The Possible Meaning and Impacts of Huawei Global CFO Arrest in Canada

by

Huawei’s global chief financial officer, Meng Wanzhou, has been arrested in Vancouver and is being sought for extradition by the US government. The reason was because Huawei violated US sanctions against Iran.

Hong Kong fell about 2.5% and Tokyo stocks closed down 1.9%. Shanghai’s market fell 1.7%, while US stock futures were pointing down more than 1%. Major indexes in Europe fell by around 1% to 1.5% in morning trading.

Is this just to send the signal to China that the US is still super-serious about the downside actions if there is no successful trade deal?

Is it hardball trade deal negotiations and a warning to the world about the seriousness of Iran sanctions.

Does this mean that China will arrest US executives?

Does this mean that Russia will arrest foreign executives?

It does toss create a lot of uncertainty now because we clearly do not know how this will play out. It could end up being smoothed over at the end but it seems like a move with a lot of risk.

It is very obvious that Iran sanctions will stay locked down as long as it takes to make them do whatever the US wants. The US and especially Texas wins with less Iranian oil. The US is becoming a major exporter of oil and not needing any imports. The only imports of oil will be unrefined oil which the US will make money in refining and then re-exporting.

Meng is also the daughter of Huawei’s founder.

Michael Every, head of Asia-Pacific research at investment bank Rabobank says “It’s as strong a message to China’s elites as a horse’s head in your bed,” he wrote in a note to clients.

Separately Notice How China Has a Lot of Powerful Women Executives. This is not the case in the US

China has a lot of powerful and competent women executives. This is the case even at technology companies. This is not the case in the USA.

The USA also has very few chinese-american executives of any gender. Obviously, China is filled with powerful and effective business and political executives who are all chinese.

In 2011, about 19 percent of Chinese women who are in management positions hold the title of CEO, the second highest percentage recorded among 39 countries and regions included in a recent survey. The average figure for the world was 8 percent, according to the 2011 Grant Thornton International Business Report. This is an older statistic, but I am pretty sure not much has changed in China or in the rest of the world.

92 thoughts on “The Possible Meaning and Impacts of Huawei Global CFO Arrest in Canada”

  1. No, it didn’t. It stated that there was a verbal agreement.

    Verbal agreements in relations between governments are not agreements and certainly not treaties.

    You said there was an agreement submitted to the GOP Senate but that it voted it down. No verbal agreement ever gets submitted to the Senate, ever.

  2. The agreement existed. Your link states so. And soon the nuclear weapons will also exist because Trump has to undo everything President Obama did.

  3. As I stated an agreement was reached.

    You stated it was submitted to the Senate to ratify when no such thing happened.

    No ratification = no agreement.

    And Trump broke it for nothing.

    He can’t break an agreement that never existed.

    YOU screwed up by a) claiming there was an agreement submitted to the Senate and b) he Republican Senate refused to do so because the President was a Democrat.

    No such thing ever occurred.

  4. The person is an idiot because their request demonstrates they cannot cope with the real world.

    No it doesn’t suggest anything of the kind. Sexist, yes. But not and idiot because he ‘cannot cope with the real world’. By his very request as stated, he clearly understands the UGLY reality that the real world can be, obviously. 🙂

  5. As I stated an agreement was reached. And Trump broke it for nothing. If I was Iran I would immediately restart my nuclear weapon program since I have nothing to gain by not doing so. And to finance the program I would agree to sell nuclear weapons under the table to any nation or group willing to purchase including the Mexican drug gangs.

  6. The person is an idiot because their request demonstrates they cannot cope with the real world. Do they live in a box? I feel sorry for this idiot. Who is this person to say who is attractive and who is not anyway? I find their comment much uglier than the photo I can tell you. Can I ban all comments like this person’s now?

  8. There was no signed agreement by the Iranians, let along NO agreement submitted to Congress to ratify as a binding Treaty.

    At.

    All.

    As per Obama’s OWN State Department: https://www.scribd.com/document/291042867/Letter-from-State-Department-Regarding-JCPOA#fullscreen&from_embed

    Also, Obama didn’t submit the Paris Agreement (despite there being at least something signed by all parties) to Congress, too. He publicly stated he wouldn’t and he didn’t.

    Congress can not vote on any treaty not submitted to it by the Executive branch, period.

    And even IF you were correct in that the Iran Agreement was submitted to Congress and the Senate refused to ratify it, that does not prove that ‘the next GOP president’ (presumably Trump) ignored it, since even then it wasn’t a ratified treaty AS YOU SAY.

