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 }}
Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks to reporters, announcing he intends to step down as Liberal Party leader, from his Rideau Cottage residence in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, on Jan. 6, 2025.
Trudeau steps down, and a leadership race kicks off
On Monday morning, Jan. 6, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau addressed reporters on the stairs of Rideau Cottage, his official residence in Ottawa, to announce his resignation. He began by stating that “Parliament has been paralyzed for months. This morning, I advised the governor general that we need a new session of Parliament. The House is prorogued until March 24.”
This means that instead of returning on Jan. 27, as previously scheduled, the Canadian legislature will not sit for another two months. This prevents the opposition from presenting a non-confidence motion to topple the government, as it had threatened to do.
“I intend to resign as party leader and prime minister after the party selects its next leader in a robust, competitive nationwide process,” Trudeau explained. “Last night, I asked the president of the Liberal Party to begin that process.”
The move obliges Trudeau’s party to hold a rapid-fire leadership race to choose a new leader – the winner of which will face voters in an election that must be held no later than Oct. 20, 2025. This makes it difficult for the party to bring in outside candidates and instead favors current cabinet members, whom Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre wasted no time attacking.
What Poilievre really wants is an immediate election. His party is currently ahead by 25% in the polls, and he has every interest in going to voters before the Liberals have the chance to improve their fortunes.
Trudeau, meanwhile, blamed caucus infighting for his decision. “If I continue to fight internal battles, I cannot be the best option in the next election.” At the time of his resignation, 59% of Liberal Party supporters, as well as three of his four national caucuses, said he should resign. He also threw shade at former Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, saying that he had hoped she would take on one of “the most important files in my government” but that “she chose otherwise.”
We’ll be watching to see which candidates arise as possible contenders to replace Trudeau in the weeks ahead. Possible names include Freeland, cabinet colleagues Dominic LeBlanc, Francois-Philippe Champagne, and Mélanie Joly, as well as former Bank of Canada and Bank of England Governor Mark Carney and former BC Premier Christy Clark.Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks to reporters, announcing that he intends to step down as Liberal Party leader and prime minister from his Rideau Cottage residence in Ottawa, Canada, on Jan. 6, 2025.
Justin Trudeau: The rise and fall of a political golden boy
Justin Pierre James Trudeau’s political life began in the cradle. Born Christmas Day, 1971, to Margaret Sinclair and Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Canada’s 15th prime minister, their eldest son grew up in the spotlight and an atmosphere of privilege. Now, he’s out in the cold, abandoned by his closest allies and maligned by his opponents as Canada, too, joins the global anti-incumbent mood.
Rise to power
As a young man, Trudeau taught drama and snowboarding, but in 2000, his emotional eulogy at his father’s funeral put him on the radar as a future leader. Trudeau delivered public speeches, engaged in advocacy, andmet and married media personality Sophie Gregoire in 2005; the pair were promptly dubbed “the Kennedys of Canada.”
In 2007, Trudeau sought and wonthe party’s nomination in Papineau, a blue-collar Montreal riding that was not a safe Liberal seat, but that he took by just over 1,000 votes in the 2008 election. Trudeau chose Papineau to silence critics who dismissed him as a political lightweight, trading on his family name. He subsequently made headlines again as a young MP in 2012 when he wona charity boxing match against Conservative Sen. Patrick Brazeau. The triumph was unexpected, but it and the Papineau victory highlighted one of Trudeau’s key political qualities: his ability to win when the odds are stacked against him.
The events also positioned Trudeau as a leading contender for the Liberal leadership, which he won in 2013, handily defeating more seasoned political rivals. Trudeau’s message of “hope and hard work” and telegenic appeal galvanized the demoralized base of the third-place Liberals, promising renewal.
Trudeau carried his “Sunny Ways” mantra forward to the 2015 federal election. His focus on youth, diversity, and progressive policies offered a sharp contrast to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government, suffering from voter fatigue after nine years in power. The Liberalssurged from third place to win a majority government, with Trudeau becoming Canada’s 23rd Prime Minister.
