Exercise increased caution in China due to arbitrary enforcement of local laws as well as special restrictions on dual U.S.-Chinese nationals.
-First sentence of US Embassy's travel advisory for China, dated 3 January
National Guard vet laid to rest after mysterious death on Chinese plane
-Headline of New York Post article from the 4th of January
Shit just got real.
Not the most scholarly sentence to begin an entry in a blog by a self-styled academic, I'll admit, but sometimes the pearls of wisdom are found within the linguistic quagmire of popular culture rather than the white-washed temples of academe, and this would certainly appear to be one of those times. For any American living in China, the air is getting thin lately and it's not from the pollution.
Here's Just Huawei Got to This Point In the First Place
It began with the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, Chief Financial Officer of Huawei, Chairwoman of its Board of Directors, and daughter of the company's founder (though I'm sure nepotism absolutely played no part in her appointment to that position, right?). Meng was arrested for her role in helping Huawei skirt US sanctions on Iran while conducting business in the US, and was apprehended by Canadian authorities upon her arrival in Vancouver on Dec. 1, as per an extradition treaty between Canada and the US (Horowitz). Immediately, the Chinese government did the only thing they know how to do in the face of allegations. They vehemently denied that it was in any way conceivable that anyone Chinese could possibly be guilty of a crime, raved against Canada for daring not to recognize what they consider obvious; namely, that Chinese are incapable of breaking laws and immune to punishment if they ever prove the aforementioned statement wrong (CCTV, Youtube), and swore that her arrest and subsequent detention in a Canadian prison was a "violation of her Human Rights (CGTN, Anonymous Editorial via Global Times)," though I'm curious how China reconciles such a claim with their detention of Canadian citizens with neither trial nor Consular access, but more on that later.
Canadian delegates' attempts to explain this foreign concept of "we simply apply the law, the same way, every time," have thus far been unsuccessful (Connolly). Canada's attempts to explain that it would be virtually impossible to get the judicial system to go along with a political stunt and that the reason for this arrest was simply a matter of law, have fallen on deaf ears in China. It's not simply that they do not believe it, it's deeper than that. Most of the Chinese do not even have a mental frame of reference to conceptualize what an "independent judiciary" even is. Observe.
"The so-called "judiciary independence" means that the court can make any judgment it wishes within the scope stipulated by the law in trial of cases regardless of any consequence caused by the judgment... Chinese judges have to consider the law and the social effect of judgment in the trial of cases."
-Yan Jirong et al., China's Governance p. 78
This passage from a Renmin University Press book about China's legal system shows the mental block. The Chinese are baffled by this idea that Western judges "can do whatever they want as long as it's the law," and are not bound to obey the political whims of the regime (and in fact that the judicial system in Western countries is typically designed specifically to oppose the other two branches), and that there does not exist a government mechanism whereby the government could compel the judicial branch to go along with such a scheme even if the Administration DID want it. The notion that the judicial system is not under the thumb of the other two branches is complete anathema to the Chinese, whose society is built upon absolute authority of a Party whose will overrules law, and Canada is making an admirable effort to explain that to the knuckle-draggers China so laughably refers to as a government. Of course, from my experience within China, it's difficult for me to conceive of China's government seeing Canada's frank and honest explanation as anything other than "making excuses," because that's precisely what they would do. In their eyes it was a political play -the taking of hostages as political leverage- because... well, because that's what they would do too.
And I don't say that in speculation. We've seen it before.
You Think the Chinese are Bound by Law?! Foolish Laowai!
"Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara called China's reaction to the continued detention of the captain 'hysterical.' He could just as easily have called it 'typical.' "
Steven W. Mosher, Bully of Asia, p. 202
In 2010, during heightened tension between Japan and China over China's illegal claims to the Senkakku Islands, a chain of islands between Taiwan and Japan known in Mandarin as the Diaoyu Islands, a Chinese trawler captain named Zhan Qixiong was illegally fishing near the islands. The Japanese Coast Guard, having dealt with such asinine behavior from Chinese "patriots" who mistakenly believe fishing in someone else's waters illegally claimed by your government is a show of courage many times before, went to take the captain into custody. However, the captain, who was drunk (McGregor, R., 262) tried repeatedly to ram the Japanese Coast Guard vessels. When the JCG (who exercised more restraint than I would have shown in their determination not to employ lethal force in their defense) finally succeeded in boarding the ship and arresting the crew, China's response was to arrest for Japanese employees of Fujita Corporation on allegations of "filming military targets," though not a single shred of evidence was ever presented to substantiate these claims (Mosher, 202). The Chinese position was "evidence? What's that? You say the Chinese guy actually committed a crime? That's irrelevant. A nation of 'laowai barbarians' dared arrest a citizen of 'the Great and Glorious Middle Kingdom!' We will retaliate by arresting anyone we choose from the 'offending' nation."
The situation for Japanese in China was the same then as it is for Canadians today. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued public statements telling the people how outraged they should be, and the people took to the internet to obey. Japanese citizens anywhere in China were subject to harassment. If you were Japanese in China, you were in danger of being the government's next hostage on fabricated charges at any moment. Violent crimes committed against Japanese citizens by the rank and file neanderthals who inhabit the Chinese mainland were mysteriously overlooked by Chinese police and courts until Japan released the criminal whom China claimed had been "abducted." After a few weeks of the "Central Nation" not getting their way, they resorted to economic retaliation: they cut off their imports of rare earth minerals to Japan (Chu, 200). The message was clear. "Our citizens will do whatever they want in your country, and are above your laws. If you forget that, 'the Mighty China' has the right to punish you by force."
In the end, Japan conceded to Beijing's wishes. Beijing made a huge show of how they had brought Japan to heel, and it is likely that this incident was one of the moments when Japan realized they needed to strengthen their position against a suddenly-more-arrogant China. China was so pleased with the results of this tactic that it became their standard practice. Last summer, when a Chinese reporter in London was arrested for an assault she committed on camera (Siu), China's response was to declare the arrest an "infringement upon her freedom of speech" and a "violation of the free press (Allen)," which was also laughable coming from a country where neither right exists that it almost doesn't bear printing. Just like in the 2010 Japan incident, Chinese State media praised the arrested perpetrator as a hero and held them up as a martyr, a heroic victim of some foreign conspiracy to oppress China. In each case, China's tantrum became so unbearable that the nation who arrested the Chinese lawbreaker ended up releasing them to a hero's welcome back home in China.
Perhaps that's why Beijing is so perplexed that the same tactic is not working with Canada.
At Some Point, Trudeau Grew a Backbone
No one was that surprised when China' response to the Meng Wanzhou arrest came straight out of the same playbook as usual. Scant days after their petulant complaints about how Meng's Human Rights had allegedly been violated (because apparently stealing US technology while conducting business on US soil with for the express purpose of giving it to US enemies (Reuters) is a Human Right, according to the government that cannot even use the phrase Human Rights without putting it in quotes (Communique), the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs switched its tactic to threats, promising "grave consequences" to Canada if they failed to bow to Beijing's demands for their aristocrat to be granted immunity from prosecution for her crimes, putting a typically arrogant Chinese spin on this threat with their classic phrase commonly used when high-handedly 'passing judgement' on a 'laowai vassal' who dares step out of line, like an emperor speaking to one who somehow owes fealty to them: "hurting the feelings of the Chinese people." This phrase, verbatim, is used every time Beijing wants to say "last warning: we are China, you are not; you have no right to presume you are our equal. Submit or be 'punished.' "
Canada, however, did not budge. Their extradition treaty with the US states anyone who is a fugitive from one country and is found in the other country is subject to arrest, and they have stood by it. Even before Beijing issued this threat, Canadian media had been reasonably sure that arresting Canadians in China (likely on ridiculous charges written to be as sensational as possible) would be Beijing's next move (Mulroney). In fact, China's legion of social media parasites, known as the "Fifty Cent Party," were encouraging it.
