FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

As a Canadian, How Are We Supposed to React to Donald Trump?

The border treaty Donald Trump recently referred to was established in 1908 and finalized the international boundary between Canada, then a British dominion, and the U.S.  Trump also mentioned revisiting the sharing of lakes and rivers between the two nations, which is regulated by a number of treaties.  For years, both Canada and the U.S. have shared responsibility and resources in managing border security and environmental concerns surrounding the Great Lakes in particular.  For example, the Canada-United States Air Quality Agreement signed by Canada and the U.S. in 1991 to address transboundary air pollution leading to acid rain.  Both countries agreed to reduce emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, the primary precursors to acid rain, and to work together on acid rain-related scientific and technical cooperation.  The Ozone Annex was added to the Agreement in 2000 to address transboundary air pollution leading to high ambient levels of ground-level ozone, a major component of smog.  One result was that, as of 2020, emissions of sulphur dioxide in Canada and the U.S. decreased by 78% and 92%, respectively, from 1990 emission levels.  This preserved our water quality and in turn the health of our fish stocks in shared waters and in general.

As far as border security is concerned, this is a red herring put out there by Donald Trump.  As it stands, for sometime now, only less than one percent of the fentanyl comes across the border from Canada, as per the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.  Under the other hand, the Royal Canadian Mounted Policy (RCMP) estimates that over 80% of all guns used in violent crimes in Canada originate in the U.S.

According to the New York Times (March 7, 2025), Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick stated that Trump wants to abandon our treaties and he wants to:

  • eject Canada out of an intelligence-sharing group known as the Five Eyes that also includes Britain, Australia and New Zealand,
  • tear up the Great Lakes agreements and conventions between the two nations that lay out how they share and manage Lakes Superior, Huron, Erie and Ontario, and
  • review and reconsider military cooperation between the two countries, particularly the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD).

We already know that Trump is interested in having access to Canada’s abundance of critical mineral rights as noted in my previous blog of February 17, 2005: Trump’s Trade Policy Appears to be Directed at Securing Critical Mineral Rights | FROLITICKS

With his recent flip flopping on the proposed 25 percent tariffs against all Canadian exports to the U.S., it’s hard to get a reading on where Trump’s next move will go.  All that his administration is doing is creating a hell of a lot of global and economic uncertainty.  His expectation that Canadians would be cow towing to his wishes is way off.  If anything, he has generated an immense amount of Canadian pride across this country.  Canadians see these attacks on our sovereignty as an insult, especially from a nation that was a trusted friend and ally.  All in all, it’s difficult to know exactly what Trump’s expectations are!  Just how are Canadians supposed to react differently?  Your guess is as good as mine!

Leave a comment »

Canada Should Be Thanking President Trump For His Proclaimed Trade War!

There is no point in analyzing what Donald Trump’s executive orders are doing to shake up the government in Washington, particularly since there are more than enough American observers to undertake this analysis.  Instead, we in Canada can best focus on Trump’s continuing attacks on Canada’s sovereignty and its current trade relations with the U.S.  Trump’s proposed imposition of an across the board (except for oil and natural gas) 25% tariff on Canadian imports to the U.S. is seen as a blatant insult to the vast majority of Canadians.  After decades of free trade arrangements between both countries, such a tariff imposition would seriously alter the current relations both economically and politically.  The threat has created an outrage among Canadians that I have never seen in my lifetime.  In addition, there is little doubt that a trade war would economically hurt both Canadians and Americans alike.  It would certainly lead to greater inflationary pressures in both countries, something that the Trump Republicans had campaigned to control.

President and CEO of the Public Policy Forum, Inez Jabalpurwala, recently stated: “We must seize this moment to take decisive action to shape a stronger, more resilient and innovative energy-secure economy, as well as a united Canada.  It is incumbent upon us to stimulate economic growth, advance clean technology, expand our markets, remove internal trade barriers and get projects built.”  What we are seeing are campaigns across Canada to promote “Buy Canada” efforts by consumers whenever there are Canadian-made alternatives to imported American products.  In addition, the situation has convinced provincial premiers to seriously find ways to reduce or eliminate any inter-provincial trade barriers.  This has been something that the provinces have not really taking up earnestly until now.  By encouraging greater inter-provincial trade, Canadian business associations believe that it could result in billions of additional dollars for provincial economies.  Such an initiative, once implemented, would also lead to greater internal investment and the expansion and growth of Canadian companies throughout the country.  Even Canadian municipalities that purchase American products and contract with American companies for services are now examining local and Canadian alternatives. 