Progressive achievements
Trudeau’s tenure began with sweeping promises: climate action, reconciliation with Indigenous peoples, electoral reform, and restoring Canada’s global standing. His gender-parity Cabinet,“because it’s 2015” made him the standard bearer for progressivism at home and abroad. The Liberals introduced the Canada Child Benefit, cut middle-class taxes, and legalized recreational cannabis. On the international stage, Trudeau championed multilateralism, free trade, and feminism, curating a swoon-worthy, media-friendly brand as the heir apparent to liberals such asoutgoing US President Barack Obama.
Trudeau won two subsequent elections in 2019 and 2021, though with diminished mandates. His signature initiatives included a national carbon tax, the renegotiation of NAFTA (USMCA) in 2018, the advancement of LGBTQ+ rights, legalized assisted dying, and stronger gun control. To maintain the support of the New Democratic Party for his current minority government, he also enacted a national $10-a-day daycare and free dental care for children, the elderly, and the disabled, and paved the way for a national pharmacare program.
Creeping failures
However, Trudeau’s tenure is also marred by broken promises and ethical lapses. His failure to implement electoral reform and maintain “modest” deficitsalienated both left- and right-wing segments of his base. TheSNC-Lavalin political interference scandal in 2019, coupled with Trudeau’s lavish vacations and the emergence of a series of blackface photos from his youth, further damaged his credibility on ethical and racial issues.
Indigenous leaders accused him ofnot making meaningful progress on reconciliation, while frustration over inflation, housing costs, and an overstretched healthcare system have fueled public anger. Trudeau also greenlighted immigration policies that saw millions of newcomers enter the country between 2022 and 2024, further straining the country’s already scarce housing supply.
On the international front, Canada’s relationship with China deteriorated following the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou. Canada’s relationship with India also suffered following accusations by Trudeau that the government of Narendra Modi masterminded the assassination of a Khalistani terrorist on Canadian soil. A recent public inquiry also revealed foreign interference in the Canadian electoral system, with accusations that Trudeau did not act on crucial information about his own MPs.
The black swans
Ultimately, Trudeau was undone by two black swans. The first was Donald Trump. The US president’s year-long tariff war with Canada in 2016 forced Trudeau to sideline domestic priorities to tackle the renegotiation of NAFTA. Trump’s Muslim ban also inspired Trudeau’s viral tweet welcoming refugees to Canada, which was followed by a surge in immigration and refugee claims – now a hot-button issue as anti-immigrant sentiment rises and the government backtracks on its welcoming policies.
The second swan was the COVID-19 pandemic. Trudeau drew initial praise for rapid financial relief programs, but also criticism for vaccine procurement delays and vaccine mandates. In 2022, Ottawa was occupied by a “Freedom Convoy,” which paralyzed the nation’s capital and saw Trudeau invoke the Emergencies Act, Canada’s equivalent of martial law. That event galvanized the Conservative opposition and contributed to the election of a new Conservative leader, Pierre Poilievre, Trudeau’s fiercest critic, who nowappears poised to replace Trudeau.
The end
By 2025, Justin Trudeau’s political career had come full circle. He rescued his party from its third-place finish in 2013, only to return it to a possible third – or even fourth-place finish – were an election to be held today. He once again found himself the object of derision by Trump, and also an object of rancor at home.
Then, after the shock resignation of Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland on Dec. 10, the dominoes began to fall inside the Liberal Party. With the looming threat of a non-confidence vote when Parliament resumes in January, three of the four Liberal regional caucuses demanded that Trudeau quit, and with a general caucus meeting set for this Wednesday, Trudeau finally decided the odds were insurmountable. On Jan. 6, 2025, he announced his plan to stand down as Liberal Party leader.
What’s next?
Trudeau leaves his party, and his country, with a very murky future. He has no obvious natural successor, and the timeline and process for a leadership campaign are not yet known. The Liberals’ organization is severely weakened – with the party practically non-existent west of Ontario – and their policy agenda is exhausted. According to Eurasia analyst Graeme Thompson, “Whoever ascends to the leadership may well face snap elections, and there is a real risk that the party could fall to third or even fourth place. It also faces the stark choice between pivoting back towards the political center or cementing its alliance with the leftist NDP.”