As predicted, it was. On 11 December, less than 2 days after the "grave consequences" threat, a former Canadian Diplomat named Michael Kovrig was arrested in China on ill-defined charges of "threatening State Security (McGregor, J.)," which is China's catch-all charge for anyone they want to arrest but cannot pin a solid charge on. Michael Spavor, another Canadian citizen, was detained the same day on similarly ill-defined charges, and was not granted Consular access until a month after his arrest (and even then only after intense international media pressure). By comparison, Meng Wanzhou, whose crime is actually articulated and backed up by verifiable evidence, was given Consular access the very day she was detained (Elmer). In addition, Spavor has been denied access to a lawyer and is being held in an undisclosed location (Vanderklippe). Though China's constitution has claimed since 1996 to uphold the "innocent until proven guilty" principle (Pan & Ma, 74), China's Chief Prosecutor had no qualms about saying without any trial whatsoever “Without a doubt, these two Canadian citizens in China violated our country’s laws and regulations, and are currently undergoing investigation according to procedure (Vanderklippe)." You read that right. He states guilt before there has even been any investigation. And finally, just to make sure the world got the message that China was mad enough to start taking hostages, 13 Canadian citizens have been detained in China on charges of varying degrees of legitimacy since Meng's arrest (Zilio).
Of course, while Canada was the first target of China's tantrum over coming face-to-face with the reality that not all nations will kowtow to China's delusions of immunity (Canadians were the ones who made the arrest), they did eventually move on to the one who filed the request and is building the case: the United States. And apparently China has realized that the US is going to play hardball even more than Canada did, because they've already switched their tactics, in a BIG way.
So, Now the Americans
We've known from the beginning that China would eventually realize bullying Canada wasn't working (besides, they're making themselves look really foolish by having a second-tier regional player like Canada go toe-to-toe with a would-be "superpower" like China, and beating the "superpower"), and would eventually move on to Americans. As I mentioned above, a travel warning was issued on January 3 by the US State Department, prompt an immediate denial (I'm shocked, I tell ya) from China (Global News), though China made sure to give themselves plausible deniability in this speech by reiterating a series of incredibly vaguely defined circumstances under which they reserved the right to do precisely what the travel warning spoke of. To clarify, here is what the travel advisory warns about.
Chinese authorities have asserted broad authority to prohibit U.S. citizens from leaving China by using ‘exit bans,’ sometimes keeping U.S. citizens in China for years. China uses exit bans coercively:
to compel U.S. citizens to participate in Chinese government investigations,
to lure individuals back to China from abroad, and
to aid Chinese authorities in resolving civil disputes in favor of Chinese parties.
In most cases, U.S. citizens only become aware of the exit ban when they attempt to depart China, and there is no method to find out how long the ban may continue. U.S. citizens under exit bans have been harassed and threatened.
These "exit bans" line up with tactics already used by the Chinese government (Beauregard-Champagne), and the talk of compelling the detained to participate in internal investigations is an extremely mild way of describing the ludicrous farcical investigations and forced confessions outlined in Vanderklippe's article above. It is also worthy of note that getting a lawyer in China is not only difficult, but often useless even if you manage, since all lawyers in China are now required to swear an oath of allegiance to the Party (Gao), and isn't it funny that the first batch to take this oath were compelled to do so on the same day Meng was arrested? Never mind. In any case, recall Yan Jirong's words about the courts being subordinate to the Party and being required to consider the "social effect of the judgment?" If you are a lawyer on the Party payroll, and the law says you are accountable for a crime if your case has a bad social effect (with "bad" defined as "unfavorable t the Party"), are you going to represent someone who is targeted by the Party?
Right. Moving on.
In an case, when it comes to Americans, the courts are not the biggest problem to face in China. Recall the NYT headline I quoted at the beginning of this article? China is not above assassinations as revenge when they feel slighted (such as being shown that their citizens are not exempt from law when they go abroad) and frankly, there are signs they've already committed one as revenge for the arrest of their "princess."
Consider the case of Norman Easy, an American businessman (and National Guard retiree). Easy was on a China Eastern Airlines flight to Shanghai on December 7 (4 days after the announcement of Meng's arrest). However, he died en route, and the circumstances of his death leave a lot more questions than answers (Mongelli & Golding) For one thing, the answers about his time of death have been conflicting. Now frankly, given that many of the Consulate staff are Chinese, if that was the only suspicious circumstance I could chalk that up to incompetence and inability to communicate rather than malicious intentions, but there are other issues. For one, the Chinese authorities have refused to hand over the body until the family signs a waiver (get this) agreeing not to challenge China's account of what happened.
