Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
American and Canadian voters yearn for something they might never get
Is there a deep, secret yearning from American and Canadian voters for a radically open border? Do people really want Canada and the US to be more like the EU? OR, is border politics all about isolationism, security fears, and building walls? The results of an exclusive new poll from GZERO and Data Science will surprise you – and ought to be shaping the election campaigns in both countries.
We revealed part of the poll at the US-Canada Summit that I had the pleasure of co-hosting in Toronto, put on by the teams at Eurasia Group and BMO. Led off by our own Ian Bremmer and BMO’s CEO Darryl White, it included a remarkable collection of over 500 people, including political leaders from across the spectrum in both countries who debated, speechified, conversed, and argued.
Why are so many people so keen to discuss the US-Canada relationship? As Bremmer said, this is a hinge moment in history, with three wars raging — one in Ukraine, one in the Middle East, and one in the United States — a remark that caused gasps and nods. On top of that, 60+ elections are reshaping the world this year (Modi humbled in India, Macron in a showdown with the far right in France, Sunak shambolically slinking off in the UK). Meanwhile, China is threatening Taiwan, and AI is grinding its way through our economies and imaginations.
Gary Cohn, former director of the National Economic Council under Trump and the vice chairman of IBM, admitted that what worries him most is the collision between geopolitics and the economy. They are inextricably linked and making things worse. With the political bombs falling so close, people are desperately looking for a safe shelter, and that shelter is the US-Canada relationship. As Delaware Sen. Chris Coons said, squabbles between the two countries over tariffs or softwood lumber don’t add up to a pile of shell casing next to say China and Taiwan, which may be why the relationship is so often taken for granted or outright ignored. It is and remains one of the biggest bilateral trading relationships in the world.
Globalization is giving way to new forms of regionalism, or “friend-shoring with a vengeance.” But should the region have internal walls or not?
The mandate of the conference is to bring together people tired of partisan bickering, slogan swamping, and dizzying disinformationalizing – in other words, the bubble-blowing BS of everyday politics. They are urged to be authentic, honest, and, despite their political differences, get on with figuring out how to build something better and more secure than we have now. And they did.
Who joined in?
This is a partial list (pause for a long breath): Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, Industry Minister Francois Phillippe Champagne, Treasury Board President Anita Anand, who settled a major border strike during the conference, Ontario and Saskatchewan Premiers Doug Ford and Scott Moe, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, political wizards like David Axelrod from the Obama campaign and Christopher Liddell, the former White House Deputy Chief of Staff to Donald Trump.
Speaking of the Trump folks, there was Gary Cohn, mentioned above, giving Canada a shot and saying it can “tag along” on US economic progress. Former Bank of Canada and England Governor Mark Carney spoke about building together based on common values, and there was Mitch Landrieu, the Biden/Harris 2024 National Campaign Co-Chair, who was in full fight mode over Trump. They were joined by more than 150 CEOs, dozens of policy wonks, and experts on everything from AI, security, economic policy, and more.
There were tray loads of interesting insights and ideas:
- On Trade: The 2026 review of the USMCA is widely seen as the most important framework for the economic future of North America, and there are genuine fears that if Trump wins (Turns out, Ivermectin may actually be a political vaccine against felony convictions) and senses that trade imbalances with the US have not changed, he will rip it up and send the economies reeling with nasty and counterproductive tariffs.
- On the Inflation Reduction Act: Candid admissions from US politicians that protectionism and US industrial policy can sideswipe Canada, simply because Canada gets forgotten.
- On Biden vs. Trump: A quote attributed to Bill Clinton was repeated as to why Biden’s good economic record is not reflected in his polling: “Strong and wrong beats weak and right.”
- On why Democrats are losing working-class voters: I asked David Axelrod why Democrats and progressives spend so much time convincing themselves that people like Trump are not fit for office but so little time reflecting on why their own policies are failing to connect with so many people. He told me — and later told the audience — that Democrats treat working-class Americans with such condescension it’s like anthropologist Margaret Mead studying what were then called “primitive societies” and telling them, “You need to be more like us, and we can teach you.” A devastating critique.
- Here is another Axe moment: Why are some independent and conservative voters tuning out Trump?” “Having Trump as president is like living next to someone who runs a leaf blower 24/7.”
