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 }}
Three amigos, or two?
Ford called on Mexico to match Canadian and American tariffs on Chinese imports to stop it being a “backdoor for Chinese cars, auto parts, and other products."
Ford’s province depends on the CA$11.6 billion auto industry, with integrated supply chains across the border. Any threat to that could cause an economic meltdown.
During the negotiations of the new NAFTA — the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement — in 2019, some Conservative critics of Justin Trudeau’s government faulted the Canadians for making common cause with Mexico in resisting US demands. They are getting an early start this time ahead of the deal’s review in 2026.
“If Mexico won’t fight transshipment by, at the very least, matching Canadian and American tariffs on Chinese imports, they shouldn’t have a seat at the table or enjoy access to the largest economy in the world,” Ford said.
Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, who played the pivotal role in negotiating USMCA withUS Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, has repeatedly emphasized that Canada and the United States are in lockstep on tariffs on China.
Graeme Thompson, a senior analyst with Eurasia Group's global macro-geopolitics practice, says it is hard to know if they will remain in lockstep if Donald Trump’s tariffs on China get too high.
“Given Canada’s dependence on the US market, I think Ottawa will be tempted to do things that only a few years ago would have seemed impossible – including imposing significant new tariffs on China and abandoning Mexico if necessary to preserve its trade and security relationships with Washington.”
Lighthizer, who is expected to return to his job under Trump 2.0, is laying the groundwork for a new tariff policy that would include a 20% tariff on all goods coming into the US.
If there is no exemption for Canada, the policy would also lead to a sudden and dramatic slowdown in the Canadian economy.
Expect the Canadians to remind the Americans that Canada exported $124 billion of oil to the United States last year. Any new tariffs on that trade would increase prices at the pump for Americans, which Trump’s party would pay for in the 2026 midterms.
Trump picks Trudeau critics for Cabinet
President Donald Trump’s credulity-straining Cabinet picks (Matt Gaetz and Tulsi Gabbard, for example) are getting all the attention, but anyone interested in the relationship between Canada and the United States will want to know that two of his lower-profile nominees are no fans of the Canadian prime minister.
Trump’s next national security advisor, Rep. Michael Waltz, has a long track record of critical public comments about Justin Trudeau, suggesting he is weak on China and that Canadians should get rid of him.
Waltz represents Florida’s 6th District in the House of Representatives, which includes Daytona Beach, a frequent destination for Canadian sunseekers, which may explain his interest in Canadian politics.
In May, Waltz shared a post from Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre: “This guy is going to send Trudeau packing in 2025 (finally) and start digging Canada out of the progressive mess it’s in.”
Waltz’s dim view of the Trudeau government may strain security cooperation between the two countries, but Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, is more likely to be front and center at the conflict point.
Homan, the former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, will be in charge of implementing Trump’s plan to deport millions of undocumented foreigners. Homan is from West Carthage, NY, just south of the northern border, which he sees as a threat because of irregular crossings.
On Monday, he told a local TV station there that he intends to make it harder for illegal immigrants to get into the United States, promising to arrest any who try.
“We’re gonna lock you up,” he said. “So more agents, we’ll end catch and release, and President Trump will need to work with Prime MinisterJustin Trudeau and say, ‘look, you need to enforce the immigration laws you have because this is a gateway to the US.’”
Homan is not a Trudeau fan. “Find a better man,” he said in February. “He’s terrible."
Trump’s chosen deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, meanwhile, has called Canada “increasingly authoritarian and despotic” and referred to the PM as “far-left Trudeau.”
The Canadians are bracing for the impact of Trump, beefing up surveillance aimed at preventing crossings in the other direction. The likely result is a more heavily policed frontier, which could slow the trade that both sides rely on.
Trudeau’s former right-hand man thinks Trump 2.0 ‘will be harder’
When Donald Trump shocked the world by getting himself elected in 2016, Gerald Butts was the principal secretary to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. He was also a key member of the Canadian team that managed the tumultuous but ultimately successful negotiation of the USMCA, sitting across the table from Trump, Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, and Robert Lighthizer. He is now vice chairman and a senior advisor at Eurasia Group, which is the parent company of GZERO Media.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
You were in the Office of the Prime Minister the last time Trump was elected. How is this different?
