From passive-aggressive politics to unified resistance against annexation.
OTTAWA: It is with a twist of irony that I write this column. I had deep insights into what Trump was initially after, but as usual, he went off script, creating a significant ripple and diplomatic backlash in Canada and the European Union. His remarks were of great interest in India and the Middle East, as TV news anchors interviewed me about them.
Just what does Trump want? No one knows for sure, including myself now.
In early December, the President-Elect, in yet another famous Tweet, suggested he would use an Executive Order and impose 25% tariffs across all products against Canada and Mexico if they did not address each of their respective roles in the deadly Fentanyl trafficking business and the lack of border security by each country. He then suggested in a famous Tweet Oh Canada that wouldn’t it be great if Canada just joined the Union?
Perhaps the team that generated the image should have suggested Lake Louise as a backdrop instead of the Matterhorn in Switzerland.
No matter, the notion of annexing Canada as the 51st state, citing economic leverage to access Canada’s abundant natural resources, including minerals, oil, gas, and freshwater reserves, was a Bridge Too Far. Canada responded, and PM Trudeau and then Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland went to Mar-A Lago to hear firsthand what he was looking for. They offered up more border security, drones and a promise to look into the fentanyl trafficking claims. But was it enough? I suggested it was not, so coincidentally, Dominic LeBlanc made another Trip down Palm Beach just before the New Year.
Fast forward to yesterday, when Trump held his press conference and made a lot of seemingly bombastic statements, drawing everybody’s ire, including yours truly, who believes that a strong North America is a hegemonic union that can rival a few others. However, this aggressive stance directly challenges Canada’s sovereignty and economic stability and threatens America at the same time. Trump loathed the Canadian Prime Minister, who had shared his disdain for the former President publicly on numerous occasions, and I am sure displacing him would tickle his fancy. His comments have indeed opened many a political wound.
BUT HOW DID WE GET HERE?
How have the three foremost federal party leaders acted previously, and how might they engage the United States and President Donald Trump? Canadian political leaders have historically exhibited passive-aggressive behaviours, oscillating between conciliatory gestures and assertive critiques.
For instance, in December 2024, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s office downplayed reported tensions with Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, emphasizing unity on economic policies.
However, following Freeland’s resignation on December 16, 2024, Trudeau criticized opposition parties for exploiting internal government matters, accusing them of undermining national stability, which the President exploited.
Similarly, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh maintained a cooperative stance with Trudeau’s minority government throughout 2024, supporting key legislation and avoiding direct confrontations.
Yet, on December 17, 2024, Singh publicly called for Trudeau’s resignation, stating that the Liberals were “focused on themselves” and that Trudeau “has to go,” marking a significant shift from his earlier supportive position. This is another aspect that Trump could exploit.
Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre also demonstrated this pattern.
In October 2022, his party supported the Liberal government’s Bill C-30, which doubled the goods and services tax rebate, indicating a willingness to collaborate on specific economic measures.
Shortly after, Poilievre criticized the Liberals’ broader economic strategy, opposing Bill C-31, which introduced a public dental care program and a housing allowance, citing concerns over increased inflation due to government spending.
In light of Trump’s recent threats, such passive-aggressive tendencies must be set aside. Canada’s political landscape has been marked by division and a lack of clear leadership, especially following Prime Minister Trudeau’s resignation, a prorogation of Parliament and the delay in much-needed elections. We should not doubt that the Conservatives will win a landslide majority during the next election. Still, we are where we are and must turn a page because this internal turmoil exploited by President Trump leaves Canada vulnerable to these external pressures. I recommend that all political parties collaborate and unite to present a cohesive diplomatic front against these now mounting threats from our (former?) friend and ally, the USA. The media came out strongly on Wednesday and Thursday condemning or simply putting Trumps remarks in the its all about distracting the public’s attention on what the tariffs might mean for American consumers.
A NEW DIRECTION WITH INDIA?
Trudeau’s strained relations with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have further complicated Canada’s diplomatic stance. Following Trudeau’s resignation, many Indian commentators have expressed optimism about renewed bilateral ties, particularly with the likelihood of Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives coming to power. Modi’s supporters in India view Trudeau’s departure as an opportunity to reset the fractured relationship and steer it in a more pragmatic direction. A Conservative government may prioritize economic collaboration, mutual respect and economic opportunities, starkly contrasting Trudeau’s contentious policies towards India. This potential realignment is significant as Canada navigates its sovereignty challenges amidst Trump’s aggressive overtures. There are great opportunities to be explored between the two nations if Canada is also willing to address the Khalistan separatist issue in our country which led to Trudeau suggesting the Indian government participated in an extrajudicial killing on Canadian soil. Actually, recognizing there is an issue would be a first step in the right direction.
WORKING TOGETHER TO SEND A MESSAGE
A comprehensive strategy should be implemented, encompassing a robust media and public relations campaign to inform citizens and garner international support. Diplomatic channels must be leveraged to engage allies and build a coalition that opposes any infringement on Canada’s sovereignty, and this has already started to emerge from Europe.
Business leaders whose enterprises would be directly impacted by such tariffs should voice their opposition and highlight the detrimental effects on both economies and the impact on the economic well-being of every citizen in North America. As a backdrop, the US 10-year treasury backed up to 4.77% in the bond market today, signalling the market’s concerns over the inflationary tariff proposals floated by the incoming President.
More importantly, Canadian leaders must demonstrate assertiveness and unity to counter American imperialism and hegemony and, as necessary, negotiate with CANZUK nations (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, all part of the original Commonwealth of Nations) and the European Union to isolate America. The target was the CCP(role in Fentanyl and reverse Opium War) and CRINKS alliance nations, and now Trump is testing us in this environment, perhaps to see if some might want to reconsider our exit from those quaint trading relationships. A negotiating tool or not, or is it the Art of the Deal? Quite frankly, we should not care.
Nations have interests, and our political leaders need to unify and say, as veteran National Post Columnist Tasha Kheiriddin stated in her Column, Back Off, Donald Trump, Canada is not for the taking. She suggests that the Prime Minister invoke pre-emptive measures, including tariffs like those we implemented in 2018 when Trump came after us on aluminum and steel to placate trade protectionists in the US.
So, our leaders should take some advice from the many academics and columnists by articulating clear policy responses that protect national interests, investing in economic diversification to reduce dependency on the US market, while reinforcing national defence capabilities to have necessary deterrents to military aggression and injecting a much needed investment in our ability to defend ourselves without America. Like NATO, Trump wants Canada to step up to the plate and this is a great excuse for us to build additional capabilities beyond our F-35 jet program.
The proposed tariffs and economic annexation might well threaten Canada’s economy and challenge its national identity and autonomy. But what Trump did when he spoke of Greenland, taking the Panama Canal and forcing Canada through economic coercion to join as the 51rst state sent a clear message to every world leader that the next four years will be a hell of a ride.
At this critical juncture, Canadian political leaders must transcend partisan differences and collaborate to formulate and execute a strategic response that unequivocally communicates to the United States—and the world—that Canada will not acquiesce to coercion or compromise its sovereignty.
The time for passive-aggressive politics has passed; decisive and unified action is now imperative. All political parties and private sector leaders must effectively articulate our interests to our good friend and ally, the United States of America.
Let’s unify, face Donald Trump’s challenges head-on, and stand up for our great nation.
Canada, True North, Strong and Free.
* Dean Baxendale is Publisher, CEO of the China Democracy Fund and co-author of the upcoming book, Canada Under Siege.