Front Burner - Should Canada boycott the 2022 Olympics in Beijing?

Episode Date: February 19, 2021

The 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics are just a year away, and pressure is building for Canada to take a stand by boycotting them in response to China’s imprisonment of the “Two Michaels” and the ongoing human rights abuses against the Uighur Muslim minority.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson. The 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics are less than a year away now, and pressure is building for Canada to take a stand against China by boycotting them. This in response to China's imprisonment of the two Michaels and the ongoing human rights abuses against the Uyghur Muslim minority.

This week, Conservative leader Aaron O'Toole called what's happening there a genocide. He insisted that the game should be moved out of China. We should work with our closest allies and coordinate an effort to relocate the games for 2022. And in doing so, remind our allies of the important role Canada has played and must continue to play in taking an early stand for human rights and dignity. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was reluctant to use that weighty word at all. On determinations of genocide, the principles of international law and the international community in general, I think rightly takes very, very seriously the label of genocide and needs to ensure that when it is used, It is clearly and properly justified and demonstrated so as not to weaken the application of genocide in situations in the past.

And that's why it's a word that is extremely loaded and is certainly something that we should be looking at. Today, I'm talking to former Canadian ambassador to China, David Mulroney, about why he calls what's happening to Uyghurs in China a genocide and the difficult stand he thinks Canada needs to take. Hi, Mr. Mulroney. Thank you so much for making the time today. Thank you, Jen. So, Mr. Mulroney,

should Canada attend the 2022 Winter Olympic Games in Beijing? No, I'm afraid Canada should not attend. And as you indicated in the intro, there are two very good reasons. One of them is close to home, and it's our two Michaels, our two Canadians who have been kept in very cruel detention, retaliatory detention by China. Michael Kovrig was on leave as a diplomat and working full-time with the International Crisis Group on de-escalating global conflicts when in December of 2018 he was detained in China on suspicion of endangering national security.

Businessman Michael Spavor was also detained. Same accusation. And what we should have done when that happened more than two years ago is to say, look, we've got to manage our relations with China, given its outrage in an entirely new way. While we won't go out of our way to insult and provoke China, we've got to do things differently. And one of the things we have to stop doing is anything that is celebratory or anything that serves to burnish the reputation of a state that takes hostages. So on that grounds alone, because we have two hostages and others in prison, we should not be attending. But the plight of the Uyghurs is truly awful. And if you look back at the Genocide Convention, which was signed after World War II,

when people thought, we've got to look at this particular crime of targeting a people, a community, and trying to wipe them from the face of the earth, what's happening in Xinjiang constitutes genocide. It's a planned effort to eliminate Uyghur culture, eliminate their architecture, their music, their religion, to imprison more than a million Uyghurs, and to actually break down Uyghur family life. We've also heard about forced sterilization and forced abortion, so that we're seeing birth rates in part of the Uyghur communities, cities like Hotan and Kashgar, plummet. So, yes, it is a genocide. And given that it's a genocide, we simply cannot attend the games.

We can't be there waving our flags when this is happening on the other side of the country. The Winter Games are in Beijing. Xinjiang is in the far west of China. But it's the same country and it's the same government. Right. And you mentioned the forced sterilization. Recently, we saw more evidence of this with some really disturbing BBC reporting that also included reporting on systemic rape of the Uyghurs. Tassanai Zaiwudin is reliving a story she can barely bring herself to tell. She was held at one of Xinjiang's so-called re-education camps,

sharing a cell with 13 other women with a bucket for a toilet. And she's haunted by one image, masked men coming down a camp corridor after midnight. They were three men. Not one, but three. They were three men. Not one, but three. They did whatever evil their mind could think of. And shortly after that, we saw China ban BBC World News broadcasts from the country, right? Yeah. And what we also saw was a tweet from, I think it was the Chinese embassy in Washington,

where one of the diplomats said, no, what we're doing is actually helping to ensure that Uyghur women are no longer baby-making machines. And that tweet was thankfully withdrawn, but it's indicative of what China's thinking about and what's happening. You know, there's a real Canadian dimension to this, too, Jamie, that there are lots of people of Uyghur origin in Canada, and some of them tell stories of being told by their parents or by their brothers or sisters, please don't contact me, don't call me from Canada because it will only get me in more trouble. And people knowing that they're saying goodbye to their fathers and mothers, and also being harassed by Chinese diplomats in Canada, who are saying, you know, toe the line, don't speak out, or it could be bad for your family. So this is not something that's happening just in China, bad as that would be,

but it reverberates here. And that's another reason why we can't go. The other thing I've mentioned is something's happened to the Olympics and to major sporting events, if we're going to be honest. And that is that for the Olympics, in the Winter Olympics in particular, it's almost exclusively, you know, totalitarian states that want to host it, and they'll spend lavish billions of dollars on it. We saw this at Sochi for Russia, to use it as almost a way of laundering their bad behavior. They hope that the world will go and salute them, and then we'll forget about this. 2008, the Chinese had the Beijing Games, and that followed really significant repression into that. And people said, well, we've got to have the Games because it's all about,

you know, brotherhood and collaboration, and China will learn from this. China only became more aggressive, more assertive, and they felt that I think the world had endorsed their policies. If the Olympics go ahead in Beijing, in the face of what they're doing in Xinjiang, that's got to be the conclusion they draw. It doesn't matter what we do. The world's going to come calling. What effect do you think Canada boycotting the Olympics could actually have, though? That's a really good question.