What the Trump administration has done is to galvanize Canadian governments, businesses and consumers to move to being less dependent on our southern neighbour for many products and services.  Past trading arrangements led to greater integration of and prosperity for both of our economies, especially in relation to the automotive industry, mining and the energy sectors.  Canada is a trading nation, particularly given its abundance of natural resources which make up the largest amount of its exports to the U.S. and other countries.  The current situation has again encouraged Canada to look more closely to further opening up its trade with other countries, including those in the European Union and Southeast Asia.  This move is rapidly gathering momentum and will no doubt increase regardless of Trump’s possible change of mind when it comes to the proposed tariffs.  The past trust of Canadians has been severely damaged, and a new reality of the predictable disintegration of our common markets has surfaced.

For this, we must thank Donald Trump!  His impertinent declarations that Canada should become the 51rst state have resulted in an expected backlash among Canadians.  It has unified the country as never witnessed before, even what happened during Quebec’s failed separation initiatives during the 1970s.  Canadians still view ordinary Americans as their friends and allies, but will not stand for Trump’s blatant “bullying” tactics as portrayed by numerous Canadian spokespersons.  Canadians, while normally seen as a polite people, are expressing their disappointment and anger with the U.S. administration and its supporters in multiple ways.  I suspect that they will continue to do so as long as Trump is in power and continues to attack our sovereignty.

Leave a comment »

Once Again the Ugly American Raises His Head

In 1958, a political novel entitled “The Ugly American”, written by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer, depicted the failures of the U.S. diplomatic corps in Southeast Asia. The bestseller, which naturally I read at the time with great interest, has remained continuously in print and is one of the most influential American political novels.  Shortly after, in July 1959 the first U.S. soldiers were killed in South Vietnam when guerrillas raided their living quarters near Saigon.  After, a decades’ long war began, with many years of anti-war protests within the U.S. In April 1975, with the Fall of Saigon, U.S. Marine and Air Force helicopters transported more than 1,000 American civilians and nearly 7,000 South Vietnamese refugees from Saigon in an 18-hour mass evacuation effort.  Remember that the Vietnam conflict was never actually declared a “war” by Congress, but was instead begun through a presidential “executive statement”.  Congress simply controlled the purse strings for this tragic conflict which ended with thousands of American deaths and even many more injuries.  Sounds familiar?

Today, with the presidential inauguration of one Donald Trump, the ugly American has once again raised his head.  Only this time, he is turning his back on his allies and major trading partners: Canada, Mexico and more likely others.  Trump’s administration appears to want a trade war: a war which will hurt several economies, including that of the U.S., and consumers in both the U.S. and the affected countries.  The great self-declared “peace maker” has suggested that the U.S. will take back the Panama Canal, perhaps by military force.  He has hinted that he will acquire Greenland through the use of economic force against Denmark, a NATO ally.  He has also installed his billionaire friends in numerous key ambassador posts in Europe.  His so-called advisor Elon Musk has personally attacked the policies of several current European countries and has supported far-right populist movements.  This has created great consternation among European leaders, and rightly so.

Off-the-cuff comments by Trump suggesting that he could force Canada to become part of the U.S., primarily by economic force, has stirred up national sentiments among Canadians who view his position as being totally absurd.  If this is how one treats one’s friends, imagine how one will treat one’s enemies! 

Next, there’s the very apparent tone in Trump’s remarks that appear to suggest a return to American isolation when it comes to the international arena.  However we live in a world which is more global than ever before, where many of the today’s major issues instantaneously affect each country.  For example, one appears to have forgotten the fact that we lived through a global pandemic, wherein the World Health Organization played a major role in tracking and helping to contain the spread of COVID.  Now, Trump wants to remove the U.S. from the WHO.  We are also living in an era where climate change is real and extends well beyond our borders.  Again, Trump is withdrawing the U.S. from the 2015 Paris Accord on climate change.  President Biden had pledged to boost U.S. climate aid to poor nations to more than $11 billion a year.  This aid would help lesser developed countries cope with the environmental and economic consequences of climate change given that natural disasters are expected to escalate.  These moves towards American isolation appear to be just the beginning given Trump’s past threats against NATO and U.S. support for aid programs run by the United Nations.

