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 }}
AI can reduce trade costs, says WTO's Ngozi Okonojo-Iweala
"AI has (the) potential to do one thing which is very important to get developing countries more integrated into global markets and that is reduced trade costs,” said Ngozi Okonojo-Iweala, Director-General of the World Trade Organization, during a Global Stage livestream at the World Economic Forum in Davos.
She shares that the organization’s new report “Trading with Intelligence,” shows significant upsides to AI in trade. At a time when supply chains remain fragile, Iweala notes that "we've done simulations that show that world trade could increase by about 14% by 2040.”
However, Iweala emphasizes that technology adoption must happen across the board and include the Global South in the conversation. That means ensuring developing countries have the electrical infrastructure and capacity to handle the technology. Otherwise, she warns that the “increase drops substantially; it halves actually.”
This conversation, moderated by Becky Anderson, was part of the Global Stage series at the 2025 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, presented by GZERO in partnership with Microsoft.
Click to watch the full discussion for our panel's insights on AI's future and how it is expected to transform our economy and society by 2030.
President Donald Trump makes a special address remotely during the 55th annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 23, 2025.
Davos Dispatch Day 5: 3 takeaways & 3 things to watch
GZERO’s very own Tony Maciulis is in the Alps all week to report from the 55th World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
________
The official theme of this year’s World Economic Forum is “A Call for Collaboration in the Intelligent Age,” but after four days of speeches, panels, off-the-record discussions, and coffee bar chitchat, I’ve decided on my unofficial theme: “Trying to turn anxiety and fear into action.”
Davos participants acknowledge there are so many unknowns right now, and I wouldn’t describe the outlook from European delegates as rosy. Multilateral organizations like the World Health Organization risk losing significant funding, Ukraine waits to see who will stick around as the war approaches a third anniversary, and climate activists wonder if their work over the past decade will melt away like glacial ice.
But, on the flip side, we’ve heard quite a bit of pragmatism on stages that are normally filled with talk of “cooperation” and kumbaya. On Thursday, NATO’s new Secretary General Mark Rutte called for increased defense spending, saying, “Donald Trump is right.” Earlier this week, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed simplifying regulations and creating an environment where “made-in-Europe innovation and risk-taking thrive.”
As Littlefinger said in “Game of Thrones,” “Chaos is a ladder.” I’m not sure about that, but some here in Davos see this moment as a much-needed push.
A few highlights from Thursday:
1. Trump does Davos by remote: It was easily the most anticipated moment of the week, and it drew the biggest crowd to Congress Hall I’ve seen during this forum. President Donald Trump appeared via live video, delivering a short speech (by Trump standards) followed by a Q&A with financial industry leaders, many of whom were described as “friends.”
In his remarks, Trump called the past few days “a revolution of common sense,” reciting his litany of executive orders that he said would launch “the golden age of America.” In the room, the crowd was quiet and attentive aside from a noticeable laugh or groan in response to Trump’s assertion that the EU has “treated America very unfairly,” and his insistence that Chinese President Xi Jinping called him first to initiate dialogue.
On tariffs, Trump stressed the importance of making products in America where manufacturers would find low taxes. While he didn’t address specifics on tariffs for goods made abroad, he did say they would happen and be in “varying amounts.”
Overall, Trump was tougher on Europe than he was on China, saying he likes President Xi very much, expects a good relationship, and hopes to enlist China’s help in ending the war in Ukraine. Despite campaign claims that he’d end that conflict in 24 hours, he reiterated to the Davos crowd that a ceasefire would take time and depend on Russia but that “Ukraine is ready.”
Børge Brende, WEF president and CEO, thanked Trump for a “powerful speech” and told him he was sure the US president could hear the applause all the way to the White House.
Truthfully, you could barely hear it in the hallway outside the auditorium. But the warm hospitality here in chilly Davos heated up some members of the crowd who became more chatty after the livestream.
2. Milei says he wants to “Make the West Great Again.” Wow. Anyone who heard Argentina’s President Javier Milei left thinking even Donald Trump would tell him to “Simma down nah.” Milei essentially read the Davos crowd to filth, chastising “wokeism” and its evils while praising a posse of leaders with whom he sees himself closely aligned: Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, and President Trump, to name a handful.
