The three-way tug-of war between China, Canada and the United States

Jan 22, 2020

1 min

Glen Duerr, Ph.D.


It’s a court trial in coastal Vancouver Canada that has gathered the attention of international media and plunged trade talks and international relations between America, China and America into tension, tariffs and a tug-of-war over one Chinese executive accused of fraud in in the United States.


Here’s brief background courtesy of BBC:


The Story in 100 Words


Why is the US targeting Huawei, one of the world's largest smartphone makers, and executive Meng Wanzhou?


Authorities claim they misled the US government about the company's business in Iran, which is under US economic sanctions.


The US is also pursuing Huawei and Ms Meng in criminal charges including bank fraud and theft of technology. Both reject the claims.


US officials want Ms Meng extradited from Canada to face the charges.

Her arrest caused a diplomatic dispute between China and the US and Canada.

The case against Huawei also comes as Western nations grow increasingly concerned about a possible spying risk related to the widespread adoption of the company's technology.




  • So, is there any diplomatic resolution?


  • What will happen if Meng Wanzhou is extradited to the United States?


  • What will happen if she can return to China?


  • Is Canada in a no - win situation?




There are a lot of questions – and that’s where our experts can help.


Dr. Glen Duerr's research interests include comparative politics, and international relations theory. Glen is available to speak to media regarding this topic– simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.

Connect with:
Glen Duerr, Ph.D.

Glen Duerr, Ph.D.

Professor of International Studies

Dr. Deurr's research interests include nationalism and secession, comparative politics, and international relations theory

International TerrorismDomestic TerrorismInternational RelationsBrexit
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Cedarville University

From the Pump to the Bond Market: Why Rising Oil Prices Matter for Borrowing Costs featured image

2 min

From the Pump to the Bond Market: Why Rising Oil Prices Matter for Borrowing Costs

From the Pump to the Bond Market: Why Rising Oil Prices Matter for Borrowing Costs Rising oil prices are often felt first at the gas pump, but their effects can quickly extend to the broader economy. As higher costs for gasoline, diesel and jet fuel work their way through transportation, manufacturing and food production, investors are increasingly concerned that inflation could remain elevated longer than expected. That concern is helping push Treasury yields higher. When investors expect inflation to erode the future value of fixed-income returns, they typically demand higher yields on government bonds. The result can be a ripple effect across the economy: mortgage rates, auto loans, credit-card rates and business borrowing costs may all remain high or move higher. This is an important second stage of the oil-price story. The first concern is the direct impact on consumers and businesses as energy costs rise. The next concern is whether those higher costs become embedded in the economy, causing inflation expectations to increase and making it more difficult for the Federal Reserve to ease interest rates. For policymakers, the dilemma is clear. Raising or maintaining higher interest rates can help slow inflation, but it also makes borrowing more expensive for families, businesses and the federal government. If high energy prices persist, the Federal Reserve may face added pressure to prioritize inflation control even as consumers and employers feel the effects of tighter financial conditions. The issue is also global. Oil markets respond quickly to geopolitical instability and supply disruptions, while Treasury yields influence borrowing and investment decisions far beyond the United States. Together, high energy prices and rising yields can become a powerful test of economic resilience—affecting household budgets today and financial decisions for months to come. 

White House Pushes Back on Calls for Broader AI Safety Guardrails featured image

1 min

White House Pushes Back on Calls for Broader AI Safety Guardrails

As calls grow from technology leaders, researchers and lawmakers for stronger artificial intelligence safety rules, the White House is signaling a different priority: keeping the United States at the forefront of AI innovation. The administration has pushed back on proposals that could slow development or create sweeping federal approval requirements for new models, arguing that excessive regulation could weaken America’s competitive position—especially against China. That does not mean the administration is ignoring AI-related risks. Its approach emphasizes national security, cybersecurity and enforcement against criminal misuse of AI. Recent White House action has encouraged voluntary collaboration between government and AI developers to assess the cyber capabilities of advanced models, protect critical infrastructure and strengthen defenses against malicious actors. But the framework specifically avoids mandatory licensing or government preclearance before companies develop or release new AI systems. The debate raises important questions for business leaders, policymakers and the public: How can innovation move quickly without sacrificing security, privacy and public trust? And where should responsibility rest—within individual companies, through voluntary government-industry partnerships or through enforceable federal safeguards? 

View all posts