Donald Trump is igniting a wave of political turmoil in Canada, escalating a crisis that poses a significant threat to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s leadership.

In a striking display of political maneuvering, the president-elect has unleashed a barrage of criticisms against Trudeau, deriding him as the “governor of the 51st state”—a pointed jab that not only undermines Trudeau’s authority but also diminishes Canada’s sovereignty in the eyes of the American public. This taunting is merely a preview of a more aggressive strategy as Trump actively seeks substantial victories on the international stage even before officially assuming office.

‘Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State’

In a post on Truth Social, Trump also wrote, “No one can answer why we subsidize Canada to the tune of over $100,000,000 a year? Makes no sense!” “Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State. They would save massively on taxes and military protection. I think it is a great idea. 51st State!!!,” the post added.

His readiness to meddle in the domestic affairs of an allied nation serves as a stark warning to other politically fragile governments around the world—including those in France, Germany, and South Korea—where internal strife and divisions could hinder their ability to respond effectively to external pressures.

Trump’s threat to impose a staggering 25% tariff on Canadian goods serves as a coercive tactic aimed at forcing Ottawa’s hand on unresolved border issues. This maneuver has left Trudeau grappling with the fear of a severe economic downturn, casting a shadow over his prospects as he approaches an election year fraught with challenges and uncertainty. With this tumultuous backdrop, Trudeau finds himself in a precarious position, facing mounting pressure and a potential loss of public support.

The situation represents an exceptionally hardline stance toward a nation that shares profound diplomatic, cultural, and familial connections with the United States. This relationship is not only historically significant but also economically vital, as it constitutes one half of one of the world’s most lucrative trading partnerships. Furthermore, this nation made the ultimate sacrifice when it sent troops to fight alongside the United States in the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks in 2001, underscoring the depth of their alliance.

Justin Trudeau’s leadership has already been fragile

Amidst this backdrop, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose leadership has already been fragile, faced a significant crisis this week with the dramatic resignation of Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland. Her departure came just hours before she was set to present a critical budget statement in Parliament, adding to the political upheaval.

For months, tensions over policy decisions had been building between Trudeau and Freeland, who are considered two of the most influential figures in Canadian politics. The Liberals appeared to be on a precarious path leading into an election that must occur by the following fall, consistently lagging behind the opposition Conservatives by approximately 20 points in opinion polls.

The catalyst for this political turmoil was Trump’s decision to impose tariffs, which ignited a fierce backlash within the Canadian cabinet. Freeland’s resignation letter was particularly scathing; she, a longtime ally of Trudeau, accused him of endorsing reckless policies that would place Canada in a vulnerable position against Trump’s unpredictable tactics.

“Our country today faces a grave challenge. The incoming administration in the United States is pursuing a policy of aggressive economic nationalism, including a threat of 25 per cent tariffs. We need to take that threat extremely seriously,” Freeland wrote. “That means keeping our fiscal powder dry today, so we have the reserves we may need for a coming tariff war.” Freeland went on: “That means eschewing costly political gimmicks, which we can ill afford and which make Canadians doubt that we recognize the gravity of the moment.”

‘She will not be missed’

For Donald Trump, the recent tumult in Canadian politics must feel like a stroke of luck. In a single, sweeping move, he has seen the departure of Chrystia Freeland, with whom he had a contentious and often confrontational relationship during her leadership of trade negotiations with the U.S. in his first term. Simultaneously, he has dealt a blow to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a figure he openly disdains and views as weak, overly progressive, and emblematic of a “woke” agenda.

On Truth Social, Trump wasted no time in voicing his disdain, remarking, “The Great State of Canada is stunned as the Finance Minister resigns, or was fired, from her position by Governor Justin Trudeau. Her behavior was totally toxic, and not at all conducive to making deals which are good for the very unhappy citizens of Canada. She will not be missed!!!” His words drip with vindictiveness, reflecting a larger-than-life persona that shapes all foreign relations into what he perceives as zero-sum conflicts where only one party can emerge victorious.

The effectiveness of Trump’s approach is becoming increasingly apparent. For example, Trudeau’s recent visit to Mar-a-Lago—an apparent bow to Trump’s authority—highlighted the dynamic of power in their relationship. This diplomatic maneuver may have heightened tensions between Trudeau and Freeland, who advocated for a more defiant Canadian stance against U.S. demands. Trump’s influence has fragmented a previously united Canadian front, a crucial element in the country’s strategy for managing its relationship with Washington.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford took a provocative stance, suggesting that Canada might consider halting essential energy exports to the United States as retaliation for Trump’s aggressive rhetoric. This bold assertion alienated him from fellow leaders across various provinces, particularly those from the resource-rich prairies, underscoring the deepening divisions within Canadian politics as they grapple with the ramifications of Trump’s tumultuous foreign policy.

