I don’t think Canada has the luxury of ignoring China as an export market given the size of its resource economy , especially since Trump claims US has no need of it. This does not mean that Canada embraces China as a real partner, the way US used to be viewed. Carney stated that there are clear guardrails on the relationship with respect to security and sharing of information.
I agree. Carney’s outreach to China is like a wake up call to an unfeeling romantic partner, letting him or her know that you’re not available to see them for awhile. His reference to Thucydides’s distinction about the treatment of strong and weak peoples hints at parallels to the hubris of democratic Athens subordinating its allies and neutrals like the Melians - an exercise in pride that preceded a fall in the Athenian alliance.
China is not threatening Canadian sovereignty and take over: America has been messing with Canadian politics and trying to direct the sovereignty issue for many decades - ramped most recently with the usual suspects weighing in.
Conservative PM Harper allowed right wing American hedge fund owned Post Media to buy dozens of media outlets who harangue Canadians all day with their nihilistic American right wing political garbage. Harper also happens to be the guy that decimated Canada’s military!
Easy to criticize - what’s the solution then?
Now we have a fascist Board of Peace set up to protect scum around the world - autocrats, dictators and criminals united under an American organization headed by the American President! What’s he selling and offering - $1 billion and you can do whatever you want and American justice will be blind? His own loyalty pledges a fake nato where they come to others side?
Both China and the US have engaged in foreign interference. China has UFWD groups throughout Canada and the Hogue Commission heard testimony and the report is publicly available. That’s undisputed that China has meddled. However America also has, that’s their foreign policy to meddle in the affairs of middle and lower powers to preserve their hegemony.
The way that I think of our relationship with China is different than many seem to understand. The goals of the last mission were strictly economic. Remove some tariffs, get to know the players, reestablish lines of communication. Based on his speech, Carney was not just talking about the US, but also China and Russia. If he believes what he says, there is no alliance on the offing, but we have acknowledged that China is a hegemon and deserves some respect. We will probe for areas where we both can cooperate, but be mindful of pitfalls, traps, and escape routes. We will engage on select topics where we have differences, but must maintain the stoic view that we cannot change them, only ourselves. We will continue to ally ourselves with like minded nations, but know that China, Russia, and the US will continue to deal with nations that don't share our values. We will change our view of ourselves in the world to specifically improve our defense, diplomacy, and economy to become more independent, but not be lonely. We want friends and competitors, and will be prepared for adversaries with those same or different teammates. I don't want to sound too optimistic, but I think we can do what he says and maybe more quickly than even we can think of.
Garry misreads if he thinks Carney says “choose China over USA.” Carney says to the middle powers, “Choose each other. Stop putting all your eggs in hegemon baskets.” Canada can lead this. Canada has been a free-world saving ally in two world wars. When the UK stood alone September 1939 to January 1942, a big Canadian troop deployment in the UK was an added deterrent to Nazi invasion. Canadian ports and Canadian warship escorts were key to the success of convoys that sustained the UK and Soviet defences. Canadian industry and Canadian skies trained thousands of pilots from around the world who then deployed to destroy the Luftwaffe. The Atlantic Charter, the war aims document that FDR got Churchill to sign, the agreement that for the last 85 years kept the great powers from another world war, was signed in Newfoundland in August 1941. Churchill and FDR left for home. FDR’s son Elliott (USAF aerial reconnaissance captain) flew from Newfoundland to continue the aerial mapping of Greenland, which leads us to the continued NATO and NORAD cooperative defence of the North Atlantic to this day. Canada has always been the linchpin in these great alliances. If the USA wants to give all that up, so be it. Canada can be a linchpin of allies who want to adhere to the principles of the Atlantic Charter - no matter which hemisphere or ocean.
The deal with China does bother me. But on the other hand, Canada is not refusing to have trade agreements with the USA, has never refused to have trade agreements with anyone, really. The key thing here is to unite the free world against the superpowers, to create and maintain a significant alignment without the USA.
