I have long held the position that it is futile for the top Chinese leader to make an appointment to meet with Trump.
No promise made by the Scoundrel has ever been kept, so why go for such talks in the first place?
And you would notice that the entire U.S. team for trade talks was present at the table, and thus they all gained audience to size up our president at close quarters -- an opportunity they usually wouldn't have had under normal circumstances.
Normally such talks should be conducted by trading experts led by his subordinates and not the Chinese president himself.
So what's the difference, you ask?
A huge difference -- because what the Chinese president said would be held as sacrosanct even without the signed documents while whatever Trump said could not be held to nearly the same standards.
That's the difference between East and West or in this case, China and the U.S.
So the entire appointment to 'talk about trade' was a trap set by Trump and his team, and we took the bait, still cherishing the notion that there could be a win-win outcome.
The next step from the U.S. side will be more high-pressure tactics forcing the Chinese negotiator to give up more than he possibly can in the following 90 days, by falsely claiming that the U.S. offer had already been agreed to by the Chinese president -- according to U.S. interpretation -- at the G20 meeting, which of course would be a total hoax.
Yes, it was a total trap set by Trump -- always preceded by his proclamation that the Chinese leader was his 'personal friend' whom he greatly admired and so on and so forth.
You don't do to your enemy what Trump does to his 'personal friend.'
That this approach has become the soul of his deal should have become obvious to everyone.
Recent news is full of China's give-give-give vs the U.S.'s take-take-take.
Take the Meng case for example. I have never heard of a similar case in which the CFO of a major company in a leading nation gets arrested in a third country according to national laws of the second country to which it is being extradited.
There's no doubt in my mind that Trump and his team knew about Ms. Meng's pending arrest as she was transiting through Canada to go to a third nation.
So everything that transpired and agreed to at the talks should be rejected outright as China's support to the rule of international law and Huawei because the entire edifice upon which Huawei has built its credibility and global respect is not only its technological prowess, but that it has a strong motherland as its support.
If our government appears weak at this juncture and not make the strongest DEMAND for Meng's immediate release, a huge chunk of the Western world will abandon Huawei's 5G standard because people would feel uncomfortable in the presence of a weak government which cannot protect its own citizens from unlawful arrest.
Just think how the U.S. would react if one of its ordinary citizens gets arrested in China legally for a criminal offense -- Trump asked the Chinese leader for the man's release during his first visit to Beijing in 2017 and it was done pronto without any legal proceedings in China -- which at the time already made a mockery of Chinese law in front of the world's audience.
Just remember how the entire U.S. welcomed the return of several convicted U.S. citizens back from North Korea.
People will contrast in their minds the worth of such ordinary U.S. citizens with that of VIP citizens like Ms. Meng, the eldest daughter of Huawei's president, who has not disobeyed any law other than what the U.S. had unilaterally claimed to be punishable as part of its sanctions against a third nation -- Iran..
It is time for the Chinese side to show more than just verbal protests and demand Meng's immediate return from Canada -- or let the Canadians face serious consequences.
China should tell Trudeau to get lost in no uncertain terms, and that he's not worthy of his late dad the former Canadian president Pierre Trudeau.