Front Burner - Is MAGA weaponizing Alberta separatism?

Episode Date: January 28, 2026

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has weighed in on the separatism movement in Alberta. Bessent has said that the province is a “natural partner” to the U.S., and that it has “great resources”.While Bessent is certainly the most high profile U.S. official to muse about Alberta separatism, he hasn’t been the only MAGA supporter to chime in. Donald Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon and Republican congressman Andy Ogles have also waded into the debate.Today we’re asking why MAGA is eyeing Alberta separatism and whether it’s a threat to Canada’s national security.Joining us: Jason Markusoff, writer and producer for CBC Calgary, and Patrick Lennox, a national security expert who ran for the Liberals in the last federal election in Edmonton. We’ll also hear from Jeffrey Rath, legal counsel and spokesperson for the Alberta Prosperity Project. That’s the main advocacy group pushing for Alberta independence.For transcripts of Front Burner, please visit: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcripts

This ascent isn't for everyone. You need grit to climb this high this often. You've got to be an underdog that always overdelivers. You've got to be 6,500 hospital staff, 1,000 doctors all doing so much with so little. You've got to be Scarborough. Defined by our uphill battle and always striving towards new heights. And you can help us keep climbing. Donate at lovescarbro.cairro.com.

This is a CBC podcast. Hey, everybody, it's Jamie. Alberta is a natural partner for the U.S. They have great resources. In an interview last week, as tensions ratcheted up between the U.S. administration in Canada after Prime Minister Mark Kearney's speech at Davos,

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Besson weighed in on separatism in Alberta. The Albertans are very independent people, rumors that they may have a referendum on whether they want to stay in Canada or not. Sounds like you may know something up there. What people are saying? While Besson is certainly the most high-profile Trump official to muse about Alberta separatism, he hasn't been the only mega supporter to chime in.

Here's Steve Bannon, Trump's former chief strategist. You're seeing a shift in Canada right now, and this is why I think Alberta in this succession movement that they're seeing, they're sitting there going, it's not just about economics, that's not about tax policy. Canada is rapidly changing 25%. And Republican Congressman Andy Ogles of Tennessee. I think the people of Alberta would agree with that sentiment that they would prefer not to be a part of Canada and be a part of the United States because we are winning day in and day out.

Today, why is MAGA eyeing Alberta separatism? And is this a threat to Canada's national security? I've got two guests with me, Jason Markisoff, as a writer in person. producer for CBC Calgary. And Patrick Lennox is a national security expert with extensive experience in the Federal Civil Service. For transparency, I'll note that he ran for the liberals in the last federal election in Edmonton. So Jason, let me start with you. And let's start with the comments from Scott Besson. He's talking about Alberta being a, quote, natural partner to the U.S. And just what do you think he means by that exactly? By national partner, he's talking about

the idea of a pipeline. He spent quite a bit of that little interview on Real America's voice talking about how America, Canada doesn't seem to be willing to let Alberta develop a new West Coast pipeline. Well, look, Alberta is a wealth of natural resources, but they won't let them build a pipeline to the Pacific. I think we should let them come down into the U.S. and Alberta's You know, seemingly

oblivious to the MOU that Mark Carney signed with Danielle Smith, but he says your oil will be more than welcome down here. Of course, there already is the Keystone Excel pipeline. Alberta ships most of its bitumen southward and what he's suggesting is that we would have

more of it. So when he said, well, we'd welcome more of you down here. He's talking about oil. But of course, when he then gets into talking about the referendum that he rumor has it, which of course is far more than a rumor that there could be a referendum in Alberta that's a process started. A lot of candidate canineers are going to perk up that he's even talking about it.

The fact that a U.S. cabinet level official is talking about Alberta separatism in seemingly favorable, positive, jovial terms is a huge significant turn in the level of American interest and potential influence on this. very least, the fact that he is talking about this and Andy Ogles, the congressman is talking about this, shows that this is on their radar, that people in Washington, high, high offices are talking about this, are thinking about this, and are aware that Alberta is looking to potentially leave Canada. Yeah. And just straight up, you know, people are already calling this foreign interference. And like I mentioned in the intro, we have heard some other voices in the

mega orbit, talk about Alberta separatism, and just expand for me on what exactly we have been hearing and from whom? Yeah, it's not, I wouldn't say it's many. I mean, it's not a gusher. We'll see if there is more to come now that we hear people like Scott Besson talking about this. And certainly, on Scott Besson, even if it's on a rather obscure U.S. outlet, our Real America's voice starts talking about this. People in America and in Canada definitely noticed it. But we'd have been hearing some bits and chat. about it before. Steve Bannon, the former chief advisor, Donald Trump in his first term, has been talking about it on his podcast. And there's this national security commentator, Brandon Weikert, who's been talking about that affair. But he runs this website called, or writes this website called National Interest. And he's been talking about Alberta as the linchpin. When Donald Trump talks about the 51st state, as Canada, what he's really talking about is Alberta, the province with the oil, the province with the natural resources. The Alberta's are ready to vote in the next six months. They're getting out of the Canadian Union. They're going to become an independent state, independent country. We're going to recognize them, and that's going to put them on the pathway to becoming the 51st state.

