Detention of Meng Wanzhou - CFO of Huawei

86 posts / 0 new
Last post
Noops
Detention of Meng Wanzhou - CFO of Huawei

Is anyone else here as fascinated about this story as I am?

On so many levels too.

Can someone bring me up to date on how sanctions work in this world (in theory and practice) ?

Let's say the U.S. imposes sanctions on country 'x'.
Does that mean that every country in the world (including its de facto enemies) must adhere to the sanctions?

Let's say Afghanistan imposes sanctions tomorrow on France. Does that mean that every country in the world (including its de facto enemies) must adhere to the sanctions?

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Let's say the U.S. imposes sanctions on country 'x'.
Does that mean that every country in the world (including its de facto enemies) must adhere to the sanctions?

No.  Sovereign nations remain sovereign nations.

Quote:
Let's say Afghanistan imposes sanctions tomorrow on France. Does that mean that every country in the world (including its de facto enemies) must adhere to the sanctions?

No.  Canada is still free to trade with either Afghanistan or France, or even both if they're willing.  Certainly there could be diplomatic blow back if they choose just one or neither or both.

That said, some trade comes with conditions, and as I understand it, one of the conditions of certain trade between the U.S. and Huawei was that goods sold to Huawei not be resold to certain other countries, and evidently the U.S. is alleging that Huawei broke that deal, and also acted fraudulently to do so.

You can actually see something much like this on old software EULAs, where end users are told that they may not resell their software to [insert short list of countries here].  Same basic idea.

NDPP
NDPP

Huawei Executive Accused of Hiding Connection to Firm Violating US Sanctions, BC Court Told

https://www.globeandmail.com/canada/article-huawei-executive-accused-of-...

"Meng Wanzhou committed fraud by trying to hide Huawei's ties to a Hong Kong firm that was reportedly doing business with Iran..."

 

John Bolton & Canada's Trudeau knew of Huawei CFO Arrest: Failed to inform Trump

https://youtu.be/LUcDCHzwqzc

"Canada looks increasingly bad."

Noops

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Let's say the U.S. imposes sanctions on country 'x'.
Does that mean that every country in the world (including its de facto enemies) must adhere to the sanctions?

No.  Sovereign nations remain sovereign nations.

Quote:
Let's say Afghanistan imposes sanctions tomorrow on France. Does that mean that every country in the world (including its de facto enemies) must adhere to the sanctions?

No.  Canada is still free to trade with either Afghanistan or France, or even both if they're willing.  Certainly there could be diplomatic blow back if they choose just one or neither or both.

Thanks for filling in the blanks with this.

Quote:
That said, some trade comes with conditions, and as I understand it, one of the conditions of certain trade between the U.S. and Huawei was that goods sold to Huawei not be resold to certain other countries, and evidently the U.S. is alleging that Huawei broke that deal, and also acted fraudulently to do so.

Interesting.

I followed up on NDPP's link and gained some insight from others here on this.
 

I liked this quote from kropotkin1951:
"What incenses me the most is that we have arrested a Chinese citizen on the basis that the US is investigating a breach of sanctions that are not UN based. I am hoping that the Judge at the extradition process slaps the government about the head and orders this business woman released."

If the sanctions are not UN based (heck even if they were!) why must China obey them?

 

 

cco

Long story short, it depends. There's such a thing as secondary sanctions, where a country that's powerful enough (say, the US or China) can ban any entity or country that does business with one of its enemies from doing business with it. Then it comes down to political (usually financial) considerations. Enforcement is typically a matter of leverage; for instance, KLM has to have a subsidiary airline (KLM Asia) to fly to Taiwan without losing the right to fly to China, but China's decided to limit its pushiness to that instead of requiring the Taiwan affiliate be spun off entirely.

NDPP

A Chinese View:

Arrest of Huawei CFO Pours Cold Water on Optimism

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1130761.shtml

"Without any solid evidence, the Canadian and US governments, trampled on international law by basically 'kidnapping' Chinese citizen Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of Huawei..."

 

Neocons Sabotage Trump's Trade Talks - Huawei CFO Taken Hostage to Blackmail China

https://t.co/LsoMfiNKGO

"It was a trap. The arrest is a public slap in the face of China and to Xi personally. It will not be left unanswered. Whatever Trump may have agreed upon with Xi, is now worthless. John Bolton sabotaged the talks and US relations with China. Meng Wanzhou was taken hostage to be used as leverage in China trade talks..."