All this comes at a moment of considerable uncertainty for Canada, with the economy sputtering, tensions over immigration and the cost of living rising, Quebec separatism beginning to re-emerge, and Ottawa facing a new Trump administration that will drive a very hard bargain in trade talks, over border security, and on the broader foreign and defense policy front. If the Conservatives win the next election as expected, they will inherit serious challenges on several policy fronts, beginning with US-Canada relations and delivering on campaign promises to cut taxes, boost growth, and rein in the cost of living.
Trudeau’s full legacy will be judged in time. But for a leader who promised "Sunny Ways," his political twilight is anything but.
FILE PHOTO: Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau listens to Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland during news conference in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, May 31, 2018.
Is Trudeau about to take a walk in the snow?
Canadians might not be feeling quite so superior about dysfunctional American politics after watching this week’s fiasco in Ottawa unfold like an episode of “Veep.” The resignation on Monday of Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s finance minister and deputy prime minister, sparked the most chaotic day in Canadian politics in decades.
Freeland was due to deliver a mini-budget known as the fall economic statement at 4 p.m. Yet, at 9 a.m., the finance minister rocked the Canadian capital when she revealed she was quitting the Cabinet, disbanding the double act that has led Canada for much of the past nine years.
In a searing resignation letter, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s chief lieutenant and ally said that the country faces a grave challenge, with the incoming Trump administration threatening 25% tariffs on all Canadian exports to the US.
She said Canada needs to keep its fiscal powder dry and not spend it on “costly political gimmicks,” referring to the sales tax holiday and US$175 per person thinly veiled electoral bribe that Trudeau promised — against the better judgment of his finance minister and her department.
Most damaging of all, Freeland crystallized the nagging sense, felt by many people, that Trudeau is more focused on his own future than on that of everyday Canadians.
“They know when we are working for them, and they equally know when we are focused on ourselves,” she said.
Coming from someone who has worked so closely with the prime minister, it was devastating stuff, and it has left Trudeau badly wounded — perhaps fatally — as other dissidents in the ruling Liberal Cabinet and caucus consider their next move. One Liberal member of Parliament said between 40 and 50 of 153 caucus members actively want Trudeau to resign, a feeling that was strengthened after the party was trounced in a by-election in British Columbia on Monday.
Trudeau said he will take the Christmas break to consider his options, which appear limited. The left-leaning New Democratic Party has helped prop up the minority Liberal government, but its leader, Jagmeet Singh, has also called for the prime minister to resign.
When Parliament resumes in late January, Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party will seek to table a vote of no confidence in the government at the first opportunity, and it looks like it will have the votes in the House of Commons to send Canada to its 45th general election.
Freeland’s bombshell was designed to cause Trudeau maximum inconvenience.
Finance officials were forced to put the mini-budget on hold until they could determine who should deliver it.
Poilievre stood in the House of Commons during the daily question period and asked, “A question for the finance minister: Who are you?”
The government’s own order of precedence suggested the industry minister, François-Philippe Champagne, would assume the duties of finance minister, but he was unaware of that reality when confronted by journalists and is said to have refused to read out a document he had no role in drafting. The next person in line, Randy Boissonnault, was forced to resign from the Cabinet last month, adding to the tragicomic mood.
By the day’s end, Trudeau had persuaded the public safety minister, Dominic LeBlanc, to assume the role of finance minister, and he was sworn in in time to table the fall economic statement in the House of Commons.
It all felt like governing by improv, led by a prime minister in office but not in control. Nobody seems to have been more surprised than Trudeau by Freeland’s resignation, but he really should not have been. In her letter, Freeland said the prime minister told her last Friday that he no longer wanted her to serve as finance minister and offered her another position.
It has since been reported that in an hourlong Zoom call, he told her that she would be replaced as finance minister by former central banker Mark Carney; he asked her to be the point person for Canada-US relations but not as the minister of global affairs, a job held by Mélanie Joly. (Carney has not commented on his intentions, nor has he been named as Freeland’s successor.)
