This is our fourth article in a series that examines Canada and US bilateral relations from a perspective of national interest, security and defence, in a changed and changing world order.
Our first three pieces can be accessed below.
This piece further expands on the intersection of economic prosperity, security and defence. We posit that these issues cannot be divorced from each other nor dealt with effectively in isolation.
But first, what has changed?
Putting aside, at least for now, the abrasive, irritating, big stick diplomacy of the current Trump Administration towards many countries addressing a multitude of issues, the USA is not acting ‘out of the blue’. The world has changed and the USA is behaving and (re)acting differently.
Canada, and many other countries, have not (yet). These global changes and the ensuing repercussions are such that there is no quick, easy fix.
The consequences of all this include an impact on countries’ ability to freely govern themselves, potentially significant effects on trade, and growing questions on still unclear political and economic alliances, blocks and configurations.
The new reality that the Trump Administration is admittedly facing can be summarized as follows:
The Rules-Based International Order (RBIO) is broken and is no longer sustainable. The USA wants out of the old RBIO, wants to establish a new one, or at best to reshape the old one to reflect better its national interests. The breakdown of the RBIO has economic as well as security and defence implications. These consequences add pressures to existing alliances and partnerships.
President Trump is not just focused on Canada. His administration is equally challenging the Europeans (and others) to awaken and to face a different reality – one with new and emerging threats, be they traditional, hybrid, and non-traditional military threats, the explosion of new technologies, increasing economic pressure, global migration, informational warfare, climate disasters, criminality, illegal drug trade, and a host of other concerns. Canada and most Europeans are viewed by the Trump Administration – perhaps justifiably – as defence laggards. This creates strains on the North Atlantic relations, beyond security and defence. Uncle Sam will not continue to slip further into being Uncle ‘Sucker’ by disproportionately spending to defend the other members of the NATO alliance.
The USA is focused on its national interests and will realign itself based on these interests, potentially diminishing collaboration with traditional allies, while seeking and pursuing different economic and strategic opportunities. Inherent in the ‘national interest’, is an American desire to advance its economic prosperity, which is strongly linked to security and defence concerns. That economic aspect adds to the (perceived or real) list of problems and irritants that the USA is working to ‘correct’. And this connection of the economy, security and defence ties the border and tariff irritants with President Trump’s strategy for a more secure, stronger and prosperous USA under a broader continental umbrella.
The USA is repositioning (perhaps, imposing) its leadership towards a more secure, stronger and prosperous North America. And this ‘imposition’ by the Trump Administration – including tariff threats and questions of statehood – is clearly a major problem for Canada, but also a wake-up call and a potential opportunity. We assess that the current tariff retaliatory measures- while necessary because Canada did not start the first tariff salvo – will hurt both sides, and especially Canada. But we see the tariff tiff more as a result of something bigger. Could the tariffs be President Trump awakening Canadians to the consequence of Canada’s inability to secure and defend its vast territory from growing external threats, and Canada’s insufficient contribution to the NATO military alliance? (As food for thought, would a truly “secure” Canada be more resistant to external threats, whatever form they take?
With this background in mind, we posit that the Trumpian strategy is not one of isolationism, but one of recalibration with the rest of the world, putting America’s national interests at the centre of the strategy, followed by strengthening the North American pillar, while still supporting the European pillar of NATO (if the Europeans increase their own defence posture).
Consequently, the unfolding story is bigger than Canada, and bigger than sanctions and tariffs.
The Canadian challenge then is how to navigate through these complex and complicated issues, and what opportunities and obligations might emerge for Canada.
We argue that Canada needs to step up and address its national security and defence commitments in a deliberate and determined strategy. Absent such a strategy, we posit that President Trump will continue to stir the pot until Canada steps up. He will do this for two main reasons:
- He knows that Canada is in a tenuous federal political situation for now and the foreseeable future, without a strong leader (or a group of leaders) to stand up to his demands. This seems to encourage President Trump to agitate Canadians and set further negotiations to tilt in his favour.
- Canada’s resources and its geo-strategic position are too important to the USA and therefore cannot be ignored. The Trump Administration’s strategy is to make America and the continent more secure, stronger and economically more prosperous, while keeping foes out of North America (Russia, China, and a mix of hybrid ways of waging war or competing against us).
If one were to accept the above as the new reality, what are Canada’s choices? Is it realistic for Canada to divorce itself, economically and from a security and defence perspective, from its neighbour? How will Canada reconcile its sovereignty in a reconfiguration of the North American continent, and especially the protection of its Arctic and its outer perimeter? Should Canada diversify its own interests with other countries and partners? To what extent and how? How quickly can Canada re-align its internal structures to strengthen its economic self-reliance and prosperity?
It is not our intent to address all of these complex questions, but we want to propose a plausible way forward, one that connects the dots between security and defence, and economic prosperity for Canada.
To tie the economic, security and defence challenges we need to go back to the RBIO discussion and the (admitted) inability by the USA to protect the RBIO (or to lead the defence of the RBIO) on behalf of the community of nations.
Since the end of the Second World War, the USA was a principal defender of the RBIO because it was in its best interest. And it did this by its approach to security and defence, to alliances and to collective action (including a security guarantee for like-minded countries). Because the USA believes that protecting the RBIO is no longer in their interest, countries are going to need to act in their own interests, economically and from a security and defence perspective. It is likely that countries will again act together collectively but, to be part of that club, one will need to contribute in substantive and meaningful ways. Therefore, Canada will need to get serious about its security and defence (and its economy). (Parenthetically, we hope that revised and/or new peaceful alliances do emerge and develop, as this might mitigate the disastrous mistrust between and among brutal despots that gave rise to the isolationism and complacency that took hold during the period prior to the Second World War.)
Strategically, Canada and the United States could attempt to lower the heat on tariffs and border issues by working together, as sovereign states, to address the outer perimeter and the approaches to the North American continent, by investing in a renewed NORAD, through a security and defence sharing agreement and by the protection of the Arctic. This strategy would shift focus from the internal border and tariff issues to the bigger problems facing both countries emanating from the ‘outer’ border (illegal immigration, drugs, criminality, economic exploitation, hybrid and potentially traditional military threats, interference with our domestic electoral process, space, cyber, etc). A strategic focus on the threats to the North American outer border and on what it takes to protect ourselves would create a better chance for a renewed partnership with the USA, while respecting each other’s sovereignty.
And as we have discussed in our previous articles Canada needs to establish a national vision and a 21st century national security strategy, that strengthens our ability to govern ourselves, make Canada prosperous and (re)gain respect from allies and potential foes.
At this crucial time, Canada has a precarious federal government, lacks strong central leadership, is struggling with problematic provincial barriers, and sees a population trying to find its footing. Yes, it is difficult to see through the fog of these perilous, uncertain times, but try we must!
This is the existential challenge for a new Canadian Government.
Further reading:
