Vancouver, BC – written March 19th, 2025 in collaboration with AI – Rising tensions between the United States and its closest allies have become increasingly difficult to ignore. As economic and security challenges evolve, Canada faces a defining moment: Should it maintain full independence, seek EU membership for stronger alliances, or integrate with the U.S. for economic stability? Each choice impacts sovereignty, trade, and national identity. As the global landscape shifts, Canada must carefully weigh its future path while balancing prosperity and self-determination.
Reassessing Alliances
In this context, unexpected tariff wars and the debate surrounding U.S. reliability as a trade and security partner have prompted countries like Canada to reassess their economic and political alliances. Following the recent U.S. election, in which Donald Trump secured victory, tensions escalated after a contentious Oval Office meeting where Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky faced sharp criticism from U.S. leadership. In response to these developments, French President Emmanuel Macron urged EU members to prepare for a future where reliance on the U.S. may no longer be guaranteed. He stated, “I want to believe the U.S. will stay by our side,” but emphasized that nations must be ready to forge their own paths if that assurance weakens.
Canadian Prime Minister
Newly Elected Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney, who served as Governor of the Bank of Canada from 2008 to 2013 before becoming a key figure in international finance, has consistently underscored the importance of Canada’s economic resilience and its reliance on robust trade relationships. In a 2019 speech at the Canadian Club of Toronto, he remarked, “Canada’s prosperity has always been tied to its ability to trade, and that means building bridges, not walls.” As seen in the Huffington Post on March 10, 2025, ““The Canadian government has rightly retaliated and is rightly retaliating with our own tariffs that will have maximum impact in the United States and minimum impact here in Canada,” Carney said. “My government will keep our tariffs on until the Americans show us respect.” Yet apparently President Trump has still endorsed Carney!
Official Opposition
Official Opposition Pierre Poilievre, a leading voice in the Conservative Party, has long emphasized the need for Canadian leadership to defend workers and businesses hit hard by U.S. tariffs, frequently clashing with the Liberal government over its handling of trade issues. In a 2022 statement on trade policy, he asserted, “Canadians deserve a government that fights for their jobs, not one that shrugs as tariffs choke our industries.” He also stated recently in an interview, “Canada will never be the 51st State of the US.” In January 2024, according to CTV, a headline reads “Pierre Poilievre says he would retaliate against Trump tariffs, reduce inter-province trade barriers if elected.”
The upcoming Canadian election will play a crucial role in shaping the country’s future direction. According to CBC, sources indicate that Carney will ask the Governor General to dissolve Parliament on Sunday and call an election, with voting day expected to be either April 28 or May 5, 2025. Canadians will have to choose between a candidate who holds three passports and a seasoned career politician—both of whom have pledged to defend Canada’s interests and respond to the newly imposed tariffs and other economic challenges. Both of whom will have to deal with President Trump and the challenges of a weakened economy.
US-Mexico-Canada Agreement
Seven years ago, the United States negotiated the (USMCA) to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), fulfilling then-President Donald Trump’s promise to reform trade relationships. Signed in 2018 and implemented in July 2020, the USMCA aimed to create stability for businesses and farmers while introducing new provisions to strengthen auto manufacturing, enhance labor rights in Mexico, and expand market access for U.S. dairy farmers. However, the agreement has faced scrutiny from various stakeholders over its long-term economic impact.
Shifting Tariffs: Trump’s Ever-Changing Trade Tactics
Fast forward to 2025, with Donald Trump re-elected as President, dissatisfaction with certain trade terms has resurfaced. On February 1, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titled Imposing Duties to Address the Flow of Illicit Drugs Across Our Northern Border (EO), directing the United States to impose additional tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China, effective February 4, 2025.
In a related Cassels report, it was noted that amid ongoing negotiations, the tariff implementation date was postponed by 30 days, moving the effective date to March 4, 2025. These developments mark a significant shift in North American trade relations, reigniting concerns over economic stability and diplomatic tensions between the three nations.