The “America First” policies will mean that other countries, including U.S. allies, will have to cope with numerous destructive economic, military, social and political initiatives in the next four years.  One can only hope that the damage can be contained in an apparent world where countries are becoming increasingly driven by perceived domestic self interests.  Canada is but one country in particular that unfortunately is caught up in Trump’s stated move to so-called “Manifest Destiny”.  The notion of annexing Canada echoes the 19th-century belief in Manifest Destiny, a concept that symbolized America’s past ambition to expand its territory and influence.  However, I am certain that Canadians may have something to say about this ideology.

Leave a comment »

Elon Musk May Be More Dangerous Than Trump

From a Canadian perspective, president-elect Donald Trump’s recent declarations about Canada’s sovereignty and the imposition of a 25% tariff on the country’s imports are bad enough.  What is even more worrisome is the rise of Elon Musk’s influence in Trump’s circles.  During the election, all of Musk’s posts traveled further and resounded more widely than ever. Mr. Musk’s X account began to dominate the platform, effectively making him the host of his own social media site.  More recently, he has a perch as Trump’s apparent right-hand man, even weighing in on his possible Cabinet choices and joining his conversations with global leaders.  One has to wonder what the role of J.D. Vance will be?

Internationally, Musk has begun an on-line and in-person campaign to try to influence foreign political parties’ policies.  Most notably, he has posted support for the policies of far-right and extremist figures in Europe, criticizing for example the current governments of Britain and Germany.  Recently, Musk has turned his attention to the northern neighbor, praising an interview with Pierre Poilievre, a populist firebrand who leads Canada’s Conservative Party and is expected be the country’s next Prime Minister.  In addition, his financial influence is everywhere because of his companies and investments in the U.S. and Europe.  In some instances, this has led to questions about potential conflicts of interest in light of his many business interests, especially in any future Trump administration.  For example, he once again in a tweet raised Britain’s Online Safety Act which will take effect in March 2025.  The British law requires social media companies like X to prevent children from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content and to give adults more control over what they want to see online.  Companies that run afoul of the law can face fines of up to 10 percent of their global revenue.

Experiences with Trump’s past foreign policies had been troublesome, especially when it comes to NATO, the Middle East and relations with Canada and Mexico.  The involvement of Elon Musk in positioning the next president with respect to foreign policies is a major concern.  Originally, Trump appeared to want Musk to concentrate primarily on improving efficiencies and policies within federal departments and agencies, obviously leading to potential reductions in services, employees and regulations.  Now, reports are indicating that Musk is attempting to also influence Trump’s future foreign policies, including attempts to have an impact on the domestic politics of several European countries and Canada.  Needless-to-say, American interference in other countries’ governance will not be appreciated by their current governments.

The U.S. has been very vocal about any covert foreign interference in its governance and its elections, and rightly so.  Although Elon Musk is not an elected official at this time, he is expected to be part of Trump’s administration in some official advisory capacity.  Any attempt by Musk to influence or represent the foreign policy of the next administration is totally inappropriate.  That is the role of the Secretary of State.  What is especially dangerous is the opportunity presented to Musk to influence the future president on foreign matters by having his ear on a daily basis.  If I were the next Secretary of State, I’d be very concerned.  It’s one thing for Musk to involve himself in U.S. governance and domestic matters, it’s a whole other concern if he attempts to do so in matters related to foreign affairs and dealings with America’s allies!

Leave a comment »

What Does Next Year Have In Store For Canada-U.S. Relations?

Well, if the end of this year is any indication, 2025 is going to be a tough year for Canada-U.S. relations.  Even before he is sworn in as the next president, Donald Trump has alright stirred up a hornets nest with off the cuff statements aimed at Canada.  Firstly, he warns the Canadian government that he intends to impose 25 percent tariffs on Canadian goods if Canada does not reduce the flow of migrants and fentanyl into the U.S.  Such a move of course could be devastating for Canada, whose economy depends heavily on exports to the U.S.which is its largest trading partner.  However, Trump himself has suggested that the tariff plan may have less to do with border security than with his desire to eliminate the $50 billion trade deficit with Canada.  Interesting, given the fact that oil and gas exports from Canada account for most of that trade imbalance.  Without them, the U.S. generally has a trade surplus with Canada.  This would greatly impact the province of Alberta which supplies the U.S. with the bulk of crude oil and represents a safe, cheaper and more accessible source for Americans.  Therefore, the impact on the U.S. could mean higher costs for fuels.

