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 }}
US-Canada trade war helps Mark Carney's election prospects
With recent tensions between Zelensky and Washington, how likely are the Saudi-hosted peace talks to yield real progress?
Well, we'll find out real soon. Zelensky has certainly made his efforts to make nice on the critical minerals deal, on apologizing to the Trump White House for a meeting that frankly he has very little to apologize for, and that certainly has helped with getting this engagement going. Also, he's not attending personally, rather, his key envoys and advisors meeting with Secretary of State Rubio and National Security Adviser Waltz. I suspect that the meetings will end up being just fine, but they are unlikely to lead to a ceasefire because what the Ukrainians are prepared to accept, the Russians are not close to accepting. So either Trump is going to have to be willing to take some time, bring it to the Russians and see that the Russians are not playing full ball, or he's going to have to throw the Ukrainians under the bus more and make greater demands that they're not prepared to accept. I don't think either of those things are likely to happen today, but that's I think, the direction of travel.
Are we on the cusp of a nuclear proliferation era as Poland and Germany talk of acquiring nuclear weapons?
Germany's talking more about sharing in the nuclear umbrella with France. Poland's talking about getting its own. These things are all harder. They will take longer than these countries have. It's not like France's nuclear umbrella is deep or easily extendable. In order to have anyone believe credibly that a French deterrent would apply to other countries, a lot of things have to happen in terms of coordination and infrastructure and building up those capabilities that will take frankly years. So, I think it's important that these conversations are happening. I think that many countries around the world are moving towards establishing their own nuclear capabilities in, around, the Middle East. I can certainly see over time as Iran gets closer, the Saudis thinking about it, the Turks thinking about it, in Asia, South Korea and Japan. In Europe, a number of countries needing to have collective security because they don't feel like the Americans can provide for them. But I don't think those things are happening overnight. The global order is changing. It is really past the tipping point, but these things are slow moving processes.
Does Justin Trudeau's replacement, Mark Carney, have a shot of winning Canada's general election?
Certainly does, and three months ago would've had no shot at all. There's been an extraordinary bounce back for the Liberal Party, in part because they're now represented by someone that is not an incumbent. Think about what would've happened in the US if it hadn't been Biden or Kamala Harris, but had been an outsider after general primary, better shot of winning. That's exactly what the Canadians have now done. Trudeau forced down, Chrystia Freeland, his deputy prime minister, getting 8% in the Liberal caucus vote, and Carney getting almost 86%. So he's a centrist. He's in much better position to give a serious run against Pierre Poilievre of the Conservatives. The big question is how is Trump going to respond? Because on the one hand, it's very easy for Trump to now say, "Trudeau's gone because of me, and I'm now willing to work with somebody who is more reasonable," and the markets would certainly appreciate that. On the other hand, short of him doing that, and I think it's unlikely that he's going to reach out and extend a hand to the Canadians, then Trump beating on Canada more gives Carney a better shot of winning because he's the guy that can manage an economic crisis and also because the Canadians are so united in their anger with the United States, kind of like Mexico is right now, kind of like a number of European countries are right now. So Trump is definitely a uniter, just not inside the US, more inside other countries.
Canada's Liberal Party leadership candidates, former House leader Karina Gould, far left, shakes hands with former Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney, far right, near former Liberal MP Frank Baylis, and former Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, before their English language debate ahead of the March 9 vote to replace Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, on Feb. 25, 2025.
Canadian Liberals to get new leader
Carney is favored to win, with a recent Ipsos poll giving him 68% support among Liberal members, ahead of Freeland at 14% and Gould and Baylis in single digits. While a recent poll showed Carney as the leader most trusted to take on Trump, another shows him dropping back behind Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre in the popular vote.Poll aggregator 338Canada.com shows both the Liberals and Conservatives in a position to form a government, however, if an election were held today.
After leadership, an election? Canadians must go to the polls by Oct. 25, but the House of Commons is supposed to return on March 24, and opposition parties have threatened to bring down the Liberals’ minority government. Until this week, with the party rebounding in the polls, there was speculation the new leader might simply call a snap election, perhaps as early as the week of March 10.
But the winds may have shifted with the imposition of Trump’s tariffs. The head of the New Democratic Party, Jagmeet Singh, wrote a letter Tuesday demanding an emergency session of Parliament to pass unemployment insurance relief measures, meaning his party does not immediately intend to bring down the government – giving the Liberals a lifeline to stick around a bit longer if they choose.Canada's Liberal Party leadership candidate and former Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney speaks to the media after participating in an English-language debate ahead of the March 9 vote to replace Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in Montreal, Quebec, on Feb. 25, 2025.