The family had to hire a private investigation firm to fly to Shanghai to look into the death (Dorn) and STILL had to sign the waiver, and that's where things get even stranger.
For one thing, the death certificate itself does not list the cause of death, according to Dorn. It merely says "sudden death." It's also interesting to note how the Chinese government and China Eastern Airlines (which, according to Wikipedia, is 61.64% owned BY the Chinese government) trip over themselves to repeatedly emphasize their claims that he did not eat or drink anything on the flight.
First of all, it's funny how they deny what no one asked and secondly, New York to Shanghai is a 15 hour flight. Given that Easy was allegedly found dead three hours before landing, that comes to a claim that he declined food or drink, while flying (which tends to make you hungry and thirsty), for 12 hours, and that's the story the Chinese authorities are sticking with. LTC Easy's body was finally returned to the US on 29 December, more than 3 weeks after his death (Mongelli), where an autopsy was performed. There is, at present, no readily available news about the condition of the body after three weeks in Chinese hands, and the family, having signed a waiver to be silent and also undoubtedly seeking to put the matter behind them, are not exactly flocking to the press.
So, to recap: at a time when China has lost face and is looking for revenge against the US for daring to call for the arrest of their spy princess, an American businessman who happens to be a US military veteran dies on Chinese-government-owned airline on his way to China, under shady circumstances that the Chinese government is not eager to disclose, and the body is held hostage until the grieving family agrees to keep silent, after which the Chinese government gives an incomplete death certificate and a suspicious story about the death, in which they are sure to insist that he could not have been poisoned (something no one suggested... yet)? Sorry, but I'm calling it. This man was assassinated. Hashtag, #sorrynotsorry. I have no idea why LTC Easy's story is not on the front page of every media outlet in the Western Hemisphere. I've seen the media cover up events if they were not conducive to the popular narrative, but this one, for once, would actually help the current media narrative. China's vindictive tantrums amid the Trade War and Cyber-espionage War have escalated to murder, and they need to pay the price, and that price needs to be high.
Whoever is letting this one slide is sending China the signal that they can get away with this.
So What Now?
Well, this is where the Chinese government starts preying on any Americans who are unfortunate enough to be within China's borders (raises hand). Their usual tactic would be to detain Americans on their way out of the country (much easier than tracking us down) and building nonsensical cases involving forged or extorted confessions and circumstantial evidence. However, given that doing so in the wake of a warning about such tactics (and their flimsy denial of the same) would make them look not only like villains but like predictable simpletons (both of which would be accurate, I'll admit), I think they'll switch to an older tactic: quietly stirring the masses to violence and then shrugging and saying "sorry, we can't stop them."
In 2012, when another round of Sino-Japanese tensions flared up over China's illegal claim over the Senkakku Islands, it was not the Chinese government that went on the rampage beating anyone who was found guilty of being Japanese (or even of driving a Japanese car, (Chu, 210), but that uncouth mass in whose name the government allegedly rules: the people. The only thing the government had to do was look the other way, and the Zhonghua horde showed the world what China's talk of "harmony" is really worth.
In 1988, when tensions rose between China and a group of African countries China was seeking to bring under their sway, it wasn't the government that rioted, terrorizing and massacring any African who suffered the misfortune of being in China at the time (Chu, 54). It was the people. The only thing the government had to do was look the other way.
At the turn of the 20th century, when China began to feel that foreign powers had too much influence over them (and by "have too much influence" I mean "have the audacity to expect to exchange ambassadors, you know, as if they were some kind of gasp EQUALS, with the 'Great and Glorious Middle Kingdom,' rather than kowtowing before the emperor to beg permission to trade, the way laowai barbarians were expected to do for centuries prior"), it wasn't the Qing Court who raised an army of "Boxers" to massacre missionaries and teachers (History.com. It was the People. The only thing the government had to do was look the other way (and persuade the "Boxers" not to throw them out as well, since the Qing were not actually Chinese themselves but were Manchu (Szczepanski)).