And here's why that's important. Alberta has a bevy of untapped rare earth minerals. They have the world's largest geothermal energy sources. They have some of the world's largest natural gas and oil deposits. What he's suggesting is that the statehood or the, the independence movement could become this stepping stone for Alberta to become either a state or part of the, part of the U.S. as a territory protectorate. Who knows? But it's all of this interesting piece.

I think that Canada should be mindful of that Donald Trump and the Republicans are wanting Western Hemisphere resources. Venezuela became about the oil. Yeah. Greenland became about natural resources. And Alberta is this big trove of oil and other minerals for the U.S. to potentially desire, crave, and try to exploit. Yeah, and I also saw this guy, Brandon, Whitechard, talking about how Alberta is, I don't know, in some way, the gateway to the Arctic in his estimation. Greenland is another gateway to the Arctic. So when we talk about hemispheric defense, we're not just talking about Latin America.

We're talking about the polar regions too, Steve, and how they all link together. We have also heard the people leading the charge for a separation vote make their case on conservative media in the U.S. too, the people behind the Alberta separation movement here. For example, Jeffrey Rath, legal counsel for the Alberta Prosperity Project, I myself just got off the phone with Mr. Rath. He has been on Fox and Friends, for example. He's done interviews, including a longer one with Rachel Parker, a conservative. of journalist influencer who used to work for True North. And Jason, just tell me more about what you have heard from Rath on all of this. So in March was one of his first on Fox and Friends, the Fox News Morning Show.

And back then, this was just kind of around the time that the 51st state rhetoric was going. And Jeff Rath was down in the states talking with a group about potentially making a case for Alberta as the 51st state. Right now, our group is very small. It's a steering committee of people that are looking to come to Washington on an exploratory basis and meet with a representative of appointment by President Trump to explore the benefits of either Alberta becoming an independent sovereign nation with economic union to the United States, becoming a U.S. territory, or pursuing full statehood. Flash forward to a few months later, the separatist movement really starts picking up

steam. He becomes the movement's de facto chief lawyer, one of the chief spokespeople. He's kind of dropped the 51st state rhetoric. But he has gone back again to meet with U.S. officials. He talks about meeting people in the state department. He doesn't say with whom he's meeting, but he has talked about, he's talked to them about if Alberta were to separate. What sort of support? What sort of assurances can you give us? He's pitching for a $500 billion credit facility or line of credit for this independent state so that Canada can threaten a breakaway state of Alberta economically. He's talking about ideally in his mind, the U.S. supporting and being one of the first countries to recognize an independent Alberta, these sort of things that would be necessary for effective statehood if Alberta were to separate.

So he's looking for the U.S. United States government, not necessarily as a you know, bring in U.S., bring in a free Alberta, but to support it, to lend its support as an independent movement. I mean, everybody needs to keep in mind, we are private citizens, right? We do not have any authority to enter into agreements on behalf of the province of Alberta or anybody, right? These meetings are purely academic from an academic perspective, so that we can educate our fellow Albertans on what hypothetically might be possible in the context of a free and independent Alberta, period. He was just saying to me essentially that he was kind of initially open to seeing if the

U.S. could offer like a better deal in terms of joining the U.S., but over time. We've since determined that there is no interest in the United States in Alberta becoming a state of the United States. It's not practically possible and also not popular in Alberta. So really all of his efforts are on just becoming an independent nation. I should also mention these meetings that Rath is talking about, they have yet to be confirmed by any U.S. officials. Patrick, I want to bring you in here.

You comment this from a national security lens. Also, you went through that interview that Rath did with Rachel Parker very carefully. And just tell me what you heard in that interview that concerned you. Well, Jason, I think, did a really good job at covering the landscape of my concerns. You know, I think when I first listened to it,

I thought to myself, well, look, the APP and Jeff Roth, they're not elected. They have no official standing in either Canada or in Alberta. And yet they claim to have met on three separate occasions with high-level officials of the Trump administration to plot out like sort of a future state scenario where Alberta is no longer part of Canada. The people that we're meeting with go directly from our meetings to the Oval Office. So that's the level, you know, that's the level that we're meeting at.