Canada and Europe have depended for too long on America. It's unfortunate that the collapse of the USA into authoritarianism and flat-out insanity means that the entire world is arming up. We are inching closer and closer to a more dangerous place, moving towards WWIII and thus closer to nuclear war.
But I see China as the least problematic of the superpowers, the sanest. Trump is nuts. Putin is rational but egomaniacal. Both of them are imperialists. Xi is at least stable despite being cold blooded and devious. It's a tough situation. Not without concerns and actual fear, I think Carney is doing the right thing.
Carney is a politician with vision. A rarity in today's world. The current American administration is tirelessly poisoning every well. This work will leave lasting damage for years. We need a strategy to address this "rupture," and it cannot be by collaborating with "healthy" Americans. They already have too much to do at home. We must forge new alliances and look elsewhere.
In regard to Mr. Kasparov's comments about Canada having a minor role in world affairs, I would encourage readers to consider the lives of at least two notable Canadians. Dr. Norman Bethune was a pioneering thoracic surgeon and early advocate for universal health care in Canada. He served as a stretcher-bearer in the battle for Ypres in the First World War, was a front-line doctor in the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion during the Spanish Civil war and, later, in China's Eighth Army in the Sino-Japanese War. Dr. Bethune died at the age of 49 in Heibei province, northern China. He is recognized as a national hero in China and was (belatedly) inducted into the Canadian Medical Hall of Fame in 1998. Lester Pearson (1897-1972) was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1957 for his role, as Canadian foreign minister in Louis St. Laurent's Liberal government, in forming the United Nations Emergency Force, which was stationed in a neutral buffer zone between the Egyptian and Israeli armies during the Suez Crisis in 1956. This was the first-ever UN peacekeeping force. It facilitated the withdrawal of foreign troops and stabilized the region until it withdrew, at the request of the Egyptian government, in 1967. Pearson went on to become Canada's 14th Prime Minister. Other Canadians who have been recognized for their roles in promoting world peace include: Romeo Dallaire (Commander of the UN peacekeeping mission during the Rwandan genocide); James Orbinski (founder of Medecins sans Frontiers and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for MSF in 1999); and Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Foreign Affairs under Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien, and leading force behind the land International Agreement to Ban Anti-Personnel Land-Mine ratified by the UN in 1996). Many, many other Canadians have contributed to the cause of world peace and could be added to this list. Despite its status as so-called "middle power" Canada has had an outsized and often underappreciated role in promoting peaceful international relations.
This view Kasparov place is the less important. Carney’s was about world order. Yes China is a dictatorship. But is more than dictatorship, is about economic supremacy and control. China is not an ally, but a risk weight. Why put all the eggs on the USA when there are other partners in the world that are more reliable. Is not about democracy. Is about the middle nations, Canada , France, the uk, Germany, Japan need to spread the risk and make sense of a new world order. Luke carney said very clear. The old world order of the last 80 y is over. Russia war against Ukraine and an unpredictable us gov have made it clear. Is not simple but is clear.
Hi Gary. Long time listener first time caller:) 🇨🇦 here and one of the first people in the world to sound the alarm on Trumps intention to annex Canada (Dec 2024).
That's correct, Trump threatened to annex Canada before Greenland. (Nov 26th 2024 it began). And his efforts to do so began just as early.
You have to understand the economic context. Through a series of ecocomic, military, and economic integration (trumps own cusma being only the last one), Canadian society was nearly wholly integrated with American society - and isolated from China entirely as a result. Canada 80%plus trade with USA. %1ish with China.
Trumps tarrifs on Canada were in violation of a trade agreement and alliance network that was what ***he*** described (Jan 6, 2025) as an attempt to use economic force to absorb Canada. In addition, during that time, trump has met with and coordinated with a seperatist movement ***inside*** of Canada to break up the federation of Canada. (Rath, premeir smith, etc). A referendum is now on the books in Alberta. Mysterious American advocates for seperation are reported to be knocking on doors here.