- Personnel is policy: Gary Cohn spoke about why you need to know the people in power. “Any president gets to make 2,800 appointments — they make them all — but ‘personnel is policy,’ so if you want to know what Trump will do, see who he is appointing.” By the way, expect the USMCA trade negotiator Robert Leitheiser, the very guy who insisted on the six-year trade review, to be a senior member of the Trump team,
- Christopher Liddell of Trump White House 1.0, admitted that Trump didn’t know what he was doing in the first six months of his first term, but that it’s different this time, and that the planning and policies are already well underway. We should expect the first six months of a Trump 2.o to be rapid, decisive, and consequential, as he only has one term. His first target will be China and … his political enemies.
- On defense spending: Mark Carney said Canada has no more excuses and must reach 2% spending on NATO – just weeks before the NATO summit in Washington.
But there was one issue that lurked beneath the surface of cross-border politics and wasn’t raised: Should the demand by many US politicians to close down their southern border be counterbalanced by a much quieter, almost secret demand from people to … open the Canadian border, EU style?
It is not as crazy as it sounds.
GZERO commissioned an exclusive poll from our partners at Data Sciences and asked: Would you support an EU-like arrangement between the US and Canada?
The results are fascinating.
Overall, 53% said they would support such an arrangement – 50% in Canada and 55% in the US, while 33% are neutral. And, get this, only 14% are against the idea. Not surprisingly, it breaks down on party lines: 71% of Biden supporters are far more supportive the idea, while 45% of Trump supporters want it. In Canada, it’s almost an even split: 50% LPC/NDP lime it while on the right, 54% of CPC/PPC support the idea.
The point? The longest undefended border in the world is still very defended, and millions of people would like to cross more easily, work more freely, and trade more efficiently. In 2022, US trade with Mexico was $855 billion, and with China it was $758 billion. With Canada? $908 billion.
So making US-Canada trade more efficient with an EU-style arrangement seems like a no-brainer. Last week, we all celebrated D-Day and the beginning of the fight for peace. So many people died in that bloody sacrifice, yet today, the French and the Germans, who fought two world wars that left millions on both sides slaughtered, can move, trade, and work freely across each other's borders in a way Americans and Canada can only dream about. It is baffling.
If anything is a warning about why closing borders and setting up tariffs is disastrous, look at the UK and Brexit, which has essentially tanked the UK economy. The Brexit-loving Conservatives under Rishi Sunak are now facing a potential political extinction event on par with the Canadian Conservative party of 1993, when Brian Mulroney went from winning the biggest majority in Canadian history to stepping down months before an election his party lost so badly they were left with two lonely seats.
We are heading into a US election and a possible Canadian election where low growth, high inflation, and fear of an unstable world might kill prosperity. Why aren’t the two best friends in the world campaigning on an idea that has proven to be one of Europe’s great drivers of growth? An open border.
We all get it. The politics of the southern border is driving politics at the northern border, but if voters can distinguish between the two, why can’t politicians?
They likely never will. And this may be the most 2024 political moment of all: Ignore the quiet ideas people want, and focus on the noisy fights no one can stand.
Second annual US-Canada Summit focuses on security and trade
Toronto was the place to be this Tuesday for the second annual US-Canada Summit, co-hosted by Eurasia Group and BMO. The event featured a cross-border who’s who of speakers, including former Ambassador to Canada David Jacobson, Under Secretary for Policy at the US Department of Homeland Security Robert Silvers, Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, and Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy. Canadian political heavyweights included the premiers of Ontario and Saskatchewan, Doug Ford and Scott Moe, as well as federal cabinet ministers Mélanie Joly and Anita Anand. UN Climate Envoy and former governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney gave the closing keynote, and both the US and Canadian Ambassadors, David Cohen and Kirsten Hillman, shared the stage. A full list of speakers can be viewedhere.
This year’s themes were the economy and security north and south of the 49th parallel. A major focus was the shift from global to regional blocs in international trade. While Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer reassured the crowd that “Globalization is not falling apart. We are not heading to a Cold War here,” the Chairman of Cynosure Group and former Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Randal Quarles took a more skeptical view. “If you’re a 55-year-old furniture maker from Hickory, North Carolina, globalization is never going to be better for you,” he said. The hollowing out of the working class and its impact on politics featured prominently, from the possibility of a second Trump administration to the recent right-wing victories in European Parliamentary elections.
