U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at a rally in Gastonia, N.C., on Wednesday. As Mark Carney was correct to remark, the signature of the U.S. on a treaty these days is written in pencil, the editorial board writes.Alex Brandon/The Associated Press
There has been a great swirl of uncertainty about exactly why trade talks between Canada and the United States broke off last month, with the Trump administration pointing the finger at grasping by Canadians and the Carney government saying that American demands were fundamentally incompatible with this country’s sovereignty.
Neither Ottawa nor Washington have released the text of the agreement being negotiated, so Canadians have only had broad descriptions from the Liberal government to go on. Even so, that broad language was concerning: The U.S. had sought to alter federal policies on the use of French, to have a veto over future Canadian trade deals and to have the right to alter the agreement in future as it saw fit.
Previously, this space has urged the government to provide the wording of those proposals. But Ottawa’s description of events was bolstered immensely this week by an unexpected source: the Oval Office.
When asked about discussions between Canada and the European Union about deeper trade ties, U.S. President Donald Trump had this to say: “If they do that, if I think it’s at all a hostile act, I will put very serious tariffs or stop trading with Europe on many things... If it’s a good intention, that’s fine. If it’s a bad intention, we’ll put very heavy tariffs on Europe.”
The European Union, it’s worth noting, already negotiated an agreement last year to whittle down the unilateral tariffs that Mr. Trump imposed. The EU parliament ratified the terms of that deal in June.
Mr. Trump, by his own words, is not willing to abide by the terms of that deal. He will simply ignore that arrangement and reimpose tariffs or stop trade altogether (an admittedly fantastical thought).
Carney promises sweeping economic legislation, fast pace this fall
So, Prime Minister Mark Carney was exactly correct to point out that the signature of the United States on a treaty these days is written in pencil. And the assertion that the Trump administration wanted the power to unilaterally rewrite any provisions in a U.S.-Canada trade agreement is looking like a very solid assertion indeed.
Then there is the more fundamental issue of why Mr. Trump might threaten tariffs or a trade embargo at all. He is, somehow, unsettled by the prospect of Canada and Europe forging closer trade and policy ties. Why might that be?
The answer is not hard to figure out: It can be found on page 15 of the National Security Strategy that the Trump administration issued last year. There, the White House spells out the “Trump corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine (since dubbed the Donroe Doctrine), in which the United States asserts its right to dominate the Western Hemisphere.
With that in mind, Mr. Trump’s otherwise bizarre intimation of a “hostile act” by the European Union – 23 of its 27 members are formal U.S. allies, it’s worth remembering – starts to become a little clearer. Mr. Trump views those closer ties as an incursion into his sphere of influence.
That is exactly the imperial mindset that the Carney government, necessarily, rejected in August, and continues to reject. Mr. Carney hit on that theme in his Thursday speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France.
“I want to be precise about what I am not proposing. I am not proposing a third bloc in order to become a great-power rival – only with better manners,” he said, adding that Canada is pursuing a deal “so no one can control our open markets, impair our sovereignty, threaten our territorial integrity or undermine our freedoms, our democracies, our rule of law.”
The Prime Minister did not say who that “no one” is. He did not need to.
Tony Keller: Carney laid out a vision of Canada’s future. Now comes the hard part
Mr. Trump’s opposition to deeper ties between Canada and the EU is understandable in that it would reduce his ability to use economic integration as political leverage against this country. His anger is morally wrong, but rational enough. His bullying of Canada, aimed at forcing this country to accept subjugation, has had the opposite effect.
For the moment, Mr. Trump has the ability to damage the Canadian economy through tariffs and other trade actions. But over time, expanded trade and diplomatic ties with the EU, a new pipeline to the West Coast and other measures will erode that leverage. The bully’s grasp will slip.
As we’ve previously said, Ottawa was right to reject a deal last month that would have placed unacceptable and unprecedented limits on national sovereignty. If there were any doubts, Mr. Trump shredded them this week.