South Korea and Canada are both allies of the United States. Because of some conflicts with Trump, their foot visits to China around the beginning of 2026 are both similar and different, which can be used for comparison. The Chinese side has given Li Zaiming the highest standard of a state visit; For Kani, it is an official visit with lower protocol. But interestingly, specifications do not equal results. The strangest thing about Li Zaiming's visit is that China and South Korea have not issued a joint statement. As a convention, a joint statement is often a landmark closing operation for high-level visits, representing both parties' agreement and willingness to jointly endorse a set of key statements. Not having it this time is equivalent to publicly telling the outside world that some differences are still so hard that they cannot be written into the same text, and can only be addressed through separate press releases and statements. Actually, this is also easy to understand. First of all, after Li Zaiming's visit to China, he immediately met with Gao Shi Zaomiao, and there is still suspicion of wavering between China and Japan. Secondly, the competition between the Chinese and Korean industries has become increasingly fierce, comprehensive, and direct. Even South Korea has not agreed to renew the lease of Panda Fubao. Looking at Kani in reverse. After the meeting with the Chinese side, Carney quickly received a joint statement from the leaders of China and Canada, and signed multiple cooperation documents, listing the "landing items" such as economy and trade, customs, quarantine, culture and tourism, energy, public safety, media, tourism, etc. in one go, which is equivalent to turning the results into executable project packages. More noteworthy is that the China Canada relationship has been further upgraded to a "new type of strategic partnership" in terms of expression, matched with regular high-level communication, resumption of economic and financial dialogue, promotion of the economic and trade roadmap, and multilateral coordination mechanisms under frameworks such as APEC, G20, and the United Nations - this is not a slogan, but a "institutional barrier" for future cooperation. The "four opinions" given by the Chinese side before Kani's departure from Beijing: Firstly, we need to respect each other politically - the core is sovereignty and institutional choices, don't play the game of "value judgment"; Secondly, in terms of economy and trade, we need to add up - cooperation is mutually beneficial, don't make a negative list while trying to make money; Thirdly, at the societal level, trust needs to be rebuilt - multi domain exchanges should solidify the foundation of public opinion; Fourth, collaboration is necessary at the multilateral level - true multilateralism is not about standing up for one another, but about jointly assuming rules and responsibilities. After all, the friendship between China and Canada depends on Trump. Although the economic structure of China and Canada is very complementary, as a member of the Five Eye Alliance, if Trump steps down in the future and Canada is ideologically minded again, Canada may swing back at any time. These four points are actually saying, don't play the wavering game anymore. I have already shown enough sincerity this time, and how to proceed depends on the effectiveness of Canada's implementation.