Obviously, it would be much more powerful if other countries did this with us. And this is something that we've seen coming for quite some time. And we should have been working to this end long ago instead of passing the decision off to its Canadian Olympic Committee and then ultimately saying, well, you know, it's very close. It may be difficult to change things. So we saw this coming. But even if we were alone, it's a significant step because Canada is a major Winter Olympics power. And yes, if we were to do this alone, we would face reprisals from China and economic reprisals, and they would probably bite. But I don't think we can beat Canada and attend these games.

That's not who we are. So even if we have to go it alone, and I don't by any means counsel that, we should try to build a coalition, we have to be prepared to go it alone if we're going to be true to ourselves. I want to read to you the Canadian Olympic Committee and Paralympic Committee released a statement on this. And they said that they don't want to, quote, minimize what's happening in China, but that they don't think that the boycott is the answer. They say, quote, faced with only two options, go or don't go. Our approach is to be present and join the conversation. And that, quote, we believe we can amplify voices

and use people-to-people connections to affect change. And how do you respond to that? It sounds really nice and very encouraging. But when you talk about amplifying voices, there will be no voices heard. All delegations will be told that their athletes must remain silent. Journalists will be strictly controlled. They will be monitoring every pennant and T-shirt that people in the stands bring in. And there will be every effort to silence people or expel them.

So this is not an opportunity for free speech. This will be stage managed by China, which stage manages better than almost anyone else. So the idea that this is going to be an opportunity for free speech is it's nice to hear, but it's totally unrealistic. Another point they raised that I was hoping you could elaborate on, they're saying that the Olympic boycott amounts to, quote, a convenient and politically inexpensive alternative to real and meaningful diplomacy. Do you think they have a point here? No, I think Olympics are a form of diplomacy. And China uses it as a form of, it's not soft power, it's hard power and compulsion on foreign states.

One of the things we're not really admitting as Canadians is the key reason that we're thinking about this and worrying about the boycott. In 1980, when we boycotted the Moscow Games, the real concern was the damage it would do to the Games. We weren't particularly worried about Russian reprisals. I mean, we thought there might be, and indeed the Russians didn't attend the next Olympics. But now, in 2022, next year, the real worry is that China will put pressure on us. China will exact revenge. So we'd only be going to the Games really because we're afraid not to. And if that's the case, we've got a bigger problem than the Olympics.

We have a major China problem that we have to face up to because China is capable of forcing us as a country to do things that we'd rather not do. And that means that our autonomy and our sovereignty is imperiled. We'd better be ready to pay a price to defend those things, because they're under pressure right now. But look, can Canada afford to take that kind of stand? So even with just an Olympic boycott, I immediately think of what that would mean, for example, for the two Michaels currently locked up there. Well, you know, China is engaged in hostage diplomacy. I think the message that attending sends is you can do anything to us. You can even

kidnap and hold hostage, keeping cool captivity, two of our nationals, purely because we've taken a legal step against a Chinese citizen who has been treated with the utmost respect and afforded every opportunity to defend herself. You can do that to us, and we're still going to show up and meekly wave our flag. That's what encourages hostage diplomacy, the idea that you can get away with it. China doesn't take on states who make it clear that there is a cost. So is there an economic cost to pay? There probably is. And, you know, we've seen it exacted against things like canola and pork, and there might be more of that. But there are two things to think about. One of them is that Canada and Australia,

which is also under pressure from China right now, produce a lot of things that China absolutely needs, resources, agricultural products. So they'll take some steps. But in the long run, they need Canada and they need Australia. And we should feel confident about that. The other is, if we pay a price, we should be willing to pay that price. We've shut our entire economy down, more or less, for a year because we're facing a deadly pandemic, and we're willing to pay that price. There are lots of people who are willing to see our energy sector largely shuttered, and that would entail a price, too, so that we can deal with global warming. We should be willing to pay a price for our sovereignty and our autonomy. As a country, we've paid the price for our convictions in the past, and we've paid a terrible price,

but we've been ready to pay that price, and ultimately, we've been proud that we've paid that price. I hope we're still that country. I just want to be clear here, you know, what more would you like to see Canada do? Because, you know, it certainly sounds like you'd like them to go further than boycotting the Olympics. Well, that's the key, I think, Jamie, around the hesitancy by the prime minister to use the word genocide because once you utter that word then the whole fiction of current policy towards china uh dissolves because what we've been trying to do desperately is to continue to normalize china whatever it does it's a normal state we want to have a good relationship it's a friend it's a country we should, you know, be close to. Once you acknowledge genocide, then you've got to revisit everything. It doesn't mean

that you completely abandon China. It doesn't mean that you go out of your way to revile it and provoke it. But you have to say that a lot of the things that we're doing with China, particularly those that enable China to become even more powerful and aggressive, we should stop doing. We should be much more selective. The Olympics is only a particularly egregious example of where we should apply that selectivity. So I get it. Calling this a genocide has big implications, but we can't ignore these implications much longer. The last two years plus since our two citizens were detained should have given us a really, really important and compelling lesson in what China is becoming. This has major policy implications for Canada, domestic policy implications and foreign policy implications.

