The Current - Canada-US tensions: Why Can't We Be Friends?

Episode Date: May 29, 2025

Democratic U.S. Senator Peter Welch recently came to Canada to try to mend fences, over what he sees as President Donald Trump’s damaging tariffs and threats to make Canada the 51st state. The Vermont senator talks to Matt Galloway about the Canada-U.S. relationship — and military expert Christian Leuprecht digs into Prime Minister Mark Carney’s plan for a defence deal with the EU, as a way to reduce Canada’s reliance on the U.S.

We're all looking for great places to visit in Canada. One of my favorites is the Stratford Festival. The theatre is truly of the highest caliber and there's so much selection. They have 11 large-scale shows on stage and trust me, whatever is on manure there will be exceptional. People always think Shakespeare when they think of Stratford, but it's so much more. Broadway musicals, family shows, classic comedy and drama. Whether it's Robert LaPage's Macbeth or Donna Fior's Annie, you will be blown away.

It's the perfect Canadian getaway. To quote William Shatner, who got his start in Stratford, every Canadian should make the pilgrimage to Stratford. Start your next adventure at StratfordFestival.ca. This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and this is the current podcast. Yesterday, a US federal court ruled against Donald Trump's so-called Liberation Day tariffs. The US Court of International Trade said that Trump does not have the authority to impose these

sweeping tariffs, including the so-called fentanyl-related duties on Canada. The Trump administration is appealing the ruling, with the White House, it is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency. This ruling comes a few days after a group of US lawmakers visited Canada. Their message to Canada, the United States is still open for business and they vowed to pursue new economic and security partnerships

despite the cracks in the Canada-US relationship. Vermont's Democratic Senator, Peter Welch, was part of this delegation. He is in Vermont. Senator, good morning. Good morning. You have called Donald Trump's tariffs on Canada, in your words, really, really stupid. What did you make of this court ruling? Well, it's welcome news. I mean, the reality is that in the United States under our constitution, a tariff is a tax and the originating body has to be the Congress. And the president has hijacked that authority, supposedly invoking emergency powers. I think that was bogus and has done a lot of damage. So this court ruling

says what I think is true, the president and executive, whether it's Trump or anyone else, does not have the unilateral authority to arbitrarily and whimsically impose these tariffs without congressional approval. It's interesting. This court has appointees from Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump. Do you think that the Trump administration will abide by their decision? Open question. I mean as you said when there is a court ruling the Trump administration disagrees with, it accuses the judges of being unelected

people who have no authority. Under our system of justice in our constitutional order, the court, that is their job to make a determination as to whether a law or an action by the executive is within the bounds of the Constitution. So it's situation normal and reaction normal from Trump. If he doesn't like the decision, he says it's bogus. He has disregarded many decisions. I think it'll be tougher on this one for him to do so. It's interesting because the new ambassador, the US ambassador to Canada, Peter Hoekstra, said on Wednesday that a deal between our two countries is in the works.

What do you understand about that? I mean, where are the negotiations, what are we talking about? What is this deal such as it is? Well, it's all opaque. The reality is none of us know. See, this terrorist situation in the rollout, not just with Canada,

but these terrorists on so many other countries have been arbitrarily opposed. They've been changed constantly They've been set to be implemented and then postponed for a period of time So the reality is no one knows it's like the president wakes up He reads the story gets irritated and he then makes a decision that has a broad impact. And what's so tough, and this is true in Canada and it's true in the United States, is that our folks who are running businesses and have to deal with the reality of what is their cost, what are they going to have to pay for products, from day to day they don't know.