WWWTT

First off, thanks to Noops for starting this thread. 

孟晩舟 is innocent until proven guilty. Just like anyone else. 

At first hearing this news, I was really pissed off! 

From my understanding she’s charged because of some trade that happened when she was with another Chinese hi tech company and HSBC. And HSBC ending up paying heavy fines, but not sure what HSBC was charged with?  There’s still a big cloud around this and I’m not sure what the real story is?

Now here’s the story western corporate media isn’t telling you. There have been several (not sure how many) western business execs charged with bribery and corruption in China! They have been tried and found guilty. But from my understanding, the Chinese government does not keep them imprisoned, they are deported with lifetime bans from reentering China. 

Its very possible that Meng Wan Zhou’s arrest is a retaliation?

 

WWWTT

Here’s more speculation. China will retaliate. Now how they do, no one can say for sure? But the Chinese have many ways and opportunity to do so. 

Taiwan sanctions may be ramped up? So any company that does business with Taiwan would be banned on the mainland. 

Also, China may exert pressure on its allies to arrest and detain people who are wanted in China?

And there’s a extreme remote possibility that China may find an insignificant trading partner that US/Canada has trade and supports?  Israel would fit this category. China can easily sanction Israel and order any company trading in China must cease trading with Israel or face arrest. Pretty much the same thing the US does with Iran. 

cco

It appears the actual charge is fraud (telling an American company that Huawei was complying with sanctions on Iran).

WWWTT

Not so sure about that cco? I believe it was a company that Meng Wan Zhou belonged to in the past. And the US is trying to prove to the Canadian judge that this other company is part of Hua Wei. Now the fraud part I believe is the actual charge. So I agree with you there. Either way, so far, this sounds like a complicated case.

Another thing that pisses me off is how the American lawyers are trying to convince the Canadian judge she does not deserve bail! Apparently she owns 2 houses in Vancouver worth 14 million. This raises other points.

quizzical

send her home asap.

bekayne

WWWTT wrote:

And there’s a extreme remote possibility that China may find an insignificant trading partner that US/Canada has trade and supports?  Israel would fit this category. China can easily sanction Israel and order any company trading in China must cease trading with Israel or face arrest. Pretty much the same thing the US does with Iran. 

That one's not happening.

voice of the damned

bekayne wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

And there’s a extreme remote possibility that China may find an insignificant trading partner that US/Canada has trade and supports?  Israel would fit this category. China can easily sanction Israel and order any company trading in China must cease trading with Israel or face arrest. Pretty much the same thing the US does with Iran. 

That one's not happening.

I wouldn't think so, no. If anything, they'll try to do something using Taiwan as a proxy target, though I don't know what that would be.

contrarianna

WWWTT wrote:

,,,,孟晩舟 is innocent until proven guilty. Just like anyone else. ....

No, not like "anyone" else.

The terms “guilt” and “innocence” in this context are little more the legal arm of state economic hegemonic goals. 

"Lawfare is a form of war consisting of the use of the legal system against an enemy, such as by damaging or delegitimizing them, tying up their time or winning a public relations victory.[1][2] The term is a portmanteau of the words law and warfare."--Wikipedia

State lawfare, including sanctions, is a favorate tool of the US government, especially the Trump-Bolton government, against economic and geopolitical rivals, and designated enemies, that threaten US global hegemony.

Ms. Meng Wan Zhou may very well be "guilty" of violating the specifics of US law, just don't imagine the charges reflect any impartial application of the principles of justice.

The chargee, not known till now ,were drawn up 5 months ago, probably at the incitement of ultra-nationalist, unhinged neocon "National Security" director Bolton, who has repeatetdly railed at China and its rival ascendancy as the US's main adversary in the 21st C:

WASHINGTON (REUTERS) - US national security adviser John Bolton has vowed to further intensify the Trump administration's tough approach on China, saying Beijing's "behaviour needs to be adjusted in the trade area, in the international, military and political areas"....

