Canada and the US share the longest land border in the world, always have and always will.
Our trade systems are deeply integrated, and the US is and always will be Canada’s largest trading partner.
However, and most importantly, the US cannot trust us, Canada, as a secure ally as we have allowed our national security (one of the main duties of a national government) through complacency, poorly crafted laws, misplaced trust, and deliberate misguiding of the public, to be compromised by the CCP, Indian, and Mexican cartels.
So instead of responsibly addressing our national security issues, our PM obfuscates and demands we pivot away from the our closest trading ally and align ourselves with “allies” far removed from us both culturally, and geographically, because of a supposed new world order.
And based on what, exactly? Our PM’s answer is to form a strategic alliance with the biggest threat to our sovereignty, the Chinese government.
This despite the fact that the US president’s power will vbe limited come the November US mid-terms.
The reality is that alignment with “other” allies will never improve Canadians security, nor will it replace our trade with the US, not even over a few generations!
How on earth can we expect these new alliances to fix Canada’s internal structural issues?
Good observations. Canada's internal issues are, for me, a clear signal that whatever bad comes our way in the not too distant future, we will absolutely not be prepared for it.
I mean, good that The Line publishes this, but this line of thinking is very much not accepted in the business community. Strong opinion of the C-suite (and these are the people who have Carney’s ear) is that thinking we can decouple in any meaningful way from the U.S. is a delusion, a hallmark of immature thinking.
The implication of course is that we’re going to be a satrapy, if the U.S. wants that. And that that’s a better outcome than defiance and (relative) impoverishment. Especially if you’re a partisan who is furious that the LPC never got their historic defeat in 2025 as a renunciation of everything Trudeau Jr did, and so there’s more than a bit of a view that “the U.S. is going in the right direction now, and defiance just keeps entrenching Liberal progressive decline in Canada”
Edit: comments from John Todd and Deborah Jane Hotvedt on this thread illustrate this perfectly. Also with belief that the U.S. isn’t permanently changed, that once Trump is gone the relationship will be back to what it was. (Also a common view in the business world)
Ignore Geography at our peril. Trump is a bump on the horizon. Just over 2 yrs from now he will be gone. In many cases I believe we are authors of our own misfortune. We managed to get rid Trudeau but hired a banker when we needed a boxer. Which Trudeau wasn’t
either. I do not want an Iran with nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles. If the roles were reversed do you think Carney would deal with Iran. In many ways Trump is exactly what the world needed. Buy European at your peril. If the shit hits the fan and we are tied to Europe use your imagination.
I guess anythings possible but given the American Constitution and the high numbers of firearms it would be surprising if it happened and even more surprising if it did not cause a revolt
I couldn’t agree more wholeheartedly with Mr Quinn’s assessment. Too many, particularly on the right, have failed to understand the seismic shift in our relationship with the United States.
I’m not entirely sure on the F-35 issue, but even in military terms, the old-school fetishism about fighter jets piloted by macho jet jockeys makes less and less sense in a world where hostile air defences are widely available. In other words, forget about (our legitimate) political war with the United States. This 26-year-old “fifth-generation” design may be past its best-before date.
As for Alberta, well.
It is certainly the case that the MAGATS have been supporting separatists in the province. Canadians (and, again, Conservatives in particular) who pretend that it is not so are deluding themselves.
The F-35 has actually acquitted itself very well against those air defenses over Iran in the past few years, with no combat losses to date. The length of time it takes to get a new military combat aircraft from the drawing board to service is shockingly long, but the F-35 remains the newest aircraft available and will likely retain that distinction for another decade. Meanwhile, the production lines for even older 4th gen aircraft like the F-16 and F-15 continue to crank out new versions upgraded with advanced avionics and improved engines: the designs aren't iterated as fast as they used to, but part of that is that current designs are much, much better than the past.
@GS: Thank you for weighing in; having someone who has superior understanding of these technical issues is most certainly important here.
What is your view, though, on the possibility that more advanced sensing nets, perhaps enabled by effective AI systems and Quantum computers, as well as new drone and laser technology, could diminish the operational argument for piloted aircraft, even aircraft as stealthy and net-centric as the F35?
Totally accept the premise of a generational shift with a country that is no longer reliable and can be actively hostile. Different people will come to this realization in their own way. Usually painfully. And, the disentangling needs to be done carefully. Geography will remain but no longer will be the determinant it once was.
Donald Trump is a temporary aberration. His time will end and with that end will come the opportunity to create a new beginning in the long term relationship between our two countries. One that is beneficial to both parties on this continent. Our best interests most assuredly do not exist in forming stronger relationships with China.