It is perhaps just as well for Canada that Freeland declined and offered her resignation.
The now-former finance minister is not popular with the incoming US president, a point Donald Trump made in a provocative post on social media late on Monday.
“The Great State of Canada is stunned as the finance minister resigns, or was fired, from her position by Governor Justin Trudeau. Her behavior was totally toxic, and not at all conducive to making deals which are good for the very unhappy citizens of Canada. She will not be missed!!!,” Trump wrote.
Freeland attracted the president-elect’s ire during his first term in office, when she appeared on a panel at a summit in Toronto called “Taking on the Tyrant,” against a backdrop of a rogue’s gallery of autocrats, including Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Bashar al-Assad and … Trump.
The then-president subsequently said, “We don’t like their representative [Freeland] very much.”
Trump’s reelection has proven to be the catalyst for the crisis that has hit the Canadian government. Trudeau and Freeland were simpatico for much of the government’s nine years in power — a free-spending Thelma and Louise, intent on pioneering feminist and social justice policies, even if they risked driving off a fiscal cliff (Canada’s debt has doubled under Trudeau).
But Trump’s threat of tariffs and his repeated references to Canada as the “51st state” have created existential panic in a country that sends three-quarters of its exports south of the border.
Trudeau and LeBlanc headed to Mar-a-Lago resort to pay tribute to the president-elect, only to be humiliated when it was leaked that Trump had said Trudeau could be governor if Canada joined the US as a state. If it was a joke, Canada isn’t laughing.
Trudeau has proven to be very New Testament in his approach to Trump, turning the other cheek, even while promising to retaliate to tariffs if necessary. More aggressive leadership has been assumed by a Trump-like, Old Testament, eye-for-an-eye politician, Ontario Premier Doug Ford. He has said that if Trump imposes sweeping tariffs, his province will suspend electricity exports to several northern states and block American alcohol sales to the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, the world’s largest alcohol purchaser.
Trump was at it again on Tuesday evening, saying “many” Canadians want Canada to become the 51st state because they would save on taxes. “I think it’s a great idea,” he said. His former security adviser John Bolton told the CBC that Canadians shouldn’t over-intellectualize the tweets. “I think he’s just mean” and is trying to humiliate Trudeau, Bolton said.
From Canada’s point of view, the most encouraging thing about the social media post Trump made after Freeland’s resignation was his mention that there may be a deal to be had. The president-elect has made clear his belief in tariffs, what he calls “the most beautiful word in the dictionary.”
He believes that the US is “subsidizing” Canada because it has a trade deficit that is largely the result of oil prices that have doubled in the past four years (60% of US crude imports come from north of the border). But the president-elect can’t ignore the belief held by two-thirds of Americans that his tariff plan will add to the rising cost of living.
Trump’s other concern is over porous borders in the north and south that are leaking migrants and fentanyl. However, as Canada’s ambassador in Washington, Kristen Hillman, pointed out, the 24,000 illegal migrants and 43 pounds of fentanyl intercepted at the northern border represent 0.6% and 0.2%, respectively, of the totals. Ottawa allocated an additional US$900 million for a “comprehensive” border security package in Monday’s fiscal update.
Canada has also indicated its willingness to be deputized in the trade war against China. The federal government said it will bring in more tariffs on Chinese solar products, critical minerals, semiconductors, and natural graphite, having already imposed 100% duties on Chinese electric vehicles and a 25% levy on steel and aluminum.
But it may be down to Ford and other provincial premiers like Alberta’s Danielle Smith to secure exemptions from the blanket tariffs Trump has promised.
It looks very likely that around the time Trump takes office, the ruling Liberal Party will be either embroiled in a messy leadership race or fighting a general election. In that case, the odds are that Trudeau, if he is still on the scene, will be too distracted to be an effective captain of Team Canada.
A drone view shows the Canada-U.S. border between the U.S. state of New York and the Canadian province of Quebec, near Champlain, New York, U.S., December 6, 2024.