Geopolitical tensions were also on the menu. Speakers touched on the wars in Ukraine and Israel, with Joly underscoring that US President Joe Biden’s proposal is “fundamental” to resolving the latter conflict. China loomed large in the conversation, with Silvers discussing how the US Department of Homeland Security is securing America’s ports by engaging Japanese firm Mitsui to replace Chinese cranes currently dominating port infrastructure. Ford emphasized that “China has the nickel market cornered. You know where the last safe haven is? Here in Ontario.” The Ontario premier concluded his presentation in his trademark style by giving the crowd his phone number (and no, we’re not going to publish it here).
Several speakers emphasized the need for energy security, including securing the supply chain for critical minerals necessary to build EVs. According to Dunleavy, as the world order shifts from a globalist to a regionalist perspective, North America can prosper by securing both its domestic supply and transformation. Moe emphasized that “If we get our energy security, we’ll have our food security, we’ll have our national security. But it starts with energy security.”
Finally, speakers discussed the post-COVID employment landscape and the impact of AI. Jonas Prising, chairman and CEO of ManpowerGroup, said that remote work is here to stay for the world’s knowledge workers. Eurasia Group released a new survey, which found that when asked about job automation, 17% of respondents believe almost all or most of their work could be done by machines, 28% say some of it, and 31% think not very much or almost none. The remaining 24% reported that they do not have a job.
Carney concluded the conference by underscoring the need for an inclusive economy and the importance of a growth mindset, particularly in Canada. “We need to build an economy for all Canadians. We can’t redistribute what we don’t have. We have less to spend because we’ve become less productive.”
Keeping the trains running on time was GZERO Publisher Evan Solomon, who served as event MC while Eurasia Group Advisors Gerald Butts and John Baird and Director Shari Freidman moderated several panels. And in true Canadian form, hockey was a running theme for the day, starting with BMO CEO Darryl White citing the Gordie Howe Bridge as a testament to the strength of the Canada-US trade relationship, and finishing up with Carney wishing the Oilers good luck in the Stanley Cup finals. Based on the way they played last night, they’ll be needing it.
Should Canada give three F’s?
You’re leaving your role as president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce after 17 years, which has been a transformative time. What is the biggest economic challenge facing Canada's trade with the US?
Perrin: The politics of trade has undergone a sea change in the US under the last two presidents. Previous presidents, from Ronald Reagan on, viewed America's interactions in the global economy as an opportunity to foster American prosperity, and they saw an integrated North American economy as a source of strength. More recently, however, US politicians have started to turn inward, increasingly viewing their country as a victim, and not as the primary beneficiary of international engagement. This change has led them to increasingly align themselves with domestic protectionists who want to build economic walls along the US border.
Unfortunately, this turn inward has coincided with a complacency here in Canada about our most important bilateral relationship. Even the best of friends can't afford to take each other for granted, or they will soon drift apart.
As Canada's relationship with the US has moved from being strategic to being transactional, American leaders are increasingly looking at each issue as a standalone, and they are making their decisions, not on what is in America's long-term best interest, but on where they can find immediate political advantage at home.
We need to rebuild that strategic relationship. It's vital for Canada to be seen as bringing solutions to the major problems confronting the United States, as opposed to simply pleading to be exempted from the latest punitive measure. We need to demonstrate, both in Washington and far away from it that Canada should be treated not as a problem, but as a partner.
Perrin Beatty, outgoing president and CEO of Canadian Chamber of Commerce. REUTERS/Rebecca Cook
You recently said: “Canada is increasingly being viewed by our partners in the region as a well-meaning but unserious player on the international stage." In what ways has Canada become an "unserious player," and what needs to happen to change that reputation?
Perrin: Unfortunately, we have come to see ourselves as a moral superpower whose job is to tell everyone else what they are doing wrong. And we expect them to be grateful to us for it. Too often, we are driven more by a desire for good feelings than for good results. In contrast, other countries are both faster-moving and more engaged in the issues their interlocutors consider most important. The consequence is that, where the US and other countries used to ask, “How do we get the Canadians involved?” their question is now, “Should we inform the Canadians?” The fact that we learned about the AUKUS agreement at the same time as everyone else is just one example.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine two years ago should have been seen by Canada as world-changing, and our response should have been both meaningful and swift, with us marshaling what we have to offer in defense of the democracies. For example, Canada has an abundance of the “three F’s” – food, fuel, and fertilizer – and critical minerals that are essential to global stability. What we lack is the infrastructure, the vision, and the will to bring them to global markets to give countries an alternative to sending dollars to despots. This could be Canada's moment, but only if we are prepared to seize it.
