(Left) U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris at the White House in Washington on March 18, 2024. (Right) Former U.S. President Donald Trump in Mason City, Iowa, on Jan. 5, 2024. Anna Moneymaker; Brandon Bell/Getty Images
With Americans heading to the polls in November to choose their next president, it bears pondering how each candidate’s approach may impact Canada.
While neither of the main contenders has specifically addressed what his or her foreign policy for Canada may be, Donald Trump’s four years in office, Kamala Harris’s tenure as vice president of the Biden administration, and their various recent public postures offer some clues.
Both candidates have some Canadian connections as well. Ms. Harris spent some of her teen years in Montreal, and Mr. Trump’s vice president pick, Sen. J.D. Vance, is good friends with Conservative MP Jamil Jivani, the two having attended college together.
Trump on Trade, Economics
With his signature “America First” policies, Mr. Trump’s tenure introduced a number of protectionist measures aimed at prioritizing his country’s national interests over those of trading partners, including Canada.
During his time in office, Mr. Trump renegotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement, with the new deal dictating that 75 percent of auto content must come from North America, up from the previous 62.5 percent.
It also incentivized the use of high-wage manufacturing labour, a move expected to boost production in the United States and Canada, which suffered from lost jobs to Mexico for years.
Canada made some concessions as part of the new U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), by opening up its markets more to U.S. dairy farmers, providing “new tariff rate quotas” exclusively for the United States.
Mr. Trump also in 2018 imposed tariffs on most countries of 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum, which led Canada to respond in kind. Those tariffs were lifted in 2019. The Trump administration then stated in 2020 that it would re-introduce tariffs on Canadian aluminum, effective Aug. 16 that year, but withdrew the request the following month, avoiding retaliation.
On his campaign website, the former president promises to pass the “Trump Reciprocal Trade Act,” giving him the ability to increase tariffs if other countries’ tariff barriers are too restrictive, thereby allowing American businesses to sell more of their goods. He has floated the possibility of raising those tariffs to 10 percent on all countries’ imports and to 60 percent on Chinese imports.
According to Ron Stagg, a history professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, Mr. Trump could use the threat of tariffs to get economic concessions from other countries. He pointed out that the former president has also raised concerns about illegal immigrants crossing into the United States from Canada, an issue that he could link to the imposition of tariffs.
Mr. Trump has also vowed to end the country’s electric vehicle (EV) mandate on “day one” of his presidency, likely a reference to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations that would force automakers to sell EVs.
For Canada’s part, it made over $28 billion in investments in EV battery factories in the past year and has stipulated that all new vehicles sold in the country must be zero-emission by 2035. As demand has already started to stagnate—this could have further implications if there are fewer cars in the United States needing Canadian-made batteries.
Mr. Stagg said overturning the U.S. EV mandate may not have a major impact for Canada in the short term, but over a longer time, “so much money has gone into these factories that it is going to hurt [Canadian] jobs.”
Coils of steel sit in storage in a port authority facility in Hamilton, Ont., on March 9, 2018. Peter Power/Reuters
Harris on Trade, Economics
President Joe Biden only recently dropped out of the race and the Democratic National Convention won’t be held until the middle of August, where delegates will vote to approve the party’s platform. However, it is likely Ms. Harris will continue with the current administration’s policies of “Bidenomics,” which involves focusing on middle-class workers, promoting green energy, and increasing tax rates for wealthy Americans and corporations.
“We could pretty fairly assume that she would continue a very Biden-esque set of domestic and foreign policies,” Aaron Ettinger, an associate professor of political science at Carleton University, told The Epoch Times.
On his first day in office, President Biden cancelled the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have carried millions of gallons of oil from Canada to the United States. Canada’s efforts to reverse the decision were unsuccessful.
The Biden administration also kept in place, and in some cases strengthened, American protectionism with its “Buy American” and “Buy America” requirements, using financial assistance and government procurement to promote goods being produced in the country. The administration maintained the tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber first put in place by the Trump administration, and in 2021 doubled them from 9 percent to 18 percent.
A recent ongoing bone of contention between Ottawa and the Biden administration is Canada’s newly introduced digital services tax, which requires U.S. streaming companies such as Netflix to pay a tax on revenues made in Canada.
The Biden administration also introduced tax incentives for American-made EVs under its Build Back Better Act that would have made Canadian EVs less competitive in the American market, and Canada countered with its own threats of retaliatory tariffs. The potential tariffs war was avoided after the tax credits were modified to apply to Canadian EVs as well.
Given her focus on climate change policies, there’s less chance that Ms. Harris would do away with the country’s federal EV mandates, leaving the situation as is on that front to define the demand for Canadian-made EV components, should Canada maintain its current course on that sector.
Ms. Harris had said in 2019 that she is not a “protectionist Democrat.”
The Netflix screen on a television in Pittsburgh on Oct. 17, 2022. Gene J. Puskar/AP Photo
Defence Spending Challenge
Throughout his tenure as president, Mr. Trump increased the pressure on NATO members, including Canada, to meet their defence spending target of 2 percent of their GDP. He recently called those who don’t meet their commitments “delinquent.”
Mr. Trump’s campaign website says his government would strengthen the country’s alliances by “ensuring that our allies must meet their obligations to invest in our common defence.” During his speech at the Republican National Convention on July 14, Mr. Trump’s pick for vice president said the administration would ensure there are “no more free rides for nations that betray the generosity of the American taxpayer.”