Hard Numbers: Canada’s immigration crackdown shows results, BC free contraception measure boosts birth control, Pentagon flags China’s growing nuclear arsenal, Americans aren’t thrilled with their jobs, US government tells top pols to “get off the phone”
0.4: In the third quarter of this year, Canada’s population grew just 0.4%, the lowest quarterly growth rate in two years. Given that immigrants account for almost all of Canada’s population growth, the data suggest that new government measures to slow immigration – including capping foreign student slots and slashing temporary work visas – are having an effect. Immigration skyrocketed during the pandemic, straining housing supply and services, provoking a political backlash.
10: The decision by the BC government last year to make birth control products free has caused a 10% jump in women’s use of contraceptives. Use of pricier options such as IUDs and implants, the cost of which is now fully covered by the state, jumped 14%.
20: China’s arsenal of operational nuclear warheadsgrew by 20% over the last year, reaching 600, according to the Pentagon. At his clip, Beijing will have 1,000 warheads deployed by 2030. That would still trail the roughly 1,600 nuclear warheads deployed by Russia and the 1,800 deployed by the US, but it only takes a handful to inflict unspeakable destruction. So far, China is not party to any agreements with the US and Russia on limiting nuclear arsenals.
50: How do Americans feel about their jobs? So-so. Only 50% say they are extremely or very satisfied with the daily grind, according to a new Pew study. But the generational divide is stark: 67% of workers aged 65 or older viewed their jobs in the best light, a whopping 24 points higher than people aged 18-29.
8: The US government is telling senior officials and politicians to GET OFF THE PHONE. Literally. Authorities want top pols to ditch phone calls and text messages, after at least eight US telecoms companies were hacked by the “Salt Typhoon” group of China-linked cybercriminals. Authorities say it’s safer to use end-to-end encrypted text apps like Signal, WhatsApp, iMessage, Teams, or Zoom.
Crisis time for the politically homeless
It is decision time for the politically homeless.
With 18 days left in the coin-toss US election campaign, both Republicans and Democrats are engaged in a form of political fracking, desperately trying to extract pockets of votes in hard-to-reach places. That’s why you saw Kamala Harris take on Bret Baier on Fox News on Wednesday night.
On the surface, it seemed like a waste of time. Most people who watch Fox News are not going to vote for Harris, but she’s betting that Donald Trump has alienated many long-standing Republicans, like Mitt Romney or Dick Cheney, and she wants to offer them a temporary political home. In an election where a few thousand voters in the key seven swing states may change everything, Harris believes polls telling her that disaffected Republicans are a growing, available group.
A recent New York Times/Siena College survey found that 9% of self-identified Republican voters nationally are voting for Harris, a number nearly twice what it was just five months ago. When Dick Cheney no longer feels at home in the big Republican tent, that’s not a Cheney problem, it’s a tent problem.
Democrats have their own tent problems. Some young people disaffected by the situation in Gaza are opting out of the Democratic Party, while some Jewish voters, traditionally Democrats, are backing Trump because of his overt support for Israel and his tough stance on Iran. And let’s not forget that about 20% of Black and Latino voters — especially men — see Trump as a better leader on the economy. As I have written about before, these men idolize the entrepreneurial genius and give-no-F’s aura of Trump hype man Elon Musk, who is consolidating that support. It is no surprise that former President Barack Obama is frantically out on the stumps chastising Black men for their lack of support for Harris.
This is the age of the politically homeless. Don’t like the MAGA Republicans because of their embrace of extreme voices like Marjorie Taylor Greene, or the rejection of free trade in favor of high tariffs and protectionism? Where do you go? The left has also embraced tariffs, and it too has an extreme side, with protest groups calling President Biden “genocide Joe” for supporting Israel’s fight against the terrorist group Hamas.
The right and left have drifted away from the political center in response to pressure from extreme positions on the fringes of their movements.
“There are a lot of politically homeless folks out there, which is a function of the political realignment we’re seeing to a large degree across the Western world,” my colleague Graeme Thompson, senior analyst at Eurasia Group, told me. “Some former Republicans can’t stand Trump, some former Democrats don’t like left-wing campus politics, but neither have a comfortable place to land.”
In Canada, a country that could face a federal election at any time given the precarious nature of Justin Trudeau’s minority government, it’s not so different.