And it changes from day to day, from week to week. So there's an immense amount of chaos, uncertainty, and really it's an impossible way for Canadian businesses to operate subject to the whims of a single person, our president, or for American businesses to operate. You recently came across the border to Ottawa to speak with the Prime Minister, Mark Carney. What was your message for him? Well, our message, and it was bipartisan, and many of us are along the border,

keeping it in Vermont, of course, right next door to Canada. Our message was we love Canada, and we want to continue what has been a relationship that's been mutually beneficial politically, economically, and also emotionally. You know, folks along the border here where we're back and forth with Canadians, we have very, very close personal ties. And we have a library in Vermont where it's split. Half of it's in Vermont, in Newport,

Derby Line, and half of it is on the Canadian side. So, what is your sense of that relationship now? From your perspective, what does that relationship look like? Well, it's been harmed. You know, Kevin Kramer, who was her Republican leader on this in North Dakota, very close ties with Canada, acknowledged that it's been disrupted because what has happened is that because of a lot of rhetoric from the president we've made canadians legitimately be upset the talk of the fifty first state the governor of canada that stuff is really been harmful and what he points out is that we do have a common adversary with unfair trade practices, and that's China. So the point

is it's really beneficial for us to do everything we can to restore that relationship historically that we've enjoyed together, Canada and the US, and use the alliance that we've had to try to address some of the unfair trade practices from China that have hurt Canada and hurt the United States. Do you understand that fury that many Canadians have toward the United States right now? People aren't traveling to the US, people aren't buying US things, they're buying Canadian, they're not so much now,

but we're booing your anthem, for example. Do you understand that anger? Totally. I mean, how, if, let's say, put it in reverse, you started talking us as the next province in Canada, you're insulting our president by not giving him his right title, we'd be very upset. And that's predictable. And probably when the president did this was quite intended. But what I want to emphasize, and we all did, is that we have deep, long, abiding ties.

These tariffs that the president is imposing in the manner in which he's talking about them is very damaging, but it hurts us as well as Canada. What impact has that breakdown in the relationship had in your state? I mean, I think Vermont is a beautiful place, and there are a lot of breakdown in the relationship had in your state? I mean, I think Vermont is a beautiful place, and there are a lot of people in the summer months

who might wanna come and visit and go to small towns and communities, drive through those mountains. People aren't going to do that at scale anymore, or a lot of people aren't. What is the impact of that in Vermont? Well, first of all, thank you for that beautiful description of our beautiful state of Vermont.

And we have enjoyed the visitation from so many Canadians. And I've had a number of interactions with our hospitality industry and the visits are way, way down 40% and sometimes 50%. The economic manufacturing back and forth is bad. So that's real money. That's a real impact on people.

It hurts us. It really hurts us, but there's an element too that's really quite beautiful because of the emotional connection back and forth. There's a lot of real respect by Vermonters for Canadian visitors who've come here repeatedly and know the people who run the hospitality in that Canadians may stay at.

So this is upsetting just on an emotional level. As you said, this was a bipartisan group of members that came to Ottawa, both Democrat and Republican. What is your sense as to how willing the parties are to work together when it comes to mending fences? Well, here's the dilemma that we have. This is our problem. how willing the parties are to work together when it comes to mending fences. Well, here's the dilemma that we have. This is our problem. There's widespread opposition to the tariffs

because whether you voted for Trump or you voted for Harris down here, these tariffs are making your business, running your business very, very difficult. But the reality politically for us right now is Trump continues to have a pretty iron grip on the Republicans in Congress. So at a certain point my Republican colleagues are gonna have to decide whether they're gonna defer to the president or listen

to the people they represent. Because whether you're in a Republican state like North Dakota or what's a Democratic state in Congress, Vermont, our businesses in both states, our hospitality industry, they're both being affected. And of course, you know, Canada is the major trading partner for 34 states. It is for Vermont, but we're one of 34 states. And this is something that is now integrated into the economies of 34 of our states and really our country. So these terrorists make absolutely no sense. And many

of us are saying that, but Trump's in charge and he's, from my perspective, in obviously the court's perspective, he's overreaching. He's acting beyond the scope of authority that he has as the chief executive of our country. I was going to say, do you think lawmakers like yourself have any ability to influence the White House? Donald Trump, you know, posts on social media Trump was right about everything and then firmly believes that what he is doing will be borne out. My approach is that we've got to get some republics to agree with us. Yeah, Senator Shaheen from New Hampshire who is our leader on this trip has legislation that would stop what we're calling attacks on Americans, these

