FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Aug 29

Just Who Are These American People Supporting Trump Administration’s Policies?

by bcurry

I keep reading and hearing about the American public whom the Trump administration appears to listen to and who in turn supposedly lend their support.  Some have speculated that they are those who claim to be part of the so-called Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement.  However, the MAGA supporters still only represent a fraction of the Republican Party.  Based on recent polls in the U.S., which put Trump’s approval ratings at an all time low, it certainly doesn’t appear to include the vast majority of independent voters.  As for the “big, beautiful bill” recently passed by the Republicans, at the town halls held by Republican Congressional representatives the negative and furious reactions by their constituents don’t appear to be very favourable.  The majority of Americans are now also beginning to question the administration’s tariffs and immigration policies.  It would appear the emphasis on dealing with inflation, remembering Trump’s references to the high cost of “groceries”, has now taken a back seat to his other priorities.  This at a time when the real impact of high tariffs on imports from India and China have yet to be fully felt by American consumers.  Many Americans, particularly those in states bordering with Canada, are not happy with how the Trump administration is dealing with its northern neighbour and long time friend, ally and trading partner.

Prior and during the last election, there is little doubt that some Americans were concerned about numerous federal agencies, especially with respect to their credibility and trust wariness.  Instead of restoring their trust in agencies such as the Federal Reserve Board, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Bureau of Labour Statistics, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the Justice Department to name a few, we now see the administration attempting to dismantle and weaponize these independent bodies.  Trump is replacing their heads with politically loyal hacks with little or no expertise in leading or running such institutions.  By doing this, the administration argues that the ability of the President to exercise his hiring and firing policies ensures political accountability for them to the American people.  Again, who just are these American people?  While there are always ways to improve their operations, attacking independent bodies in this manner tends to undermine their important mandates which are intended to be apolitical and based on expertise and research-based objectivity.  No other administration in U.S. history has ever assailed these institutions in the way that the Trump administration is proceeding to try to bring them into line with his political thinking.  Furthermore, there is no clear evidence of any form of so-called “deep state” existing among independent bodies.

Of course, within the federal government, there are senior positions that each new administration will fill with its own politically motivated appointments, normally leaving the remainder of each department’s operations under the capable hands of career civil servants.  One can only hope that confirmed appointees are credible and experienced administrators in what ever mandate they will represent.  Unlike in Canada, the appointment of hundreds of senior administrators is left up to the President, resulting in a major turnover at the top with each new administration.  Generally, in Canada the bulk of senior federal officials are career bureaucrats with the applicable administrative capabilities, frequently serving under governments of varying political stripes.  For this reason, the Canadian public service is somewhat admired among democratic countries and often put forward as a good administrative example for governments.

There is little doubt that Trump was attempting to appease his base, in particular MAGA, by instituting his policies via many executive actions in his first hundred days in office.  Meanwhile, the Republican dominated Congress sat on the sidelines watching it all happening and has failed to address some of the more controversial executive orders, some of which most likely are unconstitutional.  So just who are these members serving at this time?  It certainly doesn’t appear to be their own constituents based on the resulting outrage being witnessed throughout the country, even in red states!

Conservative Political Groups Donald Trump Federal Government Immigration Protectionist Trade Policies Public Service Trading Relationships US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jul 28

U.S. Is Trying to Milk the Canadian Dairy Industry

by bcurry

As part of the Trump administration’s trade talks with Canada, Trump has once again unfairly attacked Canada’s supply management system in the dairy industry.  The problem is that this continuous American attack doesn’t really make much sense!  Here’s why.