Canada backs Greenland. But in spite of the outroar in defense of Greenland, the threat to Canadian sovereignty is in my view far far more severe.
What I most appreciated about Havel's quote was this: Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: “Workers of the world unite.” He doesn’t believe it, no-one does, but he places a sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists—not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
Seems like the chess analogy is appropriate. Should we act as if there were no threat to the our pieces for fear of our opponent's reaction? No matter how much we try to act "as if" we will lose.
I want to say that as a chess player I have been a Kasparov fan for as long as I remember. Experts are vulnerable when they step out and can easily embarrass themselves. So I am glad to see how Kasparov successfully applies to politics the strategic thinking that made him the arguably greatest player ever to the world of politics.
I completely agree with the proposal (which, for some reason, I have not come across yet, maybe that is my limited reading) that democracies need to unite against authoritarian and authoritarian-leaning regimes.
Let me add one idea to this. Democracies need to make sure that they can produce the technology that they need to survive. Democracies need technological and strategic autonomy.
For example, democracies need to be able to manufacture their own chips. Why leave it to Nvidia?
As the Airbus example shows, government-led initiatives can create companies that compete successfully in the market (afaik Airbus, founded in 1969, has a larger market share than Boeing since 2019). Much of the technology of manufacturing chips is already in Europe (Zeiss, ASML). Why leave the top layer that collects most of the profits and has most of the market power in the hands of a government that threatens democracies?
Similarly, democracies need sovereign social media. Their own satellites. Etc. European countries have a long and strong track record in creating public goods (including opens source software). I think Europe needs to strengthen that tradition to our digital infrastructure.
Democracies still have the economic power to do it and the brain power. But they need to get more serious about this urgently.
I think PM Carney was telling the people in that room that dealing with one dictator is dangerous but dealing with several dictators playing with hemispheres of influence is even more dangerous.
He invited multi- lateral dialogue and agreements to create a coalition of midsized willing democracies.
Also, dealing with China more openly becomes necessary when allied neighbours are so willing to do what Putin prefers. It’s about remaking the seating arrangement around the table but not being on the menu.
He’s principled but also pragmatic and he knows all of the dictators would interfere with Canada’s sovereignty at the drop of a hat. He’s a different type of political cat, but I also think some authoritarian leaders wouldn’t mind assassinating him, because he’s not obedient to them.
It’s a speech that threads the needle and gets the job done.
In addition, while I am not comfortable with the Chinese dictatorship (we have had citizens detained as a result of standing up to China over the last decade - more than the United States)
It is american propaganda to suggest Canada is “chosing China.” That's silly.
We have agreed to import some electric vehicles. Maybe allow our anerican-displaced auto industry a chance to partner in building some. A very small fraction of them.
There really is not much more than that. At this time. So far.
US trade with China is 11%ish. Canada is 1%ish. Canada is restoring a slightly more well rounded trade exchange with China to inch that %1 slightly higher.
Canada's overall strategy :
“Have many masters and you have none”
Canada is pursuing the unenviable task of redistributing, slowly, that %80 of USA trade with other countries. ***Some*** of that includes China.
I don't like it. I don't look like China. But it is what must be done.
I would be interested in Garry’s opinion on 1) how to transition NATO to a more fluid structure where democratic backsliders are removed. Or, alternatively if that is not possible, how to set up a new organization of this kind, and 2) how to provide effective deterrence for such an organization understanding that the model of one member having “all the nukes” runs the risk of it eventually backsliding out of the organization. Also, and more importantly, if nuclear weapons are controlled by single nations then there is uncertainty in their use as a deterrent if local politicians have control over their use and not the security organization (e.g. Would USA/Trump defend Latvia? Would France defend Canada?)
I loved Carney’s speech, but I agree with you about China. Great article and suggestion on the best way for Canada and other democracies to move forward, with, or sadly, without the USA.
I don’t think Canada has the luxury of ignoring China as an export market given the size of its resource economy , especially since Trump claims US has no need of it. This does not mean that Canada embraces China as a real partner, the way US used to be viewed. Carney stated that there are clear guardrails on the relationship with respect to security and sharing of information.