Speaking in a radio interview on the Hugh Hewitt Show recorded on Thursday (Oct 11) and aired on Friday, Bolton said President Donald Trump believed China had taken advantage of the international order for far too long and not enough Americans had stood up to it.

"Now's the time to do it," he said....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-bolton/u-s-security-adviser...

NDPP

Canada Takes a Hostage: Free Meng Wanzhou

https://journal-neo.org/2018/12/08/canada-takes-a-hostage-free-meng-wanzhou

"It is clear the US is pushing the battle line to our door....We can completely regard the arrest of Meng Wanzhou as a declaration of war against China. Free Meng Wanzhou, for as long as she is held hostage, so are we all."

Noops

"The Supreme Court of British Columbia was told that Ms Meng had used a Huawei subsidiary called Skycom to evade sanctions on Iran between 2009 and 2014."

This is just one of the many fishy parts to the story I don't get.
So Ms. Meng was allegedly a criminal (to the U.S.) as far back as 2009.

Why the delay?
Why wait until Dec 1, 2018 to arrest her?
She hadn't been in Canada for 9 years?

It would be a real stretch to believe the U.S. hadn't figured out Skycom was related to Huawei until just now.

bekayne

contrarianna wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

,,,,孟晩舟 is innocent until proven guilty. Just like anyone else. ....

No, not like "anyone" else.

The terms “guilt” and “innocence” in this context are little more the legal arm of state economic hegemonic goals. 

"Lawfare is a form of war consisting of the use of the legal system against an enemy, such as by damaging or delegitimizing them, tying up their time or winning a public relations victory.[1][2] The term is a portmanteau of the words law and warfare."--Wikipedia

State lawfare, including sanctions, is a favorate tool of the US government, especially the Trump-Bolton government, against economic and geopolitical rivals, and designated enemies, that threaten US global hegemony.

Ms. Meng Wan Zhou may very well be "guilty" of violating the specifics of US law, just don't imagine the charges reflect any impartial application of the principles of justice.

The chargee, not known till now ,were drawn up 5 months ago, probably at the incitement of ultra-nationalist, unhinged neocon "National Security" director Bolton, who has repeatetdly railed at China and its rival ascendancy as the US's main adversary in the 21st C:

WASHINGTON (REUTERS) - US national security adviser John Bolton has vowed to further intensify the Trump administration's tough approach on China, saying Beijing's "behaviour needs to be adjusted in the trade area, in the international, military and political areas"....

Speaking in a radio interview on the Hugh Hewitt Show recorded on Thursday (Oct 11) and aired on Friday, Bolton said President Donald Trump believed China had taken advantage of the international order for far too long and not enough Americans had stood up to it.

"Now's the time to do it," he said....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-bolton/u-s-security-adviser...

Trump has "repeatetdly railed at China" for years. He's the one that said trade wars were easy to win.

cco

WWWTT wrote:

Another thing that pisses me off is how the American lawyers are trying to convince the Canadian judge she does not deserve bail! Apparently she owns 2 houses in Vancouver worth 14 million. This raises other points.

It does, though I wonder if they're the same points you're thinking of. Should wealthy people automatically get bail? She was arrested while boarding a flight out of the country, which makes her as literal a "flight risk" as it gets.

Quote:
Vancouver-based immigration lawyer Richard Kurland said he expects Ms. Meng, with her family’s considerable financial resources, would seek the court’s approval to stay at a private dwelling while awaiting the extradition hearing. She could propose paying for private security to watch over her and agree to electronic monitoring, he said.

If Charles Koch or Sheldon Adelson were arrested in Canada and sought for extradition by a country we liked -- say, a Corbyn-led UK -- how many of us would be okay with giving them the Pablo Escobar "Don't worry, I'll pay for my own prison mansion!" treatment?

WWWTT

contrarianna wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

,,,,孟晩舟 is innocent until proven guilty. Just like anyone else. ....

No, not like "anyone" else.

The terms “guilt” and “innocence” in this context are little more the legal arm of state economic hegemonic goals. 

"Lawfare is a form of war consisting of the use of the legal system against an enemy, such as by damaging or delegitimizing them, tying up their time or winning a public relations victory.[1][2] The term is a portmanteau of the words law and warfare."--Wikipedia

State lawfare, including sanctions, is a favorate tool of the US government, especially the Trump-Bolton government, against economic and geopolitical rivals, and designated enemies, that threaten US global hegemony.