First and foremost, Canada, with a population of about 40 million, is a small market to begin with.  Secondly, while the American dairy and poultry markets are dominated by large industrial farms, the Canadian scene is primarily one of smaller farms, often family managed.  Thirdly, U.S. dairy producers reportedly insist they’re not looking for Canada to dismantle its crucial supply management system.  Fourthly, Canada’s imports of U.S. dairy products have risen significantly since the quotas imposed under the current Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) took effect in 2020.  Those imports totalled $897 million in 2024, according to Statistics Canada data, more than four times the value of imports in any year before 2020.  In 2024, American dairy exports to Canada had increased by 67% since 2021. This made Canada America’s second-largest dairy customer and its largest customer per capita.  Moreover, Canada presently has a $520 million dairy trade deficit with the U.S.  Fifthly, Trump’s claims of a 390 or 400 per cent tariff are false, particularly given the way the quotas on American dairy products actually work under the CUSMA.  Indeed, it is reported that to date, no U.S. dairy products imported by Canada have been subjected to those higher tariffs under the current agreement.  Under CUSMA, the U.S. can send 49 million litres of milk to Canada every year, before a single drop would have a tariff imposed.  In addition, that tariff-free amount is set to continue to grow gradually over the next 13 years.  The U.S. uses the same system of tariff-free imports of certain Canadian products up to a set quantity before imposing its tariffs. Finally, Canada’s maximum allowable dairy exports to the U.S. are lower than those for other countries, including the United Kingdom and Australia, according to the U.S. International Trade Commission’s harmonized tariff schedule.  So, let’s not talk about unfairness when it comes to dairy exports between the two countries.

Furthermore, the president of the Dairy Farmers of Canada, David Wiens, notes that countries such as the United States heavily subsidize their dairy industry for production, forcing taxpayers to pay twice for their milk (once at the store and again through their taxes). In contrast, Canadian dairy farmers do not receive similar production subsidies.

Importantly, supply management has delivered food security and sovereignty to Canada for more than six decades by producing dairy here for Canadians.  It aligns production with demand to deliver high-quality, diverse products at stable prices for Canadian consumers and a fair return for its farmers.  It also strengthens the economy, with about 340,000 Canadian jobs fuelled by the supply-managed dairy, poultry and egg sectors, and over $30 billion contributed to Canada’s gross domestic product.  Simply put, Canada’s rationale for the approach taken under CUSMA is to ensure that the domestic dairy industry thrives by effectively capping how much the U.S. can export each year, preventing cheaper American products from dominating the smaller market.

There are also benefits to having few industrial farms as demonstrated by the recent and ongoing costly toll of the bird flu outbreak on U.S. dairy farms, which in particular drove up the price of eggs in the states, affected dairy cows, decreased milk production and financially decimated many affected farms.  None of this happened to the same extent in Canada.

One chief complaint from the U.S. focuses on Canada’s cheap exports of milk proteins, also described as milk solids, such as skim milk powder.  The Americans argue that because Canada’s supply management system keeps domestic prices artificially high, Canada can sell its excess production of milk proteins internationally at artificially low prices, undercutting the competition.  Such issues can certainly be reasonably discussed as part of any renegotiation of the CUSMA scheduled to be undertaken in 2026.  Remember that Trump actually signed that agreement during his first term as president.  The key point is that one has to do away with sources of misinformation and continue to deal with this particular trade issue in a way that both countries can benefit, thereby profiting farmers on both sides of the border.

Canada Donald Trump Economy Economy NAFTA Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. Trading Relationships US US.-Canada Relations

Leave a comment »
Jun 17

Canadians Can Be Mad at the U.S., But Maybe We Had a Lot to Do With the Problem

by bcurry

Yes, Canada has every right to be mad at the Trump administration for reneging on the current trade agreement previously signed by then President Trump, imposing new tariffs on Canadian exports to the U.S., and promoting the concept of a 51st state.  However, I can’t help thinking that we had a lot to do with creating the current crisis situation.

Actually years ago, I briefly thought that there might be some merit in Canada becoming part of the U.S. After all, with the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), our economy became even more integrated into that of the U.S.  Take the automotive sector for example, it was and still is the most integrated industry under past and current trade agreements between the two countries.  The so-called Auto Pact has had a longstanding history and basically prevented Canada from developing its own automotive manufacturing sector.  Perhaps it made sense given that Canada’s population is one tenth that of the American population and our market also became flooded with Asian and European cars.  Basically, we are non-competitive.  However, no one objected given the workings of the global economy, which no doubt benefited the pocketbooks of Canadians through access to cheaper goods.

