B.C. scholars of the United States are warning of significant consequences for Canada's physical and economic security as the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump takes charge.
Jeffrey Meyers, who has studied and taught populism and the intersection of law and politics at various institutions, including currently at Surrey's Kwantlen Polytechnic University, said Canadians can no longer count on the global security architecture and economic order that the United States shaped after 1945.
"All of that can no longer be taken for granted," he said.
As an example, Meyers specifically pointed to the scenario of a comprehensive cyber-attack on Canada requiring the assistance of the United States. In such a situation, Trump could use Canada's need for assistance to extract economic concessions. He also speculated on the United States undermining its formalized intelligence relationship with Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand through he Five Eyes.
"Can anyone really be certain that information being shared with the United States isn't now also being provided or easily seen by countries that were hitherto considered rivals or enemies and that Donald Trump's personal proclivities for authoritarian strong men seems to be stronger than his interest in historical alliance with other similarly minded western or democratic countries?
Meyers specifically points to Trump's well-known disdain for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization formed after the Second World War. While European members of NATO were already nervous of Trump because they "know that America is not necessarily 100 per cent there for its traditional allies" in the face of threats from China, Russia, Iran and other adversaries, Trump's attitude toward NATO impacts Canada.
Meyers said Canada will have to increase its military spending, adding he doesn't know "where the money for that's going to come from." He noted Canada has tried to increase military spending in the past, but "has had problems with procurement" of military equipment.
"At 11:59 a.m. Monday, that was a problem, because it was annoying the Americans," he said. "But as of 12:01 (when Trump became president), that was a national security problem for Canada."
Meyers also points to portions of Trump's inauguration speech that referenced U.S. isolationism relative to the rest of the world outside of North American, but also signalled hemispheric ambitions.
Meyers said Trump's musings about Panama, Greenland and ultimately Canada represent forms of "Manifest Destiny or sabre-rattling and nationalism in the western hemisphere" that are "designed to consolidate and expand America's footprint in a kind of traditional 19th-century sense."
During a recent press conference before becoming president, Trump did not rule using force against Greenland, formally the territory of NATO-ally Denmark, and Panama, home of the eponymous canal, which Trump promised to "take back" during his inauguration speech without giving details.
Trump did not threaten force against Canada, but nonetheless spoke of using "economic force" to annex Canada. What that might look like could become evident as early as Feb. 1.
Trump suggested late Monday that his administration could move ahead with 25 per cent across-the-board tariffs on Canadian imports on that date with the proviso that uncertainty continues to surround his specific intentions and their timing. Trump had first threatened such tariffs in late November, when still president-elect.
Speaking with Black Press Media Monday afternoon, Ulrich Paschen instructor at KPU's School of Business, said B.C. "would be very badly affected" by tariffs.
"Mill towns across B.C. would be really, really hit hard if their products were subject to a tariff. So any delay, reduction or redirection of that tariff threat would be most, most welcome" because in any future trade war "Canada would be very much the more vulnerable party."
Trump's obsession for tariffs, which he has called his favourite word, contradicts economic realities as modern just-in-time production techniques can see goods cross borders multiple times before arriving at their final destination.
"I think why the idea of tariffs hold so much sway is because they are a very simple and intuitive tool that work well with the kind of rhetoric that some really like," Paschen said. "Trump's tariff is very easy to explain to an audience that feels like that they have been disadvantaged over time. The Trump tariff idea is therefore a very simple rhetorical tool to appeal to its base more than anything else. I don't think anyone in trade or supply chain (management) would agree with what he thinks tariffs would be doing, right?"
B.C. — like the rest of Canada — depends heavily on trade, especially with the United States. Leaders in both Ottawa and Victoria have talked about strengthening trade within Canada and with partners other than the United States in Europe and Asia, with the acknowledgement that this switch won't happen overnight.
Paschen said "we have been quite comfortable in that trade relationship" with the U.S. "Therefore, we didn't really look too hard, because the physical connection is clear. The cultural connection has been quite established over decades and centuries. So there wasn't a lot of motivation to go look elsewhere."
He added that external shocks "like a very substantial tariff threat" will let corporate and political leaders to redirect their energy.
"I think the long-term gaze will move abroad, but to replace those big volumes of trade that we have with the United States will only be partially possible and it (the switch) will be calculated more in years than months."
However, other countries will likely also be to subject to tariffs and looking to diversify their trade as well, Paschen said. Canada holds membership in multiple multi-lateral international trade agreements and Canada will be looking to deepen those relationships, just as other countries have the same motivation.
Ultimately, Paschen predicted that the "protectionist agenda of Trump will likely be short-lived, because we are too intertwined to undo that (trade) in the way that he would like to."
