Just to be clear: We picked a fight with Canada

I telephoned my Canadian friend to apologize for my country's bad behavior.

Trump started a trade war with Canada.

President Donald Trump invoked the emergency clause under the 1977 trade agreement that permits a president to excercise unilateral power to impose tariffs on Canada. House Democrats tried to return that power to Congress to end the tariff war. House Republicans used a procedural process to stop them.

The trade war is Trump's, but now it isn't just Trump's. The chamber of Congress that represents the people of the USA is going along with Trump. Our country is doing this.

Canada is doing what Canada must: figuring out our real motives and figuring out a way to defend itself.

College classmate Sandford Borins is Canadian. He is both a local source of Canadian opinion and an expert on politics in Canada. He is a professor of Public Management Emeritus at the University of Toronto, having retired in July 2020 after a 45-year career. He writes about Canadian politics at https://sandfordborins.com. He recently received Canada’s King Charles III Coronation Medal for public service, which he is wearing in the photo.

Sandford Borins

Guest Post by Sandford Borins 

Trash Talk or Psychological Warfare?

The Trump Administration’s tariffs and continual reference to Canada as the 51st state are the elephants in virtually every room in Canada. After months of threats, the tariffs began in earnest this week with steel and aluminum, two commodities for which Canada is by far the largest exporter to the U.S. A full package of twenty-five percent tariffs on most Canadian exports is now threatened for April 2.

Scoping the Territory

Canada has begun a series of countermeasures in response to the U.S. tariffs including our own tariffs, non-tariff barriers such as the removal of all American product from provincial liquor stores, and a boycott movement that is rapidly gathering steam. Additional measures could include export taxes, especially on energy; finding alternative markets; and building international alliances. While all of these are important instruments, as background to our moves I think it is important to know as much as possible about Canada’s adversaries in the Trump Administration.

Last week, based on Canadian sources, The New York Times and other media reported that the Trump Administration is taking an aggressive look at its relationship with Canada, considering options such as abrogating the 1908 treaty that finalized the border, tearing up conventions and agreements about the management of the Great Lakes, reviewing military cooperation, and ejecting Canada from the Five Eyes (U.S., U.K., Australia, New Zealand, Canada) intelligence-sharing agreement.

Long ago, I studied bureaucratic analysis with Richard Neustadt and Graham Allison at Harvard Kennedy School. They would have said that these ideas didn’t originate with President Trump, Commerce Secretary Lutnick, or Secretary of State Marco Rubio. What president, particularly a person as uninterested in history as Donald Trump, would have known about an arcane border treaty? A bureaucratic analyst would want to know who was doing the policy work for the politicians, in which organizations they are located, how they are framing issues, and what their objectives are. As a Canadian, the reason I would want to know this is to have a better sense of what levers we can pull to influence them.

Is the continual reference by Trump and his acolytes like Homeland Security Secretary Kristy Noem and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt to the 51st state merely trash talk to gain advantage in a tariff negotiation or psychological warfare that is the first salvo in a campaign to make Canada, if not part of the U.S., then at least a vassal state?

I had a look at the State Department website and discovered that the head of the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs is Michael Kozak, who has had over 50 years of service as a diplomat, much of it in the areas of human rights and refugees, and who is a charter member of the Senior Executive Service. Kozak looks very much the epitome of the “deep state.” The State Department does not appear to be joining in the 51st state talk, suggesting that it is more respectful towards Canada than other parts of the administration.

Not Aaron Sorkin’s West Wing

I think it more likely that aggressive approach towards Canada is coming from Trump’s courtiers, staff in the west wing. When the premiers of Canada’s provinces visited the White House in February, they met with deputy chief of staff James Blair and the Director of Personnel. They didn’t meet with the people who are really on the Canada file and who may well be mapping out a strategic plan for an assault on Canadian sovereignty. Would that be Peter Navarro or Stephen Miller? Perhaps there are also people in the west wing who are working on strategic plans to take control of Greenland and of the Panama Canal. Perhaps they also have support from the CIA.

As far as I can tell, the Canadian Government has focused on getting support from U.S. businesses and governors and legislators whose constituents would be hurt by U.S. tariffs and Canadian counter-tariffs. Democratic Governors like Michigan’s Gretchen Whitmer, New York’s Kathy Hochul, and Minnesota’s Tim Walz have been vocal in their support; Republicans, with occasional exceptions like Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, have not. But if, as Canadian politicians now suggest, this struggle is not just about trade but about sovereignty, then we Canadians must be more energetic in mapping out our adversaries and supporters in the executive branch and determining how to influence both groups.

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.comSubscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]