Other Canadian sectors such as lumber, steel, aluminum and minerals all grew primarily due to the access to American markets.  Our reliance on these markets may have made us a little lazy and not overly innovative in some areas, especially as it pertains to other trading blocs.  Internally, intraprovincial trade barriers further exacerbated the lack of industrial growth and weaker productivity within Canada itself.  Professionals and trades people could not move easily between and among provinces due to labour mobility restrictions.  One could also have done a lot more to promote tourism within Canada and to build the required infrastructure for a modern tourism industry.

In more recent years, the modern world came to see the ever increasing need for rare minerals to support the growth of computerized technologies.  Both Canada and the U.S. became overly reliant on China which supplies about 80% of the much needed processed rare minerals used in such areas as electronics.  Canada has long been aware of its large sources of rare minerals, but has done next to nothing in developing processing capabilities. 

As for energy, Canada has major oil and gas reserves.  However, previous Canadian governments have stalled numerous potential projects such as the construction of pipelines to transport oil and natural gas to British Columbia ports for export to Asia and the U.S. west coast.  The expansion of pipelines within Canada has also been negatively affected by intraprovincial disputes over economic benefits, indigenous and environmental issues. 

In terms of our cultural sector, Canada has become a major cheap source for the production of American films and television series.  However, except for the support of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) and various federally subsidies and tax breaks, the growth of Canadian content has been somewhat limited.  Instead, Canada became very dependent on American content as cable and steaming services steadily grew.  Quebec is the exception primarily because of the need to supply French content within the province through Radio Canada and other Quebec sources.  Moreover, we need to do a lot more to support Canadian culture, particularly through the CBC.

Today, I am a proud Canadian and object to Trump’s assertions about a northern 51st state.  I have seen positive social-economic trends in Canadian society.  With what is happening to the apparent attacks by the Trump administration on all aspects of American democracy, I clearly prefer to remain Canadian.  However, I would argue that much of what is happening economically is partly, if not mostly, our own fault.  As Canadians, there is a lot more that we can do to strengthen our nation.  This might indeed be a significant reversal of fortune.  So, stop complaining and let us demonstrate that Canada has a future of opportunities, with or without past ties to the U.S.


Canada Leadership NAFTA New Technologies Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. Trading Relationships US

Leave a comment »
Jun 6

What Is Going On With the Circus in Washington?

by bcurry

Never before in all the years that I have been following American political news have I ever seen such a circus as the current one in Washington.  We now have the current break-up of the romance between Donald Trump and Elon Musk.  With the use of social media, the barbs are flying everywhere.  Remember that on X, Musk has almost 225 million followers.  Trump on the other hand was reported in August 2022 to have only 3.9 million Truth Social followers.  The number of Trump followers has certainly increased since becoming president, but no where near Musk’s numbers.

Then there are the members of Trump’s cabinet who continue to not impress us with their mistakes and lack of applicable backgrounds and experience.  One has the Secretary of Defence, Pete Hegseth, who recently discussed top secret military missions against the Houthi rebels in Yemen on the non-secure platform “signal”, and included his wife and personal lawyer in one post.  Then you have the Secretary of Health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has initiated a quick study about the causes of “autism” by a number of non-experts with dubious backgrounds.  Kennedy has endorsed a number of health claims that are not backed by scientific evidence, including many on vaccines, which have concerned many medical experts.  Next is Attorney General Pam Bondi who did not know the meaning of “habeas corpus” as defined in the constitution.  Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, likes to dress up and have photo ops at the southern border.  Education Secretary, Linda McMahon, who was a World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) co-founder, did not know the difference between AI (artificial intelligence) and the steak sauce A1.  We also hear very little from Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who appears often to take a back seat to Vice-President J.D. Vance.  Vance actually visited Greenland, only to the displeasure of the Prime Minister of Denmark and the vast majority of Greenlanders.  Today, it was announced that Trump Administration has taped a 22-year-old Thomas Fugate, who is one year out of college, to head up the Terrorism Prevention Role at Homeland Security.  He just happened to work on Trump’s campaign and has no experience in this important national security field.