    So where is your proof that a) the Iran agreement was an actual signed treaty by the Iranians and b) it was submitted to the Senate but voted down? WHERE?

  9. There was an agreement. The agreement was submitted to the Senate to ratify. The Republican Senate refused to do so because the President was a Democrat. But this agreement was signed by a group of nations.

    If I was Iran I would restart the centrifuges and tell the terrorists that their nuclear bombs will be ready soon. Breaking agreements should have consequences.

  10. Yes it is important. You only say that because you won’t answer the questions I ask because we both know the answers and those answers totally obliviate your claim that GOP presidents ignore treaties; you can’t name one treaty a GOP president has ignored.

  11. Isn’t really that important. Trump will eventually be gone. And hopefully the next Senate and the next President will be Democratic. And they will just undo whatever Trump has done. That is the great thing about time. It heals all wounds.

  12. Republican Senates won’t approve treaties by Democratic Presidents. They also won’t interview Supreme Court appointees by Democratic President. That is the new norm. Hopefully, four years from now the Democrats will have a super majority in the Senate.

  13. Dude there are severed horse head pillow cases or outright shaped pillows on sale on the internet. No joke. Just google ‘horse head pillow’.

  14. It wasn’t a treaty. It wasn’t anything written down, period.

    The Iranians never signed anything.

    But that isn’t as important as why would any country ever, ever sign a treaty with the US when the next Republican President will just ignore it

    What treaties are you referring to? The Paris Agreement was not a treaty, if you are thinking of that. Never was. Ever.

    So what treaties has Trump ‘ignored’?

  15. Yes plus IP theft, plus requirements for local partners.

    Tariffs are just to compensate for zombie SOEs. Not an end in themselves at all just a way to force China to look in to changing how it interacts with foreign businesses.

  16. I think that if they do something to retaliate that it just tells foreign businesses that they will turn on you and that you are just a chip in the game.

    And honestly how do you sleep while someone is putting a severed horse head in your bed? That part of the Godfather never worked for me.

  17. “But that isn’t as important as why would any country ever, ever sign a treaty with the US when the next Republican President will just ignore it.”

    Well duh because actual treaties are legally binding. If this had been a treaty then the Iranians could have shown up in DC Circuit court and sued Trump for breaking the treaty.

    Amazing things law, treaties. Obama just figured that Hillary would win and carry on with the verbal agreement.

  18. Spoke too soon?

    Seems like all japanese carriers are now preparing to remove Huawei/ZTE carrier gear, based on guidance from the government. This anti-chinese putsch is really gearing up all over now. With japan, the US, and a handful of other countries now banning Huawei gear, that’s closing off some major markets. While the chinese domestic market is huge and still growing, that’s gotta hurt Huawei long term.

  19. Not particularly. Qualcomm just wants to sell chips with integrated 5G modems, which due to their stranglehold on related patents to client access, means if you want to have an integrated SoC with 4G/5G modem for your smartphones you need to pay the Qualcomm tax. Huawei mostly has control over cell tower/carrier core stuff along with aspects of the core protocols (but 3GPP makes those accessible under RAND terms, which is why Facebook’s open software/hardware stuff for carrier cores and cell towers so interesting).

  21. The rule for Presidents is that you turn the other cheek. President Obama was disrespected and abuse on daily basis. And Trump was one of his main bully. So karma.

  23. He was also deeply embedded in the rather Game of Thrones power struggles in the Saudi Arabian Monarchy.

    What is striking is just how involved Turkey has been in all of this, which begs the question, why does Turkey, who rather routinely murders journalists critical of the government want this one, in particular to be front page news?

  24. An interesting observation was made by Scott Adams that this may be being done now on the belief the China does not want more publicity on what Huawei has been up to, and is stuck letting this one be handled in obscurity, rather the public, and so this was an opportune time to nail that group for subverting the sanctions.

    That this seems to have largely been a whisper in the headlines seems to be bearing that hypothesis out.

  25. The Senate never signed it. But that isn’t as important as why would any country ever, ever sign a treaty with the US when the next Republican President will just ignore it. If you don’t want to send our children to fight forever wars to be killed or maimed you learn to negotiate and follow treaties.

  26. ‘Chamberlain appeased a monster (which didn’t work) ‘
    Maybe it did. Hitler wanted a war in 1938, for which the UK and its allies were grossly unprepared. Chamberlain bought him off at the cost of the Sudetenland ( which was majority German.) Chamberlain at the time
    was hugely popular in Germany, whose citizens also didn’t want a war. In the meantime the Brits started mass producing the Spitfires that saved their bacon when the Phony War ended two years later.
    Anyway, does that make Shih Hitler ? I thought Trump had that role ( or was it Mussolini’s ?)