We're buying 30 F35s. I wouldn't buy any more. I'd buy Gripens. They aren't perfect, but they'll be ours. And with F35 availability still sucking, we could at least put something in the air. We need to get rid of supply management to increase our foreign trade (I don't care what Fairlife tries to sell here, I'm not buying American dairy at any price). I really don't care what Premier's toes get stepped on. We need a government with a backbone, not one of appeasement of anyone.
I would love to see some legal opinions on what the separatist provinces would get to keep if they left. I think that might be eye-opening for both sides. It certainly would be nice to know. Imagine Alberta losing Fort McMurray, or Quebec losing its dams.....a whole new calculus.....
Geography and demographic realities means that the US is *never* going to be just another country for Canada: it's always going to have outsized importance for us both economically, militarily, and politically. Generations of Canadian politicians have tried to find another way, whether it's Diefenbaker's efforts to build trade ties with the British Commonwealth or the Chretien Liberals with their trade missions to China and India. There's potential for expanded ties with the rest of the world, but the fact is that there are 330 million Americans in a very wealthy country immediately south of Canada and a short distance from the majority of Canada's population and economy.
However, the relatively greater importance of America to Canada doesn't mean caving to the US or accepting status as a vassal state because Americans have been so foolish as to elect a demagogic moron such as Donald Trump. America's going through a very rough period: it's a 2 party political system, and both of those parties seem to be trying to outdo each other with extremist idiocy. American decline and even disintegration is a very real possibility (another reason to develop alternatives for Canada), but most Americans are hostage to the ideological fixations of the small minority of politically-obsessed partisans who vote in their primary elections and dictate the course of their politics. To the extent that most Americans think of Canada at all, they think of us relatively favorably. Canadian policies need to protect Canadian interests, and that's going to cost us when we have to deal with a vicious fool like Trump. However, we don't need to cut off *our* nose to spite America if it's not serving our interests.
“The road to hell is paved with good intentions”. The world is safest when the major powers (Russia, China, the USA) look after their own interests. Peace is threatened when small, middle powers pretend they count and attempt to impose their interests on the rest. In doing so they threaten the interests of the super powers.
Why didn't we just take action against our fentanyl industry and go back to doing background checks on immigrants? So much drama just for Boomer votes.
Every successful nation acts in its own best interests. Unfortunately for Canada both Trudeau and his adviser, Mark Carney act in what they perceive to be in the interest of some global interests, both economic and environmental.
I believe that America is embarked upon creating a North American fortress and geography dictates that Canada and Mexico are within that fortress. Should any of the current shooting wars spiral into a major war, reality dictates that Canada will fight with America and Mexico to protect our shared turf. Like Europe we best find a way to work with our neighbours in planning our mutual defence.
It's great that Canada joined the GCAP program, but we still need to get through until they're available. Assuming the timelines are met and deliveries start in 2035, and a partner Canada likely won't get deliveries for a few years after that. The CF-18s are quickly burning through the last of their useful life. By 2030 or so, they're going to be unusable. So we probably need something to plug the gap from about 2030 to the early 2040s.
Ideally, this would not be the F-35 for political reasons. The problem is nothing else is really available.
The most talked about alternative - the Gripen both needs US approval before they can be sold, and has an order book that will keep them busy into the mid 2030s anyway. There may be an option to work out something creative: we do a secret deal with Saab to get our orders in first, and hope the Democrats win the 2028 election and will approve the sale and then we can get them delivered starting 2029. That would actually be a good solution, but it's a delicate needle to thread. Depends a lot on everyone else being willing to accommodate us. I think any realistic path forward on the Gripen has to have a viable contingency for the possibility that it may never happen.
Rafale can perhaps be acquired without US approval, though they have a full order book too. It may work if we start now, but if it takes 3 years to switch from Gripen to Rafale, it probably doesn't work time-wise.
We are already in contract for some F-35s. We could slow roll buying more and make do with a genuinely minimal air force for the better part of a decade, and then fill in with GCAP. That would leave us really unable to do anything except the bare minimum for at least a decade though, more if the GCAP program runs into any delays.
But looking at the options, I think we're probably stuck between an F-35 with all the political discomfort that entails, or a dramatically reduced air force for an extended period of time. The 20 year saga of delaying the order for political reasons has used up all our options to delay this far.
AJ, Trump's signature may be meaningless but Canada will take delivery of the F-35s after he is gone. All other US Presidents seem to have abided by signed treaties as near as I am aware.
