How China could use trade embargos to force Canada to end its "no restrictions on abortion" laws

China is Canada's largest trading partner, with bilateral trade equaling nearly $100 billion dollars annually.

Based on this, were China and the US to negotiate a trade embargo against Canada (similar to embargos against 3rd world nations such as Cuba), this could deal a huge blow to Canada's economic viability and put the international force on them to end their "no restrictions on abortion" laws:

https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/what-a-trade-war-with-china-would-do-to-canada/

Bilateral merchandise trade with China totals nearly $100 billion annually, having nearly doubled in the last decade, according to Statistics Canada. That makes China Canada’s largest trading partner apart from the United States.

 

Frankly, I think this concept is half-baked, and so this thread will have the viability of a premature fetus, delivered at 18 weeks gestation. But I'll give you a chance to explain/defend your concept: why in the world would China or the U.S. even care about Canada's policy on abortion, much less antagonize a top trading partner and, for the U.S., a very close ally, with trade sanctions, in order to bring about some change in Canada's sovereign, domestic politics? Is not any such thing utterly unheard of? And, as China does not like, or deem it appropriate for other nations to endeavor in, criticism of its internal policies, they would be the last nation to be picking a fight over something like this.

If I was being charitable in my estimate, and was also giving your suggestion the benefit of every doubt, I would reckon the odds of this occurring at 0%.

 

I don't see the benefit. Can you explain?

 

Thread ender....

 

China would put political pressure on Canada to end abortion - CHINA????
Up until a few days ago I would have thought I would be the last place on earth but it seems the “one child policy” was too successful

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_China

I am not surprised this happened - children born and raised in single child families are not about to have twenty kids for the state. A couple of days ago they announced that abortion will be restricted to :medical reasons only - which in essence means no restriction

 

Canada is being MORE successful at reducing the abortion rate than is the USA.

Yet, you want to end THEIR policies instead of ending OURS???

To me, this sounds JUST PLAIN STUPID.

 

I'll grant you that it sounds theoretically possible, and it's a very creative idea.
But in all realism, I highly doubt the US would have the impetus to pressure China through their trade policies to pressure Canada to change their abortion policies.
It simply is not important enough to the US, it mixes and conflates together two very different issues, would put a strain on international relations, and there's a lot of money and economic gain at stake in the trade negotiations. To say nothing of the rising military tensions between the US and China right now. I really don't think the US would want to inject something else like this into the mix.
China is also the land of forced abortions, there have been rumors persisting (up until extremely recently) about forced abortions, with the central government seeming not to care, or to even likely be indirectly encouraging it. The Chinese government would definitely not be putting pressure on Canada due to any ethical qualms or innate pro-life values.
That being said, it is not unprecedented for a country to try to put economic pressure on another country to change their abortion policy.
Canadian PM Trudeau has pledged $650 million to pressure African countries on abortion

 

The goal isn't to "reduce" - not all abortions are created equal.

Reducing legal abortions is a more significant priority than illegal ones.

 

So, what gives you the right or ability to determine which pregnancies are better than other pregnancies?

And, you got that last sentence backward. Laws are a MEANS to an END. The end of laws against abortions is to reduce the number of abortions. And, as Canada proves, laws are merely one possible means.

 

Um, no. First of all, the abortion rate in the US would be higher even if the two countries had the same abortion laws.
(You can look at abortions by race to clearly see this)
Second of all, the US is not exactly a good example of a country with laws in place to stop abortions. For all practical purposes, abortion is essentially legal in the US. In fact several states have laws that are more liberal than they are in Canada.

 

Well, you are totally missing that Canada not only has NO laws preventing abortion, it actually PAYS for them.

And, your comment about states having laws more liberal than Canada is just plain silly. In Canada, there are NO laws. What state has NO federal or state laws on abortion?

And, tossing our nation's history of racism into the mix is not acceptable for several reasons. First of all, you are suggesting laws are needed specifically to control minority populations!!! Seriosuly!! What makes you think THAT is acceptable?

 

Well put and TRUE!!! ....especially that bit about minorities...very true...

 

Um, first of all, that's not true. Second of all, you seem to be trying to hijack this thread with a separate topic.

Sorry, we're going to ignore you and focus on the actual topic of this thread.

 

Please cite a Canadian law against abortion.

Canada is ABSOLUELY NOT off topic.

The point is that the approach of using laws against women is not as successful as other approaches to reducing the number of abortions.

Canada is a test case demonstrating that.

And, that's not the only bit of stupidity going on. The There ARE reasons that women have abortions.

Why would those interested in reducing the abortion rate TOTALLY IGNORE the reasons women choose to abort???

The thing is, Canada is being MORE successful WITHOUT USING LAWS AGAINST WOMEN!

How could YOU possibly think that isn't of interest? Why would you ignore the very idea that there are ways of achieving your objectives WITHOUT writing more laws against women???

 

"""""Why would you ignore the very idea that there are ways of achieving your objectives WITHOUT writing more laws against women???"""

The Anti-Choice objective is to punish women for having sex and getting pregnant so they need laws against women to do that.

 

Are you thinking that Canada would make economic sacrifices in order to try to force China to implement laws that Canada doesn't itself agree with??

 

My own view is that they do want the number of abortions to decrease. And, I do sort of accept the abortion rate is an indicator of the difficulty of raising children in America. As one looks at the reasons women choose abortion, those difficulties do stand out.

The problem is that too many are focused on laws against women as the only possible direction.

And, Canada shows that those laws are NOT the only possible direction. They actually address many of the issues that women point to. For just one example, mothers in Canada get healthcare by walking into a clinic or hospital or private practice and asking for it - exactly like everyone else in Canada.

 

You mean not the only reason or factor.

Factors being different in different countries doesn't mean it will be so easy to change those factors.

(For example, gun homicide rates are much higher in Mexico even though they have much more restrictive gun control laws than the US. It's not those gun laws that are responsible for the difference, there are other factors. )

 

Gee gosh, aren't you going off topic and
""you seem to be trying to hijack this thread with a separate topic.""

Should we ignore you and focus on the actual topic of this thread.

 

No, I do not even slightly accept your attempts at confusing the issue.

We can (and HAVE) done serious examination of the reasons women chose abortion.

The problem is that YOU and others who CLAIM to be against abortion are not willing to even go so far as reading the results.

Instead, it's so easy to sit on ones ASS and write laws against others

 

Mexico has the issue of having a neighbour country willing to supply it with an endless stream of illegal guns

 

America has the issue of having a neighbour country willing to supply it with an endless stream of illegal drugs and illegal immigrants.

 

Illegal drugs entering from Mexico are coming through our points of entry.

The idea that we need walls to prevent drug traffic is just plain false.

And, let's remember that we can't stop drugs from being shipped all over the US.

So having Americans blame Mexico for not doing better than WE are doing should be seen as just plain embarrassing.

 

Yeah, I think you lost the context of this conversation...

(Glad we can agree the US is not in any way to blame for Mexico's problems)

 

if we let China do that, they could do it to us next