Butts: On the positive side, it’s not as much of a shock. The most salient fact of the first Trump presidency was that it happened. So everybody had to have a plan for it happening again. That’s the upside. The downside is you’re going to be dealing with a much more emboldened Trump who’s got a broader electoral mandate and whose ambitions on the economy are much more comprehensive than they were the first go-round. He campaigned in 2016 basically saying to the Great Lakes blue-collar worker that he was going to bring their jobs back from Mexico, the jobs that the Clintons sold to Mexico. And this time he’s got a much more ambitious agenda. It’s rebalancing global trade and a mass deportation plan that will make labor more expensive in the United States.
If you add those two things together, along with probably increased defense spending on an already large deficit, it’s hard to see how those things don’t cause inflation.
It seems odd that inflation is what eroded Biden’s brand, but Trump’s two key promises are both inflationary.
They don’t see it that way, of course. I think that that’s the conventional economic view. And I do think that what will inevitably be an inflated defense budget beyond the PBO’s 3% estimate is also going to be part of this, part of the inflationary pressure that Trump brings to bear.
As policymakers have learned over the past couple of years, because most of them had never had to deal with it before, inflation is a government killer. It’s the grim reaper for incumbents, and it’s mowed down governments of all political stripes all over the world.
Speaking of which, the Trudeau government generally gets good marks for handling Trump the first time, which you had something to do with. A lot of people are worried that it’s going to be a little harder this time, in part because of the relationship between the president and the prime minister. Do you think that that’s important?
Its importance is overblown. I think you’re right that it will be harder. I think that has more to do with the relative political standing of the government and the time of the mandate. If you’re dealing with Trump at the end of your first year, when you’re in the 40s in the polls, with almost a 50% approval rating, that’s one thing, because those two things add up to political capital that you have to invest.
If you’re dealing with it in year 10, when you don’t enjoy those polling numbers, that means you have less political capital to invest. And by definition, Trump is a problem that requires political capital to solve.
They have a very difficult task ahead of them, don’t they?
They really do. I never like to tell my former colleagues how to do their job, because the truth is, when you don’t have all the information they have, it’s hard to make judicious calls. Only they know how prepared they are to deal with undocumented people showing up at a Canadian border point. I don’t know that. Unless you do, it’s hard to say how you would deal with that issue either in the public or in bilateral negotiations with the Trump administration.
I do think that’s potentially the biggest problem they’re going to have to deal with because I wouldn’t say the cross-partisan consensus on immigration in Canada is gone, but it has been weakened by recent events.
On trade, what’s the best guess on whether Trump is going to exempt Canada from a new tariff policy?
I think if the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, then he will only grant exemptions in return for something. The question is, what can the government offer that he wants that will get that exemption? And I have no idea.
Cross-border trade is high frequency and very large. We’d feel the impact of tariffs sooner, and they’d cover more of our economy than any country except maybe Mexico.
Traditionally in Canada, all governments are afraid — because of the strength of our dairy lobby — to do much about the supply-managed dairy industry. (Canada’s politically powerful dairy farmers have long exerted political pressure to protect their industry from American imports.) In this situation, do you think that that’s the kind of thing the politicians may have to think about in a new way?
That’s definitely possible. I mean, my view is if you’re going to take that kind of risk, get some bigger economic reward for it. We’ve been simultaneously having this conversation yet again about Canadian productivity. And one of the big problems with Canadian productivity is that our firms and sectors like digital services face no competition. So the companies are big, bloated bureaucracies that deliver some of the most expensive services in the world. I’d be tempted to use the crisis presented by the Trump administration to fix some things about the structure of the Canadian economy that badly need fixing.
On the energy transition, all of these big bets on battery plants in the United States are legislated tax credits that Trump cannot get rid of, but the whole managed auto manufacturing sector is losing an enthusiastic ally for EVs in Biden. What does that do to the enormous subsidies Trudeau and Champagne have put on the table for EV manufacturers?
