Full Comment - How the Two Michaels’ freedom was won

00:00:00.000 Ontario, the wait is over. The gold standard of online casinos has arrived. Golden Nugget

00:00:06.000 Online Casino is live, bringing Vegas-style excitement and a world-class gaming experience

00:00:11.040 right to your fingertips. Whether you're a seasoned player or just starting, signing up is fast and

00:00:16.680 simple. And in just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive library of the best slots

00:00:21.740 and top-tier table games. Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable promotions and jackpots

00:00:27.220 that can turn any mundane moment into a golden opportunity at Golden Nugget Online Casino.

00:00:32.820 Take a spin on the slots, challenge yourself at the tables, or join a live dealer game to feel the

00:00:37.920 thrill of real-time action, all from the comfort of your own devices. Why settle for less when you

00:00:43.140 can go for the gold at Golden Nugget Online Casino? Gambling problem? Call ConnexOntario

00:00:49.080 1-866-531-2600. 19 and over, physically present in Ontario. Eligibility restrictions apply. See

00:00:56.340 goldennuggetcasino.com for details. Please play responsibly.

00:00:59.940 When I found out my friend got a great deal on a wool coat from Winners, I started wondering,

00:01:05.380 is every fabulous item I see from Winners? Like that woman over there with the designer jeans. 1.00

00:01:10.840 Are those from Winners? Ooh, or those beautiful gold earrings? Did she pay full price? Or that

00:01:16.820 leather tote? Or that cashmere sweater? Or those knee-high boots? That dress? That jacket?

00:01:21.560 Those shoes? Is anyone paying full price for anything? Stop wondering. Start winning.

00:01:27.880 Winners. Find fabulous for less.

00:01:36.600 Collectively, they're known as the two Michaels, and quite frankly, most of the time that people

00:01:40.740 talk about them, they don't mention their last names. I'm speaking, of course, about Michael Spavor,

00:01:45.480 an entrepreneur, Michael Kovrig, peace advocate, both arrested in China about four years ago for

00:01:52.600 allegations of spying. Will we ever really know the full story of these two gentlemen? Have we heard it

00:01:59.100 yet? They haven't said a lot since returning from their exile, their imprisonment in China just over

00:02:06.080 about a year ago. They appeared recently at Joe Biden's dinner and his address to Parliament. But other

00:02:13.720 than that, we haven't heard much. Two men who've written extensively about this are Mike Blanchfield

00:02:18.800 and Fenn Osler-Hampson. And before we get to them, I just want to remind you that you can subscribe

00:02:23.780 to Full Comment Podcast. Hello, I'm Brian Lilly, your host. You can subscribe to it anywhere that you

00:02:29.960 listen to podcasts, Stitcher, Apple, Google, Spotify, what have you. Make sure you hit subscribe. Make

00:02:35.840 sure you leave a comment, a like, share it on social media, and help get the word out. Now, the story of

00:02:43.920 the two Michaels fascinated me while they were in jail, because I can't imagine what it was like for them

00:02:50.100 and the conditions they were living in. I can't imagine how difficult it was for Canadian officials

00:02:55.680 trying to deal with this very international and complex story. That's what we want to talk to Blanchfield

00:03:02.760 and Fenn Osler-Hampson about. Mike Blanchfield, longtime journalist with the Canadian Press,

00:03:08.100 now with Blue Sky Strategy. Fenn Osler-Hampson is a professor at Carleton University, president of

00:03:14.820 the World Refugee and Migration Council. They both join us from Ottawa. Gentlemen, good to speak to you

00:03:19.280 both again. Good afternoon, Brian. I want to ask you, do you think that based on what you've written,

00:03:27.920 based on what we've seen in the media over the last several years, will we ever know the full story

00:03:33.340 of why they in particular were arrested and what happened to them? Well, I'll weigh in on that a

00:03:39.040 little bit, if I may. I mean, we probably will learn more in the coming years, because I think

00:03:46.420 Michael Kovrig, while he was in prison, and it's talked about in our book as well, was really eager to

00:03:51.760 re-engage with the world and get out and get his freedom, obviously. He is a pretty accomplished

00:03:58.800 writer as a government employee at Foreign Affairs, and then as an analyst for the International Crisis

00:04:04.640 Group, which is the organization he was working with when he was abducted. And I think we're going

00:04:10.620 to probably hear from him at some point on his experience on what really happened, because he's

00:04:14.760 really the only one who can tell it. As for Michael Spavor, he went to ground very early on in the

00:04:22.120 week after his imprisonment, where Global Affairs Canada put out a statement, a short one or two

00:04:28.180 line statement, on behalf of the family, with a photo of Mr. Spavor with a dog saying, basically,

00:04:34.540 just wants some private time and wants to re-engage with his life, and frankly, who can blame him?

00:04:39.340 And so, I mean, we, in our book, Fenn and I, I think we set the stage on how it happened,

00:04:45.860 why it happened, and we literally stopped writing the moment they got out of prison

00:04:49.680 and returned to Canada. So, but I agree that there's probably other chapters to be written,

00:04:56.700 but I think they'll be written by the people who were in the middle of this, the two Michaels

00:05:02.180 themselves, perhaps one of them, maybe both of them.

