I find it strange that Donald Trump is so upset by Canada saying no. By taking cheap shots like “nasty” and “mean”, he sounds like a high school student describing his ex.
He’s a classic narcissist. They can’t stand rejection, they hold grudges forever. Their midterms are next month, and he’s sick. So one way or another he won’t be around forever.
The "one thing" that we do need to keep in mind, though, is how the zealots in the USA look at the continent. In particular, this is now documented in their fall 2025 National Security Strategy. The short of it: the NSS largely frames US security as "hand-in-hand with North American continental security" -- essentially a modern-day version of the Monroe Doctrine (with the "Trump Corollary" added to it -- that USA should somewhat aggressively prevent non-hemispheric competitors from gaining military footholds or control over strategically important assets on the continent).
Canada's trade diversification is not a threat to this (though whether Trump/Hegseth see it that way . . . .). But if, say, a Chinese company "bought up all of Cameco" (Uranium mining giant), then something like THAT would likely be perceived as a threat that would require some form of "intervention" (not necessarily a military one - but something that would discourage the situation).
So, we do need to keep this in the back of our minds, too.
It’s very concerning but I think WE area headed in the right direction. Europe has woken up. Russia is one to watch right now apparently. Testing NATO.
Good point, Grant... and I checked the National Security Strategy.
That “Trump Corollary” language is actually in there, including preventing non-hemispheric competitors from controlling strategically important assets.
So diversification doesn't mean Canada should sell the family silver to China either.
We need more customers while keeping Canadian control of the assets that make us strategically important in the first place.
Canada’s PMMC (respected and very well known around the world) has successfully forged partnerships and a brighter direction for global economic growth, trade and investment 🇨🇦🇪🇺🇨🇼🌎
Great piece. There’s people on both sides that need a little reminder that Canada and the U.S. are intertwined when it comes to producing certain industries. We still do a lot of business with them, but we’re definitely pulling some eggs out of the basket.
Three main points. First, getting more business connections with the EU is going to be a long term project. We shouldn’t expect continual increases in trade like we have seen this past year. It will take years to get the paperwork sorted and the network connections bearing fruit.
Second, it is a reasonably safe assumption that the truth is the exact opposite of what Trump says. I think the tariffs have already bitten their hands and backsides more than they could have imagined and are standing there blinking and asking what happened. It is clear that the current US Administration is conduction trade negotiations like they are the Mafia come to lean on the neighbours for some more ‘pizzo’.
Kushner and Witkoff have been trying to set up ‘after the war is over’ deals that probably have terms that they think an injured and cash strapped country would have to take, which would see the profit from the sale of goods look allot like Venezuela’s oil revenue from US managed trade.
“But they were supposed to knuckle under.” Too bad Canadians know to put some tin foil on the knuckles before wrapping them with tape.
Third, it will be hard. Canadian industry is going to struggle for a year or two as the nation building level projects get going, and we will have to deal with ‘Yankee Traders’ buying into critical Canadian companies like Draganfly. If we are not careful, we may see a similar pattern to 2008 when US owned Canadian companies were closed to reduce competition for the US parent company. This was how we lost a large part our light manufacturing base.
Carney is making all the right moves for the future, so now we need to watch how the government will deal with the shorter term economic challenges.
There is one seat that is still missing from PM Carney’s Cabinet. The C.D. Howe chair.
Under his leadership, Canada created a huge number of Crown Corporations in 1939-1945 to build the factories and infrastructure needed to put Canada on a war footing and supply England. We are at war now and need to take a similar approach. It maybe a ‘trade war’ for now, but the next steps on that progression do not end well.
The main problem we face now is that the way corporations operate now is that the money involved is expected to move across the border, almost exclusively south, along with the IP and expertise. Draganfly is just the latest example. As a matter of ‘National Security’ maybe companies like Draganfly may need to be purchased and run by a Crown Corporation and any foreign ownership bought out, without paying a premium for the stock. There will be countless similar situations, because relations with the current and US Administrations may be just as challenging as we have seen. US money has been plentiful and low cost, so US corporations have been on long shopping sprees before their economy implodes.
