On economic aggression and what it reveals
Thoughts from Canada
Like many, I’m most assuredly trapped in the uncertainty of our moment. After waiting for (and working to process) Trump’s announcement yesterday (new 25% tariffs on goods from Canada1 and Mexico), I have little to no confidence in my ability to forecast what emerges from his White House. However, I’ll share a few reflections.
I wonder, given the events of this week, what (if any) form or strategy of diplomacy might work with the Trump administration.
I wonder about the strategic logic of the tariffs. The use of punishment measures usually feature a clear strategic rationale. After all, punishment only works when the target understands the behaviour they must change.
In recent weeks, the Trudeau administration announced a renewed commitment to border security and immigration — ostensibly addressing the (comparatively minimal) volume of illicit economic transit (drugs, etc…) and migrants across Canada’s southern border. Despite speaking directly to the Trump administration’s framing for the tariffs, this has mattered little, it appears.
I think Canada’s counter-measures (retaliatory tariffs) are a sovereign necessity. Following the above points: Without knowing what will change Trump’s position, merely absorbing the tariffs is recipe for prolonged economic attrition: Unacceptable to Canadians, and unimaginable if the roles (US/Canada) were reversed.
I am most curious what these measures will reveal about the quality (and durability) of the US social contract. Here, it is important to recall:
Counter measures, as announced by Trudeau last night, work directly and indirectly. In the latter sense, tariffs exert pressure or create costs for American businesses, communities, and individuals. These costs will accumulate until — theoretically — they prompt common outrage or action among the aggreived, leading them to petition the US government to change course.
The open question today is whether the current US administration is sufficiently sensitive to public opinion, even in red/Republican states, where many of the targeted tariffs will generate costs.
Will the Trump administration listen and respond to Americans?
Will aggression trump analysis?
In short, the effectiveness of Canada’s response is predicated on the strength (or presence) of America’s democratic reflex.
If this implicit yet vital democratic quality is diminished, eroded, or ignored, the playbook for US-Canada relations — not to mention US foreign policy — will require radical rethinking.
Trump’s executive order outlines a slightly reduced 10% tariff against Canadian energy.