Trump vs. everybody. How should Canada respond?
Here are six options being put out there...
Just like you, no doubt, I’m still processing Trump’s new war against pretty much everybody. Even more perplexing is how Canada should respond.
I’d love to hear your thoughts.
This week, I’m opening up the comment section to everyone so we can share what we are thinking about the week’s incredible developments – beginning with Trump’s attack on Venezuela and threats against Greenland.
(If you have trouble, email your comment to me, and I will post it for you. sstaples@peacequest.ca)
The Globe and Mail says it’s all about empire
The typically genteel Globe and Mail just came right out and said it: it’s all about “empire.”
In a lengthy editorial last weekend, the Globe said, “Saturday marked the formal debut of an imperial America, led by a president who recognizes no law, save that of the jungle.”
Prime Minister Carney’s reaction received a lukewarm review. “Ottawa’s response to the U.S. military strike on Venezuela was...well, cautious is a generous description,” wrote Globe editorialists.
To be fair, in the days following the attack, Carney reached out to Venezuelan opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate María Corina Machado, in a subtle poke at Trump after the President had declared her unfit to assume power.
Carney also stood with Denmark’s Prime Minister to – incredible as it sounds – defend Denmark and Greenland’s sovereignty (ironically on the sidelines of a Paris meeting to discuss Ukraine’s sovereignty).
What are Canada’s options?
The business community seems divided. One investment advisory group with influence on Canada’s recent Prime Ministers ranked Trump’s efforts to “capture the machinery of government, and weaponize it against his enemies” as the most significant threats to global stability this year. The group says Canada must balance the defence of Canadian sovereignty with the reality of strategic dependence on the U.S.
On the other hand, the head of Scotiabank said Canada should cash in on Trump’s muscle-flexing in the Americas. “Longer-term, this is a good thing for the Western Hemisphere. It’s a good thing for the U.S. It’s a good thing for the Bank of Nova Scotia,” said Scotiabank’s CEO Scott Thomson to a Bay Street crowd.
Human rights defenders pointed to Trump’s threat to the very foundation of the United Nations. Common Frontiers called on Canada to speak out strongly, “unequivocally condemning U.S. military intervention in Venezuela.”
The Globe and Mail urged Canada to find new export markets ASAP, including building that new western oil pipeline, while using those billions for the military to increase Arctic defences (which may be a bit misplaced, considering many would feel the greatest threat to Canada is coming from the South, not the North).
A national security expert praised Carney for sending the Governor General and other officials to Greenland as a show of solidarity, and suggested adding a bit of Trump-style diplomacy to the trip. “Send our leaders on a Canadian gunboat, one of the new Arctic off-shore patrol vessels… Send along a Coast Guard ice-breaker… Bring along a company of Canadian Ranger,” wrote Wesley Wark.
I’ll give the last suggestion to former Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy, who suggested building a new coalition to offset Trump’s harmful impact.
“Canada’s path forward must blend principle with pragmatism. That means a renewed diplomatic push to uphold international law, stronger support for multilateral institutions, cooperative alignments with other countries in the Western Hemisphere, diversifying our procurement away from U.S. defence suppliers, and reinforcing our border policies to manage American spillover effects.”
What do you think? How should Canada respond to Trump’s recent attack and threats?
(If you have trouble, email your comment to me, and I will post it for you. sstaples@peacequest.ca)
Leave a comment to explain your vote.
Readers against “unCanadian” weapons
Last week’s newsletter looked at secretive plans to outfit Canada’s new submarines with Tomahawk cruise missiles. One military official called weapons “unCanadian” because only the big powers wield cruise missiles, and Canadians aren’t prepared for a new, aggressive military.
Four out of five readers (83%) said they were opposed to Canada buying cruise missiles for the Navy.
I agree we should speak out against violations of international law and especially violations of human rights. AND actions speak louder than words. Let the bully know that our lives can continue without our kowtowing to him. We can get along without him, since he doesn't offer co-operation.
Canada must react like it did in WWII to gear up with manufacturing, industry, crown corporations, and jobs. Forming stronger bonds with global allies and moving boldly with national initiatives (renewable energy projects, sustainable multi-unit housing, climate mitigation, food production, job training, electric vehicles and battery production, social services) will prop up society while generating $$ for the government, supports for people in need, and fair wages for workers.