I agree that MAGA is - at least over the foreseeable future - here to stay.
Now, having said that, whomever is in place after DJT is no longer in power and how they will administer things, I expect that they will not be as mercurial or as willing to rip up agreements willynilly.
What if you had a President with the ideology of MAGA, but someone with the intelligence of a smart college graduate and the patience of an USMC sniper? That could easily happen.
Currently, we have someone who is almost like that BUT he is also a narcissist, a liar and, well, other anti-social proclivities; and, he is not at all patient. My point is that most politicians in any country, very much including Canada, are also narcissists, liars to some degree but they (I very much hope!) don't have those other anti-social tendencies. Further, typically, when they sign agreements on behalf of their countries they typically keep those agreements.
So, if you think Make America Great Again is an ideology it is no more odious (honest!) than the ideology of the USSR or Communist China or ever so many other countries. What I want is simple: I want a country that is predictable and keeps it's word. I don't think those things are precluded by the ideology of the MAGA folks - well, other than the current liar in chief, but he is, in my view, an aberration.
30 F35s, 70 plus Gripens (likely with US engines) and plan/deploy strategically on a "best for purpose" basis while we can participate in the development and building of Gen 6.
No, we don't need to pick a side! We need to be conscious of our history and the geography that defines us forever. Clearly the Elbowzoes have picked a side and how's that working out?
Yes, we need to expand our trading relationships and continue the strategic partnerships we have had with the rest of the democratic countries. Trump is an aberration who will be a bad memory in a couple of years and the next government doesn't need an excuse to say well you called us shit 2 years ago, good luck with your new friends. Getting rid of the US is as sane as a divorce where the parners continue living in the same house.
Oh good. We can now stop consuming American TV and film content while hating all things culturally Canadian
Rene Simard rocks.
Canada and the US share the longest land border in the world, always have and always will.
Our trade systems are deeply integrated, and the US is and always will be Canada’s largest trading partner.
However, and most importantly, the US cannot trust us, Canada, as a secure ally as we have allowed our national security (one of the main duties of a national government) through complacency, poorly crafted laws, misplaced trust, and deliberate misguiding of the public, to be compromised by the CCP, Indian, and Mexican cartels.
So instead of responsibly addressing our national security issues, our PM obfuscates and demands we pivot away from the our closest trading ally and align ourselves with “allies” far removed from us both culturally, and geographically, because of a supposed new world order.
And based on what, exactly? Our PM’s answer is to form a strategic alliance with the biggest threat to our sovereignty, the Chinese government.
This despite the fact that the US president’s power will vbe limited come the November US mid-terms.
The reality is that alignment with “other” allies will never improve Canadians security, nor will it replace our trade with the US, not even over a few generations!
How on earth can we expect these new alliances to fix Canada’s internal structural issues?
Bollocks!
Good observations. Canada's internal issues are, for me, a clear signal that whatever bad comes our way in the not too distant future, we will absolutely not be prepared for it.
I mean, good that The Line publishes this, but this line of thinking is very much not accepted in the business community. Strong opinion of the C-suite (and these are the people who have Carney’s ear) is that thinking we can decouple in any meaningful way from the U.S. is a delusion, a hallmark of immature thinking.
The implication of course is that we’re going to be a satrapy, if the U.S. wants that. And that that’s a better outcome than defiance and (relative) impoverishment. Especially if you’re a partisan who is furious that the LPC never got their historic defeat in 2025 as a renunciation of everything Trudeau Jr did, and so there’s more than a bit of a view that “the U.S. is going in the right direction now, and defiance just keeps entrenching Liberal progressive decline in Canada”
Edit: comments from John Todd and Deborah Jane Hotvedt on this thread illustrate this perfectly. Also with belief that the U.S. isn’t permanently changed, that once Trump is gone the relationship will be back to what it was. (Also a common view in the business world)
Decoupling is going to be tough. Canadians love their American stuff.
Ignore Geography at our peril. Trump is a bump on the horizon. Just over 2 yrs from now he will be gone. In many cases I believe we are authors of our own misfortune. We managed to get rid Trudeau but hired a banker when we needed a boxer. Which Trudeau wasn’t
either. I do not want an Iran with nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles. If the roles were reversed do you think Carney would deal with Iran. In many ways Trump is exactly what the world needed. Buy European at your peril. If the shit hits the fan and we are tied to Europe use your imagination.
What if he pulls a Reichstag fire and refuses to leave whilst declaring a national emergency and suspending civil rights?