00:05:04.360 Michael, let me stay with you. You and I, when we were both on Parliament Hill, I can't

00:05:12.720 count how many family members were imprisoned in various countries, and you would constantly

00:05:18.900 have family still in Canada, you know, coming to the media, coming to the government, saying,

00:05:25.040 you've got to tell their story, you've got to talk about them, here's what's going on.

00:05:28.920 We didn't have that with the two Michaels. In fact, it was very difficult to get their family

00:05:33.180 members to speak. How much access did you have to family members in, in writing the book, either of

00:05:41.240 you?

00:05:44.260 The Spauver family kept a very low profile, it was deliberate. And as I've told other people,

00:05:50.400 if it was my brother in prison like this, I probably would do the same thing. I wouldn't

00:05:54.760 be talking to people like you or me either. But Kovrig's wife at the time, Vina,

00:06:03.180 Najibullah decided to go public about a year or so after he was in prison. She went on the CBC.

00:06:08.520 She made herself available for interviews. I interviewed her a number of times over the

00:06:13.200 course of covering the story and including a lot of that material in the book. She made

00:06:17.700 herself available to the International Crisis Group that did a podcast and interviewed her

00:06:21.940 in depth on her experiences. And so she created a very strong narrative portrait of what

00:06:27.560 Michael Kovrig was enduring. So we learned a bit about that. We know that both men had quite

00:06:33.940 a reading list of material, but it seems that from what we understand, I think Fennell probably

00:06:41.000 agrees. I think the two families kind of turned to Vina as their spokesperson, their champions

00:06:45.740 to get this, to kind of keep the story alive. And as their imprisonment crew, it just seemed

00:06:52.460 like it was going to take a lot more to keep this in sort of the public eye. And that was

00:06:56.500 sort of the reasons why we decided to write the book in the first place was to remind people

00:07:00.920 in case they just started lingering in prison without a lot of attention.

00:07:08.120 Fen, let me ask you, were these two Canadians, I mean, we know the backstory that they were

00:07:13.880 arrested in retaliation for Canada detaining Men Wazoo. But was this just a case of unfortunate

00:07:22.340 circumstances for two Canadians in a very complex geopolitical game of war?

00:07:31.020 Brian, I would say that both Spavor and Kovrig were clearly in the line sights of Chinese intelligence

00:07:42.520 and security officials. Spavor, because of the work he had done previously and continued

00:07:51.220 to do in North Korea, based from his base in China. And Michael Kovrig, being a former diplomat

00:08:03.060 working for a very high profile human rights organization, the International Crisis Group,

00:08:10.680 he was there on secondment. And so their activities, and I think it's fair to say, you know,

00:08:19.540 Michael Kovrig is high visibility. And, you know, they were being watched. The really interesting

00:08:30.060 question, Brian, is why did the Chinese go after two Canadians when they could have easily arrested

00:08:39.600 American businessmen or business persons in China? There are lots of Americans in China.

00:08:48.460 Because the warrant for Meng was issued in New York court by the U.S. Department of Justice.

00:09:01.300 And I think, you know, the interesting question there is, you know, why didn't they go after an American?

00:09:09.620 Why did they go after, you know, two Canadians? And I think...

00:09:12.940 Well, why do you think?

00:09:14.180 Well, I think it's because they were worried if they went after two Americans, this would be escalating

00:09:22.360 the situation. And so they remember when the announcement of the arrest came. It came just as

00:09:34.020 the G20 summit was taking place in Buenos Aires. Donald Trump had just had a great dinner with

00:09:45.480 the president of China, Xi Jinping. Prime Minister Trudeau was also at that dinner. There was a lot of talk

00:09:55.640 at the dinner table about turning the page on the trade dispute that the United States had with

00:10:03.160 China. And then this arrest takes place. And it's done while Xi Jinping is on the world stage.

00:10:11.480 And this was seen as a personal affront to Xi Jinping, given the high-profile nature of Meng Wanzhou.

00:10:21.580 And so that turned it into, you know, what we would call a global embarrassment for the Chinese. 1.00

00:10:33.420 And so the officials around Xi Jinping, you know, their boss was probably pretty upset about this.

00:10:40.720 And they would have said, well, we got to do something about it. Let's go after the Canadians. 1.00

00:10:46.880 They, after all, and this is a Chinese term of derision, they use against Canada, wear the lapdogs. 0.97

00:10:53.060 And so that's, that's how this happened. And the fact that Kovrig was a former, he was actually on

00:11:01.180 secondment. So he was still technically in the employment of the Canadian government as a, as a

00:11:09.080 diplomat. So, you know, they decided to go after these two guys.

00:11:12.820 Was that, was that a mistake on our part that they were allowed to be arrested or Meng Wanzhou was

00:11:23.220 allowed to be arrested while this high-profile international dinner is going on? And they're

00:11:28.300 talking about improving relations.

00:11:30.040 Well, the, the timing, you know, the, the timing was, was, was really bad from, from, from that

00:11:40.240 standpoint, obviously. I think it was a confluence of circumstances. I mean, Meng Wanzhou could have

00:11:48.420 been, they were watching her movements where she was traveling. The, the arrest warrant had been

00:11:56.660 delivered in August, uh, 2018. So, um, you know, the, uh, uh, the, the actual arrest took place on the

00:12:04.800 1st of December. Uh, so, you know, for, for those two months, they were seeing where she was going.