“More than 4 in 10 people likely consider themselves homeless in Canada,” Nik Nanos, chief data scientist and founderof Nanos Research, told me. “Major swaths of voters are not voting FOR anything — they are voting against things — in many cases someone they dislike. The enthusiasm is directed against someone.”
What this means is that the center cannot hold. “The Liberals’ move to the economic and cultural left under Trudeau has forced out a lot of fiscally conservative, socially moderate ‘blue Liberals’ who might end up voting for the Tories but don’t feel it’s a natural fit. Similarly — although to a lesser degree — this is true for so-called ‘red Tories,’” says Thompson.
One consistent error the bleeding center makes is to blame the extremes for the polarization. There is a relentless focus on the “weird” or “crazy” things that happen on the edges. But all this misses the larger point. It’s not that the fringes are inherently attractive — most voters live in the center — but the center has failed to make its case for relevance. There is precious little self-reflection on why the center is suddenly so soft and why it has failed to deliver for so many voters.
“Small ‘l’ liberals seem to have forgotten that liberalism isn’t self-evident, revealed truth — its case has to be made in the political arena,” says Thompson. “Moderates are on the back foot, in part, because “the other guys are worse” isn’t compelling enough in difficult times when voters are demanding answers.”
In his book “Trumpocalypse: Restoring American Democracy,” David Frum, maybe the most famous politically homeless Republican, does a superb job of outlining how the Burkean conservatives he championed squandered their arguments, especially on issues like the Middle East, the economy, and climate change. “In the twenty-first [century],” he writes, “that movement has delivered much more harm than good, from the Iraq War to the financial crisis to the Trump presidency.”
So while Republicans are trying to pick off small groups of politically homeless Democrats, like Black men and Jewish Americans, and Democrats are going after disaffected Republicans who believe Trump is bad for the country, the larger question remains: What can be done about it? Is the political center doomed, or can a new center emerge?
In the UK, Keir Starmer tacked to the political center to lead the once-more leftist Labour Party to a huge majority just a few months ago — a majority he now seems to be squandering.
But merely mouthing centrist words is just political lip-synching to cover up the fact that small “l” liberals no longer know how to play the instrument of government in a way that will solve the problems. Genuinely alienated voters have bolted to the fringes because they no longer believe government can actually solve the problems it promises it will solve. What to do about the cost of living, housing costs, and a feeling of powerlessness? These are deep problems that small “l” liberals have to solve to earn trust. That requires more than blame-game slogans.
“Being moderate isn’t a political program. You have to stand for something,” Thompson argues. “If there’s going to be a liberal, centrist, moderate political revival, it has to speak to the concerns of people.”
The paternalism of a government that spends money and gets involved in solving every problem for people not only fails to live up to its promises — it can’t solve everything — but it also creates a passive dependency, sending an implicit message that citizens can’t solve their own problems, only the government can. “When liberalism was successful in the past, it was about empowering people,” Thompson says. It doesn’t just rely on technocratic solutions from on high.
This doesn’t mean a new centrist party will emerge in the US or Canada. There is no real pattern for that, while the mainstream parties in both countries have a long history of changing and self-renovating, going from the extremes to the center and back again.
But for now, the fringes are ascendent, leaving behind wandering, zombie-like groups of politically homeless folks who can’t stand either side. These people are looking for reasons to vote Republican or Democrat without betraying their core principles, excusing crude mendacity, ignoring pressing problems, or ending up on the wrong side of history.
“With the advent of social media, voting against candidates or parties has been on the increase, which supercharges a negative political discourse,” says Nanos. “This has corresponded with increased anti-establishment sentiment. The impact is short-termism. Who can we punish today? Where can we vent our anger? The casualty is that discussions about long-term decisions are punted in favor of immediacy.”
That immediacy will likely mean most voters will ignore things they can’t stand and pick one salient issue — tax rates, climate, abortion, Israel, or Gaza — and cast a reluctant ballot.
“It’s hard to see the politically homeless being decisive this time around, either in the US or Canada,” says Thompson. “Except to the extent that they’ll hold their noses and pick a side.”
