RANDALL WHITE, NORTH AMERICAN NOTEBOOK, TORONTO . THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2024. According to Wkipedia : “The Ugly American is a 1958 political novel by Eugene Burdick and William Lederer that depicts the failures of the US diplomatic corps in Southeast Asia.” It ”has remained continuously in print and is one of the most influential American political novels.”

For many and probably most of us who live in the most northern part of North America, President-elect Donald Trump’s recent joke or otherwise to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that, to avoid palpably insane US tariffs, “Canada could become the 51st state” of the Union marked the re-appearance of the Ugly American species in the US capital (er, well, Mar-a-Lago at least).

This past Monday, eg, a young lady from the United States called Tara Bull raised the question “Would you support Canada becoming the 51st US State?” on X (Twitter). On Tuesday “Made In Canada” (from Canada of course) replied : “I will speak for every Canadian, NO!”

Just today (at 8 this morning) the Angus Reid Institute posted the results of a very quick poll of some 3,000 Canadians. All told, when asked “how do you believe the Canadian government should approach Trump’s threat of tariffs,” 49% answered “Play hardball — even if the tariffs come, Canada shouldn’t let itself be bullied.” Another 33% said “Try to negotiate with Trump for a lower tariff.” And then 10% were prepared to “Concede and do whatever the US demands to avoid the tariff.” (While 9% answered “Not sure/Can’t say.”)

“Donald Trump is not raising some new Ugly American principle here”

The Angus Reid poll also revealed some striking differences in Canadian attitudes among those with a different “Federal Vote Intention” in the next Canadian election. Among Conservative party voters only 32% answered “Play hardball … Canada shouldn’t let itself be bullied.” But among Liberals this play-hardball number rose to 63%, and among New Democrats it moved up one point more to 64%. (Even among Bloc Québécois voters hardball players stood at 55%.)

If I were answering this question myself I would certainly opt for Play Hardball as well. (And if from this you deduce that I would never vote Conservative in any circumstance … well you may be right! My apologies to all those who would vote Conservative, sometimes at least.)

At the same time, I think it is worth noting that Donald Trump is not raising some new Ugly American principle here. And, even as a Canadian, I must confess that I can see at least some logic in the argument.

Canada does sometimes seem to want to be two quite different things at the same time : (1) a country or UN member state altogether separate from the United States with its own health and social security programs, etc ; (2) a northern North American geography with the same unfettered access (and openness it should equally be stressed) to the economic markets of the USA as any member state of the American Union.

Republican Blaine (from Maine) in the 1890s

The syndrome here has a long enough history. In the late 19th century the late John A. Macdonald Government of Canada sent out feelers in Washington, about some possible renewal of the 1854 reciprocity or free trade treaty between the US and Canada, that the first post-Civil-War US government had cancelled in 1866.

This brought the following response from the Republican politician (and two-time US secretary of state) James Gillespie Blaine (from Maine) : “Beyond the frontier, across the river, our neighbours chose another Government, another allegiance … exactly as they have a right to do … But I am opposed … to giving the Canadians the sentimental satisfaction of waving … [their own] flag … and enjoying the actual cash remuneration of American markets. They cannot have both. If they come to us they can have what we have, but … So far as I can help it, I do not mean that they shall be Canadians and Americans at the same time.”

Donald Trump’s 51st state joke implies something similar. (Even if Mr Trump has no direct knowledge of James Gillespie Blaine!) If we Canadians really want to guarantee our “free trade” access to US markets, come hell or high water, all we have to do is become a US state — like California say (which already has almost as many people as Canada) or New York, or Florida or Texas. From what at least some of our politicians say in 2024, we often enough do seem to want to be “Canadians and Americans at the same time.”

Someone who lives in the part of Canada I do might especially say here “Hello Doug Ford” (even if somebody has most recently told him about The War of 1812). I’d also be critical of Premier Ford (and other Canadian provincial first ministers) for urging that we need trade agreements between Canada and the United States that do not include the quite different case of Mexico. What this overlooks is the crucial role a three-way North American trade agreement among Mexico, the United States, and Canada plays in protecting Canadian sovereignty.

Why Mexico is so important for Canada in any North American trade agreement

A trade agreement strictly between the United States and Canada (like the FTA originally negotiated by the Mulroney government, before American enthusiasts wanted to add Mexico as well for a new “NAFTA”) would arguably evolve in the direction of some real-world political status increasingly close to Canada as the 51st State of the Union.

The key trouble is just that Canada has only about 12% of the population of the United States. (Even though our total geographic area is 9,984,670 km² , compared to only 9,525,067 km² for the USA — the one North American superlative to which we can politely lay claim.) That means our market is at best only 12% of the US market. And only 12% as powerful, especially in the right-wing power-mongering universe about to return for 4 more years in Washington, DC.

Still, at bottom in the global village today we do have a few early connections. Most recently, eg : “On November 15, 2024, the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau and the President of Indonesia, Prabowo Subianto, issued a joint statement to welcome the substantive conclusion of negotiations for a Canada-Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with the objective of bringing CEPA into force as soon as possible … The federal government is expanding trade and investment with large, fast-growing markets, such as Indonesia, to help Canadians succeed at home and around the world.”

In the end Canadians such as myself are no doubt pleased enough that : “All told, when asked ‘how do you believe the Canadian government should approach Trump’s threat of tariffs,’ 49% answered ‘Play hardball — even if the tariffs come, Canada shouldn’t let itself be bullied.’” And to start with I think this means just stop listening to the strange second coming of President Donald Trump for a while. For one thing, it really isn’t that entertaining … and the sense it does make is really not worth taking all that seriously …