Nevertheless, both federal and provincial governments in Canada hit the panic button.  Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was forced to meet with the provincial premiers to discuss how to positively react to Trump, especially as it pertains to the issue of border security.  By the way, the issue of border security has a lot more to do with the border between Mexico and the U.S. That southern border has been a far worst scenario when it comes to illegal border crossings and drug smuggling.  The subsequent immediate result was the dinner Trudeau had with Trump at Mar-a-Lago over the Thanksgiving weekend, as well as telephone conversations between members of Trudeau’s cabinet and Thomas D. Homan, Trump’s designated border czar.  Next, was a follow-up by two top Canadian ministers, Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly and Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc.  They met on December 27th with members of Trump’s circle in Florida about a planned 1.3 billion Canadian dollars’ worth of a package of proposed new border security measures.

Whether the Canadian government’s preemptive moves will satisfy Trump is anyone’s guess?  I would suggest that it won’t and he will continue to pursue the matter as part of trade negotiations with Canada once he is in office.  Meanwhile, Trump is clearly aware that Trudeau’s minority government is now politically in trouble.  There is little doubt that the opposition parties intend to introduce a non-confidence vote possibly by the end of January after parliament re-adjourns after the holidays.  This would then result in an election being called early in the New Year, with a predicted majority win by the Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre.  Whether Trudeau will lead the Liberal Party once more is still up in the air given his current unpopularity among the electorate.

This will place a lot of perceived difficulties for Poilievre’s Conservatives on this and other potential issues in the face of President Trump’s administration.  It may mean that the next Canadian government will spend a good deal of its time simply reacting and responding to Trump’s demands.  The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), signed in 2018 during Trump’s first term, is up for review in 2026.  Should a Trump administration take a hard-line stance requesting fewer restrictions on American exports to Canada, it could lead to a trade war with the U.S.  Such an outcome will no doubt further damage our relations, and would lead to higher product costs for consumers in both countries.  Due to our size, Canada has to be an export-import country in order to grow and thrive economically.

What makes the future that much more unclear are the irrational and uninformed outbursts of one Donald Trump.  How the next Canadian government will react to his social media musings will be very interesting?  For Canadians, there is little doubt that these will be trying times.  Stay tuned for more of the Donald Trump saga!

Leave a comment »

Why I’m Proud to be Canadian and Not American

Whether in jest or being serious, Donald Trump’s ludicrous assertion that Canada should become the 51rst state is a blatant insult.  He suggested that there are many Canadians who would support the idea.  However, I’m not one!  Instead, I’m quite happy to remain as a Canadian, one whose family immigrated to this country after World War II and made a good life for themselves.  Here’s a few reasons why in a short excerpt.

First, I prefer our parliamentary system of governing over that under the Republic, especially as it pertains to that of electing a president through the antiquated electoral college process.  Even numerous American observers have promoted doing away with the electoral college and simply going with whoever wins the overall popular vote.

Secondly, the manner in which Supreme Court judges are appointed is far more politically influenced than in Canada.  As witnessed in recent years, the Supreme Court’s decisions have unfortunately caused a regression in modern American societal matters, including endorsing the right to bear arms and the overturning of Wade vs Roe.  The latter put a woman’s reproductive rights back a half century or more.  In addition, there is no age limit on the term of Supreme Court judges as is the case in Canada.

Thirdly, Canada, like most industrialized countries in the Western world, has a universal health care system.  Moreover, no one has to mortgage their home in order to pay for their medical expenses.  In the U.S., there is a much more obvious two tier system, one for the rich and the other for the rest of Americans.

Fourthly, Canada does have gun control measures in place.  The possession of guns is not seen as a right, but as a privilege which has strict requirements and does not include handguns except under tight restrictions.  As a result, shootings on a per capita basis involving homicides are very small compared to those in the U.S.  School shootings in Canada are almost unheard of, compared to the U.S. where the nation’s nearly 130,000 schools report gun incidents each year.  In 2020 for example, guns became the leading cause of death among American children under 18.