Ms. Meng Wan Zhou may very well be "guilty" of violating the specifics of US law, just don't imagine the charges reflect any impartial application of the principles of justice.

The chargee, not known till now ,were drawn up 5 months ago, probably at the incitement of ultra-nationalist, unhinged neocon "National Security" director Bolton, who has repeatetdly railed at China and its rival ascendancy as the US's main adversary in the 21st C:

WASHINGTON (REUTERS) - US national security adviser John Bolton has vowed to further intensify the Trump administration's tough approach on China, saying Beijing's "behaviour needs to be adjusted in the trade area, in the international, military and political areas"....

Speaking in a radio interview on the Hugh Hewitt Show recorded on Thursday (Oct 11) and aired on Friday, Bolton said President Donald Trump believed China had taken advantage of the international order for far too long and not enough Americans had stood up to it.

"Now's the time to do it," he said....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-bolton/u-s-security-adviser...

You overestimate the US ability in this case. You also underestimate Ms. Meng’s abilities here. She has lawyers, her husband is now in Canada and her daughter will soon be here. She has huge support in Vancouver. From her lawyers comments and the options available to her, she can fight these US charges for years. Possibly even outlasting Trumps presidency!

And what about Justin? Do you really feel that none of this will impact the liberals re-election bid in 2019???? Or even Trump for that matter really!

If this arrest/ detention of 孟晩舟 causes a lot of financial unrest, the corporate masters of the US and Canada will make sure heads will roll. Western democracies main purpose is to serve the corporations and the .0001% and this whole Trump/Justin western corporate experiment may be on the top of the corporations list to get rid of. 

NDPP

Huawei arrest: China Demands Canada Free Meng Wanzhou

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46494935

"China demanded that Canada release the arrested Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou or face consequences. Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng had summoned the Canadian ambassador and lodged a 'strong protest' a statement said. 'China strongly urges the Canadian side to immediately release the detained person...otherwise Canada must accept full responsibility for the serious consequences caused,' the statement said. 'The Ministry described Ms Meng's arrest as 'extremely nasty."

 And so it is.

 

WWWTT

cco wrote:
WWWTT wrote:

Another thing that pisses me off is how the American lawyers are trying to convince the Canadian judge she does not deserve bail! Apparently she owns 2 houses in Vancouver worth 14 million. This raises other points.

It does, though I wonder if they're the same points you're thinking of. Should wealthy people automatically get bail? She was arrested while boarding a flight out of the country, which makes her as literal a "flight risk" as it gets.

Quote:
Vancouver-based immigration lawyer Richard Kurland said he expects Ms. Meng, with her family’s considerable financial resources, would seek the court’s approval to stay at a private dwelling while awaiting the extradition hearing. She could propose paying for private security to watch over her and agree to electronic monitoring, he said.

If Charles Koch or Sheldon Adelson were arrested in Canada and sought for extradition by a country we liked -- say, a Corbyn-led UK -- how many of us would be okay with giving them the Pablo Escobar "Don't worry, I'll pay for my own prison mansion!" treatment?

What I was speculating is that Ms Meng may very well be on China’s radar for corruption. This arrest and detention may have had Beijing’s approval!

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/the-law-page/canadian-banks-helping-clients-bend-rules-to-move-money-out-of-china/article26246404/

WWWTT

bekayne wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

And there’s a extreme remote possibility that China may find an insignificant trading partner that US/Canada has trade and supports?  Israel would fit this category. China can easily sanction Israel and order any company trading in China must cease trading with Israel or face arrest. Pretty much the same thing the US does with Iran. 

That one's not happening.

Yes probably not happening. Just wild speculation. From my understanding, China and Israel use each other to sneak around hi tech equipment, and that’s a relationship both sides probably want to keep. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
and this whole Trump/Justin western corporate experiment

Trudeau is not involved, and he has no authority to involve himself directly.  Contrary to popular fantasy, he cannot just "pick up the phone" with regard to this.

contrarianna

cco wrote:
If Charles Koch or Sheldon Adelson were arrested in Canada and sought for extradition by a country we liked -- say, a Corbyn-led UK ....

