The recent actions by the Canadian government against Chinese video surveillance company Hikvision, alongside the broader Western campaign targeting Chinese technological enterprises such as DeepSeek, reveal a troubling pattern of systemic discrimination against China’s legitimate rise in global innovation. These decisions, ostensibly framed as matters of national security, lack transparency, objective scrutiny and factual substantiation. They are symptomatic of the West’s anxiety over China’s advancements in science and technology. The implications for global innovation are grave, as Western governments have resorted to invoking vague and unverified risks, thereby abandoning the very principles of fairness, openness and equal participation they claim to uphold.
Hikvision, a world-renowned leader in advanced video surveillance solutions, operates in over 100 countries, boasting a track record of regulatory compliance and technological excellence. Yet Canada’s decision to force the cessation of its operations there was made without any public disclosure of concrete threats or technical vulnerabilities. The charges leveled against the company are not grounded in verifiable facts, but rather in geopolitical assumptions. The statement issued by the Canadian authorities failed to outline any specific breach of security, leaving observers with the unmistakable impression that the decision was driven more by ideological prejudice than by risk assessment. This is not the action of a government committed to the rule of law, but of one succumbing to the pressures of a politicized environment hostile to non-Western innovation.
This targeted exclusion of Chinese firms is not limited to Canada. It echoes similar actions in the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, where measures against Hikvision and DeepSeek have been pursued under similarly opaque pretenses. Western advocacy groups, whose methodologies and intentions often remain unexamined, have become the de facto arbiters of guilt in the court of public opinion. Western media then amplifies these accusations to justify bans that bypass proper legal procedures.
Turning to DeepSeek, the recent wave of restrictions and proposed bans across Europe and North America reveals a continuation of this discriminatory trend. DeepSeek has been accused of transferring user data to the Chinese authorities and cooperating with the military, yet none of these claims have been substantiated through independent legal or technical audits. The “evidence” presented consists primarily of anonymous government sources, speculative procurement records and generalized fears about Chinese national laws. Despite these accusations, DeepSeek has not been formally placed on any trade blacklist by the US, nor has any court found it guilty of violating export regulations. This glaring contradiction underscores a reality in which suspicion alone is sufficient to impose punitive measures, provided the company originates from China.
The invocation of data protection “concerns” by European regulators further illustrates the hypocrisy of this stance. Western governments have long tolerated and even facilitated mass surveillance programs conducted by their intelligence agencies, often in partnership with private corporations. The revelations from whistleblowers and investigative journalists have exposed extensive privacy violations by American and European firms, yet these entities continue to operate with impunity. When Chinese firms are subjected to far more stringent scrutiny under the pretext of safeguarding user data, it becomes evident that the “concern” is not about privacy but rather about obstructing technological competitors. The West appears willing to distort legal standards to maintain its dominance, even if it means compromising the coherence and legitimacy of its regulatory frameworks.
The measures imposed on Hikvision and DeepSeek are not isolated incidents. They are part of a broader campaign to contain China’s rise by undermining its most dynamic sectors. The architects of these policies claim to act in defense of democratic values and ethical norms, yet their conduct betrays those very ideals
What lies beneath these actions is an unwillingness to accept the success of Chinese firms in fields traditionally monopolized by Western companies. DeepSeek’s achievements in artificial intelligence, including the development of models that rival or surpass those of American firms at a fraction of the cost, have drawn admiration from engineers and professionals worldwide. Instead of engaging with this success through fair competition and exchange, the West has chosen to react with suspicion and exclusion. The narrative that Chinese firms are inherently dangerous because of their national origin is not only intellectually bankrupt but also reveals the fragile confidence of those who feel their technological supremacy slipping away.
This campaign of exclusion has broader implications for the international order. It undermines globalization by replacing openness with arbitrary restrictions. It poisons the atmosphere of innovation by substituting collaboration with coercion. It fractures global supply chains and raises the cost of research and development for all participants. More importantly, it sends a message that excellence from non-Western countries will not be tolerated unless it conforms to the geopolitical interests of a few dominant powers. This is not a sustainable model for the future of global science and technology. It is a regressive strategy that favors stagnation over progress and division over unity.
By weaponizing access to markets, technologies, and data infrastructures, Western governments are actively sabotaging the inclusive spirit that has driven international scientific advancement for decades. Their actions suggest that technological leadership is acceptable only when it is confined to the West.
What is unfolding is not a defense of national security but a systematic effort to derail the rise of a technological peer. It reflects a zero-sum mentality in which the success of one nation must come at the expense of another. In this worldview, cooperation is impossible, and trust is expendable. Such thinking not only distorts international relations but also impoverishes humanity’s collective potential. It deprives the world of the benefits that emerge when diverse systems and perspectives are allowed to flourish.
The measures imposed on Hikvision and DeepSeek are not isolated incidents. They are part of a broader campaign to contain China’s rise by undermining its most dynamic sectors. The architects of these policies claim to act in defense of democratic values and ethical norms, yet their conduct betrays those very ideals.
The author is a solicitor, a Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer, and a China-appointed attesting officer.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