I agree. Carney’s outreach to China is like a wake up call to an unfeeling romantic partner, letting him or her know that you’re not available to see them for awhile. His reference to Thucydides’s distinction about the treatment of strong and weak peoples hints at parallels to the hubris of democratic Athens subordinating its allies and neutrals like the Melians - an exercise in pride that preceded a fall in the Athenian alliance.
China is not threatening Canadian sovereignty and take over: America has been messing with Canadian politics and trying to direct the sovereignty issue for many decades - ramped most recently with the usual suspects weighing in.
Conservative PM Harper allowed right wing American hedge fund owned Post Media to buy dozens of media outlets who harangue Canadians all day with their nihilistic American right wing political garbage. Harper also happens to be the guy that decimated Canada’s military!
Easy to criticize - what’s the solution then?
Now we have a fascist Board of Peace set up to protect scum around the world - autocrats, dictators and criminals united under an American organization headed by the American President! What’s he selling and offering - $1 billion and you can do whatever you want and American justice will be blind? His own loyalty pledges a fake nato where they come to others side?
Both China and the US have engaged in foreign interference. China has UFWD groups throughout Canada and the Hogue Commission heard testimony and the report is publicly available. That’s undisputed that China has meddled. However America also has, that’s their foreign policy to meddle in the affairs of middle and lower powers to preserve their hegemony.
The way that I think of our relationship with China is different than many seem to understand. The goals of the last mission were strictly economic. Remove some tariffs, get to know the players, reestablish lines of communication. Based on his speech, Carney was not just talking about the US, but also China and Russia. If he believes what he says, there is no alliance on the offing, but we have acknowledged that China is a hegemon and deserves some respect. We will probe for areas where we both can cooperate, but be mindful of pitfalls, traps, and escape routes. We will engage on select topics where we have differences, but must maintain the stoic view that we cannot change them, only ourselves. We will continue to ally ourselves with like minded nations, but know that China, Russia, and the US will continue to deal with nations that don't share our values. We will change our view of ourselves in the world to specifically improve our defense, diplomacy, and economy to become more independent, but not be lonely. We want friends and competitors, and will be prepared for adversaries with those same or different teammates. I don't want to sound too optimistic, but I think we can do what he says and maybe more quickly than even we can think of.
Well said,Kary Andrea and Tom.
Garry misreads if he thinks Carney says “choose China over USA.” Carney says to the middle powers, “Choose each other. Stop putting all your eggs in hegemon baskets.” Canada can lead this. Canada has been a free-world saving ally in two world wars. When the UK stood alone September 1939 to January 1942, a big Canadian troop deployment in the UK was an added deterrent to Nazi invasion. Canadian ports and Canadian warship escorts were key to the success of convoys that sustained the UK and Soviet defences. Canadian industry and Canadian skies trained thousands of pilots from around the world who then deployed to destroy the Luftwaffe. The Atlantic Charter, the war aims document that FDR got Churchill to sign, the agreement that for the last 85 years kept the great powers from another world war, was signed in Newfoundland in August 1941. Churchill and FDR left for home. FDR’s son Elliott (USAF aerial reconnaissance captain) flew from Newfoundland to continue the aerial mapping of Greenland, which leads us to the continued NATO and NORAD cooperative defence of the North Atlantic to this day. Canada has always been the linchpin in these great alliances. If the USA wants to give all that up, so be it. Canada can be a linchpin of allies who want to adhere to the principles of the Atlantic Charter - no matter which hemisphere or ocean.
The deal with China does bother me. But on the other hand, Canada is not refusing to have trade agreements with the USA, has never refused to have trade agreements with anyone, really. The key thing here is to unite the free world against the superpowers, to create and maintain a significant alignment without the USA.
Canada and Europe have depended for too long on America. It's unfortunate that the collapse of the USA into authoritarianism and flat-out insanity means that the entire world is arming up. We are inching closer and closer to a more dangerous place, moving towards WWIII and thus closer to nuclear war.