I think that may be literally a trillion-dollar question. That’s going to be a super-challenging file to manage with Trump. It’s coming at a time where the global industry is electrifying, and that process is being led by the Chinese. The Americans think the proper response to that is to create large tariffs that will keep the Chinese out of the American market because they’re kind of running the 1970s playbook. I think the response from the Chinese is going to be: “We don’t need to be in the American market. China is twice the size of the United States auto market, and we’ll take the rest of the world while you guys double down on inferior technology that the rest of the world is turning away from.”
It’s a very complicated situation. They’re already losing out to Chinese and Korean producers, and this could just accelerate that process.
So I’d be very worried if I were working on this part of industrial policy in North America because the companies have a weaker hand to deal with than the government seems to think they do.
And for Canada, there’s an extra challenge in that the Canadian economy is so integrated with the American economy that it may not be possible to set a different course.
That’s right. It may be that the American automotive market, like the American economy itself, is so large that subnational economies like California and New York — which together are larger than Canada — can keep going the way they’ve been going, and the Canadian industry basically follows them. But I think that’s challenging. It’s super challenging for a small but important producer like Canada, especially on the parts side.
Let’s close with a little optimism. What do you see as an upside of this election for Canada?
I think it’s the persistent structural problems in the Canadian economy that are not going to be solved in the absence of a crisis. Maybe Trump is the crisis that the Canadian economy needs to solve those problems.
Trump 2.0 is set to upend US-Canada relations
Donald Trump is returning to the White House. Winning the presidency, along with control of the Senate and possibly the House of Representatives, means Republicans have a long runway for policy reform — which is making Canada nervous as the Trudeau government stares down possible challenges from the next administration on trade, defense, immigration, and more.
Trump’s tariff threat looms large
Sitting atop Canada’s pile of worries is Trump’s threat to impose a minimum 10% tariff — and possibly as high as 20% — across the board on US imports, which would drive consumer prices higher in the US and could cost Canadian trade partners billions. Canada will try to finagle an exemption, but there is no guarantee it’ll succeed.
If slapped with tariffs, Canada may be forced to retaliate with its own protectionist measures, ensuring a trade war. Roughly CA$3.6 billion in goods move across the border daily, and nearly 80% of Canada’s exports go stateside.
But tariffs aren’t the only trade concern. Trump, who views trade agreements through the lens of zero-sum power politics, says he will (once again) negotiate the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement, which comes up for review in 2026. During his first term, the Republican leader replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement with USMCA, which caused considerable headaches for the Trudeau government. Canada made concessions during the renegotiation, including increased market access for the US to Canadian dairy and stricter rules of origin for automobiles — criteria to determine if enough North American production has gone into a vehicle to grant it preferential tariff treatment. During the process, Trump called Justin Trudeau “two-faced” and a “far-left lunatic.”
Pressure to spend, border woes, freshwater demands — oh my!
Canada will also face growing pressure from the Trump administration to increase its defense spending and NATO commitments.
Days ago, former US Ambassador to Canada Kelly Craft gave a sense of just how urgent the spending boost might have to be. This summer, Canada released a plan to grow its share of defense spending to the NATO target of 2% of GDP by 2032. Craft says that’s not fast enough. But to hit that target, Canada would have to doubleits defense spending in the next seven to eight years, which might be tricky if the country is hurting from a trade war with its biggest trading partner.
During the election, Trump also said he would begin a program of mass deportations. The costly idea is a stretch, but as the CBC’s Evan Dyer argued in July, even the notion of such a program could cause problems for Canada, with concerned migrants in the US moving north ahead of a possible deportation blitz.
During the first Trump administration, and into the Biden administration, a growing number of irregular crossings were a challenge, leading to a renegotiated border deal in 2023, which tightened border security.
Trump has also talked about going after Canadian freshwater to solve US water shortages. Canada is one of the world’s largest sources of freshwater — with roughly 20% of the global total. Trump has floated the idea of diverting Canadian water to the US, particularly to drought-prone California.
The president-elect recently touted the idea on Joe Rogan’s podcast, and in September, he said British Columbia has “essentially a very large faucet” that could be turned on “one day” to divert water flows south to California. But there isn’t that much spare water to divert, and the flows are already governed by the Columbia River Treaty — another deal that might be up for (further) review.
