The Munk Debates Podcast - Friday Focus: Canada enters a 'new world order' and Trump threatens to invoke the Insurrection Act

Episode Date: January 16, 2026

Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to watch and listen to full episodes of Friday Focus with Janice Stein. Your donor membership comes with other great perks like access to the videos of our main stage debates and full length episodes of our weekly podcasts with Globe and Mail columnist Andrew Coyne. Rudyard and Janice react to Mark Carney's trip to China this week and a dramatic shift away from Trudeau's hawkish doctrine which viewed China as an adversary. Carney understands that we are moving into a world where we will not be able to trade only with countries that share our values. Janice says this reset will allow Western Canada to resume their exports - mainly lobster, canola, and pork - to the Chinese market. But after years of being treated badly by China, should Canadians welcome this about face? In the second half of the show Rudyard and Janice turn to the U.S. and internal unrest over the killing of an American citizen by an ICE agent this week in Minnesota. Trump is threatening to enact the Insurrection Act which will give the government emergency powers and allow them to deploy the military to crush the protests without the consent of the governor or local police. This has been both a terrible week for the President and a frightening one for Americans who are concerned about their fundamental rights. What happens next will have huge implications for this fall's U.S. midterm elections. Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to Friday Focus for the 16th of January 2025. I'm Rudyard Griffiths, Chair of the Monk Debates, joined by Janice Gros Stein, the founding director of the Monk School of Global Affairs. Janice, great to be in conversation with you today. Good to be here, Rudyard, with you after a very eventful week. Janice, when can we have a week where we could just skip the events and I don't know, focus on gardening, maybe a great chess game, maybe some time with. friends, wow, this was another week of international turmoil from the Middle East to the Canada-U-S

relationship to America itself and what we're seeing on the streets of Minnesota. Let's though, Janice, begin with Mark Carney's trip to China. I think it's the big news as we end the week. A clear message out of the first day or so of meetings that this is a reset. And in the words of both the Prime Minister and Xi Jinping, a successful one, before we get into the specifics of some of the elements of a deal emerging around EVs and investment, Chinese investment in Canada, what do you make of this shift or seeming change between a doctrine that evolved over time under the Trudeau administration that ultimately became quite hawkish on China?

Now, you were part of what many people felt was a very thoughtful and articulate kind of strategy for Canada in Asia that recognized China as a threat, as an adversary who was challenging Canada at home in terms of our own democracy and our own elections, but also had predatory practices when it came to international trade and is, let's face it. it, an authoritarian, illiberal country that doesn't fundamentally share much in the way of values with Canada or the rest of the Western world. So you're quite right, Roger. That strategy said, compete where you must, collaborate where you can. I think that's the line that Canada needs to walk, and even more so, given the challenges that we face from the United States. So there are still issues of Chinese interference, digital interference and disinformation. There are still issues, as you just said, of human rights abuse in China.

But we're moving into a world where we will not be able to trade only with countries that share our values. and this is in fact the reset that Mark Carney is alluding to. So paying attention to the details of the deal really matter here. And this, as we see, is about resources and tariffs that we imposed on China. Right. That whole tariff storm between China kicked off with our levying 100% tariffs on cars imported from China, specifically EVs. That was at the time to harmonize our tariff regime with an American, a Biden administration's

terror regime, which, again, was based on excluding Chinese EVs from the American market to defend American auto manufacturers. A lot has happened between then, most notably the re-election of Donald Trump in a statements time and time again by this president, by his administration, that they don't want any of those stinking Canadian automobiles in the United States. They don't need the Canadian audio sector. They're going to make cars in the United States. So this deal includes a import quota from China, roughly 50,000 vehicles, electric vehicles that will be brought in at the tariff rate that existed before we increased it to 100%. So it's it's 6%, Janice, on these 50,000-odd EVs from China that will be

coming into the Canadian market. Let's talk about, I don't know, how do you think the Americans are going to react to that? What are the potential risks here, given that we're heading into negotiations over Kuzma and the auto industry itself is kind of in the headlights, is one of of the key industries that it surely will get caught up in that renegotiation and the president's kind of feelings about the future of American auto manufacturing, which he seems to give primacy to time and time again. You know, just before we go there, let's just stop for a moment and say what, a perfect setup Donald Trump gave our prime minister when he makes the comments that you just