Ian Explains: How political chaos in the UK, France, & Canada impacts the US
Big political changes are coming in Western democracies, is the US ready to deal with the fallout? Voters in the United Kingdom and France will head to the polls in the coming weeks after UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and French President Emmanuel Macron called snap national elections. Both political gambles could have a huge impact on everything from the West’s collective ability to deal with climate change to the AI revolution and countering China’s growing influence.
On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer breaks down the tumultuous landscapes of French and British politics right now, with an eye on upcoming elections in Canada and the United States.
In Britain, Rishi Sunak’s Conservative Party is almost guaranteed to lose control of the government. In France, the far-right National Rally Party is highly favored to win the most seats in the National Assembly. A similar story is playing out in Canada, setting the stage for a potentially brutal electoral defeat next year.
So why should Americans care about all this political chaos so far from home? Watch Ian Explains for more on what’s at stake with so many big elections on the horizon.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld or on US public television. Check local listings.
- G7 meeting: Ukraine and Meloni take center stage ›
- Macron-Meloni spat spotlights Europe’s left-right divide ›
- Ian Explains: Will foreign policy decide the 2024 US election? ›
- UK Prime Minister Sunak's push for early election will hardly boost his chances ›
- Macron's snap election gamble will have repercussions for France and EU ›
Canada's New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh speaks to journalists before Question Period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada February 26, 2024.
Who are Canada’s semi-witting foreign interference accomplices?
A lingering foreign interference affair in Canada has the country asking who’s on who’s side – and when they’ll find out. A recent, heavily redacted report by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians alleged that some unnamed federal politicians have been “semi-witting or witting” accomplices in foreign efforts to shape Canadian politics.
The unnamed bit has politicians scrambling and Canadians guessing as to who’s done what. Those in the know are withholding the names, citing a lack of sufficient evidence for making public accusations – and leaving it up to law enforcement to decide. New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh says he’s confident his party and its members are clean, even though the report alarmed him. Singh went so far as to claim the report reveals some members of Parliament are “traitors.” But Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said leaders ought to be “wary” of any such claim.
A separate, ongoing foreign interference commission, led by Justice Marie-Josée Hogue, has decided to take up the issue and will investigate – a move Trudeau welcomed. The inquiry’s report is due by Dec. 31, 2024, and may involve a deeper investigation into the matter, adding evidence and context. But it may also choose to withhold names. According to the commission, it has a duty “to respect the principles of procedural fairness and the fundamental rights of any person affected by its work, in compliance with the rule of law.”
Now, amid opposition claims that Trudeau is going light on foreign meddling, the questions turn to whether party leaders will deal with potential threats within their caucuses and whether Canadians will learn the names of those involved, which for now seems unlikely.
The upcoming 2025 election further complicates matters as parties try to distance themselves from the “traitor” label and, presumably, prefer that foreign countries don’t influence the outcome of Canada’s vote. But the wheels are turning slowly, testing the limits of a country that’s used to government opacity.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and US President Joe Biden face a summer of discontent.
A summer of discontent
Facing elections and down in the polls, Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau have a lot of bogeys on their radar, but three are starting to stand out: the election call in Britain, Labor strife in Canada, and the rising and potentially self-defeating political popularity of tariffs.
1. Rishi Sunak’s Soggy Snap Election Surprise: Comeback Miracle or Cautionary Tale for Incumbents?
After 14 years of Conservative rule in Britain, Labour now has a chance to take the helm. Beleaguered Prime Minister Rishi Sunak held a rain-drenched (read: pathetic) fallacy of a media conference yesterday to announce a surprise July 4 general election. Why did he do it? Most analysts expected Sunak to drag it out until late fall, giving himself at least two years as PM – 14.8 times longer than the wilting 49-day head-of-lettuce term of Liz Truss, who Sunak replaced in 2022. They were wrong. The Tories are down 20 points in the polls, so when Sunak saw inflation finally fall to the target rate of 2.3% – a rare win – he reckoned it wouldn’t get much better in the months ahead. A summer election could mean low voter turnout, which usually helps the incumbent.
Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau are watching closely. Both are also incumbents facing low polling numbers and an electorate that believes (facts be damned) that things are worse than ever. If Sunak can somehow turn it around – and that’s a big “if” – it would answer a core question: Can falling inflation rates reinflate incumbent popularity? Will people ever believe things are getting better? Biden and Trudeau hope so.
Sunak’s July 4 election will likely end in ashes, not fireworks, for British conservatives, but Biden and Trudeau will pick through the coals and see what they can learn from the fire.
2. How to Fight Your Own Base Without Losing Their Vote?
Everyone reading this column will be familiar with the return-to-work debate. How often are you required to go back to the office post-pandemic, and how much do you want to work from home? Two days, three days, or more? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on that, and you can send them my way here.
In Canada, the debate has been reignited by the federal government’s decision to get public servants back in the office … wait for it … three days a week starting in September. Currently, they work two days a week at the office.
This is not a pay cut. This is not a downsizing. This is simply a back-to-work policy that is in line with almost every other industry. But the unions have gone ballistic, threatening a “summer of discontent” that could include disrupting borders.
File this one under the department of “With friends like these …” After all, the Liberal government has increased the size of the federal civil service by 42% since 2015. Last year, the feds signed a deal with the union leading the call to protest, the Public Service Alliance of Canada, giving them a pay increase. But here is the kicker: The deal both agreed on gave the federal government power to decide on back-to-office schedules. The same union that agreed to that is protesting it now.
There is no such thing as a permanent friend in politics, only permanent interests, but this is a classic stab in the front. Trudeau needs the public sector unions to win a federal election in the next year, and like Sunak he is nearly 20 points behind in the polls. He does not want to pick a fight with a powerfully motivated base. Except for one problem: This is a fight he can win because this is a fight the public supports.
In a new poll out today, Angus Reid found that 50% of Canadians agree with the Federal government and want workers back in the office. Voters over age 55 — the kind who show up at polling stations – really can’t stand the union position, with 79% of them saying “get back to the office.”
Meanwhile, 28% of Canadians “view federal government employees as overpaid,” while 75% say federal workers “have better working conditions than others,” including 73% of Liberal voters. In other words, Justin Trudeau could win this fight and would have the support of the electorate, but he needs every part of his base possible, so he is desperate to avoid this one as well.
The same is true for his main opponent, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre. You might expect him to be taking huge swings at unions and entitlements as his goal is to cut the size of government, but he’s staying out of this one as much as he can. His own riding is in the Ottawa area, the ground zero of public servants, and he doesn’t want their ire turned on him, which could hurt his electoral chances and take the pressure off Trudeau. So who is afraid of public servants going back to work three days a week? Everyone.
Like Biden, who supports Israel’s fight against Hamas but is now losing the support of young voters, Trudeau has to be careful about the battles he picks. Since 2022, he has had a supply and confidence deal with the far-left NDP in order to remain in power. That means the public servants are core to his survival. Despite the polls, if the union folks do have a summer of discontent, Trudeau will be in the worst possible position for a politician: fighting a two-front battle, with Conservatives on the right and the union on the left.
Finally, a half note on tariffs, as Biden is also caught in a pincer move here. As Donald Trump pushes for more trade tariffs to protect American workers, (remember he put a 25% tariff on steel imports), Biden is keeping up the tariff pace, especially with ones directed at goods from China. This week, he announced tariffs on EVs, batteries, and other Chinese exports.
Protectionism is clearly good politics in the US, especially when it comes to China. That is as much about geopolitical rivalry and security as it is about economics, but in general, tariffs are self-defeating economics that lead to higher prices and inflation.
No amount of political hustling on talk shows is going to upend the logic of basic economics. Biden is jammed: On one hand, the average American believes things are worse than ever, but on the other they want him to stand up to China and protect the American worker. Does he risk higher prices and lingering inflation with more tariffs or does he risk alienating his labor base by pushing back against economic isolationism that is suddenly so faddish? For now, he is tiptoeing toward tariffs and trying to avoid the price blowback.
The summer of discontent for Biden and Trudeau is just getting started.