I guess anythings possible but given the American Constitution and the high numbers of firearms it would be surprising if it happened and even more surprising if it did not cause a revolt
I couldn’t agree more wholeheartedly with Mr Quinn’s assessment. Too many, particularly on the right, have failed to understand the seismic shift in our relationship with the United States.
I’m not entirely sure on the F-35 issue, but even in military terms, the old-school fetishism about fighter jets piloted by macho jet jockeys makes less and less sense in a world where hostile air defences are widely available. In other words, forget about (our legitimate) political war with the United States. This 26-year-old “fifth-generation” design may be past its best-before date.
As for Alberta, well.
It is certainly the case that the MAGATS have been supporting separatists in the province. Canadians (and, again, Conservatives in particular) who pretend that it is not so are deluding themselves.
The F-35 has actually acquitted itself very well against those air defenses over Iran in the past few years, with no combat losses to date. The length of time it takes to get a new military combat aircraft from the drawing board to service is shockingly long, but the F-35 remains the newest aircraft available and will likely retain that distinction for another decade. Meanwhile, the production lines for even older 4th gen aircraft like the F-16 and F-15 continue to crank out new versions upgraded with advanced avionics and improved engines: the designs aren't iterated as fast as they used to, but part of that is that current designs are much, much better than the past.
My concern is the USA as a potential enemy is a very strong possibility as dictatorships like invading their neighbors and have since forever ago.
@GS: Thank you for weighing in; having someone who has superior understanding of these technical issues is most certainly important here.
What is your view, though, on the possibility that more advanced sensing nets, perhaps enabled by effective AI systems and Quantum computers, as well as new drone and laser technology, could diminish the operational argument for piloted aircraft, even aircraft as stealthy and net-centric as the F35?
Totally accept the premise of a generational shift with a country that is no longer reliable and can be actively hostile. Different people will come to this realization in their own way. Usually painfully. And, the disentangling needs to be done carefully. Geography will remain but no longer will be the determinant it once was.
Donald Trump is a temporary aberration. His time will end and with that end will come the opportunity to create a new beginning in the long term relationship between our two countries. One that is beneficial to both parties on this continent. Our best interests most assuredly do not exist in forming stronger relationships with China.
We're buying 30 F35s. I wouldn't buy any more. I'd buy Gripens. They aren't perfect, but they'll be ours. And with F35 availability still sucking, we could at least put something in the air. We need to get rid of supply management to increase our foreign trade (I don't care what Fairlife tries to sell here, I'm not buying American dairy at any price). I really don't care what Premier's toes get stepped on. We need a government with a backbone, not one of appeasement of anyone.
I would love to see some legal opinions on what the separatist provinces would get to keep if they left. I think that might be eye-opening for both sides. It certainly would be nice to know. Imagine Alberta losing Fort McMurray, or Quebec losing its dams.....a whole new calculus.....
Concur on fighter jets and the need to fix Canada's dairy and poultry sectors.
Geography and demographic realities means that the US is *never* going to be just another country for Canada: it's always going to have outsized importance for us both economically, militarily, and politically. Generations of Canadian politicians have tried to find another way, whether it's Diefenbaker's efforts to build trade ties with the British Commonwealth or the Chretien Liberals with their trade missions to China and India. There's potential for expanded ties with the rest of the world, but the fact is that there are 330 million Americans in a very wealthy country immediately south of Canada and a short distance from the majority of Canada's population and economy.
However, the relatively greater importance of America to Canada doesn't mean caving to the US or accepting status as a vassal state because Americans have been so foolish as to elect a demagogic moron such as Donald Trump. America's going through a very rough period: it's a 2 party political system, and both of those parties seem to be trying to outdo each other with extremist idiocy. American decline and even disintegration is a very real possibility (another reason to develop alternatives for Canada), but most Americans are hostage to the ideological fixations of the small minority of politically-obsessed partisans who vote in their primary elections and dictate the course of their politics. To the extent that most Americans think of Canada at all, they think of us relatively favorably. Canadian policies need to protect Canadian interests, and that's going to cost us when we have to deal with a vicious fool like Trump. However, we don't need to cut off *our* nose to spite America if it's not serving our interests.
“The road to hell is paved with good intentions”. The world is safest when the major powers (Russia, China, the USA) look after their own interests. Peace is threatened when small, middle powers pretend they count and attempt to impose their interests on the rest. In doing so they threaten the interests of the super powers.
Why didn't we just take action against our fentanyl industry and go back to doing background checks on immigrants? So much drama just for Boomer votes.
