By Tom Fowdy
Yesterday, Commission Chief Ursula Von Der Leyen took the unprecedented step of announcing to the European Parliament that Canada was welcome to join the bloc as an "associate member," despite being in North America. The move came amidst both parties being locked in a bitter trade dispute with the United States, with trade relations between Washington and Ottawa having deteriorated further in the past few weeks and more mutual tariffs imposed.
The proposal was denounced by US President Donald Trump as "laughable," who threatened to "stop trading" with Canada or impose "very serious tariffs." As per Trump's own foreign policy, which emphasizes both economic dominance as well as hemispheric dominance in the Americas, we should take it seriously that the United States sees Canada "aligning" with the European Union, whatever that might mean, as a major provocation. But the question is, can Canada really "join" the bloc? Or is this just political posturing? I'm going to go with the latter.
Canada is in a difficult geopolitical situation right now. Even though it is, on paper, the world's 2ndlargest country, in practical terms it is a medium-sized nation with the vast majority of its population living near the border of the United States, which constitutes its largest economic partner. These geographic realities have led Ottawa to cultivate an extremely close relationship with its neighbour, and traditionally it has been the practical reality of Canada to follow America's line even when Washington causes it tremendous difficulties, such as burning its relationship with China from 2018 to 2025.
But we live in unprecedented times; Donald Trump returned to office and made the political choice of subjecting Canada to a trade war. As per his strict "America first" orthodoxy in his second term, Trump seems to dislike the fact that Canada receives beneficial terms in exporting to American markets. On top of that, he has often treated the country with open contempt, referring to it as a "51ststate" and so on. These things have come together to create a rallying effect of Canadian national identity which subsequently rejects subservience to America, and in conjunction with that, a foreign policy pivot by Prime Minister Mark Carney to reduce dependence on the USA and assert autonomy in relations.
At the same time, the European Union is also in that boat. It is well known by now that Donald Trump dislikes the EU because it constitutes a large economic bloc that imposes its own rules and enforces its members' interests, which of course challenge American ones. Thus, it has also been subject to a trade war by the White House. The EU's foreign policy consensus has subsequently strongly moved towards protectionism, seeking to preserve its economic competitiveness against larger parties such as China, while also confronting Russia and simultaneously seeking to politically "beat" Brexit Britain.
As a result, both parties see the other as mutually convenient leverage in their dispute with the United States. While it is perfectly realistic that the two can deepen trade and political relations, the idea of Canada becoming an "associate member" of the EU in any way that is meaningful, beyond sheer symbolism, is politically outlandish; here is why. First of all, and most obviously, Canada is not European. Second, to admit a 40-million-plus, external country into the bloc would shift its balance of power in ways that are not necessarily favourable to its existing membership in the long term. What if Canada becomes politically favourable to America again in the future? What if it becomes a wedge in votes? For all practical purposes, you need to think of every possibility, and that itself prospectively compromises European sovereignty. More importantly, Canada is already a member of an existing free trade bloc, "the North American Free Trade Agreement" (NAFTA). For Ottawa to join the EU is to join a different bloc, and if it has any regulatory meaning, such as customs, etc., that is giving European countries a free-for-all entry to America itself.
It does not need to be asked whether this is a red line for Trump, because it is, and in NAFTA it remains true that the US, as the largest economy in it, holds all the cards, and the President would hold no second thought in nuking the entire agreement if it were necessary. An EU-aligned Canada, by any stretch that is meaningful, constitutes a threat to his economic and political vision for the Western Hemisphere, the new Monroe Doctrine. Thus, while Canada may seek alternative geopolitical options to hedge its bets in dealing with Trump, the limits of Ottawa's own foreign policy are nonetheless very clear: even in times of difficulty, its relationship with America, constrained by geography, remains the most important one and cannot be substituted with a third party.
Canada, after all, cannot move its population from the border of the United States to Europe. Therefore, while Ursula Von Der Leyen may posture this idea of "associate membership," and from my experience she postures a LOT of proposals that come to naught, we should assume for all practical purposes it is a gesture at best because Trump is a president who has no tolerance for even allied countries becoming more powerful. America First means America First, not Canada first, and certainly not Europe first.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | The Escalation in Yemen is a direct consequence of the failure of the Iran War
Opinion | The Two State Solution is no longer rhetoric, but a red line
Comment