So we're very, very pleased about that. We had a, you know, it was a long meeting. We were, you know, we were at it for several hours, you know, going through all of the ways in which the United States government could support Alberta independence when the timing was right. Jason got into the specific, so I won't go over that again. But I think it's really important to kind of connect that fact set with the national security strategy that was published in mid-November by the U.S. where they lay out a plan to dominate the Western Hemisphere through a form of resource imperialism. As Jason mentioned, Alberta is a province rich in oil and gas

and critical minerals with a small population. So it's not hard to arrive at the conclusion that it could be an obvious target for U.S. expansionism. Wrath brought up China with me pretty quickly. The reason that they're enthusiastic about a free and independent Alberta is that they are, from the perspective of the United States government, that the third largest oil field in the world, specifically the oil and gas resources of Alberta, are currently being controlled by communist China through communist Chinese agents within the Carney government in Ottawa.

Yeah, he talked about it on that podcast. And again, he talked about it with me about how he thinks the landlocking of Alberta's resources is being done at the behest of the Chinese, essentially. I mean, the one thing that we all fervently believe and have in common is that, that the government in Ottawa and the landlocking of Alberta's resources is being done by Ottawa at the behest of the communist Chinese. And the Americans, you know, see it within. He thinks stuff like the tanker ban is at the behest of the Chinese, he said to me without evidence. Communist China benefits from all of this because they want to keep Alberta oil and gas locked

in the ground until they develop enough oil and gas projects in northern Alberta, northeastern British Columbia, which are all ongoing right now until they can fill a pipeline with natural gas or if they can fill a pipe wine. And he has said that, you know, he thinks the Americans see it in their national interest. He cites the Monroe Doctrine and their new national security strategy to support Alberta's independence and like free the third largest oil reserves in the world. And just tell me more about why that raised alarm bells for you. Well, I think it's the beginning, the crystallization of a false narrative, a piece of disinformation

that's going to start to flood our information ecosystem. And I think it will be a major talking point throughout a referendum. It's obviously false. It's obviously ridiculous. It makes no sense whatsoever. But that is going to be the narrative or the talking point that starts to pervade Alberta's referendum, which is obviously quite divisive.

It's not good for the province. It's not good for the country, especially at a time like this. And so I think platforming somebody like Rath in this moment when Canada really requires national unity to survive is problematic. And do you also worry about the American seizing on this narrative? Well, I think the Americans are the ones who are implanting it. You know, I think it's the American disinformation machine that we have to be very concerned

with at the moment. They are an incredible force globally right now. You only have to think about Trump's second inauguration and the tech oligarchs who are lined up behind him. They're the ones who are in control of the algorithms. They're the ones who are in control of pushing information and ideas to people. It's a frightening prospect, frankly, Jamie. Isn't for everyone. You need grit to climb this high this often.

You've got to be an underdog that always over delivers. You've got to be 6,500 hospital staff, 1,000 doctors, all doing so much with so little. You've got to be Scarborough. Defined by our uphill battle and always striving towards new heights. And you can help us keep climbing. Donate at lovescarbro.com. If journalism is the first draft of history, what happens if that draft is flawed? In 1999, four Russian apartment buildings were bombed, hundreds killed.

But even now, we still don't know for sure who did it. It's a mystery that sparked chilling theories. I'm Helena Merriman, and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss the first time? The History Bureau, Putin and the apartment bombs. Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts. I want to be clear here.

It is legal in Canada, of course, to advocate and campaign in support of a province or territory leaving Confederation. This is protected by, I think, it's the Clarity Act, right? And also the Charter. So, you know, why do you think that this could be a threat to national security? If you could just distill it for me. So I think the key element here is that you're absolutely right. It is entirely legal to advocate for the breakup of a province from Confederation. You're right, it's covered in the Clarity Act and it's certainly covered under the Charter. But when that combines with foreign interference, which is a broad and I think evolving term of art in the government of Canada, but it's currently defined in terms of malign activities. undertaken by foreign states or those acting on behalf of a foreign state to advance their own strategic objectives to the detriment of Canada's national security.

So, you know, these are activities that would undermine Canadian sovereignty and social cohesion. They would diminish trust in our institutions and degrade the rights and freedoms to which Canadians are entitled. I think these are in play right now, right? When we talk about the United States and their current relationship with Canada, it's adversarial. I think we've been threatened on multiple occasions in an escalating fashion by the Trump administration. And when high-level officials are meeting with people who, like Jeff Rath, who are intentionally trying to break Alberto out of Confederation, that should raise alarm bells. What is the bar for something to be considered foreign interference? Did you hear Scott Besson's comments last week and think that that was foreign interference?