You were a former defense minister under Mr. Mulroney, so you know about dealing with a dangerous world. But now, everyone is looking at the impact of the US election. Are we headed into a period of instability, conflict, and the dismantling of both trade and defense alliances that have been built since World War II?
Perrin: The problems we face, from global poverty to pandemics to wars to global climate change, all require an effective, coordinated international response. Instead of that, we are witnessing countries turning inward on themselves, as well as the increasing ineffectiveness of global institutions like the UN, the World Trade Organization, and the WHO in actually resolving issues that go to our very survival.
When I was privileged to be in government, there was a sense that, when the leaders of the G7 – leaders who included Reagan, Thatcher, Mitterrand, Kohl, and Mulroney – came together, problems would be resolved. Today, when international meetings take place, you get the feeling that our problems are bigger than our leaders. In fairness, the world is a much more complex and dangerous place today, but that's precisely why we need leaders whose vision, determination, and morality are up to the challenge. As your question suggests, we're at a crossroads that will determine whether we will be able to maintain the institutions and strategies that have guaranteed democracy, peace, and prosperity since the Second World War. The stakes have never been higher.
AI is both a transformative opportunity and a destabilizing threat. What is your view of how will impact business?
Perrin: Like businesses the world over, Canadian businesses will be transformed either for the better or for the worse by AI. AI, like the nuclear genie, can't be put back into the bottle. Our challenge is first to understand it, then to decide how to mitigate its potential bad effects, and then to determine how to unleash its positive aspects. In this instance, the technology is developing at a pace that far outstrips our capacity to understand it and manage it well. However, calls to initiate some sort of a standstill until we have thought these things through are naïve and unworkable; all that would happen is that the unscrupulous players would widen their lead.
The challenge for Canadian policymakers is how to successfully work with others on coordinated policies that limit the dangerous aspects of AI without denying its benefits to our industry and our society.
If there is a second Trump Presidency, what should Canada expect from the 2026 review/renegotiation of USMCA trade deal?
Perrin: Many Canadians expected that when Joe Biden became president, he would reverse the Trump protectionist measures. However, that assumption overlooked the fact that, in the past, Republicans were more in favor of free trade, while Democrats were more protectionist. In fact, the Biden administration has actually deepened some of the protectionist policies initiated by Donald Trump.
The danger is that the election will be a contest between two candidates trying to demonstrate who is more protectionist. Canadians must respect the right of US voters to determine their own government, just as we would insist on the Americans respecting our rights, but we need to demonstrate that it is in Americans' self-interest to foster a stronger relationship with their closest neighbor and best friend. And we must do that, not by special pleading, but by coming up with solutions to problems.
Finally, what is the best-case scenario for the US-Canada relationship in terms of economic prosperity and security? Is there a way to slalom through the protectionism, AI disruptions, political polarization, climate challenges, and conflicts and see a time of increased joint prosperity?
Perrin: The best-case scenario is that we restore a strategic partnership with the world's greatest superpower. We've let the relationship slide for too long, and it won't be easy to regain that position. But I believe it can be done if we muster the vision and the will to make it happen.
Last thing: You worked for Brian Mulroney, who recently passed away. He was the architect of the North American Free Trade Agreement and worked closely with Ronald Reagan. What lesson can today’s leaders learn from that time?
Perrin: As Canadians commemorate Brian Mulroney, our leaders should ask what they can learn from Canada's last great transformative prime minister. Brian Mulroney understood that governments don't create jobs and prosperity, businesses do. He also knew that the best way to solve problems was not to shut people out but to bring them in.
It's impossible to say exactly what policies a different government would follow, but what we do know is that our economy and our country are under severe strain today. The leader history will remember best will be the one who brings people together again in what remains the most fortunate country on the face of the globe.