Fifthly, through its Truth and Reconciliation processes, Canada has formally recognized the injustices perpetrated upon its indigenous population in concrete terms.  In particular, we recognize those injustices involving the history of residential schools, moving to compensate those directly affected and beginning an extensive program of educating and informing Canadians about this terrible period.  Americans are just starting to recognize the tragedies of their indigenous peoples resulting from the use of residential schools as a form of assimilation and the destruction of their culture and languages.

Finally, although some Americans will refer to Canada as a so-called “socialist” state, Canadians have long prided themselves on their entrepreneurial skills and a healthy and thriving market-based economy.  As in the U.S., Canadian governments have long supported the business community and its research and development efforts, particularly as they pertain to new technologies.  Our labour force is as well educated and skilled as any in the world, attracting various forms of direct or indirect foreign investment.  Several thriving Canadian companies, including some of our major banks, are multinational in nature.  For example, over a million Canadians work and live in the U.S., most often because of their sought-after credentials, skills and experience in their respective fields.

Given our smaller size, Canada has to be an exporting nation.  Canada has free trade agreements, not only with the U.S., but also with the European Union, the Americas, and the Pacific Rim
nations in Asia.  Although Canada is considered to be a peaceful nation, Canadians proudly served and died alongside Americans in two World Wars, Korea and more recently Afghanistan.  Canadians are proud to stand up for our democracy and freedoms, much like Americans.  This is why I am more than proud to remain being Canadian.


Leave a comment »

Concerns Over Refugee Flows Into the U.S. Are Decades in the Making

The current issues surrounding the influx of refugees over the Mexican-U.S. border have been decades in the making.  It doesn’t matter whether it was a Democratic or Republican administration, American policies and initiatives have created the past and current issues surrounding refugees and so-called illegals, particularly from Central American countries.  Anyone who would like to examine an excellent historical accounting of these policies should read a 2024 book by Jonathan Blitzer entitled: “Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here (The United States, Central America, and The Making of a Crisis)”.  Mr. Blitzer is a well known staff writer at The New Yorker.  He describes not only past U.S. policies supporting autocrats and military regimes in countries such as El Salvador and Guatemala, but he also relates stories which put a face on several migrants.

He noted as follows: “From the 1980s to the early 2000s, the story of the southern border was about the United States and Mexico.  At the time, migrants entering the US tended to be single Mexican men looking for work.  But around 2014, a different population started to arrive on a scale Americans had never before seen.  These were children and families from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras — traveling north to seek asylum.  In just about every respect, the US was unprepared for this shift.”

Notably, each of the last three American presidents have had to deal with a major humanitarian emergency at the border, while also deepening involvement in two major civil wars in Central America, often in the name of fighting communism as alluded to by President Ronald Reagan back in the early 1980s.  While rebels in these countries were fighting for people against authoritarian regimes, social injustice and military atrocities, the U.S. was backing those same regimes through military aid and covert operations carried out by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).  Government led violence and massacres became common place, forcing many families and individuals to flee these countries.

Today, one can add Venezuela to the list as the most recent migrants are from that single country.  Many Venezuelans had expected to join large existing communities of their compatriots in places such as Florida and Texas.  How did the governors of some states react to this latest influx?  They simply began a program of busing or flying recent migrants to cities such as New York, Washington, Chicago and Philadelphia.  Interestingly, the destinations were cities run by Democrats who supported the Biden administration’s more open immigration policy. Soon, some neighbourhoods in those cities started looking like Texas border towns.

As reported recently by The New York Times, in two years Texas alone bused more than 119,000 people to Democrat-led cities, shifting both migration patterns and the debate over immigration.  The list of targeted cities apparently just keeps expanding.  As noted, Texas governor Greg Abbott took what otherwise might have been the slow diffusion of migrants from the border to cities and towns across the U.S., and directed it at just a few places.  The White House called it a “political stunt.”  Such expensive state policies of course do nothing to address the real issues as to why people are fleeing these countries in the first place.  The U.S. has to better address the realities of violence, poverty, cartels and the drug trade, and the inability of Mexico itself to deal with the migrant problem, both economically and politically.  The detrimental impact of climate change will only add to the nature of agricultural and industrial decline in that part of the Third World.

What is most disconcerting is that under former President Trump, parents and their children were deliberately split up.  Unfortunately, hundreds of parents who eventually were deported did not even know what had happened to their children in the U.S.  Such separation was inexcusable and inhumane.  Let’s hope that another potential Trump presidency would not introduce such a policy in the name of creating some kind of uncertain deterrence factor. 