All public smiles and reassurances, for now
The first Trump administration was rough for Canada, and the Trump-Trudeau relationship was … not warm. In January, Trudeau warned that a second Trump presidency would be “a step back” for Canada. “It wasn’t easy the first time, and if there is a second time, it won’t be easy either,” the prime minister said.
Indeed it won’t. Some in Canada may be hoping the pain won’t arrive until the 2026 free trade renegotiations, but that’s probably wishful thinking.
“The headaches may come much sooner than the USMCA negotiations," says Gerry Butts, vice chairman and senior adviser at Eurasia Group. “Trump’s immigration and tariff policies will put pressure on an already strained Canadian consensus about immigration and cause swift damage to the economy.”
Nonetheless, Trudeau was quick to congratulate Trump on his second win, emphasizing that the relationship between the US and Canada is “the envy of the world,” and saying, perhaps more in hope than in anticipation, that he knows he and Trump “will work together to create more opportunity, prosperity, and security for both of our nations.”
Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly noted that Canada has been preparing for either a Democrat or Republican “for months” through networks in the US and globally. She was joined by several Cabinet ministers who at least feigned hope that things would work out given the deep ties between the two countries.
Graeme Thompson, a senior analyst with Eurasia Group’s global macro-geopolitics practice, isn’t convinced the rosy picture the Canadian government is painting reflects reality. “Trump doesn’t care about historic ties; he couldn’t care less.”
Thompson says the relationship between the US and Canada is now as fraught as it has been in a century. But, he notes, Canada is still better off vis-à-vis the US than every other country in the world, which is something at least.
How to manage a forever crisis
The challenge for Canada now is navigating the second Trump administration, particularly as the Trudeau government, down in the polls, faces its own election a year from now — if not sooner.
Canadians prefer the Conservative Party leader over Trudeau when it comes to handling Trump, but for now, the job is Trudeau’s. The plan this time seems to be similar to last time: Rather than going all-in on the White House itself, Canada will work with the Trump administration by lobbying statehouses and governors, especially along the border states, along with Capitol Hill and industry. The government has also reestablished its Cabinet committee on US-Canada relations, chaired by Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland.
Thompson says Canada has an advantage in managing the Trump administration because of the country’s deep familiarity with the US and close connections nationally and at the state level. But history and expertise aside, there’s no guarantee there won’t be challenges and pain for Canada — especially on trade and defense — despite the rhetoric.
“It’s really hard to see how this is not more challenging than at any other time,” Thompson says. “I think that for the next four years, we can expect that any grievance or opportunity to take a hard line to gain something that presents itself, that’s the line the Trump administration will take.”
American and Canadian voters yearn for something they might never get
Is there a deep, secret yearning from American and Canadian voters for a radically open border? Do people really want Canada and the US to be more like the EU? OR, is border politics all about isolationism, security fears, and building walls? The results of an exclusive new poll from GZERO and Data Science will surprise you – and ought to be shaping the election campaigns in both countries.
We revealed part of the poll at the US-Canada Summit that I had the pleasure of co-hosting in Toronto, put on by the teams at Eurasia Group and BMO. Led off by our own Ian Bremmer and BMO’s CEO Darryl White, it included a remarkable collection of over 500 people, including political leaders from across the spectrum in both countries who debated, speechified, conversed, and argued.
Why are so many people so keen to discuss the US-Canada relationship? As Bremmer said, this is a hinge moment in history, with three wars raging — one in Ukraine, one in the Middle East, and one in the United States — a remark that caused gasps and nods. On top of that, 60+ elections are reshaping the world this year (Modi humbled in India, Macron in a showdown with the far right in France, Sunak shambolically slinking off in the UK). Meanwhile, China is threatening Taiwan, and AI is grinding its way through our economies and imaginations.
Gary Cohn, former director of the National Economic Council under Trump and the vice chairman of IBM, admitted that what worries him most is the collision between geopolitics and the economy. They are inextricably linked and making things worse. With the political bombs falling so close, people are desperately looking for a safe shelter, and that shelter is the US-Canada relationship. As Delaware Sen. Chris Coons said, squabbles between the two countries over tariffs or softwood lumber don’t add up to a pile of shell casing next to say China and Taiwan, which may be why the relationship is so often taken for granted or outright ignored. It is and remains one of the biggest bilateral trading relationships in the world.