Team Canada, Part Deux
Justin Trudeau’s “Team Canada” ventured south this past week to remind Americans that their trade relationship with the Great White North is vital. The new effort was announced by Trudeau in January, signaling a determination to prepare for the outcome of this year’s presidential election. His government, you’ll recall, was criticized in 2016 for being unprepared for Donald Trump’s win. But the Team Canada approach to NAFTA renegotiation was widely seen as a success since it led to the USMCA in 2020, which will be reviewed by all the parties in 2026.
The indefatigable Innovation Minister François-Philippe Champagne was accompanied on his weeklong trip by Mary Ng, minister of international trade, and Kirsten Hillman, Canada’s ambassador to the US. They traveled to Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, and Washington, DC, meeting with politicians and talking about the importance of cross-border supply chains.
Americans are listening, Champagne said, “because it’s about jobs, millions of jobs.”
Still, the prospect of a renewed trade war with the United States remains worrying for Canada, and Trudeau’s team is no doubt hoping that Biden’s poll numbers continue inching north.Last dance with China?
Slide to the right.
Slide to the left.
And … pivot.
The diplomatic dance, dubbed “the pivot” by President Barack Obama back in 2011, is all the rage again in San Francisco, where 21 countries have gathered for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC), and this year everyone is watching one dysfunctional couple on the dance floor: Biden and Xi.
The original Obama pivot was about increasing US influence in the Asia Pacific — read: pushing back on growing Chinese influence, military might, and Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative – and it also meant pivoting away from places like the Middle East. So, choreographically speaking, it was a step from the Middle East to a bigger step to the Far East, as it were, and it caused friction with China. But the steps are more complicated today.
With the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war raging, the US can’t just pivot away from its old stomping grounds, and yet it can’t pivot away from China either. China is similarly stuck. It’s suffering from slow growth and wants to make sure the world doesn’t descend into chaotic wars that might screw up its export markets, so it also needs to start dancing with the US again.
That’s why Chinese President Xi Jinping slid on over to San Francisco to meet with President Joe Biden for the second time. They have got to start dancing again. What is the metric of success here? It’s a low bar. Open up lines of communication. Put a floor under the deteriorating relationship. Avoid a war in Taiwan. Get back to business.
On the plus side, they reestablished military-to-military communications, which is important in a world where Chinese planes and ships are dangerously buzzing US and other NATO military assets in international waters near Taiwan. A bad accident could trigger a nightmare scenario, so a direct line matters. And they made progress on stopping the deadly fentanyl export problem.
But they didn’t get much done on rules around AI, semiconductor exports, or efforts to help stop the war in the Middle East by leaning on Iran. And Taiwan remains a festering diplomatic wound. So this ain’t no thaw. Oh, and, Biden called Xi a “dictator” immediately after their sit-down, so …
Still, the fact that they met and talked is a huge win.
An even bigger sign of warming relations came not from the lead dancer but the chorus line: Top US CEOs from companies like Apple and BlackRock gave Xi a warm round of applause and ate with him while Xi lapped it up. And why shouldn’t he? Xi, after all, is desperate to boost foreign direct investment, which is in its worst shape in 25 years. Show Xi the money.
If nothing else, the summit showed that the economic links between the two countries — ChiMerica — are too critical to toss away. So Biden gets a small win here.
Now, let’s pivot to Canada, a much lonelier figure on the dance floor.
Justin Trudeau has terrible relations with China and is not meeting with Xi at the summit, which means his Indo-Pacific strategy is really in shambles. It's not entirely his fault. China has kidnapped Canadians and interfered with elections, according to the government. Not exactly a great incentive to warm things up. Still, Canada can't ignore China.
I spoke with a senior source from the prime minister’s office who would not say much about what they wanted to accomplish at APEC with China, which is the main game here. All I got was a short note saying, “We need to engage where we need to, on issues like climate, and challenge where we have to. Our focus is continuing to deepen relations and trade, and trade is up 22% with APEC members.”
OK, but trade with that region is up globally, and it doesn't address the key question: What leverage does Canada have with China?
“Canada lacks credibility in the Indo-Pacific region, where, despite its new Indo-Pacific strategy and membership of the CPTPP [Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership], it is seen as insufficiently and inconsistently engaged,” my colleague Graeme Thompson told me. “In the context of the geopolitical competition between the US and China, Beijing sees Ottawa as petulant and weak. The comparison with Australia, which is a serious military power for its size with a real, sustained, and long-term diplomatic and strategic focus on the region, is illuminating — and not flattering to Canada.”