purported. Well, we don't need Canadian cars. We want to manufacture them ourselves, and we don't even need Kuzma. We're not interested in that deal. That really opens the door for Karnay. And I think if we look at this, and we could argue about the numbers, so we don't, you know, there's not much value in that. But he threaded the needle because 50,000 Chinese EVs is not going to disrupt the auto sector. in Canada. And that really matters, Reddard, because for the Premier of Ontario, who is crucial to the future of Prime Minister Carney, that is a critical friendship that he does not want to break. And Ford was very vocal before the trip began, not one EV in this country. Well, the 50,000 that they agreed to doesn't actually interfere with the overall tariff regime. He did not lower the

tariffs against Chinese EVs, he just made, what is frankly, a relatively minor exception. So this is one example of the world that we're in. You thread the needle. You find the space. You do it

to increase our agricultural exports to China, which are critical to that sector. And you walk the fine line. Yeah, we'll have to see what the fallout is. Yes. As we record, obviously, the Premier of Ontario still to kind of speak out on this issue.

And we've talked about this, but I mean, it's a small percentage of the overall 800 to a million cars that Canada manufactures each year. But the majority of those cars are destined for US markets. These cars will not be destined for US markets. In fact, the Canadian ambassador to the United States, so the American ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoikstra said on an interview this week that Chinese EVs imported to Canada may not be allowed to cross the border. and enter into the U.S.

And I guess, Janice, that's what I'm getting at, is this relationship is so, as we know, asymmetrical. 70-odd percent of our trade is with the United States. Four percent of our trade is with China. The Americans have an endless number of levers that they can use to squeeze us. So what is the risk here? For the sake of 50,000 EVs,

we're clearly on the radar of the U.S. ambassador to Canada. How might the Trump administration react to this? And again, what are we getting in these kind of needle-threading exercises when arguably, like it or not, I don't particularly like it, but the renegotion of Kuzma is the single most important thing for the Canadian economy in the next 12 to 18 months? And here we are at a critical opening phase of that negotiation, flagging to the Americans, guess what?

We've reset relations with China. We're allowing Chinese EVs into Canada. We've broken with a harmonized tariff, which had previously been agreed. I don't know, Janice. Is the risk worth the reward? Yeah. So this isn't about EVs. This is not something Courtney wanted to do.

This is about the prairie economies. It is about. And seafood. industry. It's about canola, it's about pork, and it's about lobster sales to China, which were really suffering. They retaliated against us when we imposed that 100% tariffs. Those exports will now return to the Chinese market. It was no accident that Premier Moe was on that trip. This is really about the western part of the country, and yes, the 50,000 EVs and hope.

Certainly that Ford can live with this. In terms of the Trump reaction, there's a good chances will irritate them. But look, what's the prognosis for the USMCA or Kuzma, wherever we want to call it? Nobody expects that this will even get done in this calendar year. You know, there are midterms in the United States.

It's arguable whether anything seems. serious really starts to happen until after those midterms. So that agreement will be in limbo. That's not a bad place for us, limbo right now. We benefit from limbo the United States loses because so many of our exports to the United States are sheltered under the existing agreement. It's entirely possible. I think likely this drags out until 2027 or more. Bank, and this again is in Canada's interest, I believe, because we're hoping for a weakened Trump.

after the midterms. So doing this in January, 2026, I think it's a good bet. It does, though, Janice, run directly contrary to the national security strategy that was announced late last year, where there were clear chunks of that strategy, paragraphs that were explicit that the United States within its hemisphere, the Western hemisphere, had expectations about, in a sense, a policy of first right of refusal in terms of investment and access to resources primarily, but other capacities of so-called allies, including Canada, to enhance and bolster American security, which the Americans feel,

like it or not, that they extend a lot of that security over us, and they do in very real ways. In space, in the air, there's always the implicit notion that they would. would come to our defense if we were if we were threatened for instance in the arctic so i'm just i take your point that there may be short-term you know uh mejong that we can play with the upcoming midterm elections and how how trump will do or not and whether he'll maintain uh support over over in in the senate in the house but this janice is going against i'm not saying i'm opposed to it I'm just flagging for you in our audience that it's going against the explicit doctrine that was set out in that national security strategy. And if we don't doubt that that doctrine's not serious, then all you have to do is talk to Maduro, who is sitting in a prison in Brooklyn right now because an aspect, another part of that doctrine, the hemispheric doctrine, was acted on to kick off this new year with his arrest.

and criminal charges filed against him in the Southern District of New York. And there is no question. It is black and white reddered that this is not consistent with the national security strategy of the United States, which claims security dominance at the minimum over the whole of the Western atmosphere, and we're in the Western hemisphere. Which includes an economic dimension to it. It does. It does.