Finally, again in Cassels, “The Trump Administration announced on March 6, 2025, a temporary delay on the implementation of tariffs on all goods that qualify for US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA or CUSMA) preference. President Trump announced this delay is set to last until April 2, 2025, at which time the Trump administration plans to impose the 25% tariffs on these goods as well as move forward with additional “reciprocal” tariffs.”
Politics Makes Strange Bedfollows
This is all taking place, as many nations grapple with trillions of dollars in debt while considering borrowing more to stimulate their economies, the implications of these geopolitical shifts cannot be ignored. Countries are seeking alternatives for economic cooperation, with discussions emerging about potential partnerships beyond traditional alliances.
As seen on the Socratic Website, describing what popular quotes mean: Politics makes strange bedfellows‘ is a quote coined by American writer Charles Dudley Warner that captures the intriguing and often surprising alliances that can form within the realm of politics. At its core, this quote suggests that individuals or groups who may ordinarily have little in common or even be in opposition to one another can find themselves uniting for the sake of political gain or expediency. In the world of politics, alliances can be forged out of convenience rather than shared values or beliefs, forming a peculiar and sometimes uneasy union.The importance of this quote lies in its ability to shed light on the fluid nature of politics and the sometimes unexpected alliances that can arise.
EU or US?
One of the questions that has come up lately: Should Canada consider becoming the 28th EU member state or the 51st U.S. state? Joining the EU may offer economic benefits and greater market access while allowing Canada to maintain a distinct national identity. Conversely, statehood in the U.S. could provide immediate resources and representation but may erode Canadian sovereignty. The main issues are health care and guns. Here are some other things to consider:
Becoming the 28th EU Member State vs. the 51st State of the USA
Joining the EU:
- Sovereignty: As the 28th EU member state, Canada would gain access to a vast single market and investment opportunities while adhering to collective regulations and standards defined by EU governance. However, this would involve yielding some national sovereignty to EU institutions, particularly in areas such as trade policy, environmental regulations, and labor standards.
- Cultural Integration: Canada would align more closely with European values and norms, which could require adjustments to local laws and practices but may enhance multilateral cooperation on global issues like climate change and human rights.
Becoming the 51st State of the USA:
- Sovereignty: As a U.S. state, Canada would gain representation in Congress and access to federal funding, but it would also face the loss of significant sovereignty, as state laws would be subordinate to federal mandates. Canadian identity could be diminished within a predominantly U.S.-centric culture.
- Cultural and Economic Implications: Integration into the U.S. system would necessitate deeper cultural alignment and economic adaptation to American norms, which might conflict with Canada’s distinct heritage and policy approaches, particularly in health care and social welfare. And guns.
Debt Considerations
For Canada, the challenge extends beyond trade agreements. While the country seeks to maintain its sovereignty, uphold its commitments to supporting Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression, and continue funding extensive social services for both new and existing Canadians, there is an unavoidable economic reality: borrowing has its limits. Canada’s rising debt levels, driven by increased government spending, social programs, and global commitments, mirror economic patterns seen in other nations that have faced fiscal crises, such as Venezuela. Although Canada maintains a strong credit rating and access to international lending, history has shown that sustained borrowing without a clear path to economic balance can lead to instability.
Ultimately, as countries evaluate their positions in an increasingly uncertain world, they must also navigate the complexities of trade, alliances, and national identity. The pressing issue remains: when will the cycle of deep debt and reliance on foreign policies end, and how will these decisions shape the future of sovereignty and global cooperation?
Canadian Debt
Canada owes money to various countries as part of its international borrowing and debt agreements. Here are five countries that are notable creditors to Canada:
- United States: As one of Canada’s largest trading partners, some public debt is held by Americans through investments in Canadian government securities.
- United Kingdom: The UK is a significant investor in Canadian bonds and securities, holding a portion of Canada’s public debt.
- Japan: Japan is another country that invests in Canadian debt instruments, contributing to Canada’s international borrowing.
- China: China holds Canadian government bonds as part of its foreign exchange reserves, making it a creditor to Canada.
- Germany: Germany also invests in Canadian securities and bonds, playing a role as a creditor in the context of Canada’s external debt.