No, I think, I mean, that's him speaking openly. It's not a clandestine, you know, plot. He's, he's being very open about what he thinks should happen. And he's sort of sort of opening the door to Alberta becoming part of the United States. Right. Jason, let me bring you back in here. You have made the argument that the more Trump allies covet or show interest in Alberta, the less popular. the idea of separation may become and flesh out that argument for me. So let's start with the understanding that separatism in Alberta is not popular writ large. Polling is showed that maybe between 20 and 30, 35 percent of Albertans support. Separatism. When you ask them, do you support Alberta becoming part of the United States? That drops even further.

People are very, very opposed to it. Not a lot of people are big, big fans of it. And it seems like Jeff Rath and others in the movement are acutely aware of that. And that's why if somebody asks, what about the U.S. taking over? What about the U.S. interfering? What about is this just a big step for Alberta to become the 51st state or a territory? They'll say that's not what we want. One of the things that Jeff Rath and the other chief spokesman, Mitch Sylvester, like to say, is that we're not fighting to get out of the influence of the CRA, the Canada Revenue Agency, just to get involved with the IRS, the U.S., the U.S., version of the CRA.

They are aware that it's not popular, that people who are going to want to be Albert to be independent and free, want Alberta to be independent and free. Want Alberta to be independent free. They don't want to join the U.S. And I think that they're especially aware that for the people who are soft separatists, they're probably, like most of Canada, are very opposed and very disturbed by what's going on in the United States with various Trump. Trump adventures, certainly some of the ice stuff that I've seen in Minnesota is upsetting to a broad swath of Canadians, the Greenland Adventurism, what's happening in Venezuela and so much else that there is a big weariness of this. So the more that Trump and others get interested, and the more that people say that this is all just, you know, U.S. gobbling up a province of Alberta,

that there will be some federalists, some anti-separatist in Alberta who say, good, it makes it harder for them to prove and win their case. Patrick, do you worry that an increased interest in the topic online could sway public opinion? Let me give you an example. Angus Bridgman from McGill's media ecosystem observatory did this quick bit of an analysis for us and found there have been almost 200 instances of top U.S. influencers and podcasters discussing separatism over the last year. And they come entirely, almost entirely from right-wing media that frames the movement favorably as well as drawing parallels to Texas and share conservative values around oil guns. opposition to progressive politics. And, you know, do you think that more of that or more concerted campaigns could shift things here? Yeah, I mean, obviously that's very troubling to me. I think, you know, the American disinformation machine kind of fueled on mega sentiments thrives in division and the hardening of differences between segments of a population. It thrives in

conflict and anger and frankly rage. And it's rise in disinformation, right? And so there's going to be a real need to start to counter some of these narratives that are phony, that are false, that are, you know, painting our country in a very different light than is what is truth, what is the reality of things. What do you think it is ultimately that these U.S. officials might be interested in here? when it comes to the separatism movement, just if you could boil it down? I think they are interested in seeing Canada, which is now sort of the one beacon of liberal democracy in North America, divided and fractured. I think they see this as a way to make Trump's vision of Canada becoming the 51st state a reality. And, you know, I think that, you know, the more

the temperature is turned up when it comes to all of the, as you said, I mean, as the researcher from McGill found, you know, this is what happened in Brexit, right? I mean, Brexit, the leave side started at something like 30 or 40 percent favorability. Steve Bannon played a very important role in Brexit. People need to realize that. And he is laser focused on this situation as far as I'm concerned right here in Canada. And he is starting to spin the narratives that on his show that we are starting to see come out of Scott Bassette. You know, and so I think those are things that we should be tracking and tracing and figuring

out ways to push back against. Are we tracking and tracing them? Like, do you think that Canada is prepared for this moment, that we have the infrastructure and the people ready to do this? I think this is coming at a really bad time for us, frankly. It's sort of a perfect storm. There are so many different things that we're trying to build and create and pivot on the upheaval and the Canada-U.S. relationship. We may have been able to see this coming last January, but I'm not sure that we fully have digested it up until the prime minister's speech at Davos, where I think you really kind of pop the bubble.