Globalization is giving way to new forms of regionalism, or “friend-shoring with a vengeance.” But should the region have internal walls or not?
The mandate of the conference is to bring together people tired of partisan bickering, slogan swamping, and dizzying disinformationalizing – in other words, the bubble-blowing BS of everyday politics. They are urged to be authentic, honest, and, despite their political differences, get on with figuring out how to build something better and more secure than we have now. And they did.
Who joined in?
This is a partial list (pause for a long breath): Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, Industry Minister Francois Phillippe Champagne, Treasury Board President Anita Anand, who settled a major border strike during the conference, Ontario and Saskatchewan Premiers Doug Ford and Scott Moe, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, political wizards like David Axelrod from the Obama campaign and Christopher Liddell, the former White House Deputy Chief of Staff to Donald Trump.
Speaking of the Trump folks, there was Gary Cohn, mentioned above, giving Canada a shot and saying it can “tag along” on US economic progress. Former Bank of Canada and England Governor Mark Carney spoke about building together based on common values, and there was Mitch Landrieu, the Biden/Harris 2024 National Campaign Co-Chair, who was in full fight mode over Trump. They were joined by more than 150 CEOs, dozens of policy wonks, and experts on everything from AI, security, economic policy, and more.
There were tray loads of interesting insights and ideas:
- On Trade: The 2026 review of the USMCA is widely seen as the most important framework for the economic future of North America, and there are genuine fears that if Trump wins (Turns out, Ivermectin may actually be a political vaccine against felony convictions) and senses that trade imbalances with the US have not changed, he will rip it up and send the economies reeling with nasty and counterproductive tariffs.
- On the Inflation Reduction Act: Candid admissions from US politicians that protectionism and US industrial policy can sideswipe Canada, simply because Canada gets forgotten.
- On Biden vs. Trump: A quote attributed to Bill Clinton was repeated as to why Biden’s good economic record is not reflected in his polling: “Strong and wrong beats weak and right.”
- On why Democrats are losing working-class voters: I asked David Axelrod why Democrats and progressives spend so much time convincing themselves that people like Trump are not fit for office but so little time reflecting on why their own policies are failing to connect with so many people. He told me — and later told the audience — that Democrats treat working-class Americans with such condescension it’s like anthropologist Margaret Mead studying what were then called “primitive societies” and telling them, “You need to be more like us, and we can teach you.” A devastating critique.
- Here is another Axe moment: Why are some independent and conservative voters tuning out Trump?” “Having Trump as president is like living next to someone who runs a leaf blower 24/7.”
- Personnel is policy: Gary Cohn spoke about why you need to know the people in power. “Any president gets to make 2,800 appointments — they make them all — but ‘personnel is policy,’ so if you want to know what Trump will do, see who he is appointing.” By the way, expect the USMCA trade negotiator Robert Leitheiser, the very guy who insisted on the six-year trade review, to be a senior member of the Trump team,
- Christopher Liddell of Trump White House 1.0, admitted that Trump didn’t know what he was doing in the first six months of his first term, but that it’s different this time, and that the planning and policies are already well underway. We should expect the first six months of a Trump 2.o to be rapid, decisive, and consequential, as he only has one term. His first target will be China and … his political enemies.
- On defense spending: Mark Carney said Canada has no more excuses and must reach 2% spending on NATO – just weeks before the NATO summit in Washington.
But there was one issue that lurked beneath the surface of cross-border politics and wasn’t raised: Should the demand by many US politicians to close down their southern border be counterbalanced by a much quieter, almost secret demand from people to … open the Canadian border, EU style?
It is not as crazy as it sounds.
GZERO commissioned an exclusive poll from our partners at Data Sciences and asked: Would you support an EU-like arrangement between the US and Canada?
The results are fascinating.
