Bryan Brulotte: Canada is entering a new era of nationalism

For most of the past three generations, Canada has occupied one of the most comfortable strategic positions of any country in the world. We shared a continent with the world’s largest economy and most powerful military, enjoyed privileged access to the American market, possessed extraordinary natural resources and operated within an international system that was broadly stable and predictable. That comfortable world is disappearing.

Sign In or Create an Account

The trade confrontation with the United States, the Canada Investment Summit in Toronto and Europe’s remarkable proposal for a new relationship with Canada may appear to be separate developments. They are actually part of the same story. Canada is being forced to think seriously about national power again.

Columnist Jesse Kline keeps you up to date with what’s happening in Israel and the effects of antisemitism on life here in Canada. Friday mornings.

By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Channel Israel will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Former prime minister Stephen Harper captured the magnitude of the change this week at the summit. A longtime admirer of the United States and an architect of closer economic relations with our neighbour, Harper nevertheless argued that Canada must now pursue diminished reliance upon the United States to preserve its sovereignty. That is a significant statement from a Conservative former prime minister whose political instincts have never been anti-American.

Prime Minister Mark Carney is reaching a similar conclusion from a different political tradition. His government argues that economic integration can no longer be assumed to be benign, because tariffs, supply chains and access to markets can increasingly become instruments of national power. The response has been an aggressive effort to attract investment, accelerate major projects and diversify Canada’s economic relationships.

Then came Europe, with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposing this week that Canada become the European Union’s first “associate member.” The terminology may ultimately change, and the legal architecture remains undefined, but the substance matters more than the label. Europe is proposing deeper cooperation with Canada in advanced manufacturing, defence production, Arctic security, energy, critical minerals, artificial intelligence, quantum technology and economic security.

These developments represent a remarkable geopolitical moment, but Canadians should resist declaring victory before anything has actually been built. The Investment Summit reportedly produced nearly $500 billion in investment and financing commitments. The federal government also announced a major expansion of immediate expensing for business investment, covering more than 65 per cent of capital assets and reducing the estimated marginal effective tax rate on new investment from roughly 13 per cent to 6.4 per cent.

Those are significant numbers, but capital commitments are not the same thing as economic capacity. Money announced at a conference still has to become mines, pipelines, LNG terminals, nuclear reactors, ports, railways, factories, data centres and technology companies. Canada has spent too many years announcing projects that take too long to approve, cost too much to build or never get built at all.

That is the real test of this moment, because Canada possesses enormous advantages. We are one of the world’s largest producers of oil, natural gas, uranium and hydroelectricity, while also possessing vast deposits of critical minerals, enormous agricultural capacity, sophisticated financial institutions and advanced technology companies. We also have access through existing trade agreements to roughly 1.5 billion consumers, yet we have too often behaved like a country that assumed these advantages would develop themselves. They will not.

Nor should diversification be confused with turning away from the United States. Geography cannot be repealed, and the United States will remain our largest neighbour, an indispensable security partner and one of the world’s most important economies. The objective should therefore be diversification without estrangement.

Indeed, there is a Canadian paradox at the centre of all this. To preserve a healthy long-term relationship with the United States, Canada may need to become less dependent upon it. A Canada capable of exporting energy to Europe and Asia, processing more of its own resources, defending its Arctic approaches, building military equipment with allies and attracting global capital would not be anti-American; it would simply be more sovereign.

Ultimately, such a Canada would also be a more valuable American ally. For the first time in decades, Canadians are being forced to think about sovereignty not simply as a constitutional concept, but as economic capacity. National power today includes energy, resources, infrastructure, industrial capacity, technology, capital, defence and the ability to reach markets without depending excessively upon any single country.

Canada did not choose this moment; the world changed around us, and extraordinary periods sometimes force countries to confront weaknesses they have been able to ignore for years. If this disruption finally compels Canada to develop its resources, rebuild its productive capacity, strengthen its military, diversify its markets and rediscover the importance of national sovereignty, something enduring may yet emerge from it. The world has changed, and Canada now has to change with it.

National Post

This website uses cookies to personalize your content (including ads), and allows us to analyze our traffic. Read more about cookies here. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.