tariffs, really, we end up paying for them as you do in Canada. And we've got to persuade four or five Republicans to join us in restricting the president from having this authority and returning it to Congress. So we've got a ways to go. and that's a reflection of the grip that President Trump does have in the Republican Party. But the reality is that these terrorists are damaging Canada, but they're damaging us as well. So why would we want to inflict a self-inflicted wound when we're much stronger if we're working together? And that was something that Prime Minister Carney was very clear about. You know, he says, the hope is that to do the things we have to do, we do as much of it as we can together. But the Canada is prepared to do what the United States won't participate in alone.

That's a fair and square position, an independent, upright position for Canada. But my view is that the best thing for our country is to go back to the days before we started having these punitive and I think arbitrary tariffs that have been so disruptive on your side of the border in mind. Do you worry about what you just said? I mean, the Prime Minister has said that Canada will cooperate with the United States

when necessary, but not necessarily cooperate with the United States. We're going to speak in just a moment about how Canada is looking elsewhere for a dance partner in defense, for example, looking to align closer with Europe. Do you worry about that? Absolutely. One of the effects of the arbitrariness of the way the president is proceeding is we're upsetting our friends. And what you need in order to deal with a significant economic threat like China, where they do have unfair trade practices, where they dump products, where they do things that

are hurting us, is you need friends. There's power in numbers. There's power in cooperation. So a kind of bullying approach where you're constantly disrupting things, and one day tear us off another, where you're actually attacking your own friends, Canada's been our best friend for centuries, that weakens us, it doesn't strengthen us. And that's the debate. Let me just, before I let you go,

how do you see that relationship being repaired? If you upset your friend, you apologize, you earn their trust back, and you hope that they will eventually see you as a friend again. What is it going to take? So many of us have close ties with the United States, friends and family in your country, and that feels ruptured. What is it going to take to build that relationship back? Well, first of all, I think we continue

to have a very strong relationship because I think folks in Canada that I met do make a distinction between the unilateral and arbitrary actions of the president, President Trump. And we see that not just in the way he acts towards Canada, but in many other areas as well. But I think a lot of people, if I might, a lot of people are rattled by the fact that 70 million plus Americans voted for those actions.

Well, that's not right. We didn't vote, those who voted for Trump didn't necessarily vote to go after Canada. I don't agree with that. There was a big vote that Trump got because he appealed to the need we do have for some disruption, but it's the manner in which he's doing it.

I don't think people thought having, I think people thought really we were have for some disruption, but it's the manner in which he's doing it. I think people thought really we were going to deal with China, and China's unfair trade practices, not Canada. So the hope here is that folks in Canada can make a distinction between the unilateral and arbitrary and I think damaging actions of the president versus the sentiment of the American people. And a major reason this bipartisan group went to Canada was to convey that members of the United States Senate do want to maintain that or restore that relationship with Canada that

we've enjoyed for so long. Senator, I'm glad to have the chance to talk to you. Thank you very much for your time this morning. Thank you. Thank you very much for your time this morning. Thank you. All the best. Peter Welch is the Democratic Senator for the state of Vermont and one of a group of senators who came to Canada to speak with the Prime Minister, Mark Carney.

We're all looking for great places to visit in Canada. One of my favorites is the Stratford Festival. The theater is truly of the highest caliber and there's so much selection. They have 11 large-scale shows on stage and trust me, whatever is on when you're there will be exceptional. People always think Shakespeare when they think of Stratford, but it's so much more. Broadway musicals, family shows, classic comedy and drama. Whether it's Robert LaPage's Macbeth or Donna Fior's Annie, you will be blown away.