And let's talk about EVs in particular for a moment to argue from your side of the table for a moment because when we put the tariff on, it wasn't, of course, it was done to save our own auto sector and to avoid wiping out the North American auto sector, which is what would happen if there were no tariffs. Because the Chinese, let's just understand, sell these EVs at below production cost,

which is a long-term Chinese strike, sell below market cost, production costs, until you drive other manufacturers out of the market, and then you capture the market because they're out of business. There's a third issue that was raised in the United States when this was going on. EVs suck up Canadian data and transfer that data because all Chinese manufacturing companies

are legally obligated to share back the data they get. And they could have a kill switch. Yeah, and the absolute nightmare is, you know, if that was the argument that was made, if you had millions of Chinese cars on North American highways, there could be a kill switch. Now, I think that elastic argument is over-exaggerated for a whole bunch of technical reasons.

I think the American ambassador, Huxra, who is never moderate this time, it's entirely conceivable because of some of, like Senator Warner, these cars will never be allowed across the U.S. border for data reasons. I'll just say if you're in the market for a new car, there's 50,000 of these landing the next year in Canada. It would be a very interesting negotiation with the dealership. When do you drive this? I have a place in Florida.

Is this car right for me? I think there's all kinds of great discounts that we can negotiate on these EVs. You know, we might argue that for all our... stay-at-home Canadian vacations. Yeah, yeah, this is perfect. This is a great investment. Recently, the Monk debates hosted a fascinating debate about the two-state solution. But 90 minutes on this contentious topic can also barely scratch the surface.

After all, Israel is a hotbed of conflicting ideologies, identities, interests, and historical narratives. Even for experts, that's a lot to keep up with. And it's not just Israel. The Middle East is changing fast. alliances are shifting. New power centers are emerging and longstanding assumptions are being rewritten in real time. If you want to understand what's really going on, I'd like to invite you to join me on the Call Me Back podcast. I'm Dan Cienor, host of Call Me Back. Our mission is to give

you the facts, context, and insights you need to make sense of Israel and the region. Our contributors include some of the best source journalists in Israel like Nadavail and Amit Segal and top thoughtly leaders in the U.S. like Sam Harris and Scott Galloway. So if you're ready to go deeper, find me on Call Me Back wherever you get your podcasts. See you there. Just as we wrap up this section of the show, the bigger picture, China treated Canada horribly for a period of time. There was the imprisonment of the two Michaels. There was our own foreign interference inquiry that documented.

extensive Chinese manipulation of nomination meetings for party nominations for provincial and federal MPPs, MLAs, and MPs. There were reports, I think credible reports, that the Winnipeg Lab leak involved Chinese espionage in our universities, which I think we can assume, a bit like drug interdiction. You see it happen once. You've got to assume it's happening in other places, too. There are even, I think, again, also credible reports that out of different Chinese consulates and embassies, the Chinese government had effectively been running police stations that were policing, harassing, and intimidating Canadian citizens who were also dual citizens, who had family

and or businesses in China. There's lots of ways to look at China. that are positive. But there's another way to look of China, which is a history of behavior vis-a-vis Canada, which you can only characterize as pretty lousy. So we're resetting that now. We're in a sense saying, I guess, time for a do-over, everything, you know, forgotten between friends. I don't know, Janice. I think for many Canadians, that's hard to stomach.

It, again, it suggests the weakness of our position. It suggests the extent to which we're unable to articulate and act on our own interests because we now have to compromise from a position of weakness, not only with the United States, but with China. So, look, this raises the larger issue of as we adjust to a very different United States. And that, a United States has taken 70 percent, you know, plus. or minus of our exports who do we trade with well if we weren't going to trade with people who treated us in a lousy way we wouldn't trade with the United States if

we weren't going to trade with the country right I think China the United States are a little different yeah but they haven't been very nice to us the president's not been very nice to us in the last but they're not interfering directly in our elections they're not running police stations out of their consulates they know but let's take India who for all intents of purposes has ordered an assassination of a Canadian citizen on Canadian territory. We've reset the relationship with India.