Trump is reportedly fuming about his new nickname “TACO”, standing for “Trump Always Chickens Out”.  The acronym was brought to Trump’s attention at the White House press conference on May 28th by CNBC correspondent Megan Cassella.  The acronym refers to the President’s ongoing tendency to suddenly introduce high tariff rates on countries, only to reduce them shortly after or to defer them to some future date.  The continuous introduction of new fluctuating rates has created a great deal of economic uncertainty and has caused chaos in the markets and affected most business sectors.  It makes no sense at all!

With the Trump-Musk feud, late-night hosts are having a field day.  The heads of foreign countries are wondering what the hell is going on in Washington, including the Prime Minister of Canada.  Hopefully, trade negotiations and foreign policy matters can continue to be carried out rationally behind closed doors in order to avoid all the senseless and needless noise.  If the Trump administration’s gaffs weren’t so serious, they unfortunately would actually be hilarious.

Donald Trump Economy Elon Musk Foreign Policy Protectionist Trade Policies Social Media Trading Relationships US

Leave a comment »
Apr 30

What The Results of The Canadian Election Mean For Canada

by bcurry

By now, anyone who keeps informed about Canadian news events, including a few Americans, have come to realize how the final federal election results are more than just significant for Canada and its federal parties.  Federally, there are six federal parties: the Liberals, the Conservatives, the New Democratic Party (NDP), the Bloc Quebecois, the Green Party and the Peoples’ Party of Canada (PPC).  Moreover, the election became a two party race to win by either the Liberals, under Mark Carney or the Conservatives, under Pierre Poilievre.  The primary issue of the campaigns became that of Canada’s relationship with the U.S., more precisely with President Trump.  The Green Party has only one seat and the PPC has none.

In the end, the election results proved to be extraordinary with the Liberals winning enough seats in Parliament to form a minority government — its fourth consecutive term!  What is remarkable is the fact that the Liberals a few months before the election were more than 20 points behind the Conservatives in the polls.  Then suddenly, all that changed when Donald Trump got elected, Justin Trudeau stepped down as Prime Minister, and Mark Carney took over leadership of the Liberal Party.  The Liberals increased their position in recent polls to take the lead over Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives.  Then came the election itself, with the Liberals taking 169 seats to form a minority government.  Close behind is the Conservatives with 144 seats.  However, what is even more astonishing is that the Liberals gained most of their new seats at the expense of the NDP, a socialist party, with only 7 seats (a loss of 17 seats from 2021) and the Bloc Quebecois, a separatist party, with 22 seats in Quebec (a loss of 13 seats from 2021).  Even more surprising, is the fact that Pierre Poilievre and the NDP leader, Jagmeet Singh, both lost their riding seats.  Once an opposition party, the NDP no longer has official party status in parliament, which handicaps its ability to perform or contribute. 

While the popular vote was close, 43.7% for the Liberals and 41.3% for the Conservatives, Canadians favoured Mark Carney as the leader who could confront Trump over his tariffs on Canadian industries.  As a former head of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England and a former CEO, Carney is seen as someone with fairly qualified experience in finance, business, economics and international trade.  Canadians switched their support to the Liberals to support a strong opposition to the tariffs and political attacks by Trump who has frequently referred to Canada becoming a 51st state.

Now, Carney will have to start negotiations with the Trump administration with respect to an updated or new trade agreement, such as is governed by the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) previously signed by all three countries in 2018.  By introducing initial tariffs on Canadian aluminum and steel, oil and gas, softwood lumber and automotive sectors, Trump has already broken that trade agreement.  The danger for Canada is that if additional tariffs are introduced by the U.S., the economic impact on Canada would most likely lead to a major recession similar to that in 2008-09.  Canada would have to retaliate with tariffs on American goods, leading to higher prices for Canadians.  Americans would also see similar inflationary pressures due to Trump’s tariffs.