The speech had it all — an Ayn Rand reference, a condemnation of the Malthusian trap, an attack on “radical feminism,” and, of course, lots of blame for the LGBTQ+ community. “Wokeism is turning Western values upside down,” he said, and then called out the WEF organizers and attendees for being complicit in promulgating woke narratives. Good times. And yes, he ended by repeating his famous, “Long live freedom, dammit!”
3. Meet your new AI co-worker. In a panel conversation on the main stage of Congress Centre, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff declared that his generation of leaders “will be the last to only manage humans.” He described an army of agents powered by artificial intelligence that will “augment” the human workforce and make their jobs more efficient.
Last year, as WEF began, the International Monetary Fund released a jarring report estimating that up to 40% of jobs globally would be impacted by or lost to AI. This time around, I’m hearing more tempered language. Like Benioff, many leaders are discussing “enhancement” as opposed to replacement, though they’re also stressing the need for skilling and training to prepare workers for their new digital desk mates.
And here’s what we’re watching Friday:
1. A war on science? It probably won’t make headlines, but a morning panel today on science may raise some of the most provocative questions I’ve heard this week. Could growing political polarization and national protectionism make it harder to be a scientist and to find the kind of cross-border collaboration that often leads to faster breakthroughs in research? It was an issue UNESCO’s Gabriela Ramos raised with me during our conversation at the Paris Peace Forum in November.
2. The global economic outlook. In the final hours of WEF, a powerhouse panel will assemble to dissect what these turbulent times mean for growth and stability in the coming months. European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, and other moola masters from around the world will talk tariffs, mounting public debt, and market movement in 2025.
3. "Uf Widerluege” from Davos. At noon local time, WEF President and CEO Børge Brende will deliver his closing remarks in the Congress Centre, bringing the 55th annual meeting to a close and sending participants out into the deep uncertainty of this geopolitical moment.
President Donald Trump makes a special address remotely during the 55th annual World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 23, 2025.
The Big Tar-iffs: Will he or won’t he start a trade war?
The big Trump tar-“iff” now has a when: Feb. 1.
That’s when the busy new US president has promised to slap 25% tariffs on both Canada and Mexico. In his virtual address to the folks attending the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Thursday, President Donald Trump again singled out Canada for harsh treatment. “We have a tremendous deficit with Canada,” he said, reiterating his usual inaccurate tariff mantra. Trump claims the trade deficit is between US$200 and US$250 billion a year when it is significantly less than half of that, mainly due to energy exports.
Trump then followed up with his favorite new expansionist taunt. “You can always become a state,” he said to Canadians. “If you’re a state, we won’t have a deficit. We won’t have to tariff you.”
But what he said next was more dire because it was aimed directly at the industries that are core to the Canadian economy. “We don’t need them to make our cars,” President Trump said. “We don’t need their lumber, because we have our own forests. We don’t need their oil and gas. We have more than anybody.” In other words, we don’t need Canada at all.
Cue the economic peril clutching.
Let’s slow-walk through all this.
Will President Donald Trump really follow through with tariffs, or is it a negotiating tactic?
Yes, tariffs are coming the way cold comes in winter. Why so certain? Our general rule is to take the president of the United States both seriously and literally. As Trump said in his inaugural address, tariffs are now his primary source of government revenue, not just a tool for negotiation.
“Instead of taxing our citizens to enrich other countries, we will tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens,” he announced. “It will be massive amounts of money pouring into our treasury coming from foreign sources.” He even floated the idea of an “External Revenue Service,” so tariffs are the flywheel in the engine that Trump promises will drive a golden age.
In his Davos speech on Thursday, the president emphasized the warning. “If you don’t make your product in America,” he said to a large group of CEOs, “then, very simply, you will have to pay a tariff, differing amounts, but a tariff which will direct hundreds of billions of dollars, even trillions of dollars, into our treasury to strengthen our economy and pay down debt.”
Is he right that high tariffs will really work for the US?
Not as promised. This is where the Trump math breaks down and politics and economics collide. Trump’s tariff threats will drive some businesses to keep factories in the US instead of, say, Canada. For example, this week Stellantis announced it was going to build the new Dodge Durango in Detroit and not move it to Canada as initially thought. It will also reopen a previously closed plant in Illinois to build another vehicle. So, expect some short-term “wins” from the America-first, protectionist agenda.
After all, in his first term, Trump used tariffs on goods like steel, aluminum, and products from China to more than double the amount the government collected from duties to about $111 billion.
