PRC continues to pose systemic challenges to Euro-Atlantic security… we are boosting our shared awareness, enhancing our resilience and preparedness, and protecting against the PRC’s coercive tactics and efforts to divide the Alliance.”
The language is a major step given that until 2019 the alliance never officially mentioned China as a concern, with U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan saying “the declaration demonstrates that NATO allies now collectively understand this challenge and are calling on the P.R.C. to cease this activity.”
Anger and denial — Chinese officials were quick to respond that Beijing was not a ‘crisis maker nor a participant’ and criticized NATO's accusations:
Responding at a daily briefing one day after NATO’s statement, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian asserted that China has maintained a fair and objective stance on Ukraine, and that NATO’s accusation is “unreasonable and sinister,” urging NATO to halt Cold War thinking.
Lin added that “NATO’s reach into the Asia-Pacific, strengthening of its military and security ties with China’s neighboring countries and U.S. allies, and collaboration with the U.S. to implement the Indo-Pacific Strategy harm China’s interests and disrupt peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific.”
Spokesperson Liu Pengyu of the Chinese Embassy in Washington stated that “China is not a producer of or party involved in the #Ukraine Crisis. We have been playing a constructive role in facilitating a political settlement. China has not provided weaponry to any party.”
Canada ups defence promises — Ottawa pledged to increase its defence spending to 2% of GDP ontop of new Arctic partnerships aimed at China and Russia:
Speaking at the summit in D.C., Prime Minister Trudeau announced Canada will meet NATO’s target to spend 2% of its GDP on defence by 2032, saying “we continually step up and punch above our weight” and “always questioned the two per cent as the be-all, end-all of evaluating contributions to NATO.”
U.S. Senator Roger Wicker of the Senate Armed Services Committee criticized Canada's announcement as “shocking and unacceptable” and has previously stated that “China is increasing their defence spending dramatically. We are being overtaken by the dictatorships of this world.”
Gen. Jennie Carignan, Canada’s newest-appointed Chief of the Defence Staff, recently stated that “we are assessing how our conventional opponents are getting ready and assessing their own capacity and own military forces as well. So we’re talking about China. We’re talking about Russia.”
Canada, the U.S., and Finland also unveiled a trilateral ‘Icebreaker Collaboration Effort’ pact at that is to be concluded by the end of this year and is aimed at co-producing polar vessels, enhancing Arctic security, and creating a coherent supply chain for “like-minded nations.”
A Biden administration official said the pact will “reinforce the message to Russia and China that the United States and its allies intend to… doggedly pursue collaboration on industrial policy to increase our competitive edge in strategic industries like shipbuilding, to build a world-class polar icebreaking fleet at scale.”
What They’re Saying
A keep-the-door-open visit is something that at least Canada would be happy with, and maybe now the Chinese are realizing that open doors are better than closed doors… from the Chinese side, they're worried about their international margin for manoeuvre, given the deteriorating relations with the EU and the United States. Given that Ottawa, and in particular minister Joly, has been looking to resume dialogue for some time, I think the Chinese side has determined now is the time to seize the moment, before it becomes too (late), before the door gets shut in their face.
– Jeremy Paltiel, Senior Fellow, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy
Tariffs will not bring the story of Chinese automakers in Canada to a close. Rather, it is likely to open an entirely new chapter – one that will disrupt the industry in ways those putting pressure on policy makers have probably not fully contemplated. Tariffs or not, Chinese automakers are coming… Just as they failed to do in the 1980s, protectionist tools will not cause Chinese automakers to give up on North America and the 20 per cent of the global auto market it represents. However, high tariffs will cause Chinese vehicle companies to adjust their approach, expediting their shift from exporter to local manufacturer.
– Greig Mordue, ArcelorMittal Dofasco Chair in Advanced Manufacturing Policy, McMaster University
Canada's [potential EV tariffs] is more about sending a political signal and pleasing the U.S., sacrificing Sino-Canadian relations in the process. Canada has failed to realize that China's promotion of EVs is in conformity with global efforts to combat climate change... China and Canada should work together to address bilateral and multilateral issues, including addressing climate change, to make greater contributions to global efforts to fighting climate change.
– Li Qingsi, Professor, School of International Studies, Renmin University
If you enjoy our work, please consider contributing:
Image credit: Ministry of Foreign Affairs | Office of the Prime Minister