Geopolitics at play in Meng’s case

In Canada, nearly 12,500km away from Kenya, a case involving Meng Wanzhou, a Huawei senior official is brewing and turning misty by the day. Remote in our shores as it may sound, the case bears crucial geopolitical overtones worth taking note of.

That is significant because Huawei, a giant in ICT, is a provider of a common denominator service that links the global community technologically. Besides, Huawei being one of the more visible Chinese companies worldwide is naturally a perfect alibi for high-flung diplomatic manoeuvres.

Application of diplomatic tactics is not new in negotiating desired outcomes where two or more countries find themselves in a contest for resources or influence. Indeed, aside from nations, companies domiciled in different jurisdictions and competing for product uptake in the same markets often engage in similar intrigues to curve market niches.

Suffice it to say that competition for recognition is as old as humanity. There is nothing, therefore, significantly new about the attempt by nations to create perceptions of grandiose in the eyes of their admirers. Understood from that point of view, Meng’s case carries more than meets the eye. That is why taking Meng’s case on face value would be missing the bigger picture.

Ideologically, Kenya has an open foreign relations policymaking her amenable to making as many friends as practically possible. Therein lies—in diplomatic-speak—the risk of touching a live wire albeit unwittingly.

In close to two decades, China has been Kenya’s major ally particularly in the development of her infrastructure. This cooperation between China and Kenya has not dimmed the prospects of cooperation with other nations. Any diplomatic move Kenya contemplates must be sensitive to the doctrine of good neighbourliness and strategic geopolitical affiliations of her allies.

The tiff playing out in courts of law between China on one side and Canada and US on the other makes for a curious lesson. At the same time, it raises many questions. Is the impasse about the US — cheered along happily by Canada — sizing China up? Are Huawei’s growing influence, technological breakthroughs and enviable commercial spoils the matter? So, could Meng Wanzhou, merely be collateral damage?

It may help to jog the memory of those who may not have followed the Meng Wanzhou case. Huawei’s deputy board chair and chief finance officer (CFO), Meng is the daughter of Ren Zhengfei, the founder of the Chinese telecom giant. On December 1, 2018, Meng was intercepted at Vancouver International Airport in Canada by Canada Border Services Agency on the request of the US while en route to Mexico from Hong Kong.

In January 2019, the US Department of Justice declared financial fraud charges against Meng. In February this year, Meng was again indicted for alleged trade secrets theft by the US. The shifting goalposts of the accusations are as telling as they are curious.

On July 28, 2020, documents filed ahead of the formal hearing on Meng’s extradition to the US scheduled for April 2021 were released to the media in Canada. It is rather obvious that Meng’s case is being sensationalised through hyped media crusades to secure a negative public verdict.

Lest we forget, soon after Meng’s arrest, Trump gloated that, “if I think it’s good for what will be certainly the largest trade deal ever made, I would certainly intervene if I thought it was necessary.” Meanwhile, Canadian PM Justin Trudeau is on record urging Trump not to cut a final trade deal with China until the two Canadians held in China after Meng’s arrest are set free.

Obviously, Meng has become a bargaining chip for the US and Canada for reasons that have more to do with geopolitical brinkmanship than the phoney accusations levelled against her and Huawei. Now it is time to ask, has Meng become the proverbial sacrificial lamb being led to the abattoir as atonement for grudges?

 -The writer is an ICT policy and internet governance journalist. davidindeje@gmail.com