Sounds like a lot, but it’s not. In 2023, the US government took in over $4.2 trillion in income and payroll tax. Even with 10% tariffs on all goods from China and 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican goods, the US government would take in only another $140 billion in 2025, according to the Committee for a Responsible Budget.
That’s not nearly enough to finance new tax cuts. For example, Trump has promised to extend his 2017 tax cuts in 2026. The Congressional Budget Office estimates doing so will cost about $4.7 trillion in lost revenue between now and 2035. That leaves a Grand Canyon-size hole that revenue from tariffs and savings from government cuts can never fill. Deficits will explode.
So will tariffs really be 25% across the board on Canada and Mexico, or will President Trump come down to a more manageable level on a few select goods?
That remains very unclear. The president didn’t slap these tariffs on week one, revealing they may have dropped as a symbolic priority for him. That opens up some room to maneuver to negotiate until the Feb. 1 deadline, and now there is even further hope for exceptions. The president has also asked for a report on trade and unfair practices to be delivered to him by April 1, which offers yet another potential delay in the tariff war. There will be lobbying, networking, and a full-bore strategy to give Canada some kind of carveout.
Still, neither date removes the possibility of the promised tariffs happening at some level. The president needs revenue, and tariffs are his preferred tool, despite the math.
Will Canada retaliate dollar for dollar?
Yes. The same strategy Canada deployed in Trump 1.0 during the steel and aluminum tariffs will be deployed again, and the list amounting to CA$37 billion worth of goods — including things like Florida Orange juice — is already made and ready to be deployed. After all, if Trump goes through with the tariffs, Canada could get pushed into a recession, with up to 5% of its GDP hit. While goods and services in both countries will get more expensive for citizens, it will hurt Canada much more for one reason: Canada sends almost three-quarters of its exports to the US, compared to just a little more than 17% of US exports crossing the other way.
If there are 25% tariffs across the board, will Canada use the nuclear option and try to cut off energy exports to the US, risking a full national unity crisis?
Very unclear. All the premiers and territory leaders met this week with Justin Trudeau to align their retaliation strategy, which includes energy … except for Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, for whom any inclusion of fossil fuel exports in a trade war is strictly off-limits. This is the lifeblood of the Alberta economy, after all, and she is protective of her province. However, her position deeply hampers a united Canadian response and allows the new US administration to deploy a divide-and-conquer strategy, knowing they can absorb any trade shocks better than Canada, especially if they do not include energy.
Is Trump still serious about taking over Canada by economic force?
Unclear. That view has certainly created a surge of patriotism in Canada and escalated tough trade talk as politicians jockey to wear the “Captain Canada” label. But if there is a desire to have an integrated North American economy — newsflash! — we already have one.
Energy alone is the best example. The US imports 24% of its crude oil from Canada, and that is very hard to replace because US refineries are retooled to process Canadian heavy crude oil, not the kind of oil the US extracts from fracking. Not only that, when looking at all energy products that flow across the border, like natural gas, there is a combined network of pipelines in North America that is over 281,000 miles long! With the free trade agreement, integrated fossil fuel pipelines, and hydroelectric systems in the East supplying electricity to the Northeastern states, it would be hard to find two more interconnected economies anywhere in the world.
In other words, on Feb. 1, the US and Canada are headed for a trade war they don’t need over a prize they both already have.
Graphic Truth: Which major economy has the lowest tariffs?
The Biden administration scaled back the EU tariffs but built on the China tariffs with additional measures. The tariffed share of US imports is now the highest it has been in decades, and Trump has threatened to boost tariffs even more.
But he’s starting from what is still, despite all that, a low base. The US has the second-lowest tariff barriers among the G20, the group of the world’s largest economies.In 2023, the trade-weighted average US tariff rate – a measure that takes into account the mix of goods a country actually imports – was just 2.2%. Only Japan’s was lower. Canada’s, by comparison, was 3.4%. The EU’s was 2.7%. And India’s was a whopping 12%. Here’s a look at how all 20 economies stack up when it comes to levies at the border.Container ships in front of the port of Bremerhaven.
How scared should the world be of Trump’s economic threats?
On Wednesday, President Donald Trump used his social media platform to threatenVladimir Putin with “high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States” unless he struck a bargain over Ukraine.