Every successful nation acts in its own best interests. Unfortunately for Canada both Trudeau and his adviser, Mark Carney act in what they perceive to be in the interest of some global interests, both economic and environmental.
I believe that America is embarked upon creating a North American fortress and geography dictates that Canada and Mexico are within that fortress. Should any of the current shooting wars spiral into a major war, reality dictates that Canada will fight with America and Mexico to protect our shared turf. Like Europe we best find a way to work with our neighbours in planning our mutual defence.
It's great that Canada joined the GCAP program, but we still need to get through until they're available. Assuming the timelines are met and deliveries start in 2035, and a partner Canada likely won't get deliveries for a few years after that. The CF-18s are quickly burning through the last of their useful life. By 2030 or so, they're going to be unusable. So we probably need something to plug the gap from about 2030 to the early 2040s.
Ideally, this would not be the F-35 for political reasons. The problem is nothing else is really available.
The most talked about alternative - the Gripen both needs US approval before they can be sold, and has an order book that will keep them busy into the mid 2030s anyway. There may be an option to work out something creative: we do a secret deal with Saab to get our orders in first, and hope the Democrats win the 2028 election and will approve the sale and then we can get them delivered starting 2029. That would actually be a good solution, but it's a delicate needle to thread. Depends a lot on everyone else being willing to accommodate us. I think any realistic path forward on the Gripen has to have a viable contingency for the possibility that it may never happen.
Rafale can perhaps be acquired without US approval, though they have a full order book too. It may work if we start now, but if it takes 3 years to switch from Gripen to Rafale, it probably doesn't work time-wise.
We are already in contract for some F-35s. We could slow roll buying more and make do with a genuinely minimal air force for the better part of a decade, and then fill in with GCAP. That would leave us really unable to do anything except the bare minimum for at least a decade though, more if the GCAP program runs into any delays.
But looking at the options, I think we're probably stuck between an F-35 with all the political discomfort that entails, or a dramatically reduced air force for an extended period of time. The 20 year saga of delaying the order for political reasons has used up all our options to delay this far.
Canada could use the upcoming decisions on purchasing more F-35s as an incentive to reduce tariffs that the USA has imosed on Canadian exports.
Nah. Trump's signature isn't worth the paper it's printed on, so any agreement will Art of the Dealed away in a month.
Best to build/buy the best package (in terms of cost, technology IP, security, etc etc) with those who respect an ally and a contract.
The planes will be used after Trump leaves office. It makes sense to use planes that can be repaired by American & Canadian technicians.
Canadian technicians? I 100% agree. American? Not necessary and potentially dangerous.
I am sure the American technicians help train the Canadian technicians.
Dangerous? How exactly?
AJ, Trump's signature may be meaningless but Canada will take delivery of the F-35s after he is gone. All other US Presidents seem to have abided by signed treaties as near as I am aware.
Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. MAGA is here to stay, whether you ask a White House courtier or an Alberta seppie.
I agree that MAGA is - at least over the foreseeable future - here to stay.
Now, having said that, whomever is in place after DJT is no longer in power and how they will administer things, I expect that they will not be as mercurial or as willing to rip up agreements willynilly.
What if you had a President with the ideology of MAGA, but someone with the intelligence of a smart college graduate and the patience of an USMC sniper? That could easily happen.
You might well have that combination.
Currently, we have someone who is almost like that BUT he is also a narcissist, a liar and, well, other anti-social proclivities; and, he is not at all patient. My point is that most politicians in any country, very much including Canada, are also narcissists, liars to some degree but they (I very much hope!) don't have those other anti-social tendencies. Further, typically, when they sign agreements on behalf of their countries they typically keep those agreements.
So, if you think Make America Great Again is an ideology it is no more odious (honest!) than the ideology of the USSR or Communist China or ever so many other countries. What I want is simple: I want a country that is predictable and keeps it's word. I don't think those things are precluded by the ideology of the MAGA folks - well, other than the current liar in chief, but he is, in my view, an aberration.
30 F35s, 70 plus Gripens (likely with US engines) and plan/deploy strategically on a "best for purpose" basis while we can participate in the development and building of Gen 6.
No, we don't need to pick a side! We need to be conscious of our history and the geography that defines us forever. Clearly the Elbowzoes have picked a side and how's that working out?
Yes, we need to expand our trading relationships and continue the strategic partnerships we have had with the rest of the democratic countries. Trump is an aberration who will be a bad memory in a couple of years and the next government doesn't need an excuse to say well you called us shit 2 years ago, good luck with your new friends. Getting rid of the US is as sane as a divorce where the parners continue living in the same house.