Featured Post from Cedarville University

What will the extradition of Meng Wanzhou mean for relations between Canada, China, and the U.S.?

Jun 10, 2020

2 min

Glen Duerr, Ph.D.


There is the rule of law, and there’s politics – but what happens when you are a country like Canada stuck in the middle of an ugly legal battle between China and America?


This Monday, in Vancouver – a hearing is underway that will see one of the world’s titans victorious and the other, probably quite angry.


Legal arguments at the B.C. Supreme Court in the extradition case of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou may stretch into next year.


Crown lawyer Robert Frater told the court Wednesday that lawyers for both sides will propose a new schedule later this month that would bring the hearings to a close in early 2021 at the latest, instead of this fall.


The Unites States wants Canada to extradite Meng over allegations she misrepresented the company’s relationship with Skycom Tech Co., putting HSBC at risk of violating U.S. sanction against Iran, a charge both she and Huawei deny.


Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes dismissed the first phase of arguments last week by Meng’s lawyers who claimed the case should be thrown out because the U.S. allegations against her wouldn’t be a crime in Canada.  Global News - June 03

 



It has been a long and drawn out process and will likely stretch into this year, and odds are patience is wearing thin.

 

  • Can any of the countries expect retaliation and what would that look like?
  • Is the United State right seeking extradition of this official?
  • Will a change at the Whitehouse see this effort dropped?
  • And what are the underlying issues at play that may be attributing to this drama?


If you are a journalist covering this topic – then let our experts help.


Dr. Glen Duerr's research interests include comparative politics and international relations theory. Glen is an expert on this subject and 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

Supreme Court Expansion Debate Raises Questions About Judicial Independence featured image

1 min

Supreme Court Expansion Debate Raises Questions About Judicial Independence

Should the Supreme Court remain at nine justices, or would a larger bench strengthen the nation’s highest court? That question is drawing renewed attention after a Republican-backed constitutional amendment to permanently limit the court to nine seats failed in the House in September. Democratic proposals include expanding the court to 13 justices, while supporters and opponents disagree over whether changing its size would improve its credibility or deepen political divisions. Although nine justices may seem like a constitutional requirement, Congress determines the court’s size. Its membership changed several times before settling at nine in 1869. Legislation introduced by Rep. Al Green would increase that number to 13, reopening a debate over how much influence elected officials should have over the structure of the judiciary. Supporters see expansion as a way to restore balance and bring additional perspectives to the bench. Critics worry that adding seats to secure favorable rulings could encourage future majorities to pursue similar changes. The broader issue is how to preserve public confidence in an institution designed to exercise independent judgment. The Constitution’s protections for federal judges, including service during good behavior and protection against salary reductions, are intended to shield them from partisan pressure. Changing the court’s membership would create new opportunities for presidential appointments, with consequences that could extend well beyond a single administration. As the debate continues, Americans face a consequential question: What reforms would strengthen accountability while preserving the Supreme Court’s ability to interpret the law independently?

Inflation and Interest Rates Put Household Budgets and Business Plans Under Pressure featured image

1 min

Inflation and Interest Rates Put Household Budgets and Business Plans Under Pressure

For American families, inflation is felt in everyday decisions: what to buy at the grocery store, how much to spend on gas and whether a major purchase can wait. This week’s Consumer Price Index report will bring those pressures into focus as the Federal Reserve considers its next interest-rate decision. Some officials have signaled that another increase could wait until December, but stronger inflation data could strengthen the case for action at the October 27–28 meeting. The stakes extend beyond the price of everyday necessities. Higher interest rates can make credit card balances and new auto loans more expensive, adding pressure to households already managing rising living costs. Homebuyers also face difficult affordability decisions, with the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate reaching 7.40% last week. Mortgage rates respond to bond markets and inflation expectations as well as monetary policy, meaning uncertainty can affect buyers even before the Fed acts. Businesses face a similar calculation. When financing becomes more expensive, purchasing equipment, expanding operations or hiring additional employees can become harder to justify. Rising operating costs can also force companies to choose between raising prices and accepting smaller profit margins. For policymakers, the challenge is to bring inflation under control while preserving employment and economic growth. This week’s report will offer another signal about that balance—and help shape the financial decisions families and businesses make in the months ahead. 

Slowing Job Growth Raises Questions About the Economy’s Momentum featured image

1 min

Slowing Job Growth Raises Questions About the Economy’s Momentum

The U.S. economy added just 29,000 jobs in September, while unemployment edged up to 4.2%, raising concerns about the strength of the labor market. Downward revisions to July and August’s employment figures further weakened the picture, suggesting hiring had been less robust than previously reported. For workers seeking their first job or a new opportunity, the slowdown adds uncertainty to an already challenging economic environment. The report also complicates the Federal Reserve’s next interest-rate decision. Weaker hiring reduced expectations for another rate increase this month, as policymakers weigh inflation concerns against the risk of slowing the economy further. Higher borrowing costs can make business expansion more expensive and discourage spending on homes, vehicles and other major purchases. A softer labor market gives the Fed another reason to consider how much financial pressure households and employers can absorb. September’s figures do not establish that a recession is underway: unemployment has remained between 4.1% and 4.3% since March, and employers are still adding jobs. Nevertheless, the report raises a broader question about whether the economy can sustain growth while hiring remains subdued. The coming months will help reveal whether September represented a temporary slowdown or a more persistent loss of momentum—with consequences for household confidence, business investment and monetary policy. 

View all posts
Powered by