That's a good one!    In your amazing  world what would keep them from sprouting wings and escaping to never never land? 

=========

DOJ hooked a whale with arrest of Huawei CFO
BY ARTHUR DONG, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 12/07/18 01:00 PM EST
....
What makes this incident unusual is that you have the CFO of a Chinese company being arrested for the alleged wrongdoing of a corporation. Customarily, the corporate format offers its officers and employees “limited liability."

Wrongdoing liability is placed instead on the corporate entity, and individuals who work for the corporation are offered the protection of the corporate shield. Sealed indictments have been issued that specifically name Meng....

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/420241-doj-hooked-a-whale-with...

Huawei arrest: This is what the start of a tech Cold War looks like
By Julia Horowitz, CNN Business

Updated 11:10 AM ET, Sat December 8, 2018
New York (CNN Business)The arrest of a top Huawei executive raises the stakes in the intensifying battle between the United States and China for tech supremacy.

Huawei is one of the world's biggest makers of smartphones and networking equipment. It is at the heart of China's ambitions to reduce its reliance on foreign technology and become an innovation powerhouse in its own right.
The country is pumping hundreds of billions into its "Made in China 2025" plan, which aims to make China a global leader in industries such as robotics, electric cars and computer chips. The introduction of 5G wireless technology, which hinges on Huawei, is a top priority.
The United States, meanwhile, has made clear it intends to push back against China's growing tech power in order to maintain American dominance...,

But for Huawei to succeed at building out 5G networks, it needs the United States.
Out of the Huawei's 92 main suppliers, 33 are US companies, including chipmakers Intel, Qualcomm, and Micron, and software firms Microsoft and Oracle, Tom Holland of Gavekal Research said in a note Friday.
"If Washington now prohibits these companies from selling to Huawei, the Chinese telecoms giant will struggle to survive," Holland said....

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/08/tech/huawei-cfo-tech-cold-war/index.html....

China warns of severe consequences if Canada does not release Huawei CFO By Ben Blanchard and David Ljunggren Reuters

When asked about the possible Chinese backlash after the arrest of Huawei’s CFO, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told reporters on Friday that Canada has a very good [sic] relationship with Beijing.

Canada’s arrest of Meng at the request of the United States while she was changing plane in Vancouver was a serious breach of her lawful rights, Le said.

The move “ignored the law, was unreasonable” and was in its very nature “extremely nasty,” he added.

“China strongly urges the Canadian side to immediately release the detained person, and earnestly protect their lawful, legitimate rights, otherwise Canada must accept full responsibility for the serious consequences caused.”....

https://globalnews.ca/news/4743451/china-consequences-canada-release-hua...

WWWTT

Possibly Mr Magoo? But I don’t believe you are correct. Justin can get involved. Right now Justin and the liberals are probably very worried that this case will have a huge negative impact on their 2019 re-election bid!

cco

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
and this whole Trump/Justin western corporate experiment

Trudeau is not involved, and he has no authority to involve himself directly.  Contrary to popular fantasy, he cannot just "pick up the phone" with regard to this.

I decided to actually read the Extradition Act, and it turns out that the power is, in fact, entirely in the hands of the justice minister -- to receive the request, to personally determine whether or not it's valid, and to issue the authority to proceed.

Quote:
15 (1) The Minister may [emphasis mine], after receiving a request for extradition and being satisfied that the conditions set out in paragraph 3(1)(a) and subsection 3(3) are met in respect of one or more offences mentioned in the request, issue an authority to proceed that authorizes the Attorney General to seek, on behalf of the extradition partner, an order of a court for the committal of the person under section 29.
40 (1) The Minister may, within a period of 90 days after the date of a person’s committal to await surrender, personally order that the person be surrendered to the extradition partner.
(3) The Minister may seek any assurances that the Minister considers appropriate from the extradition partner, or may subject the surrender to any conditions that the Minister considers appropriate, including a condition that the person not be prosecuted, nor that a sentence be imposed on or enforced against the person, in respect of any offence or conduct other than that referred to in the order of surrender.
(4) If the Minister subjects surrender of a person to assurances or conditions, the order of surrender shall not be executed until the Minister is satisfied that the assurances are given or the conditions agreed to by the extradition partner.