00:12:10.600 She was traveling around the world. Um, and, you know, to be honest, I think the American, uh, authorities

00:12:17.940 felt, uh, more confident that, um, the Canadians would actually honor, uh, uh, an extradition request

00:12:26.280 as opposed to, she'd been in, I think, France. You can correct me, Mike. She'd been in France, uh, uh,

00:12:32.560 earlier, uh, uh, she'd been to a whole string of countries in that sort of intervening period.

00:12:38.300 And, uh, yeah, as Fenn is explaining, she could have been picked up elsewhere. I think, um, for the

00:12:44.460 Americans, I think they realized they had an ironclad agreement with Canada. We're a security partner.

00:12:49.040 We're a neighbor, and they could count on us to, uh, honor a treaty, which is what a lot of people

00:12:53.920 argued. We should have done, despite the fact that had horrible ramifications for these two people,

00:12:59.100 other, other politics, ex-politicians like John Manley, a former foreign minister has argued,

00:13:03.840 uh, we should have botched the job strategically and let her get away to let her go on to Mexico, 1.00

00:13:10.580 which is where she was headed to do. Yeah. And just basically, you know, sidestep it. And then

00:13:15.960 this wouldn't have happened, uh, to Canada. There wouldn't have, we wouldn't receive this blowback,

00:13:20.120 but that became sort of the central issue that be the sort of, you know, political issue that,

00:13:25.720 uh, aside from the, the human suffering that kind of was played out through all of this is,

00:13:29.820 do we break our rules? Do we bend our rules to, you know, to avoid a conflict with China? Uh,

00:13:35.420 you know, we interviewed Brian Mulroney in the book and he said, you know, you know what,

00:13:38.920 it's terrible what happened to these guys, but, uh, you know, we have to honor our treaties with our

00:13:43.460 best friends, the United States. Otherwise, what good is our word? Uh, so there was no,

00:13:47.160 you know, there was really wasn't room to, uh, screw up the arrest and let her get away.

00:13:51.380 I mean, what, what, one of the interesting questions is, you know, was, uh, global affairs

00:13:56.500 Canada in the loop when the arrest was made? Because, um, certainly, um, the view of some

00:14:03.160 of the former very senior officials in that department who we talked to was that, um, they

00:14:09.120 would have, uh, smelled, uh, a rat, uh, a mile away here, uh, in this case and would have strongly

00:14:16.120 urge that, um, uh, you know, uh, Canada, uh, you know, not, not, not get involved in this as,

00:14:23.680 as, you know, as, as Mike just said, the view of, of many was, um, uh, you know, botch it, uh, say,

00:14:32.120 you know, the, the message arrived late, uh, she's already on the plane to, to Mexico. So I think,

00:14:37.680 you know, one of the interesting questions, and it's an unanswered question, is who actually knew

00:14:42.280 what, when this arrest take place, arrest took place? And, and was, you know, PMO, um, and the

00:14:50.120 prime minister himself, uh, uh, aware of this and, and the consequences that would, uh, that would,

00:14:57.020 uh, you know, clearly come from it, uh, when, uh, uh, when they, uh, detained her in Vancouver

00:15:03.180 airport. And, and, you know, uh, we'll, we won't see those files for a while yet.

00:15:08.720 I mean, what we do know right now though, is that, um, the RCMP knew, uh, intelligence services

00:15:14.140 knew their American counterparts knew the border Canadian border services were really aware.

00:15:19.900 They, they came up to speed really quick on who this person was and how important she was and who

00:15:24.200 her father was the founder of, of, you know, this company, um, you know, tech royalty in China,

00:15:29.820 basically business royalty. Um, and it also, but it raises the question that, uh, I mean,

00:15:35.180 I think we did find out later and it was made public probably at a press conference that,

00:15:38.540 you know, the prime minister's office did in fact know, or was tipped off. But as we've seen time

00:15:43.380 and time again, and just lately with all kinds of other events is, uh, you know, the whiff of a,

00:15:48.960 of a political leader, uh, giving advice to a law enforcement agency and how to do their job.

00:15:55.740 We know, we know that doesn't go back. That doesn't play well either. So, uh, so it's, uh, it's,

00:16:01.280 uh, you know, it's, uh, and, uh, and whatever does happen, if that happens, then it can,

00:16:06.180 you can make the argument that that totally plays into the, to the intent of, of the Chinese

00:16:11.420 to disrupt our democracy. Okay. Look, they can say, look, they, they broke their own rules. They,

00:16:15.600 they played fast and loose and all of that. So, you know, so, so it's, it's, it's, it was a tough,

00:16:20.560 it was a paradigm.

00:16:22.020 One of the claims from China as, uh, the Trudeau government was defending, um, arresting

00:16:30.520 man was always that, uh, well, you know, you guys don't always follow the rule of law because

00:16:35.420 this happened just before, uh, SNC Lavalin broke wide open and they kept throwing SNC

00:16:42.400 in the face of the Canadian government saying, well, you follow the rule of law when it's

00:16:48.320 suits you, but you don't, you didn't in this case.