Overall, 53% said they would support such an arrangement – 50% in Canada and 55% in the US, while 33% are neutral. And, get this, only 14% are against the idea. Not surprisingly, it breaks down on party lines: 71% of Biden supporters are far more supportive the idea, while 45% of Trump supporters want it. In Canada, it’s almost an even split: 50% LPC/NDP lime it while on the right, 54% of CPC/PPC support the idea.
The point? The longest undefended border in the world is still very defended, and millions of people would like to cross more easily, work more freely, and trade more efficiently. In 2022, US trade with Mexico was $855 billion, and with China it was $758 billion. With Canada? $908 billion.
So making US-Canada trade more efficient with an EU-style arrangement seems like a no-brainer. Last week, we all celebrated D-Day and the beginning of the fight for peace. So many people died in that bloody sacrifice, yet today, the French and the Germans, who fought two world wars that left millions on both sides slaughtered, can move, trade, and work freely across each other's borders in a way Americans and Canada can only dream about. It is baffling.
If anything is a warning about why closing borders and setting up tariffs is disastrous, look at the UK and Brexit, which has essentially tanked the UK economy. The Brexit-loving Conservatives under Rishi Sunak are now facing a potential political extinction event on par with the Canadian Conservative party of 1993, when Brian Mulroney went from winning the biggest majority in Canadian history to stepping down months before an election his party lost so badly they were left with two lonely seats.
We are heading into a US election and a possible Canadian election where low growth, high inflation, and fear of an unstable world might kill prosperity. Why aren’t the two best friends in the world campaigning on an idea that has proven to be one of Europe’s great drivers of growth? An open border.
We all get it. The politics of the southern border is driving politics at the northern border, but if voters can distinguish between the two, why can’t politicians?
They likely never will. And this may be the most 2024 political moment of all: Ignore the quiet ideas people want, and focus on the noisy fights no one can stand.
Second annual US-Canada Summit focuses on security and trade
Toronto was the place to be this Tuesday for the second annual US-Canada Summit, co-hosted by Eurasia Group and BMO. The event featured a cross-border who’s who of speakers, including former Ambassador to Canada David Jacobson, Under Secretary for Policy at the US Department of Homeland Security Robert Silvers, Delaware Sen. Chris Coons, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, and Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy. Canadian political heavyweights included the premiers of Ontario and Saskatchewan, Doug Ford and Scott Moe, as well as federal cabinet ministers Mélanie Joly and Anita Anand. UN Climate Envoy and former governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney gave the closing keynote, and both the US and Canadian Ambassadors, David Cohen and Kirsten Hillman, shared the stage. A full list of speakers can be viewedhere.
This year’s themes were the economy and security north and south of the 49th parallel. A major focus was the shift from global to regional blocs in international trade. While Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer reassured the crowd that “Globalization is not falling apart. We are not heading to a Cold War here,” the Chairman of Cynosure Group and former Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve Randal Quarles took a more skeptical view. “If you’re a 55-year-old furniture maker from Hickory, North Carolina, globalization is never going to be better for you,” he said. The hollowing out of the working class and its impact on politics featured prominently, from the possibility of a second Trump administration to the recent right-wing victories in European Parliamentary elections.
Geopolitical tensions were also on the menu. Speakers touched on the wars in Ukraine and Israel, with Joly underscoring that US President Joe Biden’s proposal is “fundamental” to resolving the latter conflict. China loomed large in the conversation, with Silvers discussing how the US Department of Homeland Security is securing America’s ports by engaging Japanese firm Mitsui to replace Chinese cranes currently dominating port infrastructure. Ford emphasized that “China has the nickel market cornered. You know where the last safe haven is? Here in Ontario.” The Ontario premier concluded his presentation in his trademark style by giving the crowd his phone number (and no, we’re not going to publish it here).
Several speakers emphasized the need for energy security, including securing the supply chain for critical minerals necessary to build EVs. According to Dunleavy, as the world order shifts from a globalist to a regionalist perspective, North America can prosper by securing both its domestic supply and transformation. Moe emphasized that “If we get our energy security, we’ll have our food security, we’ll have our national security. But it starts with energy security.”