It's the perfect Canadian getaway. To quote William Shatner, who got his start in Stratford, every Canadian should make the pilgrimage to Stratford. Start your next adventure at StratfordFestival.ca. At Desjardins Insurance, we know that when you own a nail salon, everything needs to be perfect, from tip to toe. That's why our agents go the extra mile to understand your business and provide tailored solutions for all its unique needs.

You put your heart into your company, so we put our heart into making sure it's protected. Get insurance that's really big on care. Find an agent today at Desjardins.com slash business coverage. As we were just talking about, Canada's relationship with the US is not going particularly great right now. And so the Prime Minister Mark Carney is looking for some new partners. Here he is speaking with the CBC's David Cochrane. Part of what's been happening in the last few months since I became Prime Minister is a number of conversations of increasing specificity with our major European partners so that we become defence partners with them,

that we become part of a very big build out of their defence industrial base, which will have big benefits for jobs here in Canada. We're making great progress on that. And by Canada Day, we'd like to see something concrete there. The Prime Minister wants Canada to sign on to a major European defence plan called Rearm Europe so that this country can rely less on the United States for weapons and munitions.

Christian Leprecha is a professor at the Royal Military College of Canada and Queen's University, also the editor-in-chief of the Canadian Military Journal, and he's a visiting fellow at the Wilfrid Martins Centre in Brussels and joins us now from Petawawa, Ontario. Christian, good morning to you. Good morning, Matt. You have said that Canada is in your words, an existentially precarious position right now. What do you mean by that? Our sovereignty and our economic and political sovereignty is clearly under threat, but the challenge is in the past we've had allies and friends that have been there to defend us and that have seen the value of protecting our sovereignty.

And we find ourselves in a situation where particularly our closest allies, those in Europe, feel that Canada has not been adding value for them on the key priorities for them, energy security, defense and defense industrial investments. And so for 100 years, we've used our relationship with Europe to counterbalance the vagaries of US unilateralism, in particular those of presidential administrations. And we've seen both by the reactions by key European leaders such as Keir Starmer, but Emmanuel Macron, that those friends are not currently particularly eager to be on our side because we have let them down. And I think what we get from the prime minister is an understanding that we urgently need that rebalancing in terms of our relationship as an assurance and an insurance policy against those US vagaries.

And so what is this thing that the prime minister wants us to join? What is Rearm Europe? So it is a $650 billion incentive by the European Union for European Union countries to collaborate on defense. It builds on a much smaller program that currently exists. It effectively provides co-funding for projects in which countries engage together, either on procurement or in development, particularly development project. It also comes with $150 billion in addition to that in infrastructure

spending because there's an understanding that procuring defense equipment only gets you so far. You obviously need to get that equipment to where it needs to go. And within that mechanism, there already exists a pre-existing mechanism called the permanent structured cooperation for most non-EU partners in particularly the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, but also for instance, Ukraine, to collaborate with the European Union on those projects. And the intent of that mechanism is precisely to demonstrate to the United States

that the Riyam Europe is not building a competitive mechanism to the to NATO but rather a complementary mechanism where the relationship within European Union countries and with the European Union and other key allies such as Canada is meant to complement NATO and NATO's capacity and to build some more autonomous capacities in areas where the United States wants the European Union Canada to act more autonomously, in particular when it comes to the deterrence of Russia. Do you think the United States will see it that way? The United States has made very clear what its position was during the first Trump administration

when France tried to advance its particularly peculiar interpretation of strategic economy within the common security and defense policy of the European Union, which was by France interpreted as effectively establishing an autonomous capacity for Europe to decouple from the United States. At the time, the European Union got in France, got a rather nasty letter from the US NATO ambassador and Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, has made it abundantly clear, as have a number of other entities, including David McAllister,

the chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, that this is a mechanism that is intended to strengthen solidarity and the transatlantic relationship. And if you look at the details in the way in which it is designed and the way the money is being spent, it is clearly structured as such. I mean, I don't know whether it's decoupling, but in his conversation with my colleague, David Cochran, the prime minister said that it is in