Note the "may". Neither treaty nor Canadian law requires automatic compliance with an American request. And if you're saying "Well, it's all up to Jody Wilson-Raybould, then, and Trudeau has no say in it", note that Trudeau's admitted he was informed in advance -- and if Wilson-Raybould said she was going to proceed without his consent, he'd be completely within his rights to fire her.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Neither treaty nor Canadian law requires automatic compliance with an American request. And if you're saying "Well, it's all up to Jody Wilson-Raybould, then, and Trudeau has no say in it", note that Trudeau's admitted he was informed in advance -- and if Wilson-Raybould said she was going to proceed without his consent, he'd be completely within his rights to fire her.

Yes, I don't disagree.  But as I understand it, the U.S. has not yet issued a formal extradition request -- that's the one that Wilson-Raybould could decline. 

In fact, there's even a specific recognition of her (our) right to decline that request if it's believed that the charges are politically motivated.  That probably requires a high standard of evidence though -- I don't think "well, Bolton would love it" or "the U.S. doesn't like China" would cut it. 

NDPP

Read #16

WWWTT

That makes no sense mr Magoo? Ms Meng has been arrested and the minister of justice according to the link cco provided could have declined doing so  

 

cco

CBC:

Quote:
According to a statement from the Department of Justice, Meng was arrested in Vancouver on Saturday and is being sought for extradition by the United States...The statement said Meng sought, and was granted, a publication ban which prevents the department from releasing further details about the arrest. Supreme Court of British Columbia records show the ban is pursuant to Section 26 of Canada's Extradition Act, which says that before an extradition hearing is held, a judge may decide that the publication or broadcasting of evidence may put the accused's right to a fair trial at risk, in this case once she is handed over to the U.S.

I'm not sure how she's being held (and denied bail) if there hasn't been a request.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

OK.  What's the part that's supposed to change what I said?

Not this, I hope:

Quote:
The pretext for her arrest is that Huawei has violated US sanctions against Iran.

I heard it was fraud.  The rest of the article seems to believe that the U.S. has issued an extradition request, which it has not yet.  As noted in my post, if they do then Canada CAN decline that request.  Then and only then can you try to implicate Trudeau.

WWWTT

Mr Magoo check section 11 and 12 from cco’s Link. The US had to ask the minister first to arrest Ms Meng. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Yes.  The arrest is not the same as extradition.

Quote:
"If the application from the requesting state is in order, then Canada is legally obliged to arrest her," said Rob Currie, a Dalhousie law professor who focuses extensively on extradition law.

...

Under the terms of the extradition treaty, the U.S. could request Meng's arrest in Canada if she was wanted in connection with conduct considered criminal in both Canada and the United States, and if the offence carries a jail sentence of a year or more. Once that threshold is met, the treaty compels Canada to act.

Again, as I understand it, that conduct is alleged fraud.

NDPP
WWWTT
WWWTT

Ok here’s a continuation link

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bensin/2018/07/27/the-key-for-huawei-and-china-in-5g-race-against-the-u-s-is-a-turkish-professor/#769ece41222b

Take special note of the date of the article! The US has serious 

There seems to be a race for international standardizing coding. And the fight appears to be China vs US. And the guy that invented this coding system is a Turkish professor!

The above link is a must read!

NDPP

Five Eyes Against Huawei

http://www.voltairenet.org/article204264

"The motive for the war undertaken against Huawei is deep rooted and spurious are the justifications..."

NDPP

Vancouver Chinese Community Speaks Out on Huawei Executive's Arrest (&vid)

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/vancouver-chinese-community-speaks-out-on-huawei-e...

"People are worried about the relationship between the two countries and the people,' Hang said..." 

NDPP

News on Meng Wanzhou on Twitter

https://twitter.com/hashtag/MengWanzhou?src=hash

Noops

NDPP wrote:

Vancouver Chinese Community Speaks Out on Huawei Executive's Arrest (&vid)

">https://bc.ctvnews.ca/vancouver-chinese-community-speaks-out-on-huawei-e...

Thanks NDPP. From the article you mentioned above:

"Huawei is the biggest global supplier of network gear used by phone and internet companies and has been the target of growing U.S. security concerns. The U.S. has pressured European countries and other allies to limit the use of its technology."

and from another recent article:

"The company has been repeatedly singled out by officials in the United States. US intelligence agencies have said American citizens shouldn't use Huawei phones, and US government agencies are banned from buying the company's equipment."