We're going to trade with India. Our foreign minister in Indian and was there. I think where the ground has shifted, when we have exports that really matter, and we are trying to diversify. Only 4% of our exports are to China. I know, but they're concentrated in the agricultural sector. It's a small part of our total export.

though. Yeah, you're right. So we're making big compromises on their past actions, our institutions, our values to go from 4%, maybe to 5%, we're not even sure about that because the ratio is 2 to 1. We have a huge trade deficit with China. For every billion dollars they send us, we send them too. Yes. But again, let's look at those exports are. You'd be the first Canadian, I know, to say that the west of this country perennially feels that it doesn't get the attention and the fairness and in fact they've argued

we sacrificed Canadian agricultural exports to save the car industry in Ontario this is a longstanding I think there's also some powerful banking and financial interests in Toronto and Montreal they're rather like a reset with China so this isn't just about good old farmers out there in their canola fields

This is about some very powerful families in Canada who, yeah, want to... Manulife. Manulife. Power corporation? I could go on. Powerful companies with lots of lobbyists and the year of Ottawa.

So there are, and these companies have long-standing ties in the Chinese market. But I think the bigger picture is we're going to have to be pretty, frankly, tough-minded and realistic that we are not going to change the government of China or anything it does. We are not going to change the government of India, and we're not even going to change the government of the United States. So our interest, if we're talking about furthering Canadian interest, is to grow our export market. We're in four, hopefully it'll go to six, seven, or eight.

That's a lot of canola and park valleys. If we say no, we're not going to that market because we don't like the government, and we don't like what their government does. We're talking maybe 35 governments in the world right now that we would trade with, right? And that's tough. And so we've got to ask ourselves. I would just say, yeah, maybe, you know,

maybe the prime minister should spend more time meeting with Great Lakes governors in the United States. Maybe instead of, you know, comments that he made that are getting a lot of attention today that we're in a, quote, new world order, which assumes, in a sense, that the United States has fundamentally changed forever and that we are moving on from the Americans. I'm not so sure about that. I think there could be ways to either repair or find

allies and partners in the United States. I don't think America is lost. You've mentioned on the show, and we discussed before, the midterms could be a major setback for this president. The Supreme Court will soon rule on his emergency tariff powers. It's easy, and I want to talk about this because we're going to pause in a moment and go to the events in the streets of the United States because I think those are consequential and we need to inform our audience about them. But I think despite how bleak America can look right now, I do worry a little bit that we're making kind of short-term decisions based on conclusions that might not actually be that conclusive.

Look, trying to be hopeful here, Janice. Yes. and I do think this is a pivotal year in the United States. I think we will know when you and I do this so a year from now, we will know a lot more about the future trajectory of the United States. The field is still open. I say that all the time and there's no more important year than 2026 right now. But that having been said, it is not healthy for us to send 70% of our exports to one.

market. We should have done something about this. We've been talking about it for 40 years and we've never done anything. So let's give the prime minister some breathing space to see how far he can actually push this diversification agenda while we spend a lot of time with governors and state legislatures and congresspeople shoring up our friends. Sure enough. I just think elbows up should be extended to authoritarian regimes that are involved in the large-scale suppression of their own people. Remember those folks called the Uyghurs and don't have the best reputation in terms of their own dealings with us inside Canada.

Let's take a short break, Janice. I want to come back on the other side and talk about the madness that is Minnesota at this moment and the images that are filling our screens of what seems to be chaos in the streets fueled by immigration enforcement and what this all means about the midterm elections and the year ahead in the United States. Back in a moment. Thank you for listening to the first half of the Friday Focus podcast. To access the full episode, consider becoming a monk donor. For just $50 a year, that's less than a dollar a week, you get exclusive access to full-length editions of our weekly monk dialogues with Andrew Coyne, exclusive access to the live streams of our

main stage debates and all kinds of other great perks and privileges. Simply go to our website, triple-w monk debates, that's MUNK, Debates with an S.com, and click on the join button on the top right-hand corner of our homepage. Again, that website, www.munkdibates.com. The Monk Debates are a project of the Aurea and Peter and Melanie Monk Charitable foundations. Rudyard Griffiths and Ricky Gerwitz are the producers. Be sure to download and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts, and if you like us, feel free to give us a five-star rating. Thank you again for listening.