There’s just one problem: Russia has very little trade with the US. Americans imported just $2.8 billion in goods from Russia from Jan. to Nov. 2024, less than a tenth of the pre-war figure and less than 1% of all US imports over the same time period. The extensive sanctions already in place have hardly brought Moscow to its knees, and arguably benefited US rivals like China, Iran, and North Korea. It’s tough talk, but it’s not likely to push Putin to the table.
China is a different story. Trade with the US added up to an average of $54 billion per month in 2024, and the 60% tariffs Trump threatened to put on China on the campaign trail would cause severe damage to both economies. That may be why Trump is backing off the high sticker number and said Tuesday he is considering imposing at 10% tariffs on Chinese goods as soon as Feb. 1.
Now, 10% is a number that Beijing feels is much more manageable. China is experiencing price deflation — a really damaging phenomenon with one silver lining in that it could mean US consumers wind up paying about the same prices even if Trump hikes tariffs. The central government is also promising funds to stabilize the stock market in the face of potential tariffs and prevent investors from seeking safer shelter for their cash.
The fears are more real in Europe, where Trump threatened to impose tariffs without specifying a rate on Tuesday. Growth in the region’s most important economies is already stagnating, and even small barriers to trade with their most important partner will have serious consequences. Further economic troubles could empower far-right movements across the continent, which may suit Trump just fine. We have our eye on Germany, which will hold elections in precisely one month.
And don’t forget Canada and Mexico, which are staring down the barrel of 25% tariffs that Trump threatened on Tuesday as well. It’s creating a decidedly tense atmosphere in North America, with Canadian Prime Minister (for now) Justin Trudeau promising retaliation, which Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has hinted at as well.
The bottom line? You’re probably in for rising prices in the near future … unless everyone can come up with a reason for Trump to let them slide. We’re watching what Trump says when he speaks at the World Economic Forum in Davos on Thursday.
FILE PHOTO: Singapore MAERSK TAURUS container ship transits through Cocoli Locks in the Panama Canal, on the outskirts of Panama City, Panama, August 12, 2024.
Trump threats prompt Panama probe
Just hours after Donald Trump threatened again to take the Panama Canal in his inaugural address Monday, Panama opened a probe into a Hong Kong-based company that operates ports at both ends of the waterway.
The backdrop: The US built and opened the canal in 1914, and kept direct control of it until 1999, when it was given to Panama after years of protest against the US presence. Trump says that was a “mistake” and wants to retake it, claiming Panama “overcharges” US ships and has allowed China to exert too much influence.
Canal tolls have increased in recent years due to water shortages, but they apply equally to ships from all countries. Chinese companies are active in Panama, but there is no evidence so far of their meddling in the canal itself.
Panama says it won’t give up the canal, which handles 6% of global trade. But if Trump wants to force the issue, there’s little the tiny country could do. Probing a company based in Hong Kong, a nominally autonomous city-state that has fallen under stricter Chinese control in recent years, is a sign Panama wants to head off a bigger crisis.
Trump’s response to the probe will tell us a lot. If he’s using threats to secure preferential rates for US ships, then a peaceful resolution is possible. But if he thinks direct control is essential in a zero-sum global competition with China, then the probe won’t move him, and things could get frothier fast.
If so, the question in Panama – as in Greenland, which Trump also wants – will quickly become: What other global powers might Panama turn to for help?
Navigating global trade during uncertain times
In a rapidly shifting geopolitical landscape, businesses are focusing on adapting to global trade uncertainties. Dr. Nikolaus Lang, global leader of the BCG Henderson Institute, shared his insights with GZERO’s Tony Maciulis during the World Economic Forum in Davos. Dr. Lang discussed the Trump administration’s cautious approach to tariffs, emphasizing the likelihood of increases in the near future. "Our point of view is that there will be tariff hikes in one way or the others. Whether this will be the magnitude that was kind of mentioned in the campaign remains open."
While the delay may provide corporations some time to prepare, he stressed the urgency for businesses to strengthen their "geopolitical muscle" by diversifying supply chains, planning for inflationary volatility, and integrating geopolitical awareness into decision-making. Despite the complexities, Dr. Lang remains optimistic about global trade growth, forecasting a 3% annual increase over the next decade. Emerging markets, particularly Southeast Asia and India, are poised to benefit significantly, offering substantial expansion opportunities. His insights underscore the need for businesses to remain agile and proactive, finding opportunities even amid disruption.