Do the Liberals stand a chance after all?
Over the past year, everyone had counted the Liberals down and out – their chances of holding on to power after the next federal election in Canada had been somewhere south of slim. But now the party is enjoying a twin boost from two recent shifts in the political terrain and has closed the polling gap between them and the Conservative Party.
In January, Justin Trudeau announced his intention to resign as party leader and prime minister. Then Donald Trump was inaugurated as US president for the second time and immediately started coming after Canada hard, threatening economy-destroying tariffs, calling Trudeau “governor,” and talking about annexing the country and making it a “cherished” 51st state.
With Trudeau (and his baggage) on the way out and Trump stirring up nationalist fervor, the Liberals have now surpassedthe Conservatives in one recent poll by Ipsos, coming back from 26 points behind in just six weeks to lead 38% to 36%. Another poll, by Léger, finds that with Mark Carney as Liberal leader, the party’s support would hit 40% compared to 38% for Pierre Poilievre and his Conservatives.
One or two polls will never tell the whole story, but over at 338 Canada, which aggregates federal polls, the Liberals are showing a sharp uptick and, on average, find themselves within 10 points of their Conservative competitors – and climbing day by day.
Disclaimer: Mark Carney’s wife, Diana Fox Carney, is an advisor to our parent company, Eurasia Group, but no one other than GZERO’s editorial team – and excluding publisher Evan Solomon, a family friend of the Carneys – is involved in the selection and editing of our coverage.President Donald Trump meets with Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in a bilateral meeting at the G7 Summit in Charlevoix, Quebec, back in June 2018.
Will the Five Eyes become Four Eyes?
This week, Canada and the global intelligence community were shocked and concerned at the suggestion that the White House was considering removing Canada from the Five Eyes intelligence alliance. On Tuesday, The Financial Times reported that Donald Trump’s trade and manufacturingadviser Peter Navarro, a trusted consigliere to the president, was lobbying the administration to kick Canada out of the intelligence-sharing group, which also includes the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand.
Navarro was quick to deny the reports, calling it “crazy stuff,” and adding “We would never, ever jeopardize our national security ever with allies like Canada. Ever.” But the FT, which stands behind its reporting, has sources in the administration who say Navarro’s threats to cut Canada out of the Five Eyes alliance is a tactic for pushing the country to fall in line on Trump’s demands on trade, border security, and defense spending.
CTV News reporter Stefanie Ha spoke with former Justin Trudeau national security and intelligence advisor Vincent Rigby, who said the Five Eyes threat could indeed be a “pressure point” the Trump administration is exploiting, similar to a tactic the president used during his first term by threatening to withhold intelligence from Canada.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks at the Invictus Games in Vancouver on Feb. 16, 2025.
Lame-duck Trudeau announces high-speed rail
The Liberals say the 1,000-kilometre (620-mile) project would produce 51,000 jobs, boost GDP by up to $35 billion, and shorten the travel time from Montreal to Toronto to three hours, about half the time it takes to drive.
Canadians have often studied a high-speed link in the Quebec-Toronto corridor, the most densely populated part of the country, but have been dissuaded from actually building because of the price tag, which is estimated at being at least $65 billion.
It is too early to answer many specific questions, said Martin Imbleau, the president of the consortium that won the design contract. “We’re going to take our time, properly develop the project, look at the different phases, and in four or five years, we’ll know what we’re building.”
There are reasons to be skeptical, but it is not out of the realm of the possible. “This investment in Canadians, which starts right now, is going to be very difficult to turn back on,” Trudeau said.
The Conservatives, who are generally keener on private cars, would likely not find it hard to cancel the project if they win an election this spring, but a Liberal government might have good political reasons to proceed since the tracks would run through the most reliably Liberal-voting parts of the country.
Trade war may push Canada closer to its threatening ally
When Canadian defense expert Philippe Lagassé met with American counterparts in Washington this week, he quickly sensed they had not registered that the mood had shifted in Canada.
“There’s still a lot of emphasis on partnership,” he said. “We should be working together. We should be doing some things together.”
But Lagassé, an associate professor at Ottawa’s Carleton University, had to tell them that things had changed. “That’s hard right now because, politically, that’s just become a lot more difficult.”