  27. “How is requesting NBF not to post photos of ugly women constitute being an idiot?”

    It actually is, no matter what she looks like, it has nothing to do with the article – subject. The pic gives us a face to connect to the person. While she may not be a supermodel, I think she looks OK. Definitely not ugly.
    I think after a make over session commensurate to her wealth she could look a stunner.

  28. ” abolish all its tariffs and trade barriers”
    But isn’t that what Trump wanted in the first place? I believe one of the points that triggered the confrontation was, that China imports into the US with minimal duties, and slams US products with ridiculously high duties.

  29. Assange never got an arrest warrant issued by the US for selling US secrets. He has/has had warrants issued by the Swedes and Brits for other reasons.

    There might be an arrest warrant issued by the US for crime(s) that don’t have to do with national secrets.

  30. How is requesting NBF not to post photos of ugly women constitute being an idiot? Being politically incorrect is not idiocy.

  32. What deal?

    Show me the signed document for this ‘deal’.

    Good luck with that as the Iranians never signed one.

    But if you should find it, show me in the Congressional Record the Senate resolution that ratified it as a binding Treaty. Good luck with that one, too.

  33. the Asia Times is being silly.

    Yes, and so is the America-hating person who called that ‘rational insight’, too.

  36. Who cares what the EU sees it as?

    As for EU firms: They face a fine or being cut off from transacting international business in USD. Even worse, their banks could be cut off from SWIFT as well if one of their clients does not comply with US laws in violation of EU ones.

    Guess who will ‘win’ under that situation? Hint: It won’t be the EU.

    The sanctions were imposed unilaterally without the authorization of the Security Council

    So? The US doesn’t need authorization by the Security Council to impose sanctions. And if the Security Council has a prob with that, the US veto on the Council will pretty much put that to rest.

    …other parties to JCPOA including the EU, UK, China and Russia continue to honor the agreement.

    Good for them! Just as long as their firms do not use the SWIFT system to trade with Iran, they should be golden!

    We can assume that the courts will not uphold the U.S. claim and that Meng will soon be on a plane to Beijing.

    Where do you have any basis on that ‘assumption’…other than you hate the US calling the shots like this?

  39. Evdiently the US didn’t care about that. Not surprising considering who is in the Oval Office. Corporal Bone Spurs is not an exemplar of morals, honesty or empathy.

  40. Hope is not analysis. She is in NA, a place were no one gives a fig about international law. Maybe Xi should offer Corporal Bone Spurs a bribe. I am sure his current AG would go along with it.

  41. China has a ‘low trust’ culture. So connections and clannish ties matter more than things like the rule of law. Nepotism is actually a good thing in this system.

  43. Keep up with the wu mau propaganda, Godfree.

    What is really sad about all that is that your loyalty to Beijing is taken for granted, don’t you know that?

  44. A multi-polar world is much better where everyone treats each other fairly

    Don’t you mean more like: A multi-polar world is much better where everyone screws each other roughly equally

  45. Senator Sasse is running the DoJ? Wow! Could have fooled me.

    However, the EU views these sanctions as illegal and its Blocking Statute will result in fines against EU companies that comply with the sanctions.

    So, EU firms get cut off from being able to conduct transactions in dollars and not face fines or pay the fines but continue to be able to conduct transactions in dollars?

    They might even be dumped by their banks because the US can target them simply for being involved in the forbidden SWIFT transactions to.

    So what will really happens is corrupt Eurocrats will only fine those companies that don’t have any political pull while it won’t fine those that do, period.

    The sanctions were imposed unilaterally without the authorization of the Security Council or the consent of Congress.

    1) Who cares about the Security Council? 2) Congress did allow for it by giving US Presidents the authority to levy sanctions just like this.

    Do you know ANYTHING about the US governmental system? I think not given how you think that Senators are in the Executive Branch.

    They were imposed after the U.S. claimed that Iran violated the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA)

    There was no JCPOA. Show us the signed document with the signatures of Iranian officials on it. Good luck with that: It doesn’t exist.

    As a result all other parties to JCPOA including the EU, UK, China and Russia continue to honor the agreement.

    1) There’s no agreement and 2) So what?

  47. Yeah really. It’s better, of course. But I’m so skeptical I’ll disbelief the idea that whatever one or few powers at the top won’t abuse of their influence.