Trump is acutely aware that he is navigating the political landscape from a position of considerable strength. The United States stands as the most formidable partner in its relations with Canada, and while a full-scale trade war could inflict pain on American consumers, it is Canada that would bear the brunt of the immediate and severe consequences.

In response to Trump’s escalating demands for Canada to take more decisive action against illegal migration and to curb the flow of fentanyl across their shared border, Ottawa has stepped forward with promises of substantial investments—amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars—along with increases in border searches and personnel. However, these measures seem minor compared to the pressing challenges faced at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Yet, Trump’s apparent contempt for traditional alliances that previous presidents cultivated over decades, combined with his reluctance to entertain compromises that would benefit both parties, complicates efforts by America’s allies to foster normal diplomatic relations under his administration.

This confrontational stance is likely to intensify if he secures a second term. In dealings with Canada and Mexico, Trump seemingly seeks significant concessions in anticipation of the planned renegotiation of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Although he previously celebrated this trade deal as a standout achievement of his first term, he now expresses a desire to overhaul it.

United States is providing other nations with hundreds of billions of dollars: What does it mean?

During a recent news conference at his Mar-a-Lago estate, the president-elect declared, “We lose a lot of money to Canada—a tremendous amount of money. We’re subsidizing Canada. We’re subsidizing Mexico. That can’t go on.” He continued, sharing his personal rapport with the people of both countries, yet firmly insisted, “Why are we supporting and giving other countries hundreds of billions of dollars? It’s not fair. It’s not right.”

The exact meaning behind Trump’s assertion that the United States is providing other nations with hundreds of billions of dollars remains ambiguous. He might be alluding to trade deficits, which he often interprets as a sign that foreign countries are exploiting the US economy. However, these deficits frequently reflect the insatiable appetite of American consumers for diverse goods from around the world, signaling a robust American economy.

Trump’s uncompromising approach to negotiations stems from a profound sense of self-assuredness following his electoral victory. He represents a significant portion of the American populace who believe that the era of global free trade has eroded the foundation of American manufacturing, benefiting a select group of business elites who have shifted jobs to countries with lower labor costs. This sentiment resonates particularly in communities located in border states, where the impacts of these economic shifts are felt deeply.

Read More: Narendra Modi’s 3.0 Foreign Policy: Pak, China, Western Countries

In contrast to previous US political leaders who viewed global trade and agreements with nations like Canada, Mexico, and those within the European Union as catalysts for wealth distribution, many of Trump’s supporters associate these policies with economic decline. They argue that such strategies have left entire regions struggling and have fueled social deprivation among their populations.

However, the intricacies of continental trade cannot be overlooked. The manufacturing landscape is intricately linked through established supply chains shaped by various trade agreements. For instance, components of a single automobile may traverse international borders multiple times before reaching completion at an assembly plant. Thus, a trade conflict between the United States and its North American neighbors—Canada and Mexico—could lead to adverse effects not only for American workers but also for consumers, as well as individuals living across the northern and southern frontiers.

While Canada and Mexico currently occupy Trump’s focus, it is anticipated that he will soon shift his attention toward what he perceives as other inequitable trading relationships once he officially assumes office next month.

Is your country next?

Trump is poised to implement his well-known divide-and-rule strategy among European nations, aiming to replicate the discord he successfully cultivated in Canada. While many of these countries benefit from the robust collective trading power of the European Union, they are also rife with political turmoil that Trump is likely to exploit. French President Emmanuel Macron finds himself mired in a self-inflicted political crisis that has lasted for months, while the government led by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz recently crumbled, setting the stage for elections next year. In the UK, newly appointed Prime Minister Keir Starmer holds a substantial majority, yet the country no longer enjoys the protective umbrella of the EU following Brexit. Trump’s past interactions with Canada illustrate that even smaller, ostensibly loyal allies may not receive favorable treatment.

Moreover, Trump has a compelling reason to engage in tough political maneuvers: many of these nations are home to conservative populists who are waiting in the wings and whom he would likely prefer to engage with. In Canada, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, known for his blunt, right-wing stance, is viewed as a prime minister-in-waiting. He garnered significant attention from US conservative media for his support of the trucker protests that flooded Ottawa in 2022, where enthusiasm for Trump-style populism was unmistakable.

As the political rhetoric intensifies across the border, Canadians are getting a preliminary glimpse of what a potential second term for Trump might entail. However, it’s clear that the rest of the world will soon find itself swept up in this unfolding dynamic.