The Munk Debates Podcast - Friday Focus: Trump's territorial aspirations - Liberal leadership race

Episode Date: January 10, 2025

Friday Focus provides listeners with a focused, half-hour masterclass on the big issues, events and trends driving the news and current events. The show features Janice Gross Stein, the founding director of the Munk School of Global Affairs and bestselling author, in conversation with Rudyard Griffiths, Chair and moderator of the Munk Debates. The following is a sample of the Munk Debates' weekly current affairs podcast, Friday Focus. Rudyard and Janice dissect Donald Trump's comments about territorial expansion in Greenland, the Panama Canal, and even Canada. Is this part of an America First agenda? And how should Canada respond to an incoming U.S. President that does not take well to smaller countries standing up for themselves?  In the second half of the show Rudyard and Janice turn to the big news out of Ottawa this week: Justin Trudeau is stepping down as Prime Minister in March and proroguing Parliament until the party chooses a new leader. Who gets to vote in this contest? And why is Justin Trudeau sticking around during this process instead of stepping aside for an interim leader who is better equipped to take on the incoming Trump administration? To access full-length editions of the Friday Focus podcast consider becoming a donor to the Munk Debates for as little as $25 annually, or $.50 per episode. Canadian donors receive a charitable tax receipt. This podcast is a project of the Munk Debates, a Canadian charitable organization dedicated to fostering civil and substantive public dialogue. More information at www.munkdebates.com.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.

The following is a complimentary excerpt of this week's edition of the Friday Focus podcast by The Monk Debates. To access full-length editions of each and every episode, along with all kinds of great additional benefits and perks, become a donor to the Monk debates. You can do that for as little as $25 a year, and you'll receive each and every year 50 Friday Focus episodes at full length. It's all available right now on our website. in just a few simple clicks. Triple W. The Monk Debates.com. Look for the Friday Focus option in our navigation bar, the top right of the website.

Make your donation, and we will send you each and every Friday a link to listen to the full-length edition of this program. Thanks in advance for your generous contribution. Welcome to the Friday Focus podcast for the second week of January. I'm Rudyard Griffiths, the executive director of the Monk Debates. as I am each and every edition of Friday Focus, joined by Janice Gwis Stein, the founding director of the Mung School of Global Affairs. Janice, how are you on this cold, blustery news-packed week? Rudyard, it may be freezing cold outside, but let me tell you, the temperature is hot.

It is hot in Ottawa. It is hot in Washington. this was a breakneck paste week. Janice, I want to begin with President Trump's press conference earlier this week, midweek, at Marilago, where in addition to making some, frankly, inflammatory, and let's just call it what it is, outrageous statements about Panama, the Panama Canal, Greenland, the future of Greenland, as a U.S. protectorate in the eyes and minds of Donald Trump, he also made comments about Canada, which I think struck you, struck really all of us listening to those, arguing in effect that he wouldn't use military means, I guess there's some small black there, but economic means

to humble Canada, to bring Canada. to heal, to encourage Canada effectively to become a satellite, a satrap? I don't know. You tell me what it is. But Janice, these are just unprecedented remarks for an American president. I guess what has me concern I want your thoughts on was that there seems to be something in the background here. This isn't just now a series of random musings by this president. What's going on and just how concerned do you think we should be? Right off the top, Rudyard, I am really concerned. You could dismiss the first few as a joke.

It is no longer a joke. And nobody right across the political spectrum in Canada is taking this as a joke right now. What's he trying to do here? you are asking exactly the right question. What's behind all this? Well, it is not a military invasion at physical occupation of Canada. Even he takes that off the table. But effectively, it doesn't matter how incredible and unprecedented these statements are.

They sap confidence in the Canadian economy, which is not how to start it's right now. It has implications for the Canadian dollar, the strength of the Canadian dollar. It has implications for the interest rates. It has implications for bond markets. And most important to me, it has implications for private sector leaders who are looking at this, hate turmoil and uncertainty above everything else and think, why am I not getting behind this U.S. tariff wall? So the consequences for Canada, in my view, are already very grave.