Finally, speakers discussed the post-COVID employment landscape and the impact of AI. Jonas Prising, chairman and CEO of ManpowerGroup, said that remote work is here to stay for the world’s knowledge workers. Eurasia Group released a new survey, which found that when asked about job automation, 17% of respondents believe almost all or most of their work could be done by machines, 28% say some of it, and 31% think not very much or almost none. The remaining 24% reported that they do not have a job.
Carney concluded the conference by underscoring the need for an inclusive economy and the importance of a growth mindset, particularly in Canada. “We need to build an economy for all Canadians. We can’t redistribute what we don’t have. We have less to spend because we’ve become less productive.”
Keeping the trains running on time was GZERO Publisher Evan Solomon, who served as event MC while Eurasia Group Advisors Gerald Butts and John Baird and Director Shari Freidman moderated several panels. And in true Canadian form, hockey was a running theme for the day, starting with BMO CEO Darryl White citing the Gordie Howe Bridge as a testament to the strength of the Canada-US trade relationship, and finishing up with Carney wishing the Oilers good luck in the Stanley Cup finals. Based on the way they played last night, they’ll be needing it.
Should Canada give three F’s?
You’re leaving your role as president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce after 17 years, which has been a transformative time. What is the biggest economic challenge facing Canada's trade with the US?
Perrin: The politics of trade has undergone a sea change in the US under the last two presidents. Previous presidents, from Ronald Reagan on, viewed America's interactions in the global economy as an opportunity to foster American prosperity, and they saw an integrated North American economy as a source of strength. More recently, however, US politicians have started to turn inward, increasingly viewing their country as a victim, and not as the primary beneficiary of international engagement. This change has led them to increasingly align themselves with domestic protectionists who want to build economic walls along the US border.
Unfortunately, this turn inward has coincided with a complacency here in Canada about our most important bilateral relationship. Even the best of friends can't afford to take each other for granted, or they will soon drift apart.
As Canada's relationship with the US has moved from being strategic to being transactional, American leaders are increasingly looking at each issue as a standalone, and they are making their decisions, not on what is in America's long-term best interest, but on where they can find immediate political advantage at home.
We need to rebuild that strategic relationship. It's vital for Canada to be seen as bringing solutions to the major problems confronting the United States, as opposed to simply pleading to be exempted from the latest punitive measure. We need to demonstrate, both in Washington and far away from it that Canada should be treated not as a problem, but as a partner.
Perrin Beatty, outgoing president and CEO of Canadian Chamber of Commerce. REUTERS/Rebecca Cook
You recently said: “Canada is increasingly being viewed by our partners in the region as a well-meaning but unserious player on the international stage." In what ways has Canada become an "unserious player," and what needs to happen to change that reputation?
Perrin: Unfortunately, we have come to see ourselves as a moral superpower whose job is to tell everyone else what they are doing wrong. And we expect them to be grateful to us for it. Too often, we are driven more by a desire for good feelings than for good results. In contrast, other countries are both faster-moving and more engaged in the issues their interlocutors consider most important. The consequence is that, where the US and other countries used to ask, “How do we get the Canadians involved?” their question is now, “Should we inform the Canadians?” The fact that we learned about the AUKUS agreement at the same time as everyone else is just one example.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine two years ago should have been seen by Canada as world-changing, and our response should have been both meaningful and swift, with us marshaling what we have to offer in defense of the democracies. For example, Canada has an abundance of the “three F’s” – food, fuel, and fertilizer – and critical minerals that are essential to global stability. What we lack is the infrastructure, the vision, and the will to bring them to global markets to give countries an alternative to sending dollars to despots. This could be Canada's moment, but only if we are prepared to seize it.
You were a former defense minister under Mr. Mulroney, so you know about dealing with a dangerous world. But now, everyone is looking at the impact of the US election. Are we headed into a period of instability, conflict, and the dismantling of both trade and defense alliances that have been built since World War II?
Perrin: The problems we face, from global poverty to pandemics to wars to global climate change, all require an effective, coordinated international response. Instead of that, we are witnessing countries turning inward on themselves, as well as the increasing ineffectiveness of global institutions like the UN, the World Trade Organization, and the WHO in actually resolving issues that go to our very survival.
