Big Stick Diplomacy, Security of North America, and the National Interest: Wither the USA-Canada Relationship?

Tony Battista & Christopher Coates

In our first article on Canada-USA relations, titled, “The Deal: Making America Respect Canada Again (MARCA)”, we examined this bilateral relationship through its functional and interest-based lenses, making the case that the relationship, while at times stressful, endured and brought significant prosperity to both countries, while deepening the bilateral relationship and avoiding violent conflict between them. We argued that it is in their mutual interest to continue embracing a ‘functional approach’ to make things work even better for both.

In this article we argue further that the interest-based approach is even more important and certain strategic issues need to be urgently and seriously addressed on a priority basis by the Canadian government in this new era of ‘big stick diplomacy’ and major global turbulence.

In the shorter term, as Canada navigates a new reality, there will be economic and social pain, and friction. Canadian unity is essential to address tough decisions that have been avoided for too long – on the economy, on foreign policy, on security and defence, on infrastructure and productivity, on border issues, and immigration – in favour of pursuing an agenda focused on the environment and a socially-biased ideology and initiatives.

To be sure, environmental programs and social progress are important and significant, but they seem to have been pursued at the exclusion of, or at least prioritized over, other matters that are of critical importance for Canada, including its economy and relations with the USA. A balance was absent, and that approach has taken Canadians a good distance down a path that is increasingly difficult to change, or recover from, as the needs become greater, the costs larger and the decisions more difficult, compounded by regional, divisive strains within the Canadian federation.

During his 30 minutes inauguration address on January 20th, 2025, and the follow-on signing of dozens of Executive Orders, President Trump made good on many of his campaign promises. Absent from these was any specific mention of Canada. To be sure, he did mention the threat of tariffs against those countries that have a trade surplus with the USA, and later that day from the Oval Office, he did say that a 25% tariff would be levied against Canada on 1 February. It remains unclear at the time of writing this article when the 1 February announcement would take effect and if there will be any exception to the list of goods from Canada. To add a further measure of uncertainty, one of the President’s Executive Orders directed the various internal departments and agencies to examine all trade agreements, including the ones with Canada, and report back by 1 April 2025. So, while there is some temporary reprieve or perhaps hesitancy on the part of President Trump, tariffs seem to be coming Canada’s way sooner or later. The extend, severity and length of these tariffs remain uncertain, and hopefully subject to further consideration and discussion on both sides of the border.

So, what should Canada (or more specifically the Canadian government) do on a priority basis?

Before delving into this question, we would like to add some context, largely because of recent comments from the new Trump administration.

We think a glimpse and perhaps a certain clarity about the incoming Trump Administration’s strategic intent can be gleaned from statements made by Marco Rubio during his confirmation hearings for Secretary of State. He said it was a “dangerous delusion” to believe “that all mankind was destined to abandon national sovereignty and national identity” to “instead become citizens of the world.”

Rubio went on to say: “The postwar global order is not just obsolete—it is now a weapon being used against us.”

These are powerful statements that need serious attention. If we take Secretary of State Rubio’s assertion at face value, the Trump Administration sees the Rules-Based International Order (RBIO) as detrimental to the USA and its national interests, and that further application of the current RBIO is an Achilles heel for the USA. Secretary Rubio went further in his comments, repeatedly indicating that US policy would be based on US interests and specified that those would be based on making America safer, making America stronger and making America more prosperous. Trump has previously demonstrated an aversion to alliances and a decidedly non-internationalist bias. Considering his remarks about US expansionism in this inauguration address, along with the comments about the Panama Canal, Greenland, and continued references to Canadian statehood, this reflects a more “regional approach” than previous administrations. Whether there is some sort of renewed Manifest Destiny at play or not, the attention of the US is clearly on a safer and stronger US in this hemisphere.

If this is the Trumpian grand strategy, then what of Canada? Should we distance ourselves from such a strategy? How do we account for geography and the many ‘ties that have bound us’ to the USA for a long time? What are the Canadian interests in relation to a US administration focussed on creating a safer and stronger region? Are there Canadian interests that align with a US focus on a safer and stronger region? Do the Canadian interests bring us closer to or further from the US, and how would these impact Canadian ties to other countries, blocks, or regions?

If President Trump stays the course with his threat of imposing tariffs on Canada (25% across the board or specific goods), the current Canadian government has stated that ‘everything is on the table’ as part of a tariff retaliation strategy. But what does this mean and how credible is it? Should everything be on the table? Or should Canada develop a more discriminating approach to retaliation and focus on selective tariff measures that minimize the impact on the Canadian economy and maximize the impact on the USA (especially damaging for certain States)?

Our understanding is that a tariff war forced on Canada by the Trump Administration, in whatever form – will almost certainly hurt both sides economically, and generate emotional and diplomatic reactions, which could result in dissensions and fractures among and between Canadian Provinces and American States. Once this Pandora’s box is opened, the consequences on both sides of the border will be hard to assess, but it is hard to imagine how such an approach benefits either side, and certainly not for Canada, with so much at stake. (Parenthetically, our sense, not being economists, is that with an economy 1/10th of the US (or less), and with a greater fraction of our trade oriented towards the US than the US towards Canada, we have far more to lose in a tariff war than does the US. We should avoid such an approach, if possible.)

So, while addressing President Trump’s threat to impose punishing tariffs on Canada is a pressing matter, Canadian policymakers need to put the possible tariff tit-for-tat in perspective as it will likely lead to a lose-lose outcome.

Considering a US administration focused on making America safer and stronger, we assess the greater interests for Canada are related to the strengthening of Canadian security and defence, border and immigration, access to and control of the vast Arctic territory and its resources. These responsibilities are strategic interests that require both immediate and sustained action by the Canadian Government for several crucially important reasons. Firstly, Canada has not paid enough attention to these requirements, thus weakening Canadian sovereignty by opening potential doors for foreign interference and exploitation. Secondly, urgently addressing regional defence and security in a serious manner by the Canadian Government will lead to regaining respect and credibility by the Trump Administration, as well as other allies and partners. Thirdly, polls have shown that these issues will likely be supported by a majority of Canadians, and by the governments of every province and territory, thus strengthening unity across the land. Fourthly, affording sufficient attention and resources to address these needs will reinforce Canadian sovereignty over its vast territory and resources. And fifth, addressing these issues will contribute significantly to a stronger, self-sufficient Canada, promoting respect between neighbours in a more secure and prosperous North American continent.

Share the article :

Do you want to respond to this piece?

Submit and article. Find out how, here:

Cookies

In order to personalize your user experience, CDA Institute uses strictly necessary cookies and similar technologies to operate this site. See details here.