Canadians were so angered by Donald Trump’s tariffs and annexation threats that they yanked American bourbon from liquor stores and turned up their noses at American produce. The typically staid hockey fans of Ottawa even booed the US national anthem.
Canadians, who are used to thinking of the Americans as friendly neighbors, are suddenly seeing them as a threat to their sovereignty. A poll this week shows 80% of Canadians support using oil as a weapon in the trade dispute, which would be a dramatic escalation. On Monday, Trump called off the planned 25% tariffs after Justin Trudeau agreed to take measures on the border, but the pause is for just 30 days.
Rattled Canadians are suddenly more committed to enhancing their sovereignty by reducing internal trade barriers, diversifying international trade so the country is less dependent on the United States, and beefing up the military.
Long a NATO laggard
It will need a lot of beef. For decades, Canada has sheltered under the coattails of Uncle Sam.
With oceans on both sides, an impassable ice cap to the north and friendly Americans to the south, there was little public support for military spending and lots of support for spending money on social programs. Even tough-talking Conservative Stephen Harper did little to boost defense spending. Canada is a NATO laggard, spending only 1.37% of GDP on defense — the average across NATO members is 2.71% of GDP — something Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Trump have all complained about. Last year, leaked documents showed that Trudeau told NATO that Canada had no plan to get to 2%, the level all NATO countries have agreed on.
When political circumstances changed, Trudeau laid out a plan to get to 2%, but years of neglect will take time to turn around. Due to recruiting problems, there are only 63,000 people in the Canadian Armed Forces — well below the 71,500 it is supposed to have. Even at full strength, it is tiny compared with the 2 million troops south of the border. To make matters worse, three-quarters of Canadian soldiers are either overweight or obese.
Canada has summoned the will, finally, to spend on defense. Trudeau has promised to reach 2% by 2032. His likely successor, Mark Carney, said Wednesday he would aim for 2030. The defense minister has said we could get there within two years, although quickly rearming would pose logistical challenges.
But it is not clear if Canada's big push will be in partnership with its newly hostile neighbors. After all, if the United States decides to put tariffs on all Canadian exports, driving the country into a deep recession, would Canada want to proceed with the CA$70-billion purchase of 88 F-35A US fighter jets? Or would Ottawa cancel the order and buy fighters from Sweden, which has never threatened annexation? And if Canada’s economy is in free fall, could it afford to buy either?
Pentagon control
And should Canada buy kit from a hostile power? Canada’s military technology is integrated with America’s, so any operations without US approval would be complicated. The F-35 can’t function without its autonomic logistics information system, which is controlled by the Pentagon, which could limit its effectiveness in a showdown with America.
There may be pressure, therefore, to work more closely with other countries — to buy equipment from the Europeans, for example — although the natural inclination of the defense community in Ottawa is to stick with the Americans, whom they see as their friendly big brothers.
“I think there’s going to be a pretty heavy emphasis on the fact that you take Trump at his word, so you buy more American equipment, and you invest more in the US,” says Lagassé. “You try to integrate yourself more deeply into those supply chains, and that’s how you protect yourself. The other side is going to argue, well, now this is too vulnerable. We should try to become less dependent, take a step back.”
Not a lot of choices
But Canadians are limited in their options, says Graeme Thompson, an analyst with Eurasia Group, because at the forefront of military innovation with AI and advanced computing, there are only two real options: China and the US.
“There’s the Chinese ecosystem and there’s the American ecosystem, and basically Canada doesn’t have a choice there. It’s not going to be able to develop its own autonomous tech ecosystem or supply chains. It has to be plugged into the US side of things. There’s a great line, I don’t know who said it, but ‘the US is our best friend, whether we like it or not.’”
Canadians may want their government to do more to assert national sovereignty, but Lagassé doubts that sentiment is strong enough to disrupt the close military cooperation between Canada and the United States.
“The public may want us to do something differently, but … is the public willing to sustain the cost? Is the public’s attention going to be sufficiently focused so that political leaders see gain in pursuing that? Or does it just kind of evaporate once the tariff threat is no longer present?”
Once tempers cool, Canadian politicians will continue to use procurement deals as a way of currying favor with the Americans rather than a way of asserting independence. After all, they are Canada’s best friends, whether they like it or not.
Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum holds a press conference in Mexico City, Mexico February 3, 2025.
Trump strikes last-minute tariff deal with Mexico and Canada – but not China
With hours to spare, President Donald Trump hit pause on a North American trade war, reaching agreements with both Mexico and Canada to delay the imposition of 25% tariffs that had businesses and markets sweating.