Complex Supply Chains
While Canada aspires to economic independence, the reality is far more complex. Over the past two decades, Canada has become deeply intertwined with U.S. goods, services, and supply chains—particularly in technology and manufacturing. Unraveling these economic ties is not as simple as making a policy decision; it requires navigating the practical and financial challenges of shifting production and supply networks that have been built over decades. This reliance is particularly evident in the automotive sector, where cross-border integration has shaped the industry’s efficiency and competitiveness.
TD Economics Forecasts – Automobile Example
- The president-elect recently mused: “Canada makes 20% of our cars. We don’t need that. I’d rather make them in Detroit.”
- This statement overstates the share of U.S.-sold vehicles produced in Canada by about 10 percentage points. While the U.S. could attempt to shift more production stateside, the near-to-medium-term challenges of replacing Canada’s annual exports of approximately 1.5 million vehicles are significant.
- To bridge that gap, the U.S. would need to increase domestic production by over 10% compared to current levels. Given that the average auto assembly plant produces around 225,000 units per year, this shift would require the construction of approximately six new plants—an endeavour demanding substantial time and investment.
This doesn’t factor in onshoring/expanding parts production in the assembly of those vehicles. Failing that, the U.S. would increase its reliance on parts imports.
- This would pose an even greater lift in reorienting factories, supply chains and user-choice. Canada currently only produces 14 models of vehicles, while consuming 325 models (Chart 6). Absent a seismic shift in production methods towards efficient, high-variety, low-volume processes, Canadians would likely have to consume materially fewer varieties of vehicles to produce all of its own vehicles.
- This would come at a hefty price tag for U.S. domestic producers, especially in the full-onshoring scenario.
- The other challenge surrounds vehicle choice for American consumers. It’s one thing to boost production volumes. It’s another to provide the diversity of vehicle choice. Consider that in the U.S., there were 328 different vehicle models sold in the U.S. last year, with only 121 of them being produced domestically.
- What if we re-engineer the president-elect’s argument? Could Canada on-shore production to meet its domestic needs and deliver a shot in the arm to manufacturing?
Bottom Line from the TD Economics Report
Some of the datapoints in this report may come as a surprise to readers. The bulk of the U.S. trade deficit with Canada is owing to energy. Outside of that, the scales tip into America’s favour. Even with this data, it’s proven insufficient to fend off trade attacks that will extend well beyond this current bout. In mid-2026, the USMCA comes under review. Regardless of the deals that will eventually be struck between countries, the lesson that should be learned in Canada is that there can be no guarantee against future tariff attacks.
Read the full TD Report Here – https://economics.td.com/ca-canada-us-trade-balance
Conclusion
The decision of whether to maintain the status quo, pursue EU membership, or integrate with the U.S. presents Canadians with profound implications for their sovereignty, identity, and economic future. Remaining independent allows Canada to chart its own course, making decisions without external influence. However, in an era of increasing globalization, can Canada truly sustain its sovereignty without outside economic or military alliances? Joining the European Union could provide greater diplomatic influence, stronger global partnerships, and access to a massive common market, but it would also mean adopting EU regulatory frameworks and policies.
Conversely, integration as a U.S. state would offer immediate economic benefits, enhanced defense, and shared infrastructure investments. However, it could also erode Canada’s unique cultural identity, alter its governance systems, and challenge key policies like universal healthcare and bilingualism. While economic ties with the U.S. are already deep, full political integration would be a seismic shift in national identity and autonomy.
Ultimately, Canadians must weigh these factors carefully in contemplating their nation’s future trajectory, especially with the upcoming election in Canada set for April or May 2025. Can Canada continue to thrive independently in a rapidly changing global landscape, or will shifting economic and security needs push it toward closer integration with a larger entity? The balance between prosperity, sovereignty, and cultural preservation will not only shape Canada’s place in the world for generations to come but will also be a key issue in the electoral debates that will influence future policies.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are based on information gathered from various sources on the internet and represent my personal opinion. They do not necessarily reflect the views of Westcoast German News.
About The Author
