How The Great White North is a Disaster Entirely of Our Own Making

Andrew Graves

Liberal Party PM candidate Mark Carney campaigning on an anti-Trump platform. | (AFP Via: Getty Images)

In 1939, Winston Churchill, describing the 5000-mile peaceful border dividing Canada and the United States, said, 'That long frontier from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans, guarded only by neighborly respect and honorable obligations, is an example to every country and a pattern for the future of the world." 

~ Ronald Reagan

It is difficult to articulate the breadth and unparalleled scope of the U.S.-Canadian relationship across contemporary history. There have seldom been two nations so closely interlinked in culture, history, economy, and shared goals anywhere on the surface of the globe now or before. 

The then target of annexation during the War of 1812 and the current commonwealth nation used to be a bastion of loyalists to the British crown. But upon being granted further autonomy (and later total independence), the necessity for a closer relationship to its southern neighbors became evident. Heralding in an era of unprecedented co-operation and cordial relations for over 130 years. Hallmarks of this relationship include the longest civilian-law-enforced border on earth, deep military integration in NATO and joint command in NORAD, mutual majoritarian exporters, and a completely integrated electrical grid. Canada was the first nation to provide aid and security to survivors of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Canadian soldiers fought alongside Americans on D-Day and have come to the aid of our nation countless times. This relationship has enormous strategic incentives for mutually beneficial cooperation; it was effectively built to last. Its degradation is in its entirety due to a supranational export of American conservatism, and the hubris and unwillingness to cooperate behind American nationalism. 

Ever since the first Trump administration in 2016, the special relationship has begun to unravel, with the U.S. becoming the pre-eminent object of ridicule in Ottawa for electing someone seen as unserious, anti-intellectual, and even embodying an adversary to Canada. By the time of the 2020 election, Canadians preferred Biden to Trump by a margin of 67%-15%. 

In the four-year span between the 2020 and 2024 elections, Canadians saw an export of far-right ideology into their own borders. This was made most evident in the ‘Freedom Convoy’ protests in 2022 against COVID-19 vaccine mandates across the country. What was unknown at the time was the scale of influence that American conservatism had on these protests, with 44% of all donations to sustain the protests coming from American donors. These protests were praised by far-right American politicians like Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and Senator Ted Cruz publicly, calling the protestors “heroes” and “patriots.” These protests, however, were extremely unpopular across Canada, with only 30% initially supporting them, eventually dropping to 25% by July. These protests eventually culminated in an American attempt to do the same. American involvement in the protests was seen by many at the time as the U.S. attempting to influence Canadian politics. 

These sentiments grew as the Canadian Conservative Party inched further to the right of center over time, taking after American conservatives. As the political right wing between the two nations grew closer together, the ideological gap between the Conservative Party and Liberal Party grew too. Before traveling to Moscow to personally interview Russian President Vladimir Putin, American political pundit Tucker Carlson made a stop in the Canadian province of Alberta. While there, he spoke to over 4,000 Albertans on his “Liberation Tour,” where he said, quote, “​​I'd be grateful if you passed a message on to the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau: “We are coming to liberate Canada, and we'll be there soon.”

And with it, the ‘Canadian MAGA’ movement grew within the Conservative Party, putting party leadership in a difficult position. How much could they afford to give in to an American agenda while still claiming to be Canada first? This balancing act was most pressing for Conservative Party leader MP Pierre Poilievre, who has routinely faced accusations of being a ‘Canadian Trump’, something which he fervently resents. 

This style of conservatism, while perhaps controversial, was paying dividends. In the 2024 lead-up to the upcoming 2025 federal election, Liberal Party leader and then Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had an extremely low approval rating of just 22%. This is for a number of reasons. Canadians have seen their cost of living soar in recent years, and many perceive the 10-year ruling Liberal Party as being out of touch with the average Canadian voter. As such, the conservatives had momentum coming off years of frustration with Trudeau’s policies. In a risky political gambit on January 6th, after a contentious cabinet meeting, Justin Trudeau resigned as leader of the Liberal Party. In the wake of Trudeau’s resignation, pundits and average citizenry alike expected nothing short of a blowout at the federal election with an overwhelming conservative victory. 

That’s when something unexpected happened.

Leading up to his second term, Trump began claiming that he wanted Canada to become the United States’ 51st State. At first, most people believed he was joking. Then he said it again, and again, and then again. Then came ‘Liberation Day’, where Trump placed 25% tariffs on Canadian goods. 

T his was a shot of adrenaline in the arms of the Canadian population. What had been perceived as fearmongering by so many had finally begun to materialize as concrete actions. According to a March 2024 (pre-Liberation Day) Abacus Data poll, even 62% of conservative voters deemed Trump’s annexation rhetoric ‘dangerous’, a sentiment Poilievre struggled to navigate. Seeing the opportunity presented before them, the Liberal Party wasted no time in placing itself at the forefront of resistance to these actions. Newly elected Liberal Party leader Mark Carney has taken his short tenure as Prime Minister to heart by bolstering anti-American sentiment, claiming that the old relationship is ‘dead’. In response to tariffs, he placed reciprocal 25% tariffs on American steel and aluminum worth $30 billion. Though the effects of reciprocal tariffs are still yet to be seen, and may yield serious economic consequences, such as a loss of jobs in interdependent industries. 

Carney quickly garnered a reputation for being a no-nonsense, decisive leader. He has spent much of his time on the federal campaign trail calling for increasing division from the American economy, military, and way of life.

But it’s not just Carney; Canadians are responding in kind to this sentiment, which has become enormously popular. A culture of resistance against a far larger and more powerful force has been born in Canada. This has manifested itself in Canadians choosing to boycott American goods, choosing to travel within Canada rather than the US, and refusing to purchase from companies with ties to the US. Carney has stated publicly that he wishes to pursue greater ties with the European Union, creating a new power bloc in America’s absence. However, it is yet to be seen to what extent the EU wishes to antagonize the new American regime due to their high economic interdependence. 

While Carney has made the most of this new normal, Pierre Poilievre has tried desperately to escape the ties to the Republican Party and American conservatism. This has led from a once 20-point lead on the Liberal Party to trailing behind Carney. He has struggled to find a coherent platform that is updated to the current circumstances. 25% of all Canadians now see the U.S. as an enemy, and Canadians have, by and large, begun to question Poilievre’s ability to lead in this time of crisis for the nation. 

While we will not know definitively the result of the federal election until after April 28th, 2025, one thing is abundantly clear. The U.S. has betrayed the trust of the Canadian people in recent months and will face the consequences of doing so for years to come.

The old relationship is dead, and with it comes the finality of the partnership that heralded in the American century. What may emerge in the future is a hesitant partnership. One where neither side quite trusts the other but recognizes the geo-strategic and economic significance of the relationship. All that is certain is uncertainty, and the illusion of inevitability between nations is gone for good.