The deals, brokered after multiple calls with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, postpone the application of tariffs by 30 days while both countries work to secure their borders with the United States. Mexico agreed to deploy 10,000 troops to curb drug smuggling and illegal immigration, while Canada appointed a fentanyl czar and committed to a Canada-US Joint Strike Force targeting drug trafficking and organized crime.
There was no movement, however, with Beijing. Ten percent tariffs on Chinese imports took effect at 12.01 a.m. on Tuesday, prompting China to hit back with additional tariffs (both countries already had some tariffs in place) on liquefied natural gas, coal, farm machinery, and various other US products. Beijing also imposed new export restrictions and launched an antitrust investigation into Google. Earlier, Beijing said it would challenge the tariffs before the World Trade Organization.
Trump has also warned that tariffs on the EU are coming, prompting UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to insist that Britain won’t pick sides between the US and the EU, despite his push for closer relations with the continent.
While Mexican and Canadian businesses and consumers breathe a sigh of relief, Trump’s hardball negotiation tactics may negatively impact relations with both countries, particularly Canada, in the longer term. Canadian leaders have said they will actively pursue trade deals with other partners, there has been speculation about Canada joining the EU, and there remains uncertainty about whether the United States remains a trusted ally after Trump forcefully repeated his hope that Canada would become the 51st state – just an hour before his final conversation with Trudeau.
Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is joined by Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Foreign Affairs Melanie Joly, and Minister of Public Safety David McGuinty, as he responds to President Donald Trump's orders to impose 25% tariffs on Canadian imports, in Ottawa, Ontario, on Feb. 1, 2025.
Trump ignites trade war. Will there be a legal response?
On Saturday, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order applying 25% tariffs on all Canadian and Mexican imports, excluding Canadian energy, which will be tariffed at 10%. The order, which takes effect on Tuesday, also imposes a 10% tariff on all Chinese imports. Trump threatened to escalate tariffs further if any of the countries retaliated, which Mexico and Canada have already done.
Canada will apply 25% tariffs on $155 billion of American goods, from orange juice to appliances to car parts, phased in over three weeks. Ottawa will also consider nontariff measures relating to energy and procurement, and provincial liquor monopolies areremoving American alcohol from their shelves. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum also retaliated with “tariff and non-tariff measures in defense of Mexico's interests,” without specifying the rate.
China has responded with plans to implement “countermeasures” and called Trump’s tariffs a “serious violation” of international trade rules, which it will contest before the World Trade Organization.
On what basis did Trump issue the order? Trump expanded the scope of the national emergency he declared on Jan. 20 at the southern border of the United States, due to “the sustained influx of illicit opioids and other drugs” that is “endangering lives and putting a severe strain on our healthcare system, public services, and communities.” It now covers both Canada and China, which he accuses of not doing enough to combat fentanyl production, money laundering, drug gangs, and transnational crime.
Could legal challenges derail Trump’s tariffs? To declare this emergency, Trump invoked the US International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, the National Emergencies Act, or NEA, as well as sections 604 of the Trade Act of 1974 and section 301 of Title 3, United States Code.
But the IEEPA hasnever been used to justify tariffs. It allows for the imposition of sanctions, suchas those imposed by the Biden administration against Russia, which can be invoked immediately. Trump chose the IEEPA because it allowed him to bypass the lengthy investigations and consultations required by other trade laws he invoked during his first term.
It also allows him to claim the tariffs are legal under World Trade Organization rules, as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade’s Article XXI designates a national security exception. President Richard Nixon similarly invoked the Trading with the Enemy Act to impose 10% tariffs after the US quit the gold standard in 1971 to stave off a balance-of-payments crisis.
This may not bode well for a challenge by China before the WTO. But if American courts rule against Trump on his use of the IEEPA, his emergency declaration could be considered invalid, opening the door to penalties under global trade rules.
Finally, there’s the USMCA. A Congressional analysis found that tariffs would violate the tripartite treaty, but with Trump already threatening to withdraw from the agreement, it would appear he does not care. Trump said on Truth Social on Sunday that Americans will feel “SOME PAIN” but that “IT WILL ALL BE WORTH THE PRICE THAT MUST BE PAID.”
We’ll be watching to see who might challenge the US president in court – and whether they succeed. Meanwhile, the markets were taking a hit as of early Monday with stock futures lower and the dollar and oil rising.