Leave a comment »

Student Protests in U.S. and Canada More Than Just About Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

As most people know who follow current news and social media, college student protests in both countries have escalated in recent weeks.  Students have now set up encampments on campus grounds and have even occupied university buildings.  In numerous cases, especially in the U.S. to date, the university administrations have called in the police to physically force the protesting students from their encampments on campuses.  Universities are doing so under the guise of protecting the safety of their student population, especially in the case of Jewish students who appear concerned for their safety on campus.  In some cases, faculty members have joined the protesters in objecting to the use of physical force, especially where the protests have been peaceful.

However, the fact of the matter is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has also galvanized the unrest witnessed among student bodies over the last two to three decades.  As one observer notes, in many students’ eyes, the war in Gaza is linked to other issues, such as policing, mistreatment of Indigenous people, racism and the impact of climate change.  More than likely, protesters have been joined by others who oppose the role of their governments in terms of their global policies and lack of action on tackling climate change viewed by many as the first priority in terms of today’s issues.  There is a lot of pent-up anger among young people over a number of social issues that they are facing on a daily basis.  In addition, many college programs and policies supporting diversity, equality and inclusion have been watered down, particularly in the U.S. as a result of recent Supreme Court decisions.

In addition, there is the apparent lack of transparency among university administrations concerning the allocation of resources and investments in various domestic and foreign industries and businesses.  Students pay a lot of money to attend these universities and are asking for greater transparency and accountability in such transactions at home and abroad, not only with respect to Israel but also other global matters.  One has to ask whether such student demands are indeed reasonable under the circumstances?

Most would agree that violence on campus, including hate mongering, is not the answer.  Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail over the course of the coming weeks.  However, with pro-Israel students ratcheting up their counter protests on a number of campuses, the climate could grow even more strained in the coming days.  The current disproportionate involvement of an increasingly militarized police force is a major concern, and can only exacerbate the situation on many campuses.

Young people have a right to peacefully protest, which is part of the freedom of expression normally supported in universities and colleges across Canada and the U.S.  Unfortunately, college faculties in many states have come under attack by governments over what is being referred to inappropriately as the “woke” effect.  Critical thinking has come under attack by conservative elements in both countries.  Some faculties are being told not only what they can teach but also how they go about teaching certain subjects.  We must all agree that this is a major affront on the fundamental rights and obligations of universities to offer open and considered dialogue on today’s important issues.  These attacks have once again frustrated many students in light of the increasingly apparent lack of respect for these institutions of “higher learning”.

Universities have often served as one of society’s important settings for activism, given the very nature of examining and questioning many of our daily issues; whether political, economic, environmental or technological.  Activism can often lead to open peaceful protests in a democratic society and must be supported, especially on our campuses.

Leave a comment »

Electorate in Both U.S. and Canada Appears to be Very Disgruntled. I Wonder Why?

George H. W. Bush Senior, going into his bid for a second term, was frequently told that it’s all about the economy stupid!  The U.S. economy went into a recession in 1990; the unemployment rate rose from 5.9% in 1989 to a high of 7.8% in mid-1991; and the debt percentage of total gross domestic product (GDP) rose from 39.4% in 1989 to almost 46.8% in 1992.  By the presidential election in1992, many conservative Republicans’ support of Bush had waned for a variety of reasons, including raising taxes and cutting defense spending.  Americans were less concerned with his foreign policy successes (e.g. Persian Gulf War victory over Iraq) than with the nation’s deteriorating economic situation.  Thus, despite having once been a relatively popular president, he lost to Bill Clinton.

Today, the primary issue among voters continues to be the economy, and especially the high rate of inflation and high interest rates affecting people’s mortgages and the cost of loans in general.  Yes, there is low unemployment and more people are employed today than anytime since the pandemic.  However, unfortunately for Joe Biden, the average American is struggling on a daily basis to make ends meet, especially since average wages have not kept up with increasing inflation over the last few years.  Many people and businesses are still recovering from the pandemic, which has created a real sense of insecurity and a general malaise within the population.