As 2019 dawns, China is in crisis, and the government has spent a great deal of effort directing the rage of their ignorant population away from the Party and onto foreigners, especially Americans, as the scapegoats for the crisis. I'll be surprised if waves of violence against any American unfortunate enough to be here haven't already broken out before Easter. I mean, after all, if you're an American in China, and you get attacked by a mob of Chinese, what are you going to do: look for help from the police?
If anyone reading this is an American who is living in China, let me say this: I'm making my exit strategy, and you really, really need to be doing the same.
Works Cited
Allen, Kerry. "State TV Reporter Praised in China After ‘Slapping Tory'." BBC. 2 Oct, 2018. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-45723640
Anonymous. "Opinion: Canada's Treatment of Meng Wanzhou in Violation of Human Rights." CGTN 9 Dec, 2018. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
Beauregard-Champagne, Jerome. "Why China’s Exit Ban is Worrying for Travellers." The Globe and Mail. 20 Dec, 2018. Web, 7 Jan, 2019.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-why-chinas-exit-ban-is-worrying/
CCTV. "China Condemns Canada's Arrest of Huawei's CFO Meng Wanzhou." Youtube, 6 Dec, 2018, https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/tech/huawei-cfo-arrested-canada/index.html. Accessed 9 Jan, 2019.
CGTN. Chinese state media seeks sympathy from their wumaos after Meng Wanzhou is granted bail. Facebook. 13 Dec, 2018, 3:00 PM. https://www.facebook.com/ChinaGlobalTVNetwork/posts/2730258483681621? . Accessed, 8 Jan, 2019.
CGTN. Propagandized Chinese account of Meng Wanzhou's bail hearing. Facebook. 11 Dec, 2018, 8:38 AM, https://www.facebook.com/ChinaGlobalTVNetwork/posts/huawei-chief-financial-officer-meng-wanzhous-bail-hearing-has-been-deferred-till/2725010557539747/ . Accessed 7 Jan, 2019.
"China Eastern Airlines." Wikipedia: the Free Encyclopedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 9 Jan, 2019, 01:04 (UTC), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Eastern_Airlines . Accessed 9 Jan, 2019.
China Travel Advisory. U.S. Department of State - Bureau of Consular Affairs. 3 Jan, 2019. Accessed, 5 Jan, 2019.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/china-travel-advisory.html . Accessed 8 Jan, 2019
Chu, Ben. Chinese Whispers. London, 2013. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
ISBN 978-1-7802-2474-9
Connolly, Amanda. "Canadian Delegation Tried 'Educating' Chinese About Huawei CFO Arrest While Raising Detentions." 7 Jan, 2019. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4822937/canadian-delegation-china-huawei-arrest-detantions/
Communiqué on the Current State of the Ideological Sphere Communist Party of China General Office Central Committee. 22 Apr. 2013. http://www.chinafile.com/document-9-chinafile-translation . Accessed 9 Jan, 2019
"China Says US Travel Advisory 'Does Not Hold Water.' " Global News Canada. 4 Jan, 2019. Web. https://globalnews.ca/video/4814522/china-says-u-s-travel-advisory-does-not-hold-water . Accessed 7 Jan, 2019.
Dorn, Sara. "Family Demands Answers as Former National Guardsman’s Body Returns From China." New York Post. 29 Dec, 2018. Web, 7 Jan, 2019.
https://nypost.com/2018/12/29/family-demands-answers-as-former-national-guardsmans-body-returns-from-china/
Elmer, Keegan. "Michael Spavor Granted Canadian Consular Visit a Month After his Detention in China." South China Morning Post. 9 Jan, 2019. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2181302/michael-spavor-granted-canadian-consular-visit-month-after-his
Gao Feng. "China Makes Lawyers Swear Oath of Loyalty or Face Sanctions." Association for Defense of Human Rights and Religious Freedom. 7 Dec, 2018. Web, 8 Jan, 2019.