The election also resulted in a clear split between the eastern provinces which largely supported the Liberals and the western provinces, especially Alberta and Saskatchewan, which largely supported the Conservatives.  The western provinces have long argued that the federal government under the Liberals has harmed the growth of their oil and gas industry, particularly because of environmental policies.  Some westerners have already claimed that they might potentially be better off by withdrawing from the Canadian federation in some manner.  The Prime Minister will have to attempt some form of compromise to assuage the western grievances and maintain a sense of unity among all ten provinces.  Canada needs to provide a common, strong and unified front in its planned negotiations with the Trump administration.  After all, we are talking about Canada ’s state of sovereignty as a nation.

Canada Donald Trump Economy Federal Election Federal Government Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. US US.-Canada Relations

Leave a comment »
Apr 8

Today, Something Unprecedented Is Happening Among Canadians

by bcurry

In reaction to Donald Trump’s statements about Canada as a 51st state and the imposition of tariffs on Canadian products exported to the U.S., a number of things are happening in the country.  Canadian nationalism is rising to heights not seen since the Second World War, stressing the need for a concerted and unified national reaction to the Trump administration.  There is an evident “Buy Canadian” movement that has grown quickly among Canadian consumers.  In the midst of a federal election, all the parties are in one way or another vowing to stand up to American economic aggression and push for expanding Canadian trade to other countries.  Canadians are also cancelling vacations to the U.S. and looking to vacation either in Canada or other countries.  Cross-border travel to the U.S. by Canadians has tumbled by more than half.  Canadian politicians are carrying their message about the harm to American consumers through visits to the U.S. and via digital billboards, broadcasts, media sources and social media targeting Americans themselves.  In recent basketball and hockey games in Toronto, Ottawa, Calgary and Montreal, fans booed the American national anthem, something unheard of before.  So-called “polite” Canadians are openly expressing their national pride in increasingly angry ways and through outbursts of disappointment.

It is remarkable that the current interim Canadian Prime Minister, Marc Carney, has flatly stated that the trust between the two countries has been broken, and that the relationship will never be the same.  As a result, his parliamentary website states that he leads a government that will take action to unite Canadians, defend Canada’s sovereignty, and build the strongest economy in the G7.  Do not be fooled, the candidates for P.M. all recognize that the damage of tariffs to the Canadian economy will be significant, possibly causing a recession and high rates of inflation and unemployment in the not-so-near future.  Trump’s economic policy and political statements have created an environment of uncertainty and distrust.  Canada will and has already reacted with the imposition of its own tariffs on selective American goods while waiting to see what Trump’s next moves will be.

Whoever becomes the next P.M. on April 28th knows that he will have to present a strong defence of Canada’s economic and political concerns vis-à-vis the U.S. The election has turned into primarily a one issue campaign, that being about how Canada will deal with Trump.  This situation is unprecedented in itself, and is a major reason why many Canadians believe that Marc Carney, a former Governor of the Bank of Canada, head of the Bank of England and businessman, would be a good match to confront Trump.  Since becoming leader of the Liberal Party of Canada in March of this year, he has turned around support for his party following a previous major lead of the Conservative Party of Canada in polls.  His main opponent, Conservative Pierre Poilievre, is a full-time politician with little international or business experience.  As P.M., Carney has said he’ll keep Canada’s counter-tariffs in place until “the Americans show us respect and make credible, reliable commitments to free and fair trade.”  Being P.M. at this time also gives Carney a clear advantage as he can make prime-ministerial like statements which naturally are covered daily by the mainstream media.  This contributes directly in his positive polling results.

No matter who wins the election, average Canadians will look to a strong leadership when it comes to defending Canadian interests against Trump’s attacks.  Canadians do not blame Americans for the current situation, instead focusing on the economic and political attacks by the Trump administration.  However, there is little doubt that a future Canadian administration will have to focus on reducing Canada’s dependence on U.S. trade relations and defence policies.  Having lived together for decades within an integrated North American market and coordinated defence and security regime, this will not be an easy transition for both countries.  Let’s hope that the damage that’s been done can be mitigated down the road.  Like Americans, Canadians are a proud people and have a shared history of cooperation and trust, thus hopefully leaving the door open to re-establishing our mutual relationships.

