Monday, November 18, 2019



By Robin Mathews, November, 2019.

The Vancouver Extradition procedure requested by the U.S. government (of the Canadian government) intends to remove Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer of the huge Huawei international technology Corporation, to the U.S.A. for trial... for various alleged wrong-doings. The request is freighted with contradictions.  On the face of it a perfectly reasonable request under the Canada/U.S. Extradition Treaty was made which requires (and is proceeding) that the subject of the request, Meng Wanzhou, undergo a process in Canadian court to determine that the U.S. request is legitimate and, if so, to then be handed to U.S. authorities for trial in the U.S.A.

A Canadian can argue that the request has been made in proper form and the treaty is a common structure among countries (China apparently has a number of extradition treaties) and Canada is simply fulfilling its obligation and must do so.

The request, however, exists in a global condition in which the U.S.A. sees itself in contest with China over trade matters, spheres of influence, military power, and control of geographical areas (like the South China sea, etc.).  In addition, the Chinese may see Canada as nothing more than a U.S. lackey.

In South and Central America where the U.S.A. promotes and supports  thug leadership which aligns with U.S. policy, it has trained some of those leaders in the U.S. School of the Americas. Both Russia and China have been known to support legitimate forces struggling to represent the people of those countries against U.S. thug policies and allies.  In almost every case, Canada has supported the most egregious violators of Human Rights put in place or openly supported by the U.S.A. in Central and South America.

China, therefore, has no reason to believe that Canada is acting purely out of the requirements of the Extradition Treaty with the U.S.A (but, perhaps, as a known and proved lackey of whatever U.S. policy is hatched.)

As in all well-run Communist Societies, merit and need decide the lives of the Chinese people: from each according to his (her) ability, and to each according to his (her) need.  Meng Wanzhou's father is an especially talented man creating, according to his ability Huawei, over which he still retains a measure of power.  His needs being especially great (as a man of genius), he is now listed as a billionaire. And Huawei, in keeping with the operative policy in China, exists in the structure of Socialism with Chinese characteristics. As an independent Free Market corporation, Huawei may or may not, ultimately, take direction from the Chinese government.

The founder's daughter, Meng joined Huawei, we are told, as an answerer of telephones.  But having great ability, she now contributes as Chief Financial Officer and a member of the Board of Huawei her relation to the founder, her father, the powerful billionaire, has had no bearing upon her rise (from sheer ability) in the Corporation.  Her needs, too, are significant and upon her arrest in Vancouver, she was able to choose which of her Real Estate holdings "valued overall at something more than twenty million dollars"  she would choose as a place to reside during the legal process.

A further complication "if not a major contradiction in the matter" involves the violations with which Meng Wanzhou is charged. She was arrested on suspicion of violating U.S. Trade Sanctions against Iran.  Those are unilateral U.S. Sanctions which have been questioned by many and rejected by the United Nations.  Upon the discovery of Iran's nuclear undertaking (earlier), a Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action was initiated by a number of countries, the U.S. among them.  The U.S. withdrew (May, 2018) claiming a horrible agreement criticism which the UN didn't recognize.

U.S.-Iran Relations might fill an encyclopaedia.  Suffice it to say that since the forcible removal of the Shah of Iran, 1979, (a U.S. puppet), the U.S. (deeply interested in the oil-rich nation) has wanted to exert a proprietary hold on the country.  And so the withdrawal of the U.S. in May, 2018, from the Joint (many nation) Comprehensive Plan Of Action (approved by the UN) to oversee Iran's development of nuclear power for peaceful purposes led to the re-institution of heavy U.S. sanctions against Iran รข€¦ not approved of by many other countries.

In that light alone, the U.S. allegations against Huawei and Meng Wanzhou are open to serious question.  Nevertheless, she is charged by the U.S.A. with conspiracy to defraud multiple international institutions; to defraud certain banks by pretending to clear money for a corporation in order to disguise its dealing with Iran; with wire fraud to mask sales to Iran; with obstruction of justice and with misappropriating trade secrets.

A reasonable Canadian might observe that the U.S. sanctions against Iran are highly questionable and so being able to violate them (questionable sanctions) may be equally questionable.  And in that light, some argued at the time of the arrest of Meng Wanzhou that she should have been released because the U.S. sanctions against Iran are illegitimate.  As true as that may be or have been, Canada felt bound by its Extradition Treaty with the U.S.A. to arrest and to hear the arguments in Court for and against there being a legal basis for the arrest.

A more serious contradiction in the whole matter has been engaged in by China, which has chosen to arrest, hold in torture conditions, and not bring to trial two (actually more) unrelated and innocent Canadians! But Canada didn't request the Extradition of Meng Wanzhou: the U.S.A. did. And so China should have seized U.S. citizens in China, demanding that the request for extradition of Meng Wanzhou be withdrawn by the U.S.A.  HERE, the contradictions of Big Power Politics seem clearly to be in play.  China appears to have been afraid to offend the U.S.A. in a matter wholly created by the U.S.A.  Instead, China decided to beat up Canada for something Canada is not responsible for.  And, to rub salt into the wound, China bought products from the U.S.A. to make up for products it refused to buy from Canada!

The real possibility that the whole scenario is a sham points to another  serious contradiction.  And that is the failure to use the Canadian courts expeditiously to manage Canadian needs. No one claims that wait times and procedure times and accessibility to Canadian courts are reasonable for Canadians.  But the courts can be used endlessly on call to please a country (the USA) seeking, perhaps, false charges against a trade competitor.

The Canadian State, moreover, which leapt to serve the dubious request of the U.S. has still not moved on the gigantic False Flag, fake Islamic Terrorist Event at the B.C. Legislature grounds on July 1, 2013, an event alleged (by TWO higher courts) to have been intricately and criminally created by the RCMP, involving the entrapment, improper incarceration, fake charges, and enormous mental stress to two wholly innocent Canadians who have not received a single gesture of compensation from the RCMP or the Government of Canada ! !

Contradictions in the Meng Wanzhou Extradition case in the Vancouver Courts pile up as I write, not only in Canada, but in the lands of the two principals in the case, both apparently too powerful to be challenged or to be bothered much with Truth and Justice.

 Contact: Robin Mathews

No comments: