In Michael Moore’s 1995 comedy Canadian Bacon, Alan Alda plays a bumbling American president looking to use an international conflict to distract U.S. voters from economic problems he can’t solve. With the Cold War thawed, he has no obvious enemy to pick a fight with, which leads Alda’s character to jokingly state “How about Canada?” That suggestion snowballs, and Canada ends up Uncle Sam’s new wag-the-dog toy.
Featuring John Candy in one of his last movie roles, Canadian Bacon playfully mocks American ignorance of our nation along with Canadian stereotypes. We are depicted as simple syrup-loving people who remain polite in the face of hostility. The humour worked, at least for Second City fans, because nobody at the time could imagine a war between Canada and the United States—and not just because both nations are members of NATO. Simply put, despite different approaches to nation building and opposing relationships with Mother Britain, which resulted in the U.S. invasion of Canadian territory in 1812, we have long coexisted as relatively respectful neighbours, ones who have agreed to disagree on many things while benefiting from the integration of our economies and fighting side by side to defend common values.
But times change, and since winning the recent U.S. election, Donald Trump has been celebrating his decisive victory, along with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s looming resignation, by broadcasting his version of “Blame Canada.” In that satirical South Park movie tune, our nation is accused of teaching American children to “fart and curse.” Trump’s insistence that Canada and Mexico should both be hit with a blanket 25-per-cent tariff as punishment for being major contributors to America’s problems with illegal immigration and drugs is equally ridiculous. Nevertheless, Canadian politicians legitimized this threat by scrambling to announce border improvement initiatives. We also weakened our position by indicating a willingness to throw Mexico under the bus while renegotiating existing trade agreements. And after watching us dance to his tune, Trump added insult to injury by suggesting he might deploy economic warfare to coerce Canada into becoming America’s 51st state.
As Globe and Mail columnist Tony Keller recently pointed out, “Canada has lived in the lee of the American empire – which was, at least for the past century with regard to us, a mostly positive thing. We had the good luck to live next to the Great Republic and not, say, China or Russia or any one of a long list of hungry neighbours. Maybe that benevolent state of affairs will return, but for the next four years we have Mr. Trump. Instead of the American exceptionalism, he incarnates its all-too common opposite.” And that’s something Canada needs to remember as Trump unleashes his shock-and-awe policy campaign in the days and months ahead.
Trump’s initial talk of forcing an annexation of Canada could have been nothing more than an undiplomatic joke. He might not even have been serious when threatening to impose stiff tariffs on Canada and Mexico, which failed to materialize as promised on inauguration day. But the threat of economic destruction remains. As Ivey Business School professor Andreas Schotter explained in the Ivey publication Impact, sweeping trade threats often give way to more targeted and limited measures. But even a much smaller blanket tariff of just 10 per cent could trigger a Canadian GDP contraction of 2.4 per cent, while putting 500,000 jobs at risk.
As things stand, Trump still insists Canada and Mexico should expect blanket 25-per-cent tariffs. But he has also ordered his advisors to make policy recommendations related to America’s major trade deficits after examining the flow of unlawful migration and fentanyl into the United States. That could turn out well for us. After all, a trade war with Canada isn’t in America’s best interests, and we have already announced plans to tighten our border, which relatively speaking, isn’t even an issue. And yet, nobody knows what to expect in the days ahead. Everything depends on what Trump thinks makes him look good, which can change overnight. The only constant we can take to the bank is his need to appear tough. And that’s why Canada needs to play it cool and stop publicly issuing threats of our own until the lay of land becomes clear. We should also stop making references to 1812 while pointing out why becoming American isn’t an attractive proposition for most of us.
After Trump first started referring to Canada as America’s 51st state, Ontario Premier Doug Ford playfully suggested his need to impose tariffs stems from some historic insecurity, telling Fox News host Neil Cavuto, “I guess he’s still upset that in 1812 we burned down the White House and he’s holding a grudge after 212 years. He’s a funny guy.”
Despite getting some things wrong, including the date (the burning of Washington took place in 1814), Ford’s remark was celebrated by Canadians who have long seen referencing the War of 1812 as the perfect comeback to any American diss. But a few weeks after Ford did this, Fox News host Jesse Watters started calling Canadian patriotism an insult to Americans. During another interview with Ford, Watters insisted every non-American on the planet except Canadians would welcome giving up their national identity for the privilege of becoming an American citizen. When asked what our problem was, Ford politely noted that Canadians simply love Canada as much as Americans love America. Watters—who has an audience of about 4 million Americans—then made it clear that he thought this was ridiculous by ending the discussion stating: “So this may just have to be a hostile takeover.”