It does make sense that the Canadian government should be building its wealth along side the infrastructure we need. And not just for another pipeline to give the oil industry another revenue source at Alberta’s and Canada’s expense. Owning key industrial capabilities for the common good was part of Adam Smith’s argument about trade, and now it is time to get something in return for the billions of dollars the Canadian Government is going to spend, instead of just taking all the risk and letting privately owned corporations take the profits.
Does that make me a socialist for not wanting to give away publicly funded infrastructure to private corporations? It seems to my mind that if the government builds it, the government should receive a return on the investment, and have control of the investment as an asset. As a tax payer, I’m all for making good investments, especially when they can balance against bad, but necessary ones. Is it consistent to think that we need to stop treating large corporations like ‘welfare queens’?
Jim, I think you've put your finger on something important.
If Canadian taxpayers are putting billions into building industries and infrastructure, why shouldn't Canadians retain a stake in what they've paid for?
That doesn't make you a socialist.
It makes you someone who expects a return on an investment. 😄
We need to build Canadian industrial capacity, but we also need to pay attention to who owns it, who controls the technology, and where the profits end up.
Otherwise, we could spend billions building our independence only to discover somebody else owns it.
Diversification isn't going to happen neatly or overnight.
There will be some rough years while the ports, trade routes, industries and new customer relationships get built.
And your point about ownership matters too.
There's not much sense becoming less dependent on one country if we sell off the Canadian companies and strategic assets we're depending on to get there.
I think the next chapter isn't just “build it here.
” It's **build it here, own enough of it here, and make sure Canadians benefit from it.**
Is it possible that Trump has recognized the damage his tariff attacks on Canada are failing? When he proclaims we will come begging in 3-4 weeks,, is he setting the stage with his faithful to back away from his tarrif attacks on Canada and claim that he won? It seems his faithful get their news from Truth Social and Fox, so they will be oblivious to other media explaining what really is happening?
Cost of living (groceries, gasoline, interest rates) are challenging his claims that his tariff wars are winning for them.
That's certainly possible, Lee, but I don't think we can know yet whether he's preparing an exit ramp or genuinely expects Canada to come begging.
What caught my attention was the “three or four weeks” prediction.
Now he's put a clock on it himself.
So I'm going to remember that one. 😄
If three or four weeks pass and Canada hasn't come crawling back apologizing while America “wins everything,” we'll have something very interesting to revisit.
The bigger point for me is that Canada shouldn't build its strategy around what Trump might say next.
Keep diversifying, keep building alternatives, and let the numbers tell us who's actually gaining leverage.
It’s no surprise Trump has directed his anger toward Canada—we’re right next door. What he clearly mistook, as Jean Chretien pointed out, was our friendliness for weakness.
A bully wants a reaction. He wants a response that signals surrender and submission. Instead, he got crickets.
Our Prime Minister’s clever counter was simple: don’t respond. And Trump clearly can’t handle it.
Trump may think his latest round of tariffs has Carney on the ropes, but I suspect Canada’s response will be another round of counter-tariffs. If that happens just before the midterms, the political consequences could be significant.
After the midterms, it will be up to Democrats in Congress to duct tape Trump’s mouth, stop the chaos, and get the American government working for the people again.
Just a rumour I heard and didn’t research. It’s difficult to get the truth these days, if I use Chat GBT vs Open AI the results can vary. Even AI has its own agenda.
I find it strange that Donald Trump is so upset by Canada saying no. By taking cheap shots like “nasty” and “mean”, he sounds like a high school student describing his ex.
He’s a classic narcissist. They can’t stand rejection, they hold grudges forever. Their midterms are next month, and he’s sick. So one way or another he won’t be around forever.
That's the key for me.
Trump won't be there forever, but Canada shouldn't go back to putting all our eggs in the American basket when he's gone.
Build the new customers and relationships now, and keep them.
😂 That “high school student describing his ex” line is pretty good.
And it does seem that Canada simply saying “no” has become the part Washington finds hardest to deal with.
Agree with everything, Fred. Nailed it as usual.
The "one thing" that we do need to keep in mind, though, is how the zealots in the USA look at the continent. In particular, this is now documented in their fall 2025 National Security Strategy. The short of it: the NSS largely frames US security as "hand-in-hand with North American continental security" -- essentially a modern-day version of the Monroe Doctrine (with the "Trump Corollary" added to it -- that USA should somewhat aggressively prevent non-hemispheric competitors from gaining military footholds or control over strategically important assets on the continent).