You know, we're not going back to some kind of a normal relationship with the United States, not any time soon at least. And so we need to figure out, you know, how do we insulate ourselves against some of these tactics, these MAGA-influenced tactics that could very well play a role in this democratic process that is set to play out in Alberta, but also others across Canada. Jason, where are we right now on the road to a referendum in Alberta? I know that other national security experts have raised concerns that if the separation vote goes ahead, elections Alberta might not be equipped to deal with the risk of foreign interference. There is that risk, but it seems like we are well in our way to having this referendum, having this big, intense conversation within Alberta about whether Alberta wants to stay in Canada or not.

Daniel Smith, the Premier, has made it very easy for the separatist movement to force a referendum. They've started this petition drive. They need to get 177,732 signatures supporting this referendum, and then it will be willed into being. That's barely 6% of the electorate. So a very small group of people within Alberta can do that. And they seem like they're well on their way. to getting that. They have until May to collect these signatures. Just on Monday, they filled a room with more than 3,000 people in Calgary. And that's in an urban setting, supporting separatism. It's a very popular sentiment outside of the big city. So it sounds like this, you know, it's very high potential that this goes ahead. Whether they can move from 20, 30% of the population supporting it to 50%. That's a whole other question. and that'll be a whole part of a debate and could trigger this very, very visible patriotism within Alberta.

We saw this last fall of another referendum drive for a petition to stay in Canada by a former deputy premier, Thomas Lekazek, didn't seem like it was going to do very well, but attracted more than 400,000 signatures, more than double what this separatist referendum wants. Now, in terms of elections Alberta and their equipment and the ability to track foreign funding, foreign influence, funding will certainly be their vehicle. To look at that, I mean, they can't police all speech by any measure, nor do we, you know, probably should they. But they, you know, they say that they will be able to monitor for foreign funds. Jeff Rath and the separatists in Stafree, Alberta say they would not accept U.S. money. And, of course, there would be legal consequences if they were to take foreign funding and be caught with it. That doesn't mean it's foolproof. But at least there is an institution that is aware of this and will be hopefully watching this.

Yeah. What does Premier Daniel Smith's office said about these latest developments, Bessence comments, et cetera, if anything? I mean, they're always in this tricky place because Daniel Smith will. always insist that she supports a strong Alberta within the United Canada, that she's not in favor of separatism. But she's been very permissive of this separatist group getting, being able to to get this referendum into place because she's aware that this is a big part of her base. She was asked this week about Besson's comments. And she said, you know, we're, we want to sell them oil. We want to develop a pipeline there.

So we're on side with that. but she says just more matter-of-factly that I don't think Albertans are in favor of U.S., Alberta becoming part of the U.S. When I talk to people who are frustrated with the way we've been treated for the past 10 years, they don't say, therefore, I want to be an American state. That is not what I am hearing. She's walking this fine line. I mean, she doesn't want to tick off the U.S. because they're a big trading partner,

and, you know, Alberta is not affected by a lot of the tariffs that other sectors like auto and seal are oil and gas sectors. kind of running footloose and fancy free with trade right now, which puts us in a different situation than a lot of other regions. And she also doesn't want to take off the separatists too much, but she does want to stay in this lane of, well, she can at least find consensus among a large, large swath of Albertans, including those in her base, that Albertans don't want to become the 51st state or a U.S. territory.

The federal government is set to name a foreign interference commissioner. The news just came out on Monday. And, you know, what did you make of that announcement? What do you think that commissioner might want to be looking at vis-a-vis this issue that we've been talking about today? So I was very happy to hear that. I think there has to be a lot of urgency put onto this file right now. I think this new act, the countering for an interference act, has got some very interesting new powers there, the powers of compulsion.

So this is a this is a, this is a, regulatory power, which I think the commissioner would be able to use to compel the APP to be transparent about their dealings with the Trump administration through civil procedure, which would bring a lot of light in an important way to this issue for Canadians. If I could throw in on that, I think that for the federal government, it's going to be a very careful move. They're going to be very careful vis-a-vis Alberta separatism. They won't want to be seen as the federal government who's best interest in squelching and nacing the Alberta separatism movement, they're going to want to be careful not to say that, oh, this is all just U.S.

foreign interference and just Chinese or Russian subterfuge, because that's a, you know, that could be seen as an attempt to undermine sincere, earnest Albertans who believe in separatism. So there's going to have to be a careful, delicate hand on the foreign interference file vis-à-vis the Alberta by the federal government and especially by the liberals who becomes a magnet for the Alberta separatists and the opposition. All right. Jason Patrick, thank you so much for this. Jamie, it's been a pleasure. Thank you very much. All right. That is all for today. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening.

For more CBC podcasts, go to cBC.ca slash podcasts.