    And the European refugees are today’s excuse for xenophobia that goes back decades.

  48. The “crime” according to Senator Sasse is that Huawei continues to do business with Iran in violation of the unilateral sanctions imposed by the Trump administration. However, the EU views these sanctions as illegal and its Blocking Statute will result in fines against EU companies that comply with the sanctions.
    The sanctions were imposed unilaterally without the authorization of the Security Council or the consent of Congress. They were imposed after the U.S. claimed that Iran violated the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA). There is no verifiable evidence that Iran has violated the terms of JCPOA. As a result all other parties to JCPOA including the EU, UK, China and Russia continue to honor the agreement.
    We can assume that the courts will not uphold the U.S. claim and that Meng will soon be on a plane to Beijing.

  50. China has all the technology she needs. Some of it, like Huawei’s, is ahead of ours and some a generation behind. If we cut off all exports to China she could still produce everything she needs and, within 2 years, all the components would be as good as ours.

  53. Powerful female Chinese execs are a result of nepotism and corruption, not enlightenment. If she did something wrong, she should be prosecuted. If she did nothing wrong, she should go free. Either way, I think she gets let off the hook.

  54. Not really. The Soviet Union kept the US in check (and vice versa) for several years. A multi-polar world is much better where everyone treats each other fairly. Also not sure what European refugees has to do with the US bullying other countries.

  55. I wonder if this is part of the war over 5G? Due to what can probably be described as dereliction of duty, the 5G spec was effectively defined by Huawei. Which means highest compatibility and earliest to market for carrier 5G gear will be Huawei. The only reasonable alternatives are Nokia and Ericsson.

    Just yesterday, an epic global meltdown of 11 4G LTE carriers due to Ericsson carrier software having an expired certificate doesn’t help matters. Notable here is Softbank in japan went down for about 6 hours or so, and Softbank is partnering with Huawei for their 5G rollout up until now. But with all the moaning and groaing over Huawei from the US, that might come into jeopardy (but who else will step up? Ericsson is still screwing up, Nokia is a declining star, and it’s not like NEC will step up to the plate).

  56. I see your point. If China quiet then you win. If strong response my win. But regardless … you were, and are, wrong on Elon 🙂

  57. No it won’t.

    His main claim to fame with the business community (southern-coastal China) is how he can handle those Americans.

    Everything Trump has thrown at him proves otherwise. It is by intention on the US side, too. OR…worse: it shows to many that the US has finally wised up and it doesn’t matter who is in Beijing…and by logical inference thus it doesn’t matter if it is Xi or not. This is causing a crisis of confidence in the Party and business community too. Even in the military. That is NOT good for Xi or for whomever is in power right now in China.

    Savvy insiders in China see this for what it is no matter how much Xi, his cronies and the armies of wu mau Internet forum trolls try to spin it otherwise.

  58. This will strengthen Xi domestically. Huawei is to China as Apple is to US. IMO this was a bad move …. but US market down less than most in Asia …

  60. No, the Japanese attacked us because they were desperate after we cut off their supplies of oil, rubber, etc. from them.

    They literally were going to run out of fuel for most of their economy. They had not choice but to go for it.

  61. Statistically, US citizens/residents commit on average three felonies per day, too.

    We need criminal justice reform that involves cutting down 99% of the felonies on the books and restricts the creation of new felonies to only via an Act of Congress, if you ask me.

  64. You count your money when the game ends and not while playing.

    And MAGA was the phrase for those Americans that didn’t want America in WW2. The Japanese took that as a sign that America didn’t have the guts for a fight so they attacked Pearl Harbor.

  66. Every company in the world probably violate US laws in one way or the other. Something simple as having union employees that must pay their dues. Laws on pollution.

  67. The Iranians did what was agreed to. The US was the one that reneged on the deal. I wouldn’t play Charlie Brown to the US Lucy. If I was China then yes I would first express my displeasure and ask for her to be freed. Then if she was not freed I would arrest a few US executives.

  68. she committed the alleged crimes while on U.S. soil, that’s one thing. If she committed them while in China, that’s quite another.

    Not if she’s being charged as an Officer of a company doing business in the US or trading with US businesses or conducting financial transactions with US dollars. The Iran sanctions and criminal liability thereof thus apply to Huawei and/or the officers (in this case, her) of Huawei that committed said crimes. Doesn’t matter if she committed them from China or Timbuktu or wherever just as it doesn’t matter if US residents/citizens commit them from China or Timbuktu or wherever, either.