Canada's trade diversification is not a threat to this (though whether Trump/Hegseth see it that way . . . .). But if, say, a Chinese company "bought up all of Cameco" (Uranium mining giant), then something like THAT would likely be perceived as a threat that would require some form of "intervention" (not necessarily a military one - but something that would discourage the situation).
So, we do need to keep this in the back of our minds, too.
It’s very concerning but I think WE area headed in the right direction. Europe has woken up. Russia is one to watch right now apparently. Testing NATO.
I think “headed in the right direction” is the important part.
Europe has certainly had a wake-up call, and Canada getting closer to Europe looks more important by the day.
And yes, Russia bears watching.
NATO itself is describing the recent airspace violations, drones and other activity as testing Allied resolve.
Another good reason Canada needs strong relationships beyond just the United States.
Good point, Grant... and I checked the National Security Strategy.
That “Trump Corollary” language is actually in there, including preventing non-hemispheric competitors from controlling strategically important assets.
So diversification doesn't mean Canada should sell the family silver to China either.
We need more customers while keeping Canadian control of the assets that make us strategically important in the first place.
That may be worth a whole article.
Thanks, Grant.
Canada’s PMMC (respected and very well known around the world) has successfully forged partnerships and a brighter direction for global economic growth, trade and investment 🇨🇦🇪🇺🇨🇼🌎
That's what I'm seeing too, Roma.
The important part for me is that Canada isn't just talking about diversification anymore...
We're actually building the relationships, trade and investment to make it real.
More partners means more options, and more options mean a stronger Canada.
Great piece. There’s people on both sides that need a little reminder that Canada and the U.S. are intertwined when it comes to producing certain industries. We still do a lot of business with them, but we’re definitely pulling some eggs out of the basket.
Exactly, Barb.
We aren't divorcing the Americans...
we're just finally realizing they shouldn't be the only basket in the kitchen. 😄
Keep doing business with them, absolutely.
But every new customer gives Canada a little more room to say “no” when we need to.
Good on ya! Glad to have you for my neighbor. Not quite ready to move further north. Hope to come visit again someday.
We'll save you a spot, A R. 😄
And hopefully we can get back to being good neighbours who disagree sometimes without somebody threatening to put a tariff on the backyard fence.
Three main points. First, getting more business connections with the EU is going to be a long term project. We shouldn’t expect continual increases in trade like we have seen this past year. It will take years to get the paperwork sorted and the network connections bearing fruit.
Second, it is a reasonably safe assumption that the truth is the exact opposite of what Trump says. I think the tariffs have already bitten their hands and backsides more than they could have imagined and are standing there blinking and asking what happened. It is clear that the current US Administration is conduction trade negotiations like they are the Mafia come to lean on the neighbours for some more ‘pizzo’.
Kushner and Witkoff have been trying to set up ‘after the war is over’ deals that probably have terms that they think an injured and cash strapped country would have to take, which would see the profit from the sale of goods look allot like Venezuela’s oil revenue from US managed trade.
“But they were supposed to knuckle under.” Too bad Canadians know to put some tin foil on the knuckles before wrapping them with tape.
Third, it will be hard. Canadian industry is going to struggle for a year or two as the nation building level projects get going, and we will have to deal with ‘Yankee Traders’ buying into critical Canadian companies like Draganfly. If we are not careful, we may see a similar pattern to 2008 when US owned Canadian companies were closed to reduce competition for the US parent company. This was how we lost a large part our light manufacturing base.
Carney is making all the right moves for the future, so now we need to watch how the government will deal with the shorter term economic challenges.
There is one seat that is still missing from PM Carney’s Cabinet. The C.D. Howe chair.
Under his leadership, Canada created a huge number of Crown Corporations in 1939-1945 to build the factories and infrastructure needed to put Canada on a war footing and supply England. We are at war now and need to take a similar approach. It maybe a ‘trade war’ for now, but the next steps on that progression do not end well.