00:16:51.820 Well, I see, I, I, Brian, just, you know, the, the other dimension to this is, you know,

00:16:56.900 was there white house intervention with the justice department in going after

00:17:00.900 Meng Wanzhou? Because if you look at other, you know, violations of us sanctions

00:17:06.360 cases, which was, you know, the basis for the arrest and, um, uh, you know, the, the

00:17:14.060 accusation, uh, uh, against Meng Wanzhou was that she had lied in a presentation she 0.92

00:17:20.700 gave to the Hong Kong Shanghai banking corporation about Huawei's relationship with

00:17:26.480 its, um, uh, Iran based, uh, subsidiary, uh, Skycom. Um, you know, it was all pretty

00:17:34.200 tenuous actually. Um, uh, and, you know, the, the offending slide was one slide, uh,

00:17:41.040 that, um, uh, didn't have that, uh, information on it, but, but the real issue is why did they

00:17:47.820 go after her and not the company? Because normally you go after the company, you negotiate

00:17:53.440 then, uh, you know, deferred prosecution agreement, et cetera, et cetera. And, and my

00:17:59.520 suspicion, um, uh, is that, um, you know, the Trump administration, uh, had no, uh,

00:18:07.580 compunction about inter interfering with the work of the justice department. And, you

00:18:13.280 know, this may well have been a case where, uh, uh, officials in the white house, uh, on

00:18:19.420 the national security council said, you know, let's go after Meng, uh, herself, not just

00:18:25.640 the company.

00:18:26.840 Hey, I, and I want to ask you about Trump in a moment, but, um, I think it was you

00:18:31.220 fan. And so I'll start with you that you mentioned, um, one of you mentioned John

00:18:35.600 Manley earlier and, and, and Manley did make those comments. Oh, you know, we could have

00:18:40.040 just botched it and let her get on the plane, but there were others that jumped out and, and

00:18:45.860 immediately said, we should cut a deal with China. Many of them, prominent Canadians, uh,

00:18:51.000 conservatives and liberals, uh, former ministers, former prime minister, Jean Chrétien, I believe

00:18:56.440 was one of them. Were you surprised at how many prominent Canadians were willing to step

00:19:01.980 up and say, yeah, forget about our treaty with our American friends, just cut a deal,

00:19:06.720 let her go. 0.99

00:19:07.880 So there, there, there are two dimensions there. One is, you know, the sort of views of Manley,

00:19:13.940 Chrétien, uh, others, um, um, you know, who had, uh, had extensive, certainly on, in, in the

00:19:22.560 Chrétien era. I mean, that was, uh, you know, the era of trade, uh, uh, missions, Team Canada

00:19:29.360 missions to China. Um, uh, you know, the, the corporate sector, um, did not want, uh, to see a 0.85

00:19:38.080 disruption in relations with China. They wanted to, uh, expand business opportunities in China. So,

00:19:45.820 you know, I'm, to be honest, I, I wasn't surprised at, uh, uh, the views of those who said, uh, you

00:19:53.360 know, let's, let's cut a deal. There was a letter that, um, was sent to the prime minister's office

00:20:00.360 and full disclosure. Uh, I, I signed that letter, uh, and that was in 2020. And, um, that was,

00:20:08.220 that was really motivated, uh, by, by two things. One was, um, uh, COVID had struck, um, people were

00:20:17.180 dying. Uh, there was real concern that these two guys, um, were, you know, at great risk. Uh, and

00:20:24.000 this is before we had vaccines, you know, we're talking 2020, um, in, in the full throes of, uh,

00:20:31.180 of COVID. Um, secondly, um, those who looked carefully and including, you know, some of

00:20:38.580 Canada's most, uh, distinguished, uh, extradition experts, um, who said, you know, the, the rule

00:20:46.000 of law here, um, uh, you know, there's, there's sort of a fork in the road here and, and given

00:20:53.800 the highly political nature of this case, um, there's nothing to stop Canada from, uh, cutting,

00:20:59.960 cutting a deal with the Chinese. Uh, that was, um, that was, uh, uh, I think, uh, um, you 0.72

00:21:07.440 know, part, part of the motivation here, uh, and also recognition that, you know, the Trump

00:21:13.080 administration was cutting deals, to be honest, left, right, and center to, uh, get Americans

00:21:19.260 out of Iranian jails, out of, you know, uh, uh, Syrian jails, uh, uh, out of, uh, you

00:21:26.340 know, uh, uh, uh, all sorts of other, uh, places where they'd run into, into, uh, into

00:21:32.660 trouble. And, and so, you know, the sense was, you know, given, given the, the personal

00:21:41.220 risk these two guys were at and, um, and, um, uh, you know, they were now, um, you know,

00:21:48.200 they'd also been formally charged, um, Schellenberg, who was, uh, uh, a Canadian, uh, correct me,

00:21:55.180 Michael, but he was a Canadian who'd been detained in China and was executed. So I think

00:21:59.940 there was, no, no, he wasn't, he was, he was, he was convicted of drug dealing, drug trafficking.