    Still, the US could have just done this to poke Xi’s nose and don’t really care for the results of the extradition hearing by the Canadian judge. Xi’s domestic position has weakened considerably thanks to a POTUS who no longer is playing Globalist Ball. This raises the stakes publicly in Beijing even more, which is what Trump really wants. Either way: Trump wins!

    #MAGA USA! USA! USA!

  69. That response still does not change the Neville Chamberlain characteristic of that sentence you just wrote, Gary.

  70. Another waste of effort in commenting deleted here. My crime: Keep poking NBF for its ridiculous association of Peter Zeihan with George Friedman’s 1991 book The Coming War With Japan. Peter Zeihan is roughly my age or even younger. That meant he was either still in high school/early college in 1991.

    If NBF can’t handle the heat because it got caught flat flooted making ridiculous points, it shouldn’t make those points to begin with, not censor those who point out said ridiculous points.

  71. If you really wanted them to punish Hauwei then you should want the US to forbid the sale of US technology of them. They would be out of business in a couple of months. Of course you’d rather appease business interests than destroy our relations with every other country on earth. Chamberlain appeased a monster (which didn’t work) but it seems like the monsters that Trump appeases are the large international corporations (which probably will be just as likely to stop their bad behavior as Germany was.)

  72. How do you feel about Australian Julian Assange, who published US secrets while he was nowhere near US soil?

    Easy answer: It sucks to be Julian Assange.

    More detailed answer: He had arrests warrants from Sweden and the UK he was avoiding, not the US.

    Even more detailed answer: United States prosecutors accidentally revealed the existence of criminal charges against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange in an unrelated ongoing sex crime case in the Eastern District of Virginia. So if they do seek extradition, it will be because of that alleged crime THAT WAS committed in the US, anyway.

    You America-haters should really, really get your facts straight.

  73. She is neither a U.S. citizen, was not in the U.S., and had nothing to do with the U.S. itself.

    What do you mean?

    She is an executive officer of a company that does business in the US that violated US law. What planet are you on?

    This arrest is a form of extraterritorial jurisdiction of the likes we have not seen since the 19th century.

    Wrong. While this does not happen all the time, it is not uncommon either.

    The U.S. government is saying that it considers all humans and the entire world to be under its legal jurisdiction.

    No, just the ones that violate US law or are executives of corporations with a presence in the US that violate US law. Many other nations have the same standard and have extradition treaties of their own to enforce them on people outside their immediate jurisdiction. The US is not ‘special’ in this regard. Not by a long shot.

    This is why Canada arrested her: Canada has similar laws and can — and does — extradite those arrested on their behalf in the US who violate them as well.

    And a Canadian judge has to approve the actual extradition first, btw.

    All normal, international jurisprudence.

  74. Just when you think our foreign relations couldn’t get any worse the Trump Administration comes up with something to really poke the hornet’s nest.

    Spoken like a True Neville Chamberlain, Gary.

  75. Is this just to send the signal to China that the US is still super-serious about the downside actions if there is no successful trade deal?

    I don’t think that there will be a trade deal. Or if there is, it will just be a ‘stay of execution’, no more. The real goal is for the US to cut off dependency on China and disrupt the Chinese export profit gravy train, period. Geopolitical castration, in otherwords.

    Does this mean that China will arrest US executives?

    Let’s hope Beijing is that stupid! It will only fuel the fire of Trumpist Protectionism here at home. Even some of the Bernie-Ocasiocrats on the other side might jump on that bandwagon if Beijing should so overreact, too!

    The US is becoming a major exporter of oil and not needing any imports. The only imports of oil will be unrefined oil which the US will make money in refining and then re-exporting.

    Something Peter Zeihan gets into extensively in this books. And his predictions on that have been dead right. But it NBF would rather insinuate that Zeihan is responsible for George Friedman’s book “The Coming War With Japan” published in 1991 when Zeihan in all probability wasn’t even old enough/still in college to be working for STRATFOR… 🙂

    “It’s as strong a message to China’s elites as a horse’s head in your bed”

    For Millennials, you’ll have to see The Godfather or read the book in order to understand that cultural reference. Boy did our pathetic education system really do you guys a number or what, eh?

  76. Somebody senior in the Trump Administration probably had the final say in this so on the face of this, the Asia Times is being silly. The Trump Administration is highly capable of sabotaging itself. Trump himself said the tariffs were a good thing and maybe he wanted an excuse (which China will likely now give him) to not drop them.