The sooner we wake up to that, the better. And I think you wake up to it by calling things what they are. Right. And I just want to note here, this is something that we heard from Mehmet Toti. He's the executive director of the Uyghur Rights Advocacy Project. And he talked about what it would mean to him to actually hear Justin Trudeau take the step to call what's happening to Uyghurs a genocide. It means that we are not silent anymore for ongoing genocide. And secondly, as a signatory country of 1948 Geneva Convention, we have obligations to stop this ongoing genocide

and punish those responsible for this heinous crime. and is crying. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people, and I have some startling numbers to share with you. 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo. 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. You talked about how you don't picture Canada acting alone here.

And who else might be motivated and ready to take this on? You know, you just mentioned Australia. I haven't ruled out the United States. And of course, both former Secretary Pompeo and current Secretary Blinken have said that in their opinion, what's happening in China constitutes a genocide. There's a very lively discussion about this in the United Kingdom. There are countries in Europe, Sweden is one of them, that have really felt the bite of Chinese hostage diplomacy. So there are other places where this debate is happening. And I think, I suspect that there are discussions going on behind the scenes. But what I worry about is that we'll let those discussions roll on until people will say, well, it's too late now and it's inevitable and we should just sort of hold our noses and go.

Because I think that will only encourage China to be more aggressive, more assertive. That's what happened after 2008. How many times do we have to learn this lesson? So getting a band of six or eight countries together would be very, very powerful. eight countries together would be very, very powerful. The other effect it would have is that Xi Jinping, the leader of China, who's the architect of this policy, is vulnerable. He has a lot of conservative senior Chinese officials around him who are allowing him full scope to do what he's doing, but who are watching nervously as he picks fights with a growing number of countries in the world. And if something like the Olympics were imperiled by his actions,

China would, of course, strike out and blame the wider world. But back home in Beijing, people would be thinking very, very seriously about whether Xi Jinping's overreach is costing them too much. So that could be a very powerful lever for change. It might not be, but I think it's one of the best chances we have. So there could very well be an election before these 2022 Olympics and a new government could be in power, for example, Erin O'Toole's. And I wonder if you think they'll be sticking to their guns here, calling this a genocide, protesting Canada's participation, if they're the ones who are in charge. I certainly hope that they would do that. And as I say, the only thing I worry about is that the longer this goes on, the greater the inclination will be to say, well, you know, it would be nice to do that, but it's actually too late now, and, you know,

we've made too many preparations, etc., etc. So time and delay is the enemy, I think, of decisive action. But I'm encouraged to think that it's not just the Conservatives, but I've heard your voices from the NDP and, indeed, from the Liberal Benchers themselves, that other people think this too. So it would be nice to hear independent voices in Parliament encouraging us to do the right thing. You know, if Canada does not do anything that we've talked about, specifically if they don't boycott these Olympics in Beijing, big picture here, I wonder what effect you think that will have. Well, I think if the world shows up and pays tribute to China in Beijing, it will indeed validate the Communist Party's policy of stepping up their aggression because they think they can get away with it.

But it will also be very damaging in Canada because it will feed this sense that I really worry about, a kind of moral collapse, moral fatigue, that we can't push back. China's simply too big and too powerful, and we have to go along. We've heard so many voices in Canada from the great and the good who are saying, you know, we should send Ms. Meng back regardless, because the Chinese are asking that, you know, regardless of our responsibilities under the exposition treaty, we should just collapse. There's a real sense of fatigue in this country that I think we have to push back against and that solid leadership would help us to push back against. And showing up in Beijing only feeds that sense of inevitability. Let's go have some fun. Let's wave our flag and

cheer on the hockey team. And it's too bad about what's happening in Xinjiang, but we're just powerless to do anything about that. That's a real defeat for Canada, no matter how many medals we end up winning. Okay, Mr. Mulroney, thank you so much for this conversation. Thank you. Take care. All right. So before we go today, on Thursday, federal conservatives put up a motion for debate that would formally declare China's persecution of the Uyghurs genocide. And it stands a good chance of passing. Bloc Quebecois, Green and NDP MPs all spoke in favour of the motion yesterday. Parliament will vote on the motion on Monday. That is all for this week. Frontburner is brought to you by CBC News and CBC Podcasts. The show is produced this week by Imogen Burchard, Elaine

Chow, Ashley Fraser, Ali Janes and Derek Vanderwyk. Derek also did our sound design this week with Mackenzie Cameron. Our music is by Joseph Chabison of Boombox Sound. The executive producer of Front Burner is Nick McKay-Blocos, and I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening, and we will talk to you on Monday. Thank you.