When I was privileged to be in government, there was a sense that, when the leaders of the G7 – leaders who included Reagan, Thatcher, Mitterrand, Kohl, and Mulroney – came together, problems would be resolved. Today, when international meetings take place, you get the feeling that our problems are bigger than our leaders. In fairness, the world is a much more complex and dangerous place today, but that's precisely why we need leaders whose vision, determination, and morality are up to the challenge. As your question suggests, we're at a crossroads that will determine whether we will be able to maintain the institutions and strategies that have guaranteed democracy, peace, and prosperity since the Second World War. The stakes have never been higher.
AI is both a transformative opportunity and a destabilizing threat. What is your view of how will impact business?
Perrin: Like businesses the world over, Canadian businesses will be transformed either for the better or for the worse by AI. AI, like the nuclear genie, can't be put back into the bottle. Our challenge is first to understand it, then to decide how to mitigate its potential bad effects, and then to determine how to unleash its positive aspects. In this instance, the technology is developing at a pace that far outstrips our capacity to understand it and manage it well. However, calls to initiate some sort of a standstill until we have thought these things through are naïve and unworkable; all that would happen is that the unscrupulous players would widen their lead.
The challenge for Canadian policymakers is how to successfully work with others on coordinated policies that limit the dangerous aspects of AI without denying its benefits to our industry and our society.
If there is a second Trump Presidency, what should Canada expect from the 2026 review/renegotiation of USMCA trade deal?
Perrin: Many Canadians expected that when Joe Biden became president, he would reverse the Trump protectionist measures. However, that assumption overlooked the fact that, in the past, Republicans were more in favor of free trade, while Democrats were more protectionist. In fact, the Biden administration has actually deepened some of the protectionist policies initiated by Donald Trump.
The danger is that the election will be a contest between two candidates trying to demonstrate who is more protectionist. Canadians must respect the right of US voters to determine their own government, just as we would insist on the Americans respecting our rights, but we need to demonstrate that it is in Americans' self-interest to foster a stronger relationship with their closest neighbor and best friend. And we must do that, not by special pleading, but by coming up with solutions to problems.
Finally, what is the best-case scenario for the US-Canada relationship in terms of economic prosperity and security? Is there a way to slalom through the protectionism, AI disruptions, political polarization, climate challenges, and conflicts and see a time of increased joint prosperity?
Perrin: The best-case scenario is that we restore a strategic partnership with the world's greatest superpower. We've let the relationship slide for too long, and it won't be easy to regain that position. But I believe it can be done if we muster the vision and the will to make it happen.
Last thing: You worked for Brian Mulroney, who recently passed away. He was the architect of the North American Free Trade Agreement and worked closely with Ronald Reagan. What lesson can today’s leaders learn from that time?
Perrin: As Canadians commemorate Brian Mulroney, our leaders should ask what they can learn from Canada's last great transformative prime minister. Brian Mulroney understood that governments don't create jobs and prosperity, businesses do. He also knew that the best way to solve problems was not to shut people out but to bring them in.
It's impossible to say exactly what policies a different government would follow, but what we do know is that our economy and our country are under severe strain today. The leader history will remember best will be the one who brings people together again in what remains the most fortunate country on the face of the globe.
Team Canada, Part Deux
Justin Trudeau’s “Team Canada” ventured south this past week to remind Americans that their trade relationship with the Great White North is vital. The new effort was announced by Trudeau in January, signaling a determination to prepare for the outcome of this year’s presidential election. His government, you’ll recall, was criticized in 2016 for being unprepared for Donald Trump’s win. But the Team Canada approach to NAFTA renegotiation was widely seen as a success since it led to the USMCA in 2020, which will be reviewed by all the parties in 2026.
The indefatigable Innovation Minister François-Philippe Champagne was accompanied on his weeklong trip by Mary Ng, minister of international trade, and Kirsten Hillman, Canada’s ambassador to the US. They traveled to Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, and Washington, DC, meeting with politicians and talking about the importance of cross-border supply chains.
Americans are listening, Champagne said, “because it’s about jobs, millions of jobs.”
Still, the prospect of a renewed trade war with the United States remains worrying for Canada, and Trudeau’s team is no doubt hoping that Biden’s poll numbers continue inching north.