  77. It’s always been this way and it would be some other country if it weren’t the USA.

    Better this than “yellow peril” fueled public support for actual war, which is what used to be normal just a few decades ago. Just like the current idiotic fringe (arguably fringe?) rhetoric about Europe and the USA being overrun with dirty brown people (pick your specific flavor of).

    Within a century none of this stupidity will matter. We just need to squeek by roughly that lapse of time.

  78. Just when you think our foreign relations couldn’t get any worse the Trump Administration comes up with something to really poke the hornet’s nest. I say foreign relations here and not Chinese relations because this action has implications for all countries and not just China. First, will countries stop honoring their extradition treaties with us or worse yet tear them up? Second, will countries try to do the same to US executives traveling abroad? Third, will some companies just stop dealing with the US when possible? I’m sure I missed lots of unintended consequences of this but I fear this will make Trump’s trade war look like tiddly winks by comparison.

  79. How do you feel about Australian Julian Assange, who published US secrets while he was nowhere near US soil? Chinese CFO was likewise providing restricted US technology to its enemy Iran. Note that it wasn’t that she was providing Chinese technology, she was providing US technology to Iran, which her company was only allowed to use if it didn’t go to enemies like Iran.

  80. She was selling US technology to Iran, which is in violation of US law. Her company has a right to sell its own technology to Iran, because the US has no rights over her company and its own intellectual property. But it was US technology which she was providing to Iran, and the US has authority over its own technology and intellectual property. By doing this, she provoked the US into filing for an international arrest warrant. Same thing happened when Australian Julian Assange published US secrets while being nowhere near US soil.

  82. Yes, but what you are talking about is a U.S. law. Since when are Chinese citizens living in China under U.S. legal jurisdiction? Tell me how than is not extraterritoriality, in the 19th century imperialist sense.

  83. There are laws in China and then there is what companies get away with. The two aren’t the same. This isn’t about arresting CFOs/CEOs. It is about companies that sell goods to Iran and North Korea. Huawei in this case is doing what ZTE was doing just with Iran instead of North Korea.

    In the end if Chinese companies break agreements and the Chinese government won’t stop them then it becomes the responsibility of other nations to stop them.

    From my time in China I learned that China is somewhat lawless. Sure there are plenty of laws but they are viewed as optional. In some cases laws are simply opportunities to accept bribes. That is why there is so much pollution and corruption even though the laws say there shouldn’t be.

    I don’t prefer this outcome, it invites a response in kind. China could arrest Mr Zuckerburg for any one of a number of things (they can keep him). But if China is going to look the other way and let their companies break the law then there are going to be consequences.

  85. We make the tech, we set the terms for its use, if you violate those terms that were agreed to, and infringe our national security interests get ready to have the hammer come down. Yes, we will hunt you down anywhere, yes we will bring you into compliance with our rules. Don’t like it? Don’t buy our tech. In China’s case, and Huawei chiefly, also don’t steal it: Huawei and Cisco’s Source Code: Correcting the Record – Cisco Blog
    https://blogs.cisco.com/news/huawei-and-ciscos-source-code-correcting-the-record

  86. I think the Kim Dotcom case is relevant here, and yes, I am going to follow this closely. Brian, keep us informed on this.

  87. Agreed. She is neither a U.S. citizen, was not in the U.S., and had nothing to do with the U.S. itself. This arrest is a form of extraterritorial jurisdiction of the likes we have not seen since the 19th century. The U.S. government is saying that it considers all humans and the entire world to be under its legal jurisdiction. I see this as an example similar to that of Kim Dotcom as well as Julian Assange.

  88. Canada had no choice but to detain her, as that is a legal obligation under our extradition treaty with the U.S.. However, we are NOT obligated to extradite her. The U.S. justice department will have to prove their case against her in a Canadian court room. It remains to be seen whether they have any real evidence against her or whether these are just Trumped up charges (pun intended). If the latter, she will not be extradited. Then there is the issue of the applicability of U.S. law in an extraterritorial context. If she committed the alleged crimes while on U.S. soil, that’s one thing. If she committed them while in China, that’s quite another. The legality of the extraterritorial application of U.S. law might well be another issue that will be tested in court. Should be interesting…

  90. Don’t kid yourself. This a way of saying to the Chinese that the USA is number one and it’s going to stay that way no mater what it cost in gold or blood.

  92. Another incredibly stupid and dangerous precedent being set by the us, the worlds biggest bully. I’m pissed that Canada is complicit in this action.

Comments are closed.