So here we have a country that is clearly not an ally of the U.S., but is expected to honor any sanctions that the U.S. imposes on other non-allied countries.
Rich! Very rich!
 

 

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
So here we have a country that is clearly not an ally of the U.S., but is expected to honor any sanctions that the U.S. imposes on other non-allied countries.
Rich! Very rich!

China remains a sovereign country and can trade with Iran all it wants.

Huawei is a company doing business in the U.S., and it's alleged that they fraudulently misrepresented their private commerce with Iran as part of that business.

WWWTT

I do not believe Hua Wei sells anything in the US. It only purchases US tech. Also it’s alleged that SkyCom is the one that does business with Iran, not HuaWei. But the US alleged that SkyCom is a front for HuaWei. 

Heres the big problem for the Canadian crown. Ms Meng is innocent until proven guilty. The crown must prove SkyCom is owned by HuaWei and I don’t think that will be any easy task

WWWTT

Another point would be the type of business being done with Iran. Not all “business” is banned. From what I’ve read, the US doesn’t want their tech ending up in Iranian hands

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
I do not believe Hua Wei sells anything in the US. It only purchases US tech.

Perhaps.  I'd bet that that tech comes with an agreement not to resell it, or anything made with it, to certain other countries including Iran.

Quote:
Heres the big problem for the Canadian crown. Ms Meng is innocent until proven guilty. The crown must prove SkyCom is owned by HuaWei and I don’t think that will be any easy task

She won't be tried in Canada, so there's zero burden for the Crown.  If the U.S. makes a formal request for extradition, all Wilson-Raybould has to do is examine the prima facie case.  If it has merit then the extradition proceeds, and Meng would go to trail in the U.S.

Quote:
From what I’ve read, the US doesn’t want their tech ending up in Iranian hands

Yes.  And it's alleged that Huawei (as SkyCom) provided such, after assuring the U.S. (as Huawei) that they would respect the terms of any U.S. deal.

That's my understanding, anyway.  It's got nothing to do with everyone in the world having to obey U.S. law, or China having to do what the U.S. says, or whatever.  That doesn't mean that the U.S. government isn't tickled pink to have Meng in custody, of course, or that they're not eager to prosecute this for other reasons, but if the legal allegations are true then the government's feelings toward Huawei or Meng won't really matter.

WWWTT

Ok sounds logical Mr Magoo 

Noops

Mr. Magoo wrote:

She won't be tried in Canada, so there's zero burden for the Crown.  If the U.S. makes a formal request for extradition, all Wilson-Raybould has to do is examine the prima facie case.  If it has merit then the extradition proceeds, and Meng would go to trail in the U.S

I read that if it goes in this direction, Meng could appeal the extradition and that it could take years before it is settled.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

True.  I expect that would put the bail question back on the table -- it's not unreasonable to detain someone like Meng for a short time, but years would seem a bit much.

Contrarianna's post raises an interesting question as well:  why is Meng being detained, and not her corporation? 

NDPP

"Samsung and Ericsson have apparently been allowed to operate in Iran despite US sanctions. Now do you see the obvious double standards concerning Huawei? I won't accept this 'breaking the law' justification for what is blatantly political."

https://twitter.com/Tom_Fowdy/status/1071389099376947200

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

From that link:

Quote:
Samsung is the second largest cellphone provider in Iran, behind Huawei, while Sweden's Ericsson has been selling Iran equipment even under the sanctions.

So evidently, Huawei is selling cellphones in Iran under its own name?

Gets me wondering what was sold or given to Skycom.

WWWTT

Noops wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

She won't be tried in Canada, so there's zero burden for the Crown.  If the U.S. makes a formal request for extradition, all Wilson-Raybould has to do is examine the prima facie case.  If it has merit then the extradition proceeds, and Meng would go to trail in the U.S

I read that if it goes in this direction, Meng could appeal the extradition and that it could take years before it is settled.

Ya I read the same thing. I suspect the longer this is drawn out, the worse it’ll look for Justin and Trump. Especially with China breathing down both their necks 

Pages