his words, not smart that 75 cents of every Canadian dollar of capital spending for defense goes to the United States. Is it realistic that we can, that we can shave that back, that we can cut ties with the US, not entirely, but cut ties significantly when it comes to defense? So it reflects our overall pattern of our relationship with the United States, whereby consequence, and to some extent by design, as a result of the free trade agreement over the last 30 years, we've drawn much closer to the United States in

a number of areas, including economically, and that economic integration obviously has also implications for the defense relationship. And I think there is a realization that that relationship has become too close and too codependent on the United States, and that Canada has always been well served by safeguarding some ability to balance that with other partners. We also need to remember, of course, that there are any number of pieces of military equipment that we cannot procure from the United States. So anything that's, for instance, maritime or subsurface capabilities, the United States

is neither interested in selling to us nor able to sell to us because they can't produce enough of it themselves. In other areas, integration is absolutely essential. If you think about NORAD, if you think about the aerospace domain, the close cooperation requires us to have technology that is closely integrated with the United States. But if you think about the army that operates much more autonomously, for instance, there's lots of opportunity there to work together and we are too dependent between Canada and the European Union on the United States on key capabilities, such as satellite technology, intelligence capabilities, refueling capabilities, strategic lift capabilities, and some might argue extended nuclear deterrence. And so

those are certainly areas I think that will be a priority for collaboration between Canada and the European Union. Canada is going to have to pull its weight to your point. We are going to need to increase our defense spending. We have struggled as a nation to get to that commitment of, of 2%.

Mark Richter, the NATO secretary-general talked about members getting up to 5%. There are countries like Denmark that are doing away with national holidays to raise taxes to meet their defense spending commitments. The Danish prime minister said, I don't think it's a problem for people to work another day. Some 50,000 people were out protesting that

decision to get rid of the national holiday. What are we going to have to do to meet those goals? Out of 32 NATO member countries, Canada is the only country now that spends less than 2% on defense and spends less than 20% of that spending on capital. So what would we have to sacrifice to increase that spending? Well, I think the prime minister's proposing a grand bargain where perhaps the sacrifices might not be so painful because of course we sit on a wealth that

our allies have been begging us for, including multiple European leaders that have come over the last decade, which is to provide energy security for European and also for our Asian partners. And I think what the prime minister is envisaging an ability to export those hydrocarbons rather than having European allies procure them from authoritarian states in the Middle East and South America and elsewhere, procure them here from Canada

because they're going to procure them anyways, and then use that revenue perhaps in a grand bargain where you spend a quarter of it on defense, a quarter of it on new program spending such as health and other areas, perhaps a quarter of it on paying down your, paying down our national debt, and a quarter of it on paying down your paying down our national debt and a quarter on clean energy transition. This would be very reminiscent of the deal that

Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin struck in 1995 when they balanced the budget and that was able to get Canada within a matter of years into a very competitive position. Look Canada is in a very tight spot. We're spending about $113 billion in direct federal government program spending. 50 billion roughly is the structural deficit that we have and we spent 41 billion on defense. So even if we doubled our defense spending, we would be consuming nearly all

of our federal program spending and we would still not be entirely at 3%. So we currently, we can't get there with, I think, tax increases. We can't get there even with significant spending cuts. And given the structural deficit, we can't simply borrow the money. So we need to have a new grand bargain. And I think this is also very much what the Trump administration has in mind, which is why the prime minister keeps on talking about an integrated, um, trait and security pact with the United States.

I have to let you go, but you believe that that's actually possible. I mean, it's a good story if it's true, but that's a grand bargain. Sounds like wishful thinking to some people. Uh, I think the prime minister understands that this country urgently needs a new social contract.

If we do not get new social contract. If we do not get that social contract, it is extremely dangerous for Canada because our allies and partners will abandon us and then we will have no choice but to draw even closer to the United States. Christian, we'll leave it there. It's good to talk to you as ever. Thank you very much. My pleasure. Thank you, Matt. You've been listening to The Current Podcast. My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening. I'll talk to you soon.

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