Follow GZERO coverage of Davos here: https://www.gzeromedia.com/global-stage
Six issues that will shape US-Canada relations in 2025
In December, Justin Trudeauwarned that dealing with President-elect Donald Trump would be “a little more challenging” than last time around.
With Trump threatening massive tariffs that would hit Canada hard, taking aim at the country’s anemic defense spending, criticizing its border policy, eyeing its fresh water, and more, 2025 will indeed be a rocky time for US-Canada relations. But Trudeau might not be around for much of it. Down in the polls and facing calls from a majority of his caucus to resign, Trudeau is mulling his future and could resign any day.
Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievreis heavily favored to win the upcoming federal election, which would make Trump his challenge – a challenge Canadians, in fact, prefer the Conservative leader take on over his Liberal opponent.
Whoever leads Canada in the months to come, these are the top US-Canada issues they’ll be focused on:
1. Trade and tariffs
Trade between the US and Canada is worth over $900 billion a year, so the exchange of goods and services will be a top issue regardless of who’s in office. But Trump’s threat to levy a 25% tariff on imports has taken it to another level. The tariffs would raise prices in the US and hit Canadian industry, particularly the energy, automotive, and manufacturing sectors, with added costs. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce predicts the tariffs, and Canadian retaliation, would cost Canada roughly CA$78 billion – 2.6% of its GDP – a year and lead to recession. Canadian exports to the US would plummet, says the Chamber, with a predicted 60% drop in the mining and quarrying industries, 39% in m0tor vehicles, and 27% in metals – which would be costly for both countries. Ontario, the country’s most populous province and home to its auto sector, would be hit especially hard – which is why Premier Doug Ford is threatening to stop energy exports to the US if Trump proceeds with his plan.
The economic harm to Canada would be exacerbated by the fact that Ottawa would likely respond with its own retaliatory duties. The Trudeau government is working to secure an exemption from the policy for Canada but hasn’t managed to yet. But energy experts say they expect the tariffs won’t apply to Canadian oil either way.
Graeme Thompson, a senior analyst with Eurasia Group’s global macro-geopolitics practice, says Trump’s tariff threat is real but also part of the incoming president’s strategy. He’s trying to gain concessions on issues of concern, including border security and the (very limited) flow of fentanyl from north to south, and the US trade deficit with Canada ahead of the looming renegotiation of the USMCA.
Thompson notes that Canada is in a weak bargaining position given that it’s utterly dependent on its trade relationship with the US, “and for that reason, doesn’t have a lot of cards to play.” He also expects that even if Canada does secure an exemption on tariffs, Trump will be prepared to threaten them again in the future as leverage in any given negotiation.
“This is not a one-and-done,” Thompson says. “I think this is a mode of operations that will repeat several times for the next four years over a variety of issues.”
2. A (metaphorical?) border wall
Trump has made border security central to his tariff threat, arguing that the flow of fentanyl and illegal immigrants across the border poses a public safety threat to the US. Canada is already developing a border security plan to respond to Trump’s concerns. It’s also scrambling to prepare for a possible rise in asylum claims – which will exacerbate the current backlog – and irregular border crossings if Trump goes ahead with his plan for mass deportations.
Canada was already revising its immigration policy before Trump won, but it may introduce further restrictions – and continue to toughen its rhetoric – in the coming months. After Trump’s win, Immigration Minister Marc Miller said “not everyone is welcome” to go to Canada, emphasizing that his government was ready to work with the Trump administration on border security. At the same time, Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly said Canada was sticking to its new immigration plan, which would see fewer newcomers admitted to the country.
The Trudeau government reduced its immigration targets in October and cut the number of international students it welcomes. Its border security plan includes CA$1.3 billion in spending around five pillars that include a commitment to “detecting and disrupting the fentanyl trade” and “minimizing unnecessary border volumes,” including an end to flagpoling – or allowing temporary residents to leave the country (typically to the US) and return immediately to access immigration services at the border. But that may not be enough.
Thompson says leaders of the current government are “overestimating their ability to manage what is coming.” He notes future demands from Trump could include “tighter screening of regular immigrants into Canada. That means that much like with tariffs, the Canadian government may end up managing cascading demands from Trump, so no single promise or plan will likely be sufficient to placate the incoming US president.