It is never wise to poke a real bear. The same can be said about giving a political one reason to expand its territory, and a second Trump term promises to produce an administration with cocaine bear unpredictability. In this environment, publicly boasting about how defenders of the Great White North previously kicked American butt in an actual war could move Trump to inflict serious pain on us just to look strong. It could also spur him to seriously consider trying to annex our nation, or perhaps just the part of it most open to the idea. At the very least, Canadian tough talk makes it harder for Trump to focus his attention elsewhere.
Keep in mind that Trump—who claims to be on an expansionary mission from God to make America great again—has previously invoked the burning of the White House to justify calling Canada a national security risk. So given what is at stake today, and the fact that Canada does have a lot of resources that would make America stronger, all concerned would benefit from acknowledging our nations have never been at war.
For the record, the War of 1812 was a pre-Confederation conflict between Americans and the British Empire, which raided Washington, DC, and set it ablaze after American soldiers burned York—aka Toronto. As Vox noted the last time Trump was president, most of the soldiers involved didn’t even hail from Canada. The raid on Washington was led by General Robert Ross, who “had been fighting in Spain prior to his unit’s reassignment to the war with the United States—which suggests the troops were Europeans, most likely from the British Isles.” So, let’s forget it.
I am not suggesting Canada shouldn’t stand proud. On one level, I agreed when Allan Rock, former federal cabinet minister and former Canadian ambassador to the United Nations, argued for some righteous rage. But Rock lost me when calling on Trudeau to bluntly scold America’s “loudmouth” for his disrespectful rhetoric over the phone. The problem here isn’t just that Trump hates Trudeau. The bigger issue is that the U.S. president is a narcissist who doesn’t typically take—or even take in—advice. Trump wouldn’t listen even if Wayne Gretzky, someone he likes, tried to get him to play nice with Canada.
In an ideal world, our nation would be facing this ridiculous situation with a prime minister like the one played by Hugh Grant in the movie Love Actually. In that flick, Britian is being bullied to accept unacceptable treatment by a U.S. president with little respect for weaker nations, not to mention a fondness for sexual harassment. During a joint press conference, after witnessing his cocky American counterpart make unsolicited moves on a female staffer, Grant’s character boldly tells the world, “I fear that this has become a bad relationship; a relationship based on the president taking exactly what he wants and casually ignoring all those things that really matter to, erm . . . Britain. We may be a small country, but we’re a great one, too. The country of Shakespeare, Churchill, the Beatles, Sean Connery, Harry Potter. David Beckham’s right foot. David Beckham’s left foot, come to that. And a friend who bullies us is no longer a friend. And since bullies only respond to strength, from now onward I will be prepared to be much stronger. And the president should be prepared for that.”
Any decent Canadian writer could craft a similar speech about why Canadians are proud of our nation and its accomplishments—which includes the invention of many things that improve American lives, including insulin and electric wheelchairs—although it might be best to ignore how both basketball and baseball were invented by Canadians (see earlier point about poking the bear). But thanks to the Trudeau-manufactured leadership vacuum in Ottawa, we don’t have a national leader capable of standing up for us and being heard on either side of the border.
Despite his lame duck status, Trudeau appears ready to go to war with Trump and Alberta, insisting everything is on the table when it comes to fighting U.S. tariffs while promising to match American levies “dollar-for-dollar.” Meanwhile, provincial leaders are at odds over what to do. Ford is ready to hit back with a retaliatory “sledgehammer,” which he insists should include costly export bans on oil, gas and electricity. But Alberta Premier Danielle Smith warns any attempt to ban or restrict oil exports from her province will risk a Canadian unity crisis.
Amid this lack of direction, responses from other high-profile Canadians have been all over the map. Appointing himself lead negotiator of team sovereignty surrender, Kevin O’Leary has argued we should embrace Trump’s threats as a golden opportunity to merge our economies in a win–win way, which, as Globe and Mail columnist Andrew Coyne notes, isn’t at all what Trump has proposed. Meanwhile, Don Tapscott and John Manley have been penning patriotic commentaries explaining why Trump should consider changing his rally cry from MAGA to MAAGAC (make America as great as Canada) and accept a merger on our terms.
In a Fortune article, Tapscott noted, “Our homicide rate is one-third that of the U.S.; and while many Canadians enjoy their firearms, gun-control laws from the late 1970s have limited gun-related deaths to just 300 per year. Compare that to almost 50,000 annually south of the border and you’ll understand why we believe our system is better.”