Following the annual NATO summit in early July, the Liberal government announced it intends to meet the target of 2 percent GDP by 2032 but didn’t offer details on the path to that target. Treasury Board President and former Defence Minister Anita Anand has said the country’s slow procurement system makes it difficult to meet the target. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has said if he were to form government, he couldn’t commit to the 2 percent target due to the current state of Canada’s economy.
The Biden administration has also pressured other countries to meet their defence spending goals, with a White House national security official even saying ahead of the NATO summit in Washington in July that member nations will hold countries’ “feet to the fire” to meet the goal. Ms. Harris has also said that “NATO is central to our approach to global security.” But Mr. Trump’s position on this has been markedly more forceful.
Denis Stairs, professor emeritus of political science at Dalhousie University, said Mr. Trump could decide to penalize Canada with tariffs unless the country quickly increases its military expenditures.
“For a Trump administration, the military angle is a high priority,” he said. “On the other hand, tariff issues are enormously complex, and American interests can find themselves inadvertently gored unless the issues are handled with great care.”
The International Media Centre during the 2024 NATO Summit in Washington on July 9, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times
Diplomacy and Alliances
While the Liberal government has said it will work with whoever is in the White House, there have been indications by cabinet ministers that they find it more difficult to work with a Trump administration. Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly said in August 23 that it was preparing for “what could be a very difficult situation” if Mr. Trump or someone with similar policies became the next U.S. president, as Canada’s economy is “greatly tied” to that country.
Mr. Trump has also clashed with Mr. Trudeau in the past. After the June 2018 G7 meeting in Quebec, Mr. Trudeau spoke at a press conference about how he wouldn’t hesitate to take retaliatory measures to respond to American tariffs. Mr. Trump reacted by saying his Canadian counterpart had “acted so meek and mild” during the G7 meeting and only made the remarks after he had left.
A year later during a NATO meeting in London, UK, Mr. Trudeau was caught on a hot mic appearing to mock Mr. Trump in front of other world leaders for having a lengthy press conference, to which Mr. Trump later responded by calling him “two-faced.”
Following the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol Hill riots, Mr. Trudeau issued a statement saying they were “incited” by Mr. Trump.
Mr. Trudeau has said that if Mr. Trump becomes president again, it would bring “a certain amount of unpredictability,” and that it “won’t be easy” to work with him, but added that his government would be ready for whoever becomes the next president.
He was also quick to call Mr. Trump after the former president was the subject of an assassination attempt on July 13, wishing him well and condemning the attack.
But Mr. Trudeau has arguably enjoyed better relations with the Democrats. He was twice endorsed by Mr. Biden’s old boss, former President Barack Obama, during elections, and he praised Mr. Biden after he decided not to seek re-election, saying NATO and the G7 have been “lucky” to have had Mr. Biden leading “in some extraordinarily consequential times.”
At the same time, Canada has so far been sidelined from joining the Biden-initiated Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, and was not part of the 2021 AUKUS security partnership, which includes the United States, UK, and Australia. At the time, Mr. Biden said the United States has “no closer ally than Australia,” raising eyebrows in Canada, which has traditionally been America’s closest ally and trading partner, sharing 9,000 kilometres of land border.
Royal Australian Navy submarine HMAS Rankin is seen during AUSINDEX 21, a biennial maritime exercise between the Royal Australian Navy and the Indian Navy near Darwin, Australia, on Sept. 5, 2021. POIS Yuri Ramsey/Australian Defence Force via Getty Images
William Brooks, a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, says how well the U.S. administration works with a Canadian government is also to some degree dependent on their compatibility, and the situation could be different if the Tories were to form government after the 2025 Canadian election.
“In the ’80s, it was the Reagan administration, the Thatcher administration, and the Mulroney administration, and they found ways to benefit each other, because they were on the same page basically,” he said in an interview.
Sometimes, a substantial misalignment on certain policies can result in dramatic impacts.
On the issue of illegal immigration, for example, the stricter policy of the Trump administration and the timing of Mr. Trudeau’s Twitter comment in 2017 signalling that migrants were welcome in Canada, coincided with a spike in refugee inquiries in Canada. A new Trump administration, which would be more averse to illegal immigration, would likely result in more asylum seekers coming to Canada if a Canadian government is willing to take in more, compared to one that instead impedes their entry.
But when it comes to international alliances, given the tendency of Mr. Trump to prioritize national interest over multilateral initiatives, Canada could see more pressure from its traditional ally.
Regarding NATO’s spending requirement, Mr. Ettinger says given that Canada is unlikely to meet its commitment, “this just leaves whoever’s the prime minister during the Trump administration in a very difficult spot in having to manage an impossible set of expectations.”
Mr. Stagg believes that Mr. Trump would be “less supportive of Canada” than Ms. Harris would be.
“His whole thing is about making America great,” he said.
Mr. Brooks, however, says that if Mr. Trump’s policies really do make the United States a stronger country economically and on the world stage as he says, then the country’s allies, especially Canada as its closest ally, would benefit as well.
“When America is strong, Canada does well,” he said. “When one side does well, both sides do well.”
Mr. Ettinger says ultimately, Canada-U.S. relations go much deeper than who occupies the seat of either government at any given time.
“The Canada-U.S. relationship is largely determined by the pre-existing nature of this enormously complicated relationship,” he said.
“It helps if the people at the top get along, but it does not determine a whole lot.”