https://en.adhrrf.org/china-makes-lawyers-swear-oath-of-loyalty-or-face-sanctions.html?fbclid=IwAR3YF3cnTTyKjzjvn8CszH30XvOalnb0jyTfomg11-O6bfOlfQI_fxt5nIQ
History.com Editors. "Boxer Rebellion." History.com. 9 Nov, 2009. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://www.history.com/topics/china/boxer-rebellion
Horowitz, Julia. "Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou Arrested in Canada, Faces Extradition to United States." CNN Business 6 Dec, 2018. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/05/tech/huawei-cfo-arrested-canada/index.html
McGregor, Joyce. "Canadian Government 'Deeply Concerned' as China Detains Ex-diplomat." Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. 11 Dec, 2018. Web, 8 Jan, 2019.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/kovrig-detained-china-tuesday-1.4940725
McGregor, Richard. Asia's Reckoning: China, Japan, and the Fate of U.S. Power in the Pacific Century. New York, 2017. Viking Publishers.
ISBN 978-0-399-56267-9
Mongelli, Lorena. "National Guard Vet Laid to Rest After Mysterious Death on Chinese Plane." New York Post. 4 Jan, 2019. Web, 8 Jan, 2019.
https://nypost.com/2019/01/04/national-guard-vet-laid-to-rest-after-mysterious-death-on-chinese-plane/?utm_campaign=iosapp&utm_source=facebook_app&fbclid=IwAR2M7FRprBooEsDiSg5HNAPMLZUJcnnFVLliWTRaWItIgMWjtqRrsb34UwA
Mongelli, Lorena & Golding, Bruce. "Dad’s Mysterious Death During Trip to China Leaves Family Desperate for Answers." New York Post. 20 Dec, 2018. Web, 7 Jan, 2019.
https://nypost.com/2018/12/20/dads-mysterious-death-during-trip-to-china-leaves-family-desperate-for-answers/
Mosher, Steven W. Bully of Asia. Washington, 2017. Regnery Publishing.
ISBN 978-1-62157-696-9
Mulroney, David. Interview. By Mercedes Stephenson. Globe and Mail. 7 Dec, 2018. Web, 8 Jan, 2019.
https://globalnews.ca/video/4742695/huawei-cfos-arrest-triggers-questions-about-canadians-in-china/
Pan Guoping & Ma Limin. Trans. Chang Guojie. China's Laws. Beijing, 2010. China Intercontinental Press.
ISBN 978-7-5085-1719-3
Reuters. "New Documents Link Huawei to Suspected Front Companies in Iran and Syria, and May Bolster US Case Against Meng Wanzhou." South China Morning Post. 9 Jan, 2019. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2181263/new-documents-link-huawei-suspected-front-companies-iran-and
Siu, Phila. "Chinese Journalist Arrested After Slapping Volunteer at British Conference on Hong Kong Freedoms and Labelling Participants Traitors." South China Morning Post. 1 Oct, 2018. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/2166455/chinese-journalist-slaps-volunteer-british-conference-hong
Szczepanski, Kallie. "What Was the Boxer Rebellion?" thoughtco.com. 18 Jan, 2018. Web, 9 Jan, 2019.
https://www.thoughtco.com/what-was-the-boxer-rebellion-195300
Vanderklippe, Nathan. "Detained Canadian’s Social Media Activity Suggests Invasive Interrogation by China." The Globe and Mail. 3 Jan, 2019. Web, 8 Jan, 2019.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-detained-canadians-social-media-activity-suggests-invasive/
Yan Jirong et al (other authors not listed in this translation). Trans. Huang Fang. China's Governance. Beijing, 2017. Renmin University Press.
ISBN 978-7-300-24625-3
Zhou Xin. "Beijing Blames Canada for Huawei Arrest and Threatens ‘Grave Consequences for Hurting Feelings of Chinese People.’ " *South China Morning Post. 9 Dec, 2018. Web, 8 Jan, 2019.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/2177091/beijing-blames-canada-huawei-arrest-and-threatens-grave
Zilio, Michelle. "Thirteen Canadians Have Been Detained in China Since Huawei Executive’s Arrest, Says Ottawa." The Globe and Mail. 3 Jan, 2019. Web, 8 Jan, 2019.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-thirteen-canadians-detained-in-china-since-huawei-executives-arrest/