The Australian PM, meanwhile, recently made a visit to China to meet Xi — this despite taking a very hawkish stance and upping its military profile with submarines and alliances like the Quad. And yet, here they are, warming the wires with China. Why? As my colleague says, Australia has paid its military dues in the region, and Canada has not.
In a world of multiple crises, there is no room for single pivots or isolating superpowers. And you can't hold a grudge. That is the reality. There has to be a united democratic front that presses bad actors, rogue actors, and superpowers that are a threat – China being one — to play by the international rules of trade and justice. That club is expensive to join and requires muscling up. That's the Aussie model, and the US likes it. So does the UK.
Biden and the US are signaling that they are pivoting back to the big dance with China. Meanwhile, Canada looks like it is still pivoting away — does that mean Trudeau has had his last dance with China?
Dead cats, Nazis, and murder
Has politics ever been this interesting? In trying to understand wild stories about a Nazi in Canada’s Parliament and allegations that India assassinated a man on the steps of a temple in Surrey, British Columbia, I started to think about dead cats, wagging the dog, and flooding the zone with sh-t.
Dead Cats? Let me explain.
There are various ways to describe strategies that governments use when they want to distract public attention from one crisis. Often, they simply introduce another.
The Dead Cat Strategy was made famous by an Aussie political operator named Lynton Crosby, who used it to help Boris Johnson shift attention away from his shambolic UK leadership stumbles. Johnson actually wrote about it once, saying that when losing an argument the best thing to do is to deploy Crosby’s strategy and throw “a dead cat on the table.”
“Everyone will shout ‘Jeez, mate, there’s a dead cat on the table’,” he said, “and they will not be talking about the issue that has been causing you so much grief.” Johnson’s entire political career was, essentially, a buffet of dead cats.
Where there is a political cat, there must be a dog. “Wag the Dog” was the name of a 1997 Hollywood film about a fictional government that used military action to distract from a president’s troubles. Life imitates art. The next year, after the revelations about the Monica Lewinsky scandal blew up, President Bill Clinton ordered the bombing of a Sudanese pharmacy factory. His secretary of defense was immediately asked if the attacks were just “wag the dog” distractions from the sex scandal. Either way, it didn’t work. Do you remember the bombs or the blue dress?
And, of course, during his time as Trump whisperer, Steve Bannon infamously told writer Michael Lewis that the way to undermine the media was simply to “flood the zone with shit.” And flood the zone he did. That phrase, in my view, marked the unofficial declaration of the Disinformation War that is still raging today.
What does this have to do with the political difficulties Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is facing with India in the wake of the June 18 murder of Canadian citizen Hardeep Singh Nijjar, or why the Speaker of the House invited a man who was an actual Nazi to be celebrated in Parliament during the visit of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky? (You would have to work very hard and forget some key moments in history to do something as insulting, damaging, and embarrassing as inviting a guy who was in an SS unit to Parliament to celebrate fighting … the Russians, but that is what the Speaker actually did. He apparently missed the part in World War II where the Russians were allies in the fight against the Nazis. And they say kids don’t know their history … sigh). It was not a planned channel change a la “Wag the Dog,” but the Nazi story has become a major distraction from the ongoing fallout of the Indian assassination scandal and the war in Ukraine, and that’s a huge problem.
As I outlined in my column last week, Trudeau says there are “credible allegations” that the Niijar murder was orchestrated by “agents of the” Indian government. While India denies involvement in the death of a man they regarded as a terrorist, the evidence is now overwhelming. There are recordings of Indian diplomats talking about it beforehand, and there is video of the assassination squad conducting the bloody killing — using between 40 and 50 bullets. This was a political statement, not just murder.
In the immediate aftermath, it looked like Canada would stand alone, as most countries need a close relationship with India as a hedge against China. But definitive evidence of an extrajudicial killing has a way of chilling a courtship, so now its India feeling the pressure to provide a way out.
I spoke with senior intelligence sources this week about India and Canada, and they tell me that allies like the US, France, Germany, and Australia have all urged India behind the scenes to cooperate with an investigation, even as PM Narendra Modi has escalated the diplomatic war with Canada.