But I see China as the least problematic of the superpowers, the sanest. Trump is nuts. Putin is rational but egomaniacal. Both of them are imperialists. Xi is at least stable despite being cold blooded and devious. It's a tough situation. Not without concerns and actual fear, I think Carney is doing the right thing.
Carney is a politician with vision. A rarity in today's world. The current American administration is tirelessly poisoning every well. This work will leave lasting damage for years. We need a strategy to address this "rupture," and it cannot be by collaborating with "healthy" Americans. They already have too much to do at home. We must forge new alliances and look elsewhere.
In regard to Mr. Kasparov's comments about Canada having a minor role in world affairs, I would encourage readers to consider the lives of at least two notable Canadians. Dr. Norman Bethune was a pioneering thoracic surgeon and early advocate for universal health care in Canada. He served as a stretcher-bearer in the battle for Ypres in the First World War, was a front-line doctor in the Mackenzie-Papineau Battalion during the Spanish Civil war and, later, in China's Eighth Army in the Sino-Japanese War. Dr. Bethune died at the age of 49 in Heibei province, northern China. He is recognized as a national hero in China and was (belatedly) inducted into the Canadian Medical Hall of Fame in 1998. Lester Pearson (1897-1972) was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1957 for his role, as Canadian foreign minister in Louis St. Laurent's Liberal government, in forming the United Nations Emergency Force, which was stationed in a neutral buffer zone between the Egyptian and Israeli armies during the Suez Crisis in 1956. This was the first-ever UN peacekeeping force. It facilitated the withdrawal of foreign troops and stabilized the region until it withdrew, at the request of the Egyptian government, in 1967. Pearson went on to become Canada's 14th Prime Minister. Other Canadians who have been recognized for their roles in promoting world peace include: Romeo Dallaire (Commander of the UN peacekeeping mission during the Rwandan genocide); James Orbinski (founder of Medecins sans Frontiers and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for MSF in 1999); and Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Foreign Affairs under Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien, and leading force behind the land International Agreement to Ban Anti-Personnel Land-Mine ratified by the UN in 1996). Many, many other Canadians have contributed to the cause of world peace and could be added to this list. Despite its status as so-called "middle power" Canada has had an outsized and often underappreciated role in promoting peaceful international relations.
This view Kasparov place is the less important. Carney’s was about world order. Yes China is a dictatorship. But is more than dictatorship, is about economic supremacy and control. China is not an ally, but a risk weight. Why put all the eggs on the USA when there are other partners in the world that are more reliable. Is not about democracy. Is about the middle nations, Canada , France, the uk, Germany, Japan need to spread the risk and make sense of a new world order. Luke carney said very clear. The old world order of the last 80 y is over. Russia war against Ukraine and an unpredictable us gov have made it clear. Is not simple but is clear.
Hi Gary. Long time listener first time caller:) 🇨🇦 here and one of the first people in the world to sound the alarm on Trumps intention to annex Canada (Dec 2024).
That's correct, Trump threatened to annex Canada before Greenland. (Nov 26th 2024 it began). And his efforts to do so began just as early.
You have to understand the economic context. Through a series of ecocomic, military, and economic integration (trumps own cusma being only the last one), Canadian society was nearly wholly integrated with American society - and isolated from China entirely as a result. Canada 80%plus trade with USA. %1ish with China.
Trumps tarrifs on Canada were in violation of a trade agreement and alliance network that was what ***he*** described (Jan 6, 2025) as an attempt to use economic force to absorb Canada. In addition, during that time, trump has met with and coordinated with a seperatist movement ***inside*** of Canada to break up the federation of Canada. (Rath, premeir smith, etc). A referendum is now on the books in Alberta. Mysterious American advocates for seperation are reported to be knocking on doors here.
Canada backs Greenland. But in spite of the outroar in defense of Greenland, the threat to Canadian sovereignty is in my view far far more severe.