Let's talk a little bit, though, about a possible theory that could lie behind these now series of comments and remarks of the president made over the last number of weeks. There is a view among certain parts of his political and advisor group that as the United States pursues an America-fellate, first agenda. This requires certain choices. It requires not simply a withdrawal from, let's say, the Ukraine war or, you know, some kind of uneasy repressional with China, at least as far as it comes to Taiwan and the South China Sea. It requires the defense of North America, of the proverbial homeland. And, Janice, I guess what has me concerned is that there is a certain methodology to this madness, that if one was to think about continental defense, i.e. projecting American security out from America's borders to the larger continent itself, then talking about real estate from the

Panama Canal to Greenland, encompassing Canada, starts to look like a strategy, a feature, not a bug of the America First agenda. And I realize this is all coming. new to us because it certainly wasn't what I was thinking would be part of an America First Agenda. But now that I'm hearing it from the president and now that, you know, amplifiers the president's rhetoric and message like Steve Bannon are talking about a Monroe Doctrine 2.0. They're talking about fortress North America. I start to worry here, Janice, that are we seeing the outlines, the beginnings of administration policy? versus simply, you know, the musings and, you know, tweeting of this particular political actor, Donald Trump.

It's an entirely credible argument that you're making, frankly, Richard. Just think about this for a second. Your argument about fortress North America is not new. We have talked about a common security perimeter in North America since 9-11, frankly. We have talked about how we strengthen the border with the United States to make sure that the security of the United States is not embarrowed in any way. So this is a conversation that's been going on for 20 years, but in a very contained, very reasonable way. What Donald Trump has done is blow it up. So it's no longer only borders.

It's no longer the space. It's no longer the air corridors over North America. It's all of that. But it's also supply chains. What comes in through North America, and that's a big message when he talks about Mexico, any Chinese components, any Chinese products, any Chinese technology, that threatens North American security. So what are we seeing here?

We're seeing something that started probably a decade ago. It's what I call the securitization of the economy. Everything about the economy becomes an issue of national security. And what do you do then? You push out the borders of the United States, frankly. You leave the rest of us with shadow sovereignty, but on the crucial gut issues of the economy and security, it's American rules that really matter.

Janice, in his remarks, and again, I want to just be careful here about how much we read into these and what is policy versus, you know, what is just sounding off. But he did go through a laundry list of things that America doesn't or shouldn't need from the United States. And it's a worrying list. It contains automobiles, a major part of the economy of Southern Ontario. It contains agriculture and other, you know, dairy. There's longstanding aggravation in the United States amongst, you know, dairy farmers in Wisconsin who would like to send their products into Canada but run into our supply management system. Janice, there was content here that was concerning above and beyond this kind of fortress America argument that may or may not be

gestating in the early days of the second Trump administration. I mean, Janice, if we're looking at the potential of a U.S. administration that, let's say, would rethink the Auto Pact, I mean, this is like not number eight or number 10 on the dial in terms of potential stress and anxiety, I think, for Canada or the Canadian economy, at least here in Ontario. This is 11 and 12. And here's the difficulty readdard with the content that Donald Trump talked about. That could be entirely consistent with a, with the different, you know, a wholly different interpretation from the one that you and I are talking about, which is he is just a tough negotiator. and he is getting ready for a very tough negotiation over and after three.

Look at the issues. Dairy, perennial. Softwood lumber, perennial. The Autopac, new. Oil and gas, which is something that the United States needs from Canada rather than what we need from them. He is trying to say that's no longer necessary. But these are the agriculture, agro business. these are the core issues in any future NAFTA negotiation, renegotiation.

One thing only is not on that list. That will be on the table the next time around. Digital services and product. And we all know how the United States feels about the digital services that the then finance ministered, that Christopher Freeland advanced when she was finance minister. So every one of these issues has been a source, except for the Autopact, really, in oil and gas, has been a source of irritation. So that list made me think, made me take a step back for a minute and think to myself, is this Donald Trump, just the old Donald Trump true to form, trying to set the table for a very tough negotiation? What troubles me, though, is that he comes back and back and back to the 51st state, to the Panama Canal, and to Greenland, and it's all lumped together in these repetitive tweets.