Sources also tell me the US is heavily pressuring India to cooperate with Canada and find someone accountable for the murder. “There is room for accountability that does not involve Modi himself,” a senior intel source said. In other words, get some people to take the fall, show respect for the rule of law, and don’t sour more G7 relations. That way, we can all get productive on other issues. Over to you, Mr. Modi.
Canada too is feeling the pressure to do more to crack down on Khalistani-related security issues, but sources say that what India wants Canada to do in terms of monitoring and arrests could violate the Canadian rule of law. As a source told me, “India is right to say that there are extremists in Canada, but India can be dismissive about our belief in freedom of speech and the right to freedom of assembly, and we won’t violate that.”
The other thing to watch for? Arrests.
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police is conducting an independent investigation, and when they make arrests — it could take a while — India will be forced to be made accountable. Intel sources say they are concerned those arrests might lead to more domestic violence, so this is far from over.
In the meantime, as this killing is forcing India to decide what kind of player on the global stage it will be, Canada is consumed by the invitation of a Nazi to Parliament. There is no sugar coating this. It was a humiliating, damaging, and painful moment, and it handed Russia – which has long tried to justify its illegal, murderous invasion of Ukraine as a battle against Nazis – a huge propaganda victory.
It has also allowed the fight for continuing support for Ukraine to get bogged down in old wounds and historic battles that remain agonizing generations later. Besides exposing Canada’s hideous past in terms of allowing Nazis to come to Canada — ”There was a point in our history where it was easier to get (into Canada) as a Nazi than it was as a Jewish person,” said Canada’s Immigration Minister Marc Miller — our eyes are now off the main thing: Russia’s invasion and how to get them out.
No one wagged the dog, tossed a dead cat, or flooded the zone here as a strategy of distraction. This time it was just pure incompetence, but the result is the same: Distortion. Disinformation. Flooding the zone with … crap.
At a time when we need to get serious about urgent issues, the timing couldn’t be worse.
Canada braces for a Trump presidency
Canada’s Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly says Justin Trudeau’s government is working on a “game plan” for how it would respond to a right-wing, protectionist government in the United States after the 2024 election – just in case. She said she would work with local and provincial leaders as well as the business community and unions to do so.
Joly also referenced the efforts Canada made the last time, when Trudeau launched a charm offensive in 2016 in a bid to keep Trump sweet. Canadian political and business leaders made an unprecedented push to communicate with different levels of the US government and the business community about the value of the trade relationship. They eventually negotiated a new deal similar to NAFTA, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.
The possibility of a second round with Trump, who forced Canada to renegotiate its crucial trade relationship with the US, is widely seen as a threat to the countries’ trading partnership.
And Trump is not doing anything to calm the waters. The former president met recently with advisers at his Mar-A-Lago compound in Florida to discuss his plans for the 2024 election, according to the Washington Post. They discussed the idea of a “universal baseline tariff” on imports to the US, with Trump interested in putting a “ring around the U.S. economy.” This, Trump told Fox News, could entail a 10% tariff on all imports.
Under the terms of USMCA, most trade between Canada, the US, and Mexico is currently conducted without tariffs. But that deal is due to be reviewed and renewed in 2025-2026.
More than $3 billion in goods and services cross the border each day, everything from auto parts to building supplies to Amazon packages. In 2016, the two countries did $627.8 billion worth of trade. By 2022, it had increased to $1.2 trillion – so any disruption could have cataclysmic effects on the trade-dependent Canadian economy, as well as serious effects on the US economy, particularly in border states.
Why Trump 2.0 could be bad news for Canada
When Donald Trump was elected in 2016, Justin Trudeau launched a charm offensive carefully calibrated to try to keep the crucial trade relationship on track. There were gifts, phone calls, and visits, and it worked, to a point.
The Trudeau team managed to develop a friendly relationship with Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, opening a crucial back channel.
By 2018, though, as Trump and Trudeau tussled over a new trade arrangement, tempers frayed. After the leaders of the rest of the free world ganged up on Trump at a G7 meeting in Quebec – he didn't want to sign the communique the rest favored, which left him angry and isolated – the US president lashed out at Trudeau on Twitter from Air Force One. According to a memoir by John Bolton, then Trump’s national security adviser, when Trudeau said that American “tariffs threaten to harm industry and workers on both sides of our border,” Trump’s blood boiled.