Taking all of this into account, and that people are not happen with another Trump vs. Biden election, there is a general mistrust with governance.  The same can be said for in Canada where you have a Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, and a party that has been in power for over nine years.  The opposition is continuously harpooning about the high cost of inflation and high interest rates that average Canadians are facing.  There is also a good amount of discord over the government’s intention to raise the national carbon tax this coming April, despite it being only one element of several policies aimed at tackling climate change.  However, right now, climate change has taken a back seat to the economy.  A federal election will very likely be called next year in Canada, and all the government can hope for is that the economy will improve and inflation will come down.

Overall, these are tough times for governing parties.  There appear to be no win-win situations.  Government deficits have been climbing steadily, partly in earlier response to the pandemic, with no end in sight.  Wars overseas in the Ukraine and Middle East are not helping.  Funds are being allocated to support the Ukraine against Russia, Israel’s military and the plight of Palestinian refugees in Gaza.  The situation has placed both the U.S. and Canada in a difficult situation given the evolving humanitarian crisis in both conflicts.  In terms of foreign policy, domestically it is a no-win and highly emotive situation for both governments in terms of supporting one side or the other particularly in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In addition, stability in the energy markets is constantly under threat as a result of the sanctions against Russian oil and natural gas exports and the general unstable situation in the Middle East.  As a result, there has been a measurable direct or indirect impact in the form of rising costs for gas and heating fuel in North America.

There is little doubt that we live uncertain times.  There is also little doubt that voters are concerned with the cost of living and continuing hard economic times.  This bleak outlook does not bode well for President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau.  The question then becomes whether their political opponents can take advantage of the situation?  I guess time will tell.

Leave a comment »

The Power of the American Military Industrial Complex Continues to Grow

Lester B. Pearson, a former Canadian Prime Minister, was quoted in 1955: “The grim fact is that we prepare for war like precocious giants, and for peace like retarded pygmies.”  As you may know or not know, as a diplomat Pearson was largely responsible for encouraging the formation of the League of Nations after World War II, which in turn became the United Nations.

Former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned in 1953: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”  As a former general during World War II, Eisenhower clearly understood the power of the military industrial complex in the States, a power that has continued to grow from this day forward.

The U.S. is the world’s biggest arms exporter.  As of last year, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the U.S. controlled an estimated 45 percent of the world’s weapons exports.  This is nearly five times more than any other nation and its highest level since the years immediately following the collapse of the Soviet Union.  That is up from 30 percent a decade ago.

The current conflict between Israel and Hamas is just the latest impetus behind a boom in international arms sales that is bolstering profits and weapons-making capacity among American suppliers, especially with respect to Israel’s military.  The U.S. already provides Israel with more than $3 billion in military assistance every year, and Congress is now apparently being asked to increase funding to Israel to the tune of $10 billion in emergency aid due to the conflict.

Even before Israel responded to the deadly Hamas attack, the combination of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the perception of a rising threat from China was spurring a global rush to purchase fighter planes, missiles, tanks, artillery, munitions and other lethal equipment.  Other countries such as Turkey and South Korea are also increasing their military equipment exports, giving purchasers more options at a time when production shortfalls in the U.S. mean it can take years for orders to be filled.  During the Biden administration countries such as Poland, Saudi Arabia, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Australia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea and Japan have signed military equipment deals with the U.S.  Even some small Pacific island nations have done the same. Taiwan alone has a backlog of American weapons orders worth as much as $19 billion.  Canada recently signed an agreement with Lockheed, the world’s largest military contractor, to purchase F-35 fighter jets worth billions of dollars.

Economically, there is little doubt that foreign-based wars can stimulate certain sectors of a country’s economy.  One only has to recall the impact of the Vietnam and Iraq wars to witness the role of American military hardware providers who benefited from the billions of dollars spent in support of American actions in both countries.  Unfortunately, thousands of American lives were loss and thousands more were injured in these two nebulous conflicts.  Military equipment is being sold to all sorts of regimes, several non-democratic, simply to garner support for American foreign policy initiatives in their respective region.

Sadly, there are those who note that the Pentagon and the State Department are continuing to work to find ways to accelerate approval of foreign military sales to keep up with the rising global demand.  The industry has declared that the main bottleneck remains manufacturing capacity, requiring an industrial base capable of meeting these requirements.  Yes, there will always be those that argue if the U.S. industry doesn’t fulfill such perceived needs, then other countries will simply step in to do so.  Regrettably, this appears to be a winnable argument in Congress, with the military industrial complex taking full advantage at the expense of American taxpayers since it is often combined with foreign aid and foreign policy.

Leave a comment »