00:22:05.500 He got a, he got a life sentence, life sentence. And then, and then, and then the life sentence

00:22:10.420 was, um, um, it increased to a death sentence, but he was never, he was never actually executed,

00:22:15.980 but it was all part of the pressure play along with saying, you know, so there was, there was

00:22:20.340 real, there was real concern there that, you know, they, that their lives were, were at risk. And,

00:22:26.100 um, you know, Canadian governments in the past had, had cut deals with, uh, very unsavory

00:22:31.580 characters when Bob Fowler, uh, a very special, uh, uh, was, uh, kidnapped, uh, by, uh, Al Qaeda

00:22:39.500 in the Maghreb, uh, um, you know, we, we, we actually paid some serious money there to, uh, you

00:22:46.200 know, to, to release him. So negotiating hostage, uh, uh, uh, treaty, uh, you know, uh, negotiating

00:22:56.360 to, you know, to get hostages released is, is, um, is, uh, you know, well-established

00:23:02.480 practice, including by the government of Canada.

00:23:05.320 Yeah. An unsavory business, but one that does happen. We need to take a quick break. And

00:23:09.520 when we come back, I do, I do want to ask you about Trump's double dealing and issues like

00:23:14.040 that. And, and also, um, you know, comparisons to, to how Michael Kovrig, Michael Spavor

00:23:20.580 were treated compared to Manoiseau living it up in West Vancouver. Well, we'll talk about

00:23:27.260 that when we come back. Was Donald Trump trying to do a double deal when it came to the two

00:23:32.860 Michaels? That's something that, uh, is put forward in the new book, the two Michaels by

00:23:37.180 Mike Blanchfield and Fenn Osler-Hampson. And so, um, Mike, I guess I'll, I'll start with

00:23:43.000 you. Um, and then here from Fenn, uh, obviously Trump was someone who, you know, I, I don't

00:23:52.000 have that page open, but you, you quote him right in the book about, yeah, we'll talk about

00:23:55.760 that. We'll cut a deal. Yeah. He was freely talking about cutting deals. And in the end

00:24:01.000 it, it was an American deal that, that got them out. But was he playing a game with the

00:24:06.220 lives of two Canadians? Um, he clearly saw a link between people in prison and how to

00:24:13.980 cut a trade deal. And this was sort of a, a, a bombshell he dropped during an interview

00:24:18.620 with the Reuters news agency early on that, uh, you know, he wasn't above doing this. Um,

00:24:23.360 um, and I was in the white house. I was in the oval office when, um, he met Justin Trudeau

00:24:27.800 in 2019, a year later. And it was one of those classic Trump photo ops, which turned into

00:24:34.180 a 20 minute press conference, which most of it was Canadian reporters shouting at

00:24:37.860 Trump, uh, and of him taking the bait and answering, what are you going to help these

00:24:41.400 guys? What are you going to do? And he, the press conference ended with him basically

00:24:46.260 suggesting, hinting, more or less saying, yeah, yeah, I'll be talking to Xi Jinping at

00:24:50.300 the G20 summit next month. And, uh, I'll bring, I'll see what I can do. Sort of a typical

00:24:54.260 kind of Trump, like, uh, yeah, I'll, uh, talk about your deal there. And it was never

00:24:57.900 really clear what he did, if anything. Um, and, uh, uh, and it just seemed like they

00:25:05.340 were sort of collateral damage in terms of his, you know, ongoing trade wars with China

00:25:09.520 and trying to gain competitive advantage, you know, for American business and manufacturers.

00:25:14.660 I mean, but when you fast forward to sort of the, when, after he's out of power and Biden

00:25:19.980 is in power, I mean, it took the Biden administration about nine months to review the case. They, Joe

00:25:24.860 Biden did a, an appearance with Trudeau in, uh, in Ottawa, virtually their first summit

00:25:29.040 during COVID right after he was inaugurated in early 2021 and signaled that he didn't

00:25:33.260 like this. He was going to take a look at it. Um, and again, what, what got them out

00:25:39.320 of Dodge literally was a deal, but it had to be brokered by the Americans. And it was Biden

00:25:45.040 himself using leverage and capital with Xi Jinping directly, um, to, um, to basically make

00:25:52.440 the argument that you need to get rid of this irritants. Um, and again, Biden didn't want

00:25:57.700 to be seen to be messing with his justice department and how it was investigating things.

00:26:02.140 So Dominic Barton, the Canadian ambassador to China, who's a former, you know, captain

00:26:06.940 of industry got involved. They went to the United States. They helped educate the Huawei people

00:26:12.720 about, Hey, maybe you could make a deal here and take some kind of business penalty and the

00:26:17.940 case could be reconfigured and everyone saves face. And what it was, was an elaborate dance

00:26:23.820 to engineer a prisoner swap with everyone trying to save face. And that included the Canadians

00:26:28.300 saying, well, you know what, we followed the rule of law. We didn't cave. We didn't, you

00:26:32.200 know, get the minister to intervene under a special clause in our expedition law that the Chinese

00:26:37.920 knew full well existed because they did their homework. Um, and, um, and, you know, so when

00:26:43.340 we saw the chain of events play out, it was American prosecutors go to court and, um, somewhere

00:26:49.100 New York, greater New York city, they withdraw the charges provisionally, uh, reinstate, uh,

00:26:55.500 you know, this, this sort of DPA style prosecution against the company. And then Canada, you know,

00:27:01.420 the Canadian prosecutors, uh, or the American, the Canadian prosecutors on behalf of the Americans

00:27:05.580 making the extradition request, stand up in a Vancouver courtroom a few hours later, and