Trump, Bolton wrote, directed his aide Larry Kudlow to attack Trudeau on the Sunday shows: “Just go after Trudeau. Don’t knock the others. Trudeau’s a ‘behind your back’ guy.” Peter Navarro went further on Fox News Sunday, saying there is a “special place in hell” for Trudeau.
The blow-up in Quebec was a low point in the Canada-US relationship, which normally consists of politicians exchanging friendly pieties while officials and businesspeople on both sides of the border aim to maximize trade and minimize tension. That was true when the leaders were politically like-minded — the Trudeau-Barack Obama bromance — and during periods where the leaders met across an ideological divide, as when Jean Chrétien and George W. Bush led their countries.
Finding leverage in USMCA review
If Trump is the nominee in November, and the polls say he will be, and if he defeats Joe Biden, which polls say he might, we can expect craziness, says Bruce Heyman, who served as Obama’s ambassador to Canada.
“That craziness is not good,” he said. “Not good for the world order and not good for the Canada-US relationship.”
Trump mobilized a coalition of blue-collar workers against NAFTA – the standing trade agreement between Canada, the US, and Mexico – as the reason for the economic pain many working class voters experienced as manufacturing jobs moved to Mexico and overseas. Once in the White House, Trump forced Canada and Mexico to negotiate the USMCA, a deal similar to NAFTA except with some added bonuses for US dairy farmers.
The USMCA comes up for review next year, and while Trump hasn’t indicated that he plans to renegotiate it, Heyman thinks a re-elected Trump might decide to let it lapse.
“Donald Trump doesn't have a large appetite for Canada-US relations. If we revert back to isolationism, and autocracy, and a King-of-the-Hill kind of attitude, then alliances get thrown under the bus.”
Jon Lieber, Eurasia Group's head of research and managing director for the United States, who worked as a Republican economic policy advisor, agrees that we should expect conflict from Trump 2.0. “His modus operandi is to use whatever leverage he has to get what he wants. We don’t know exactly what he wants yet, because he hasn’t articulated a vision for North American trade, but we know there’s these pre-existing irritants, and a big part of his political coalition is going to be auto workers in the Upper Midwest.”
Trump will need to say something that contrasts with Biden on the campaign trail, and “things that you say on the campaign end up being enacted as policy,” Lieber adds.
Poster boy for a frozen blue state
Trump was an unknown quantity in his first term, and it took him some time to find his footing as he slowly figured out how to manipulate the levers of power. As Bolton wrote: “It is undeniable that Trump’s transition and opening year-plus were botched irretrievably.”
Next time, Trump would know how to work the levers — aided by a group of policy and communications professionals who have been cooking up plans in a new constellation of MAGA think tanks. And Trump wants to exact revenge on the Democrats who he blames for his grave legal difficulties.
Trudeau, of course, has not played any role in prosecuting Trump, and the former president hasn’t gone after him, but the Congressional Republicans closest to him have taken to lobbing rhetorical potshots north of the border. Marjorie Taylor Greene, for instance, has suggested (falsely) that Trudeau is the child of Fidel Castro while complaining about Canadian gun laws. Lauren Boebert has said that Canada needs “to be liberated,” and Tucker Carlson proposed that the United States invade Canada, although the hour-long special he had planned was kiboshed when Fox showed him the door.
Trudeau’s image as global progressive poster boy grates on American conservatives, who see him as a woke, virtue-signaling irritant, overseeing a frozen blue state where Muslim immigrants are welcome, guns are banned and vaccines mandated. Over the weekend, prominent Republican online influencers denounced and mocked him in crude terms when he posted a picture of himself and his son at a showing of Barbie. He is an irresistible target for the MAGA GOP.
‘Deeply fearful’
As the culture war increasingly dominates American politics, and the two voting blocks come to resemble warring factions, it is possible that the domestic American impulses may find expression in the Canada-US relationship, which has for decades been dominated by arcane disputes about softwood stumpage fees and dairy quotas.
Lieber thinks that’s likely just noise: “Fundamentally, none of these people have reason to care about US-Canada trade relations or do anything to upset it. It’s not like Mexico.”
Heyman, though, is uneasy. “I am deeply, deeply fearful for the Canada-US relationship if Donald Trump is back in the White House.”
Next time, if it happens, Trudeau would be unwise to rely on charm.