In a sarcastic open letter to Trump, Manley pointed out, “All Canadian politicians support our single-payer health care system because no one is refused treatment for their inability to pay and no one goes broke because they suffer a catastrophic illness. In effect, all of our citizens have lifetime critical illness insurance provided by the government. And while it’s expensive, our system costs considerably less than yours, with 100 per cent of the population covered! Your citizens will love it, I promise.”
None of this has been helpful. Publicly disagreeing over what Canada should do in a trade war before it even starts only exposes the fact that our sledgehammer might be more like a rubber mallet. Pointing out America’s flaws while trying to avoid anti-Canadian policies is equally dumb, especially when using the trade weapons that we have at our disposal could backfire by locking in American resolve while costing us dearly and dividing our nation.
So, what should be done? We need to stop thinking we can sell a win-win solution directly to Trump. As Ivey professor Ann Frost noted in the IBJ Insight “The Art of Dealing with Narcissism,” leaders like Trump don’t typically listen to reason or even care about what you want, but they do care about what other people think. So, let’s focus on collectively and calmly educating Americans on how trade with Canada subsidizes their well-being instead of rips them off. This can be done in partnerships with U.S. interests that would be hurt in a trade war. America benefits from Canadian trade much more than Trump admits, so support for tariffs on Canadian goods should drop if they are seen as an inflationary threat that will only get worse if we are forced to retaliate.
At the same time, we should work as a united country to figure out how to increase internal trade while diversifying our economy and reducing our reliance on the U.S. market. This requires more realism and less politics. We should also see what is happening next door with regards to DEI and market regulation as an opportunity to sell Canada as a more stakeholder friendly place to invest.
Finally, we should seriously consider giving Trump the appearance of a win by aggressively moving to meet our NATO commitments. We have long failed to even come close to the defence-spending benchmark of 2 per cent of national GDP, and that’s not frustrating to just our American allies. Meeting the benchmark would cost real money, but it is a pill we should have figured out how to swallow years ago.
As Grady Munro and Jake Fuss of the Fraser Institute pointed out last year, “The days are long gone where Canada was simply one of many NATO members that failed to meet the alliance’s defence spending target, and we are now one of only eight countries that spends less than two per cent of GDP on defence. Indeed, NATO estimates we will spend 1.37 per cent of GDP on defence in 2024.” (UPDATE: On January 23, Trump announced he will demand the NATO benchmark be increased to 5 per cent, making our current defence spending an even bigger issue).
According to Globe and Mail columnist Konrad Yakabuski—who points out America pays a real price for being home to the world’s reserve currency, while Canada benefits from selling into the American economy with a weaker dollar—Trump’s threatened tariffs could prove to be the price Canada must pay for free-riding on defence. But nothing is written in stone.
Announcing a credible plan to meet our NATO commitment much sooner than currently planned would rob Trump of his go-to criticism of our nation. And if we don’t shoot ourselves in the foot with needless references to 1812 or the premature use of aggressive countermeasures, we could find our way back to being treated as a valued trading partner, instead of a deadbeat takeover target.
Rapidly increasing defence spending could be done creatively. If Trump can label Canada a national security threat, we should be able to include more border expenditures in our defence budget. We could also increase investments in infrastructure or research related to artificial intelligence or quantum computing, both of which pose real threats to national security.
In an interview with The Daily Show host Jon Stewart, Liberal Party leader hopeful Mark Carney tried to be playfully diplomatic when he told Americans, “It is not you, it’s us.” But the truth of the matter is that most of us prefer our way of life. And since many Americans clearly feel the same way, nobody needs to sugarcoat our desire to remain Canadian.
That said, let’s not forget that Trump has returned to power without being surrounded by people looking to keep him in check. Our traditional relationship with the United States flies in the face of how powerful nations have treated weaker ones throughout most of history. And if we want to keep it that way without kissing the ring of a wannabe king, we need to keep our powder dry and stop openly fighting about whether we can use it while exploring other options.
There may be nothing Ottawa can do to mitigate the threats coming out of Washington, especially while Trudeau remains in charge. But our two nations share enough common interests to make our historic relationship worth preserving, and maintaining a costly tough-on-Canada campaign could quickly become the last thing Trump cares about now that he is officially back in the White House. And so, as unexpected headaches mount for Trump at home and abroad, it is in our national interest to be more smart than passionate in our response to his threats and theatrics.
In other words, until it is clearly time to drops the gloves, let’s stop acting like good scapegoats and be more like the friendly buffoons in Canadian Bacon.