00:27:09.640 they're, they're dropping the case. Everybody goes free. There's a, there's a jet with its

00:27:14.860 engines warming on the tarmac of a private hangar in Vancouver and off goes Meng. And

00:27:19.440 meanwhile, behind the scenes, the, you know, the two Michaels are rustled out of their, their,

00:27:24.060 their cells, they're brought together and they're put on an aircraft and, uh, and literally

00:27:28.920 it ended with a deal. And to pivot it back to Trump, Trump didn't make the deal. He didn't

00:27:34.580 seem willing to make a deal. He, you know, jumped the deal maker. Well, you know what,

00:27:38.360 there was no deal to be had with Canada. He's at, we, we know he's the very least he's put

00:27:43.420 it mildly. He's transactional. And looking back on it today, there was really nothing

00:27:47.720 in it for him. You know, why should I do a favor for my friend or ally? Well, in the

00:27:52.620 end it was Biden who did that. And then we saw sort of it come full circle just recently

00:27:56.720 when there is Biden back in, in parliament, it's a real visit. It's not virtual. And suddenly

00:28:02.500 there are the two Michaels and it was, uh, it kind of, uh, you know, Biden was the guy

00:28:07.600 who basically put the elbow grease into this to get it done in the end, uh, to help out

00:28:12.800 Canada, to do us a favor, to get a deal for us. Yeah, no, I think, I, I think it wasn't

00:28:16.980 just to help Canada. Um, uh, it, it's, it's pretty clear that, um, because, uh, Xi Jinping

00:28:25.440 had been embarrassed on the world stage, uh, with the arrest, um, that, um, the Chinese 1.00

00:28:33.060 made it very clear to the Americans, this issue had to be resolved if the Biden administration

00:28:39.500 was going to turn the page, the Trump page on relations with China. Um, I, I know that

00:28:45.760 sounds funny to be talking about or odd to be talking about that now, but, you know, Biden

00:28:51.340 made it clear. He wanted to have, uh, uh, a much more, um, uh, working, uh, uh, professional

00:28:58.820 relationship with, uh, you know, with, uh, with the Chinese. Um, uh, of course that, that

00:29:06.160 hasn't happened, but, uh, he wanted to recalibrate it. Um, this issue, uh, had to

00:29:12.460 be resolved, uh, uh, from a Chinese standpoint, uh, as well. Uh, the second point, uh, I would

00:29:20.940 make there is that, um, remember that, um, the Chinese were going to be hosting the, uh,

00:29:26.820 the, uh, Winter Olympics, uh, at the end of, uh, 2021, um, you know, which had been, uh,

00:29:34.280 uh, delayed, uh, uh, because of, uh, COVID, um, this case was kind of hanging like an albatross.

00:29:43.260 I mean, it had, uh, you know, gathered, uh, enormous international attention, uh, partly

00:29:49.200 through, you know, or largely because of the efforts of, uh, our own government to, uh, you

00:29:55.460 know, bring it to the attention of our allies and others saying, you know, this can happen

00:29:59.140 to, to your people too. Um, and, um, so, so, uh, uh, uh, you know, the issue really had

00:30:07.420 to be, had to be dealt with. Um, and, and, you know, it, it, it came up in, uh, um, negotiations

00:30:15.420 that, uh, Deputy Secretary Sherman had with the Chinese, uh, at the end of July, 21. It was

00:30:22.720 the subject of a phone call, uh, between the White House, uh, um, uh, you know, President

00:30:28.780 Biden, Gigi Ping, in, uh, in September. Uh, I mean, Mike's absolutely right that, um, that,

00:30:35.460 um, you know, uh, uh, Biden, um, you know, wanted to, to do something for Trudeau here. Um,

00:30:44.320 but, uh, but it was also in the American interests to, uh, to resolve the case.

00:30:49.100 I think you want to do something for Canada. I mean, look at the situation of the Americans

00:30:53.360 right now. I mean, they're, the world is fracturing all around them, right? You've

00:30:57.400 got, uh, China and Russia, you know, circling the wagons on Ukraine. You've got, uh, major

00:31:03.280 parts of the, uh, you know, of, of the world who are not on side with, um, you know, Canada

00:31:09.800 and its NATO allies and some Asian allies against Russia. Uh, the Americans don't have the power 0.95

00:31:15.540 base they once had. And it's been made very clear to me in conversations I've had with

00:31:19.700 senior Americans that, um, actually as little as we are and how insignificant we see, see

00:31:25.400 each other, like every, every bit of help helps, uh, you know, if we send a few extra

00:31:31.300 tanks or, you know, buckets of ammunition to Ukraine, the Americans appreciate that because 1.00

00:31:37.260 we're part of a team that is on their side helping. Um, and it also, and Biden has said

00:31:43.120 this repeatedly, um, and, uh, it bears repeat. I think it's important in this context. Uh,

00:31:49.000 the Americans are just relieved that they've got us on their border because they've got 0.95

00:31:51.880 Mexico on the other border with a whole host of immigration and political issues to deal

00:31:56.920 with their immigration. You know, it's an, it's a gateway from, you know, massive, you

00:32:01.980 know, mass migration through, you know, the Western hemisphere and Latin America into the

00:32:06.220 United States and sometimes up into Canada. Uh, so it's a very legitimate, uh, feeling that