Canada Federal Government Foreign Policy Foreign Policy National Security Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. Trading Relationships U.S. Canada Border US

Leave a comment »
Mar 8

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

by bcurry

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!

Canada Donald Trump Foreign Policy Foreign Policy Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. Trading Relationships U.S. Canada Border US US.-Canada Relations War on Drugs

Leave a comment »
Feb 17

Trump’s Trade Policy Appears to be Directed at Securing Critical Mineral Rights

by bcurry

After three years of war that forged a new unity within NATO, the Trump administration has made clear it is planning to focus its attention elsewhere: in Asia, Latin America, the Arctic and anywhere President Trump believes the U.S. can obtain critical mineral rights.  Moreover, this is why Trump to a large extent has his eye on annexing Canada and Greenland, both of which have an abundance of critical minerals such as uranium, graphite and lithium.  Critical minerals are currently used in over 230 sectors of the U.S. economy, from energy infrastructure to advanced technology manufacturing, and from aerospace engineering, including satellites, to medical equipment.  Critical minerals are the building blocks for the green and digital economy and demand for them will only grow throughout the global energy transition. Disruption potential is related to how much of a commodity’s global production is concentrated in countries that are relatively unwilling or unable (due to political or economic instability, workforce or infrastructure inadequacies, regulations, etc…) to supply the U.S. with critical minerals.  Some critical minerals are produced primarily in countries that are economically or politically unstable, or do not have a reliable trade relationship with the U.S. —  thereby representing a higher supply risk.  This however does not apply to Canada which is a stable supplier of minerals in general, including copper, zinc, phosphorus, silicon metal, cobalt, high-purity iron ore, and rare earth elements.

The lack of stability in Ukraine is a major reason why Trump apparently ha turned down Ukraine
President Volodymyr Zelensky’s extraordinary offer that the U.S. be granted a 50 percent interest in all of Ukraine’s critical mineral resources as compensation for past and future support of the war with Russia. 

However, Canada recognizes that critical minerals are the foundation on which modern technology is built upon.  They’re used in a wide range of essential products, from mobile phones and solar panels to electric vehicle batteries and medical applications. By building critical minerals value chains, Canada can become a major global supplier of choice for critical minerals and the clean energy and technology sources they enable.  For this reason, Canada is not willing to simply give away control of these precious minerals to the U.S. or any other nation for that matter.  They are also essential to Canada’s economic or national security.

Canada has already partnered with the U.S. when it comes to discovering and mining critical minerals.  In January 2020, the Canada-U.S. Joint Action Plan on Critical Minerals was announced to advance bilateral interest in securing supply chains for the critical minerals needed in strategic manufacturing sectors.  Canada has also worked with other countries such as Japan to encourage cooperation on international standard-setting for critical minerals, as well as several multilateral organizations such as the International Energy Agency (IEA), the World Bank, the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), and the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (IGF).  The U.S. is also an active member of these multilateral organizations.

For these reasons, it is difficult to understand why Trump continues to be so aggressive when it comes to the U.S.-Canada trading relationship.  Canada is an exporting nation, which includes most of our natural resources which make up the bulk of exports.  Canada is very interested in exporting critical minerals to its allies through various trade agreements, and is investing more in the extraction of these minerals.  Canada already provides a stable and growing market when it comes to critical minerals.  If Trump wants to ignore the existing cooperation between the two countries, he does so at his own peril and that of those American businesses which rely on a steady and reliable supply chain.

Canada Donald Trump Economy Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. Ukraine US US.-Canada Relations

Leave a comment »
Feb 6

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

by bcurry

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.

Canada Foreign Policy Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. Trading Relationships U.S. Canada Border US US.-Canada Relations

Leave a comment »
Jan 22

Once Again the Ugly American Raises His Head

by bcurry

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.

Canada Cimate Change Elon Musk Foreign Policy Protectionist Trade Policies Trade with U.S. Trading Relationships U.S. Canada Border US US Politics

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Blog at WordPress.com.