The main problem we face now is that the way corporations operate now is that the money involved is expected to move across the border, almost exclusively south, along with the IP and expertise. Draganfly is just the latest example. As a matter of ‘National Security’ maybe companies like Draganfly may need to be purchased and run by a Crown Corporation and any foreign ownership bought out, without paying a premium for the stock. There will be countless similar situations, because relations with the current and US Administrations may be just as challenging as we have seen. US money has been plentiful and low cost, so US corporations have been on long shopping sprees before their economy implodes.
It does make sense that the Canadian government should be building its wealth along side the infrastructure we need. And not just for another pipeline to give the oil industry another revenue source at Alberta’s and Canada’s expense. Owning key industrial capabilities for the common good was part of Adam Smith’s argument about trade, and now it is time to get something in return for the billions of dollars the Canadian Government is going to spend, instead of just taking all the risk and letting privately owned corporations take the profits.
Does that make me a socialist for not wanting to give away publicly funded infrastructure to private corporations? It seems to my mind that if the government builds it, the government should receive a return on the investment, and have control of the investment as an asset. As a tax payer, I’m all for making good investments, especially when they can balance against bad, but necessary ones. Is it consistent to think that we need to stop treating large corporations like ‘welfare queens’?
I look forward to your next post.
Jim, I think you've put your finger on something important.
If Canadian taxpayers are putting billions into building industries and infrastructure, why shouldn't Canadians retain a stake in what they've paid for?
That doesn't make you a socialist.
It makes you someone who expects a return on an investment. 😄
We need to build Canadian industrial capacity, but we also need to pay attention to who owns it, who controls the technology, and where the profits end up.
Otherwise, we could spend billions building our independence only to discover somebody else owns it.
That's the part we can't lose sight of, Jim.
Diversification isn't going to happen neatly or overnight.
There will be some rough years while the ports, trade routes, industries and new customer relationships get built.
And your point about ownership matters too.
There's not much sense becoming less dependent on one country if we sell off the Canadian companies and strategic assets we're depending on to get there.
I think the next chapter isn't just “build it here.
” It's **build it here, own enough of it here, and make sure Canadians benefit from it.**
Is it possible that Trump has recognized the damage his tariff attacks on Canada are failing? When he proclaims we will come begging in 3-4 weeks,, is he setting the stage with his faithful to back away from his tarrif attacks on Canada and claim that he won? It seems his faithful get their news from Truth Social and Fox, so they will be oblivious to other media explaining what really is happening?
Cost of living (groceries, gasoline, interest rates) are challenging his claims that his tariff wars are winning for them.
That's certainly possible, Lee, but I don't think we can know yet whether he's preparing an exit ramp or genuinely expects Canada to come begging.
What caught my attention was the “three or four weeks” prediction.
Now he's put a clock on it himself.
So I'm going to remember that one. 😄
If three or four weeks pass and Canada hasn't come crawling back apologizing while America “wins everything,” we'll have something very interesting to revisit.
The bigger point for me is that Canada shouldn't build its strategy around what Trump might say next.
Keep diversifying, keep building alternatives, and let the numbers tell us who's actually gaining leverage.
It’s no surprise Trump has directed his anger toward Canada—we’re right next door. What he clearly mistook, as Jean Chretien pointed out, was our friendliness for weakness.
A bully wants a reaction. He wants a response that signals surrender and submission. Instead, he got crickets.
Our Prime Minister’s clever counter was simple: don’t respond. And Trump clearly can’t handle it.
Trump may think his latest round of tariffs has Carney on the ropes, but I suspect Canada’s response will be another round of counter-tariffs. If that happens just before the midterms, the political consequences could be significant.
After the midterms, it will be up to Democrats in Congress to duct tape Trump’s mouth, stop the chaos, and get the American government working for the people again.
That Chrétien line really does fit the moment, JPowell.
Being a good neighbour was never the same thing as being a pushover.
One small wrinkle, though...
Carney has now said he isn't planning another escalation specifically as the U.S. midterms approach.
I actually think that's interesting.
Canada has already retaliated dollar-for-dollar and can now concentrate on building alternatives rather than reacting every time Trump says something.
Stand your ground, keep building, and don't let Washington decide Canada's timetable.
Just a rumour I heard and didn’t research. It’s difficult to get the truth these days, if I use Chat GBT vs Open AI the results can vary. Even AI has its own agenda.