One of my first warnings:
https://x.com/dm4444/status/1869449782193959252?s=46k
What I most appreciated about Havel's quote was this: Every morning, this shopkeeper places a sign in his window: “Workers of the world unite.” He doesn’t believe it, no-one does, but he places a sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists—not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
Seems like the chess analogy is appropriate. Should we act as if there were no threat to the our pieces for fear of our opponent's reaction? No matter how much we try to act "as if" we will lose.
I want to say that as a chess player I have been a Kasparov fan for as long as I remember. Experts are vulnerable when they step out and can easily embarrass themselves. So I am glad to see how Kasparov successfully applies to politics the strategic thinking that made him the arguably greatest player ever to the world of politics.
I completely agree with the proposal (which, for some reason, I have not come across yet, maybe that is my limited reading) that democracies need to unite against authoritarian and authoritarian-leaning regimes.
Let me add one idea to this. Democracies need to make sure that they can produce the technology that they need to survive. Democracies need technological and strategic autonomy.
For example, democracies need to be able to manufacture their own chips. Why leave it to Nvidia?
As the Airbus example shows, government-led initiatives can create companies that compete successfully in the market (afaik Airbus, founded in 1969, has a larger market share than Boeing since 2019). Much of the technology of manufacturing chips is already in Europe (Zeiss, ASML). Why leave the top layer that collects most of the profits and has most of the market power in the hands of a government that threatens democracies?
Similarly, democracies need sovereign social media. Their own satellites. Etc. European countries have a long and strong track record in creating public goods (including opens source software). I think Europe needs to strengthen that tradition to our digital infrastructure.
Democracies still have the economic power to do it and the brain power. But they need to get more serious about this urgently.
I think PM Carney was telling the people in that room that dealing with one dictator is dangerous but dealing with several dictators playing with hemispheres of influence is even more dangerous.
He invited multi- lateral dialogue and agreements to create a coalition of midsized willing democracies.
Also, dealing with China more openly becomes necessary when allied neighbours are so willing to do what Putin prefers. It’s about remaking the seating arrangement around the table but not being on the menu.
He’s principled but also pragmatic and he knows all of the dictators would interfere with Canada’s sovereignty at the drop of a hat. He’s a different type of political cat, but I also think some authoritarian leaders wouldn’t mind assassinating him, because he’s not obedient to them.
It’s a speech that threads the needle and gets the job done.
But, then there is the next move to consider.🌹
In addition, while I am not comfortable with the Chinese dictatorship (we have had citizens detained as a result of standing up to China over the last decade - more than the United States)
It is american propaganda to suggest Canada is “chosing China.” That's silly.
We have agreed to import some electric vehicles. Maybe allow our anerican-displaced auto industry a chance to partner in building some. A very small fraction of them.
There really is not much more than that. At this time. So far.
US trade with China is 11%ish. Canada is 1%ish. Canada is restoring a slightly more well rounded trade exchange with China to inch that %1 slightly higher.
Canada's overall strategy :
“Have many masters and you have none”
Canada is pursuing the unenviable task of redistributing, slowly, that %80 of USA trade with other countries. ***Some*** of that includes China.
I don't like it. I don't look like China. But it is what must be done.
I would be interested in Garry’s opinion on 1) how to transition NATO to a more fluid structure where democratic backsliders are removed. Or, alternatively if that is not possible, how to set up a new organization of this kind, and 2) how to provide effective deterrence for such an organization understanding that the model of one member having “all the nukes” runs the risk of it eventually backsliding out of the organization. Also, and more importantly, if nuclear weapons are controlled by single nations then there is uncertainty in their use as a deterrent if local politicians have control over their use and not the security organization (e.g. Would USA/Trump defend Latvia? Would France defend Canada?)
By your definition, regarding Ukraine and Taiwan, wouldn't Canada also be a Frontline Democracy?
I loved Carney’s speech, but I agree with you about China. Great article and suggestion on the best way for Canada and other democracies to move forward, with, or sadly, without the USA.