And in that meandering on focus, hour-long press conference that he gave, that's not simply a renegotiation of NAFTA. Janice, final question before we go to break, have we woken up beside when it comes to the second Trump presidency an equivalent of a Putin or a Xi? And I ask that not to be sensational, but just to acknowledge that those other world leaders think about geography in a very particular way, as you say, they kind of securitize their immediate geographic surroundings, whether Russia, that's the Eurasian landmass or China. It's the South China Sea and all the various Asian powers aligned in and around its kind of sphere of influence. That would be a very big change for both the United States to start thinking that way and frankly for Canada to live next door to an America that has adopted, I know what we could call it like a kind of great.

leader ideology of national greatness through either the direct conquest of lands that are seen as potential buffer zones or places of insecurity and instability for that great power, or as in the case of China, humbling powers that are around it, taking them over, making them subservient, making them into sat traps. this is the old kind of ideology of imperial rule. And boy, did I certainly have the feeling of that flavor this week? Boy, do I agree with you, Roger, frankly. When you think about Russia, Ukraine and Belarus are part of the historic soul of Russia.

It doesn't matter what Ukrainian thinks about that. Imperial China, you pay tribute. If you were a near neighbor of China, no matter where it's borders, you pay tribute to the emperor. Donald Trump fits this mold with the conversation that he's been having. And that's what is, you know,

I think rightly worrying and should worry all Canadians. Now, what happens in those border areas? The population unifies once they begin to perceive that threat. I don't know about you, Richard. I am already seeing a coming together in Canada,

a little toning down, despite the fact that we are in this bizarre period with a lame duck prime minister, and we have this waiting period, this holding period ahead of us. I'm already seeing a coming together of Canadians, regardless of their partisan preferences. They are saying,

We do not want to be American. We are Canadian. There's a paradoxical unifying effect on the one hand. That's the first thing I take away. And then there's a second lesson, which is going to be so tough on us right there. You know, when Zelensky first became Prime Minister of Ukraine, president of Ukraine, he's not an experienced politician. He was a comedian.

He was elected on a peace with Russia platform. When that failed, it was inevitably going to fail, he then turned his back and openly chose alignment with Europe. He poked the Russian bear very deliberately in the faith. It is going to be very hard for Canadian leaders as they confront this to signal political unity and strength to be tough on the issues that Donald Trump has put on the table to the people. best of our ability, but not to poke this president in the eye because it doesn't end well when you are the small neighbor of a very big, powerful, imperial country. Yeah, my final observation is just, I don't know how tough Canadians are at this moment. I mean, this country is beaten down economically. It's beaten down in terms of its sense of identity and purpose. It's been fractured

on its streets and in society, and that's partly October 7, but it's, you know, it's the whole post-national state that we've been experimenting with as a way of living for the better part of the last decade. It's left us disunited. And you're right, there may be a little bit of rallying around here, but are people going to accept higher grocery prices in their stores when there's countervailing U.S. tariffs, are they going to shoulder the kind of economic pain that Canadians have shouldered in the past in times of war, depression, and real national emergency and threat? We're a much weaker, much more disunited, much more lightly governed country than we were even a decade ago. So, wow, this is not happening at a good time. Well, talking about,

timing, we've got some big decisions coming up by the Liberal Party of Canada related to a liberal leadership race. We're going to get into that right after this break on our podcast at monkdebates.com. You can sign up at any time. The back half of the show is exclusive for our podcast, subscribers, Monk Debates, supporters who make a donation to support our work to encourage conversation, debate across tribes, across dividing lines. That's what the Monk Debates is all about. So support us and get the back half of the Friday Focus podcast on your favorite audio app. Thanks for watching.

Thanks for listening to this excerpt of the Friday Focus podcast. To get full-length editions of each and every episode of this program, simply go to our website, triple-w, the monkdebates.com. Click on the Friday Focus tab. in our navigation on the top right of the site. Make a donation as little as $25 a year of 50 cents an episode, and we'll send you not only the full-length editions of each and every Friday Focus podcast,

but all kinds of special offers, perks, access to events, and additional content. Again, you can do that right now by becoming a donor to the Monk Debates, at triple W. Monk Debates, MUNK, DebateswithanS.com.