3. Defense spending and securing the Arctic
US administrations, including Biden’s, have pressured Canada to increase its defense spending and hit NATO’s 2% of GDP target for years. In April, the Trudeau government outlined a plan to boost spending, focused in large part on building armed forces capacity in the Arctic. The new initiatives total roughly CA$81 billion over two decades and will push the country toward 1.76% of GDP by 2030. In December, the government announced a further adjustment to its Arctic presence, which will include more air and naval equipment, and a renewed cooperation strategy in the region with the US in the face of Russian and Chinese regional interests.
So far, Trump administration officials and other Republicans seem unimpressed with Canada’s defense plan. Former Trump ambassador to Canada, Kelly Craft, said the country could “do better.” That means spending more – and faster – especially since Trump has reportedly considered asking NATO allies to spend a whopping 5% of GDP on defense spending. He’s also threatened to leave countries that fail to spend more to fend for themselves against foreign aggression.
Philippe Lagassé, associate professor and Barton Chair at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University, says Canada could raise military spending by increasing pay, boosting operations expenditures, and contracting more for services. He says procurement of military hardware would take longer. But in the face of financial constraints, such new spending would require raising taxes, growing the deficit, cutting other programs, or some combination of the three – which could prove a challenge for the current government or its eventual replacement.
Arctic defense may prove to be a smoother issue. “The US has been trying to get Canada to do more in the region for a while,” Lagassé says, “and we've responded to that. I don’t see that as a point of tension.”
“If anything,” he adds, “the US will be glad if we just get our act together because their sovereignty considerations up there are less than ours, and they have capabilities up there that we don’t, but they do want us to actually get our act together around it.”
So, while Canada may feel the pressure on defense spending – and may need to come up with a faster, heftier plan to placate Trump, it can always point to progress in the Arctic and is likely to do so.
4. Water, water everywhere?
In September, Trump floated an idea to solve California’s drought problems: import water from British Columbia. As Trump put it, the province has “a very large faucet” that, once turned, could supply drought-stricken US states with fresh water. Experts point out that Canada doesn’t, in fact, have water to spare, and Canada can’t just turn on a “faucet” to divert water to the US.
The water Trump referred to, coming from the Columbia River, is already spoken for, in part through an existing treaty between the US and Canada – the Columbia River Treaty, which sets out rules governing flood controls, dams, and hydroelectric power generation.
That arrangement is in the process of being modernized to account for new developments, including climate change. The Biden administration and the Trudeau government recently reached an agreement in principle after years of work that began during the first Trump administration. But this time around, should Trump decide to maintain an interest in water flows north to south, the terms of the treaty could – like free trade – come back up for negotiation, with the faucet on the table.
5. Critical minerals. It’s in the name
The US and Canada share several other areas of cooperation and competition, but one is of immediate interest that could incentivize working together. Both countries are spending big on critical mineral development, including co-investments in a development in Yukon.
Critical minerals are central to cellular phones, the electric vehicle industry – in which both the US and Canada are investing heavily – and national defense. So whatever other tensions shape US-Canada relations, cooperation on critical minerals will remain a shared goal, especially as the two countries look to rival Chinese and Russian interests in related sectors.
6. Setting limits on Big Tech
Both countries are also taking on big tech giants, such as Google, through anti-monopoly investigations lawsuits. Still, the US is pushing Canada to drop its 3% digital services tax on big tech companies, including Google’s parent company Alphabet. The Biden administration requested a dispute resolution process for the tax, claiming it unfairly targets big US tech firms. The Trump administration is likely to press the issue, too, which may leave the policy as a pawn in one set of negotiations – say, over tariffs – or another.
Does Canada have any leverage to rely on? Canada has some cards to play against Trump, but it’s not clear who’ll be playing them. The Trudeau government, down roughly 25 points in the polls, is not long for this world – and Trudeau himself may resign any day. The country is due for an election by the fall, but it could come much earlier.
Regardless of who’s in power, however, they’ll likely deploy the playbook from the last time Canada had to manage its relationship with Trump. That means working contacts in states, particularly border states in which the Republicans have an interest in winning or currently govern and contacts in Washington. Then, they work the message about Canadian, and shared, interests up to Trump. There’s also the threats of retaliatory tariffs and halting certain trade, like Ford’s threat to cut off energy to border states.
Together, pulling these levers may yield some results, but Canada is in for tough negotiations and is unlikely to emerge from them unscathed.