00:32:12.600 the Americans have these days that yes, they, they always take us for granted. And, you

00:32:15.780 know, we're barely acknowledged in Washington. We matter more now than we ever did because

00:32:20.700 we're part of a, uh, dwindling group of countries that really is in their power sphere. And, uh,

00:32:26.380 as we know, everything is so fractured, uncertain right now with this new war. Um, and we see

00:32:31.600 a new detainee, American detainee, you know, the wall street journal right now in, in Moscow

00:32:36.600 as well. So it's, uh, it's all about interests. And as Finn points out, yeah, the Chinese 0.99

00:32:41.540 had a, uh, you know, a great interest in getting this irritant out of the way, they

00:32:44.580 were going to host the world at the Olympics. It was all about saving face and putting on

00:32:48.480 a good show. So, you know, after a certain point, yes, Xi Jinping was disrespected, uh,

00:32:55.160 you know, when this all happened and, and, uh, his minions ran around figuring out a way

00:32:59.800 to, to do something, but in the end it became an irritant. And I'm sure the thought in Beijing,

00:33:04.780 they came around to the argument, they came around to the point of view that they had to be

00:33:07.940 persuaded heavily that this is just a great big pain and an irritant. You got to get rid of,

00:33:11.920 we got to figure out a way to get rid of these, you know, get these guys out of here and hopefully

00:33:15.860 never hear from them again. Before I ask about going forward and, you know, the, the efforts

00:33:22.780 by the Canadian government on extrajudicial rendition and such, can either of you settle

00:33:29.540 for me, this idea, start with you, Finn, and then from Mike, um, did the Trudeau government

00:33:37.180 play a big role in brokering this release or was it all the Americans? I've heard from

00:33:42.860 folks in Ottawa. Oh no, very much a big role heard from people in Washington. No, no role at all. It

00:33:50.140 was a decision to, to move forward with deferred prosecution. Um, is either one true or is it a case

00:33:57.220 of the truth is somewhere in the middle? Well, um, uh, we, we, we did talk, uh, uh, uh, both on

00:34:05.860 the record and off the record, uh, with senior, uh, officials in the administration. And, um, uh, uh,

00:34:16.180 it's clear that, um, our ambassador, uh, to, uh, to Washington, um, uh, ambassador, uh, um, Hillman

00:34:26.180 Hillman played, uh, uh, uh, a really important role in, in, you know, keeping, keeping the issue

00:34:33.460 alive. Um, there were, uh, uh, a number of high level meetings with White House officials that involved,

00:34:42.500 uh, uh, uh, ambassador Hillman and, um, and also, uh, Dominique Barton. Um, and, and so,

00:34:50.980 you know, getting it on the radar, uh, particularly with the new administration was important. Uh,

00:34:59.060 the second point I would make is that, um, you know, even though he's come in for a lot of criticism,

00:35:05.940 um, in many ways, the, the, uh, unsung hero in this story is Dominique Barton.

00:35:12.500 And he played, uh, an important role and, and Mike touched on this, but, uh, I think,

00:35:18.180 you know, we might want to underline it, um, in really helping, uh, the Chinese helping Huawei,

00:35:29.780 which was not getting, by the way, the best legal advice and team in the United States,

00:35:35.940 because nobody wanted to touch them with a 10 foot pole. Um, uh, you know, given,

00:35:41.620 given the troubles that they had, uh, run into, uh, with, uh, uh, successive, uh, administrations in

00:35:49.540 Washington, um, in, in, in, in, in helping them understand the game, uh, the legal game of deferred

00:35:57.220 prosecution agreements and that, that, um, you know, this was sort of standard practice. Um,

00:36:04.500 you know, you admit, uh, uh, your culpability and an annex to an agreement, uh, uh, you know,

00:36:11.540 which is kind of, you know, ultimately what, what happened there, but, but really sort of,

00:36:17.300 you know, pushing them along to say, you know, uh, there is a deal to be made here. And, um, and once

00:36:26.900 you had a new sort of team in the justice department, uh, with, uh, with the Biden administration, uh,

00:36:33.140 that, you know, was looking at this case, um, they, they, uh, you know, deferred prosecution

00:36:39.140 discussions had taken place under Trump, but went nowhere, uh, as Mike mentioned, but, you know,

00:36:44.420 they got traction under Biden because, you know, once, um, you know, his officials started looking

00:36:50.340 at the case here, they, you know, they kind of came to the conclusion, we might, we might actually

00:36:56.500 lose this one in court. So, um, so I think, you know, there, there was a greater appetite to, uh,

00:37:03.460 to come to an agreement here, but, but, you know, we, we, um, you know, our diplomats, uh, did,

00:37:11.140 did play an important role. Um, I think, uh, and Mike can talk about this because, um, you know,

00:37:17.300 he was, uh, uh, uh, tracking Philippe Champagne, but, um, the, um, the, uh, um, uh, uh, agreement, uh,

00:37:27.220 or, or declaration on arbitrary detention, which, um, Canadian officials got a whole bunch of

00:37:33.380 countries to sign up to really, you know, put the Chinese in the spotlight on this one.

00:37:39.620 And so maybe Mike, I can jump in and, and just do a slight redirect on that because, uh, with

00:37:48.020 China, that sort of thing can work. And there was an attempt to have a, an international conference

00:37:53.940 last week. It's since been put off, but I don't see that embarrassing, uh, someone like Putin when

00:38:00.860 we're dealing with Evan, uh, Gershkovic of the wall street journal. So was that a successful play

00:38:07.020 by Canada and, and our allies in, in saying we're against this, uh, extrajudicial, uh, detention,

00:38:14.340 but will it have limited appeal? Yeah. Well, I think, I think the way, I mean, the way it works is

00:38:20.200 you start with, um, an aspiration and you get a bunch of people to agree on an idea. So, you know,

00:38:25.520 um, you know, to use another example, a long time ago, uh, eventually people came around to the idea

00:38:31.300 smoking is bad for you. Um, and you shouldn't smoke, probably die. It'll kill you in a second

00:38:36.860 hand. Smoke will kill people around you. And then eventually regulation and binding, you know, 0.97

00:38:42.540 mechanisms came into place. And now we have warning labels and fewer people smoke. And it was that way

00:38:48.420 with landmines. Don't use landmines. They're really miserable weapons. And you blow up innocent

00:38:51.940 kids and look at the horrible pictures, you know? So I think it's starting that way with this. You

00:38:56.100 don't take innocent people, hostages from another country to, for a political gain and lock them up

00:39:00.820 as hostages to negotiate, which is what we're seeing with the wall street journal. Um, you know,

00:39:07.060 reporter who Brian, frankly, is a member of our tribe, right? You know, I'm sure we don't, I don't,

00:39:11.560 I don't like seeing that any more than you do. Right. No. So, but here we're, here we go again.

00:39:15.480 But I think what the process of doing that and, and to talk about Francois-Philippe Champagne for a

00:39:21.020 moment, cause I covered him while he was doing it and spoke to him about it in quite a bit of detail. I mean,

00:39:25.120 he was basically hell bent on doing whatever he could to embarrass the Chinese and not embarrass 0.81

00:39:30.980 the Chinese, but pressure them, but to bring other players to the table. Uh, and I think it 0.99

00:39:35.760 was useful for Biden and the Americans and the justice department when they could look and say,

00:39:41.040 okay, well, Canada's got, you know, eventually it was 70, 70 countries saying, this is bad. This is,

00:39:46.560 you know, smoking is bad for you. It kills you. This is really bad behavior. You don't take other

00:39:51.060 people, citizens hostage to score, win political battles. Um, it, it, it gave an impetus, like a

00:39:59.160 moral impetus to the Americans who were the practical, you know, they, they, they, they had

00:40:03.700 to execute this practically. They had to decide, it was their case. They had to decide how they're

00:40:07.780 going to reconfigure it and do the deal that they did by withdrawing the charge specifically

00:40:13.400 against the person focusing on the company. They have a lot of Canadian help. And I think the

00:40:18.320 Canadians did everything that they could have done politically at the diplomatic level at

00:40:22.220 the political level. Uh, they built this coalition that may or may not, you know, make, I don't

00:40:28.040 know what kind of difference it might make with Russia and this, and this, and, um, and I mean,

00:40:32.540 but, but, but so we'll see, so we'll see what happens. Um, but I think it really, uh, I mean,

00:40:36.960 it was, uh, it was kind of, um, it was the assist, you know, I mean, they, they, they put the ball

00:40:41.500 in play and the Americans scored the touchdown. I mean, that's, I hate to dumb it down that way,

00:40:46.120 but I think that's basically how it all came to pass. Yeah. And China's not Russia. I mean,

00:40:51.520 China, you know, does a huge amount of business with the rest of the world. And, um, and, uh,

00:40:58.880 you know, they were, there were lots of people doing business in China who, you know, were coming

00:41:04.560 to the conclusion, gee, this could happen to us. Um, you know, Russia has very, certainly now very 0.86

00:41:12.520 limited, um, uh, economic ties with, uh, certainly the Western world. And so that gives fewer points

00:41:21.120 of leverage, uh, you know, to come back to your question, um, and, and, you know, for the Chinese

00:41:27.340 saving face is very important part of, uh, or maintaining face, keeping face is an important part

00:41:33.420 of their culture. Uh, I don't think Putin gives two figs about how he's viewed internationally. So.

00:41:40.440 I, I really don't either. Gents, uh, so many more questions, most of which are answered in the book,

00:41:46.300 but it's been a fantastic discussion today. So I want to thank you for your time and encourage

00:41:51.840 everyone to, uh, to pick up the two Michaels by Mike Blanchfield, Fenn Osler-Hampson. It's by

00:41:57.180 Sutherland House Books. You can find it anywhere books are sold. Thanks so much.

00:42:01.480 Thanks, Brian.

00:42:02.800 Thanks.

00:42:03.840 Full comment is a post-media podcast. My name's Brian Lilly, your host. This episode was produced by

00:42:09.300 Andre Proulx. Theme music by Bryce Hall. Kevin Libin is the executive producer. You can subscribe

00:42:14.380 on Apple podcasts, Google, Spotify, et cetera. Uh, give us a rating, leave a review, tell your

00:42:20.000 friends about us and thanks for listening.

Full Comment - April 24, 2023

How the Two Michaels’ freedom was won

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript