 Hi everyone. This is Carol Hinkel. Welcome. I can't believe this is our seventh lecture. Wow. What a glorious day. If you haven't gone out, this might be the last beautiful day. I would love to now take the opportunity to please introduce Beth Wood. She's our program chair and she will introduce today's speaker. Beth? Hello everyone. It's my pleasure today to welcome our speaker Christopher Kirke. Chris earned his bachelor's and master's from Queens University in Kingston, Ontario, and his PhD from Brandeis and all of his degrees are in political science. In 2002, Chris joined the faculty at the State University of New York at Plattsburg and he is currently a professor of political science there as well as director of the study for the center for the study of Canada. You may also recognize Chris from his appearances on Vermont this week on Vermont public broadcasting system, Vermont PBS, where he sometimes takes part in as a panelist in their annual program on cross-border issues. So it's a great pleasure to welcome Chris Kirke to Triple E today. Welcome, Chris. Thank you, Beth. It's wonderful to be part of this series. When Beth reached out to me last year to see if I could speak as part of the education enrichment for everyone series, I was absolutely delighted to say yes. Unfortunately, we have to do it through the guys of remote delivery through Zoom today, but that being said, I'm very happy to join you on a glorious Friday afternoon. I am just going to informally have a conversation with you today that focuses on American foreign policy under President Trump toward Canada because I think it's quite fascinating to see some of the contours of how that policy has emerged. And frankly, not only how it's emerged, but how we can expect it to continue to play out at least until January if not beyond. We don't know what the outcome obviously will be of the forthcoming presidential election, but it's worth evaluating and examining what's gone on for almost the past four years. I think everyone who pays close attention to the Canada-US relationship over the years knows quite honestly that we've had times very clearly when that relationship has been, if you will, nice and warm and cozy, if you will. There have been close personal relationships between prime ministers and presidents. We can look back to the 1980s and talk about the relationship between President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada. We can look a little bit more recently at the relationship between President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. Conversely, we also know that there have been periods when the US-Canada relationship has been cool, you might say, or when relationships between presidents and prime ministers have been less than warm. And there's some obvious examples to point to here. Maybe the most noteworthy one was when Pierre Trudeau was Prime Minister of Canada and Richard Nixon, President of the United States, was very clear that not only on a policy level and not only on an intellectual level, but more importantly on a personal level, the two men just did not get along. President George Bush and Prime Minister Jean Chrétien were not best friends by any stretch of the imagination. When Lester Pearson was Canada's Prime Minister in the 1960s, and LBJ was President of the United States, I think many of you probably know that in a speech at Temple University that the Canadian Prime Minister delivered, effectively criticizing the American war effort in Vietnam, that went over like a lead brick with President Johnson. He was not at all happy and in fact picked up Prime Minister Pearson by the lapel of his suit jacket and lifted him off the ground and shook him at the White House and uttered a very famous line which I'll hold off on today, but it was just, you know, a very blunt statement sort of suggesting that he keep his opinions to himself. And even further back, you can look at the relationship between President Kennedy and a Prime Minister John Diefenbaker, once again, not all that warm. Now, why do I bring this up at the outset of our conversation today? Well, I think it's important because when you do look back at the last four years and you look at sort of where American foreign policy has been going vis-à-vis Canada, there's clearly, you know, our current President, Donald Trump, has not left a positive impression with many Canadians. In fact, he's publicly taken what you might call an adversarial or a less than warm and rosy position on many occasions towards the Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, upon leaving a G7 summit in Quebec a couple of summers back in June of 2018. President Trump called the Prime Minister very dishonest and weak and that Trudeau was prone to false statements. Larry Kudlow, the President's economic chief economic advisor, said that Trudeau had quote-unquote stabbed us, meaning the United States in the back. Peter Navarro said, quote-unquote, there's a special place in hell for Prime Minister Trudeau. So it seems on, you know, on the surface that American foreign policy under our current President is really not exactly a collegial cooperative warm and fuzzy towards our neighbor to the north. I want to suggest at the outset today that as antagonistic as that may sound and it's empirically correct, the truth is that in order to understand, to explain, and advance America's current foreign policy towards Canada, we have to recognize that President Trump's priorities and actions reflect a broader approach towards engagement in the world at large. And I think that's, you know, where I'm going to start off. I'll talk a little bit, I'll do sort of four things this afternoon. I'll try and talk and discuss a little bit about this sort of worldview of the President, what's motivating his foreign policy. And as I'm suggesting, his approach toward Canada is not unique. It fits within a well-defined, broad worldview and approach toward the conduct of American foreign relations. Secondly, I'll talk a little bit about how that relationship with Canada has played out on a couple of key issues, one of which is the North American Free Trade Agreement, sort of suggesting that everything in the world that's wrong with NAFTA needed to be either fixed or dispensed with. And secondly, I'll talk about Canada's engagement with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, and some of the concerns that have been brought to light by the Trump administration there. And finally, I'll offer some conclusions and some suggestions for where we may be going forward, and then I'll be delighted to entertain any inquiries or questions that you may have. So with that being said, most observers who are scholars or journalists and who are trying to explain President Trump's approach toward an application of American foreign policy toward Canada, they tend to focus on explanations that emphasize personal behavioral indicators or political calculations that the president makes that are squarely focused on the core priorities of his conservative base, and also just his general lack of appetite for the complexities of foreign affairs. We know he's a self-described businessman and dealmaker, and it's true, his view of foreign policy tends to be more practical and lean toward a model that focuses on outcomes rather than relationships and is geared towards short-term solutions, transactional solutions rather than long-term strategies. It's fascinating to look at the sort of elbow room or flexibility that each and every president has had since the end of the Second World War 1945 in terms of implementing and choosing which options to move forward with on American foreign policy toward Canada. I think it's fair to say that in the world that we often call the Cold War or bipolar world from 1945 to the political dissolution of the Soviet Union at Christmas of 1991, that sort of period was a rough and tumble period for foreign affairs, but it was also a period in which every president in the United States had a pretty clear calculation as to what they wanted to do, and they were pretty circumscribed in terms of focusing on the Soviet Union and the threat that that's the Soviets and communism posed. All of a sudden the world changed dramatically at Christmas of 1991, and every president since has increased flexibility, increased, they don't have to wake up in the morning and say what is the Soviet Union up to and how are they going to respond if I do X. That sort of basic calculation of foreign affairs has changed dramatically and it's changed dramatically and we shouldn't at all be surprised. A lot of people will suggest oh my gosh this you know that President Trump is a little bit different than most political leaders who've come in in terms of their approach toward foreign policy, but what I'm trying to suggest is that we shouldn't be surprised that because the world in which presidents operate, we moved away from a world of two great powers and cold war to a world where there wasn't a cold war for a long stretch. We may be transitioning towards one with China these days, but the truth of the matter is you know so we should have expected that at some point a president would come along and sort of look at the world that had been created post 1945 look at that framework look at the multinational multilateral organizations both security and economic and sort of question you know what America's role in that is and frankly President Trump has done that when you look at his engagement with the international community it's very clear at its fundamental core including his approach towards Canada. Trump's doctrine is driven by a political calculus that's grounded in the unwavering belief that American participation in the world is simply too expensive and too expensive and perhaps more to the point the burden of leadership is not being fairly shared so American commitments most especially to existing institutionalized as I said a moment ago trade and security arrangements such as the United Nations the World Trade Organization the G7 NATO he believes as they are currently constituted and as they currently operate they serve the needs of other nations and not the United States costs are disproportionately and unfairly being underwritten by the United States and this has to stop so as such American foreign policy toward Canada and the greater world is above all is characterized by an unmistakable desire to correct these imbalances if you will and regardless of the issue the actor the institution our president has been on an unrelenting campaign of orchestrating significant change in American foreign relations it's not complicated because he looks at international agreements as being counterproductive to American national interests and you can go through a long laundry list you can look at the Trans-Pacific Partnership you can look at the Paris Climate Agreement you can look at the Iran Nuclear Deal you can look at the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty we've all all of these agreements have been dismissed or criticized abandoned and when you look at the list of nations where Trump has tried to reconfigure Washington's relationship with it's it's very noteworthy I mean look at this list Russia China North Korea Iran Afghanistan Pakistan Cuba Israel Syria Egypt Yemen Turkey Britain France Germany Mexico and yes Canada so American engagement in the international community under President Trump is more circumscribed and he's looking to have operations and expenses more equitably shared so what about Canada if this is the broader context of how we need to understand and approach America's foreign policy toward Canada what does it mean well not surprisingly the United States has under the leadership of President Trump sought to consistently redefine America's relations in a way that allows the United States to pursue an America first strategy even though this is being done with the United States as closest ally and nearest neighbor in a period before the Cold War ended where exceptionalism and exceptionalism were the norm these norms have been removed they're off the table the style of diplomacy you might say in the current era is more in your face and less diplomatic early early in the current administration there were multilateral trade and security arrangements that were pointed to by President Trump particularly when he was a candidate and I'll speak to that in the moment in 2016 that he argued forcefully that the White House needed to revisit and fix because there were too many bilateral arrangements in place with Canada that were just working to the advantage of Canada and not and and and that the United States was being taken advantage of um so we've had some interesting diplomacy between Washington and Ottawa we've had as I say some really punctuated conversations both by bureaucrats by political officials and others and there've been some very core disagreements and I'd like to talk to you if I can over the next 10 or 15 minutes a little bit about both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization if I can turn to NAFTA and beyond and what would become of NAFTA it's a fascinating story I think you know most scholars most political commentators most journalists would tell you that up until the time President Trump came into office that the issue of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement was really a non-politicized issue it was the consensus amongst folks was that this was an arrangement an agreement that was in many ways working to benefit all three countries all three nations the United States Canada and Mexico and it was working in different ways yes had there been because of comparatively lower labor rates and laxer environmental standards in Mexico had there been a shift in manufacturing jobs from the American Midwest in particular toward Mexico not only in the automobile industry but a variety of industries yes that was clear but had that been in some ways offset by tremendous economic growth as a result of sort of free regularized transport of goods and services across all three borders in a way that allowed all three economies to expand I think most people would say yes that has been the case so it's interesting that he comes in and this is not something that clearly the president invented in 2015 or 16 you can go back and see a long-standing footage of concerns that he had with the way America's trading relationships were working including with Canada and specifically with NAFTA so I don't think we should think about this as an outlier this concern about NAFTA was was there and remains in fact when you look at his platform the president's platform when he was running as the Democratic first as a candidate sure sorry Republican candidate and then ultimately as the Republican Party nominee in 2016 he was making this America first promise and he pledged to would be voters that he would restore greatness to America however that was defined expanding the economy strengthening the military and so on and so forth he blamed among other things unfair trade practices cheap foreign labor and foreign friendly trade agreements as the key culprits in America's economic decline he specifically targeted the TPP and NAFTA NAFTA was a regular target during campaign rallies indeed during the presidential I should say the Republican Party presidential primary as the Republican presidential candidate and ultimately as president of the United States he hammered and still does on the message that NAFTA was the most flawed international agreement ever crafted between nations NAFTA the president observed during the first presidential debate he engaged in in September of 2016 September 26th NAFTA in his opinion constituted quote the single worst trade deal ever approved in this country its terms and conditions which I mentioned a moment ago which date back to 1994 had systematically in his view worked to directly disadvantage and harm the United States while enriching Canada and Mexico the latter in the Mexican case as I mentioned because of laxer environmental standards he suggested and comparatively lower rates was disproportionately injuring the American manufacturing society tens of thousands of working class planned employees have been terminated as companies relocated factory production to Mexico canada had by benefiting from preferential access to the single largest national market in the world named with the United States developed healthy annual goods and services surpluses from its engagement with the United States in addition Canadians Trump argued embraced a protectionist approach in certain sectors most notably with regard to dairy products something near and dear to Vermont as well as to New York that effectively made the import of American products too expensive or simply not possible as president Trump would repeatedly observe in the course of press conference of speeches and most importantly Twitter statements NAFTA needed to be immediately renegotiated or jettisoned altogether so he demanded that let's see what we can do to make this deal better and frankly negotiations unfolded in 2017 they were punctuated by periodic acrimonious exchanges between the president the prime minister senior officials as I suggested in Washington and Ottawa as well and the negotiations would continue through September of 2018 and by late August of that year significant progress had been realized to the point that the United States of Mexico announced that it had reached an agreement a bilateral agreement on revising key elements of NAFTA well apart from the specific points of the agreement the most notable feature of the accord was quite obviously the absence of Canada the Trump administration was clearly at this stage motivated not only by a joint desire to have the outgoing Mexican president president neato sign the agreement before he left office on December the first but they wanted very clearly to preemptively use this new bilateral arrangement as leverage against Canada to prompt Ottawa to demonstrate greater flexibility in the negotiations and ultimately agree to a trilateral arrangement the question now was how would Canada respond and the United States was very blunt the White House was very blunt and wasted no time in declaring the willingness of the United States to move on without Canada ideally we'll have the Canadians involved indicated Robert Lighthouse or the United States strike representative and the principal American negotiator with regard to NAFTA if we don't have Canada involved we will notify Congress that we have a bilateral deal and that Canada at a later date is free to join President Trump was as honestly was decidedly less equivocal in his remarks he took to Twitter on September the 1st of 2018 did declare quote there is no political necessity to keep Canada in the new NAFTA deal if we don't make a fair deal for the US after decades of abuse and that that really stands out as probably the most vitriolic statement that an American president has hurled towards Canada after decades of abuse Canada will be out well what I will tell you is that throughout the month of September 2018 seemingly little progress was being made there was this negotiating deadline of September 30th coming up and so the president decided to exercise greater pressure on the Canadian authorities to quickly reach an accord and speaking on September the 26th the president said noted that he had refused to meet with Prime Minister Churro during the United Nations General Assembly sessions in the United States because Canada was quote unquote treating the United States very badly then he unveiled a direct threat if Canada was unprepared President Trump noted to move expeditiously forward and conclude a new trilateral trade agreement the United States would move to impose a significant new 25 tax on any car exported into the US from Canada a move that have carried out it was recognized would cause severe hardship and in Canada especially in the province of Ontario putting an estimated 250 thousand people out of work so this was this was quite serious and it would obviously have a strong negative impact on the Canadian economy as Trump said during the news conference frankly we're talking we're thinking about just taxing cars coming in from Canada that's the mother load that's the big one we're very unhappy with the negotiations and the negotiating style of Canada he reaffirmed at the same time his intense dislike of NAFTA he said I don't like NAFTA I never liked it's been very bad for the United States it's been great for Canada great for Mexico we're very well along with Mexico the relationship's very good we'll see what happens with Canada they're charging us 300 tariffs on duty we can't allow that to happen Canada responded Prime Minister responded that said very same day saying we are working hard and we'll take as long as it is necessary to get the deal right for Canada so in late September it seemed like there was trouble of what would they be able to successfully reconfigure this North American free trade agreement finally after a weekend of intense video link negotiations between Washington and Ottawa both parties reached agreement essentially on what are revisions to NAFTA and what we now call and title the United States Mexico Canada agreement the US MCA and that was formally wrapped up if you will on September the 30th what did what what did the United States secure them why was it so important well amongst other provisions the accord satisfied Americans concerns over access to the Canadian dairy market by allowing the US to sell a greater range and volume of products to Canada it allows for significant increase in pharmaceutical patents revamp the rules governing the manufacturing model bills in an effort to grow more automotive production jobs here in the United States Canada receives some things they wanted Mexico receives some things they wanted and at the end of the day President Trump came out and said you know this US MCA he was quite happy to dispense with the NAFTA acronym and put the US at the front of this is quite a great deal for all three countries he said on his twitter account when he spoke at a news conference in the White House rose garden he underscored quote we had some very strong tensions it was just an unfair deal whether it was Mexico or Canada and now it's a fair deal for everybody it's a much different deal it's a brand new deal it's not NAFTA redone throughout the campaign I promised to renegotiate NAFTA and today we have kept that promise like any important negotiation we had to make some compromises but today is a great day for the United States the US MCA as many people know was signed by the president prime minister Trudeau and president in the capital of Mexico in Buenos Aires at an international summit meeting on November the 30th of 2018 um and at that time the president observed what we've worked hard on this agreement it's been long and hard we've taken a lot of barbs and a little abuse and we got there well it's I think most observers would point out that it's fascinating that you know um as much as the president chose to take NAFTA this long-standing trade arrangement with Canada and Mexico and suggest that there were all these procedural and shortcomings and in in terms of its operational practices the truth is that since the US MCA has been launched informed what was once politicized meaning NAFTA is no longer politicized it's no longer I mean the president will periodically come out and talk a little bit about this um and quite honestly um but it's it's a point of of it's a point of celebration in some ways I was surprisingly last night that I anticipated during the presidential debate between President Trump and Joe Biden that we would hear from the president a little bit more because not so much that he would celebrate the US MCA but in effect sort of saying look you know this NAFTA thing is just horrible um anybody chose to leave that effectively alone last night so um I was thinking he was going to use that particularly to attract voters in the Midwest in the United States um so let's turn if we can just briefly um to talk about NATO and Canada and the concern that the Trump administration has had vis-a-vis the North Atlantic Treaty Organization now I think everybody is well aware that the NATO formed in April of 1949 there's been a military and political alliance that during the Cold War period was effectively one of the two well it was it was the most important international alliance for helping to preserve peace in Europe and beyond um during this period of time um and when Trump began to look at the operations of NATO and specifically Canada's engagement and contributions to NATO from his perspective um it was and frankly still remains insufficient although he's willing now uh as you've heard even briefly last night without mentioning Canada that NATO nations are making larger contributions um he essentially in very simple terms has taken the position that Canada must do more with NATO um it needs to commit additional financial resources it needs to commit additional material resources to make sure that the alliance works well um when he looked at what Canada had been doing had been paying um you know this was a source of concern he said at a campaign rally in 2016 where the schmucks paying for the whole thing many countries it was a tremendous amount of money for many years when they're delinquent as far as I'm concerned because the United States has had to pay for them um when John Bolton was uh working for the president he noted in 2016 that what we're trying to do here um when you're talking about the NATO alliance is making sure that it's not undermined and that we basically have um a strong military um commitment amongst all member states to NATO um his first president Trump his first real public criticisms and demands that were leveled at Canada with regard to its NATO engagement um acutely surfaced in June and July of 2018 um there was about to be in July of 2018 a NATO summit in Brussels and just before everybody arrived in Brussels to chat um and this was a you know clearly calculated preemptive measure on the part of the White House the president on June the 19th dispatched letters to several leaders of NATO member countries including Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau exhorting Canada to do more for NATO he noted that there was quote unquote a growing frustration in the United States with regard to the alliance's underwriting commitments he stated that the United States expected quote to see a strong recommitment by Canada to meet the goals to which we have all agreed in the defense investment pledge that pledge by the way was something that was set up in 2014 at a summit of NATO members in Wales where all the signatories agreed to spend two to move towards spending two percent of their GDP on NATO defense by 2024 um or just I shouldn't say to NATO but just in terms of the general defense spending in Canada's level a military spending was well known to Mr. Trump was well known to um American officials and this is something that goes back years and years I'm talking 50 years you can go back and take a look at comments from various congressmen from various secretaries of defense and sometimes the secretary of state or even a president where there's some concern about the fact that Canada really isn't paying a lot um but never in a way that was as blunt as Mr. Trump would do here Canada for example when you measure what they spend um um you know towards NATO that number percentage or real dollars hasn't been much in the sense that in 2018 the figures I have most recently um Canada spent 1.23 percent of its GDP on on military defense spending and that ranked it of course with countries like Belgium and the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Spain so Trump was frustrated so when he wrote to the prime minister um he said you know we appreciate what Canada has done by way of making commitments to NATO in places like Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria but quote unquote these do not excuse any of us from our commitments to ensure NATO has the resources it needs. Canada's continued defense spending of less than 2% undermines the security of the alliance and provides validation for other allies that are also not meeting their defense spending commitments so how did Ottawa respond to this they sort of had a sense this was coming um because the current president is is you know somewhat fixated on on sort of trying to revisit trade and security arrangements and and either dispense with them or revisit them and try and improve them um so Canada uh you know thinking about this um said you know we're going to do a couple of things um and this was just basically on the cusp of the uh July 2018 NATO meeting in Brussels so what Canada did um was that they agreed to renew through 2023 and expand their manpower commitment there's a NATO multinational group called Ford Presence it's a battle group that's in Latvia it's in the Baltics because of concerns about Russia principally um and so Canada said look you know not only will we increase our manpower commitment but will agree if you will um to continue leading this for four more years and then at the summit itself in Brussels Ottawa committed to assuming command of NATO's new multinational non-combat training and capacity building mission in Iraq for its first year of operations and this meant um about another 250 members of the Canadian forces and some additional helicopters and and different materials so at the end of this Trump sort of said well you know um uh you know uh how do I feel about this when he was leaving Brussels he was uh he didn't say he was happy didn't say he was ecstatic but but welcomed if you will these positive steps that have been made by Canada um and he believed that uh he had successfully gotten states to move in the direction that he wanted them to move in fact when they left Brussels um he he basically focused on a key point which was or two key points number one of which is he had gotten states including Canada or nations including Canada to move more in the direction of the two percent and that that target of two percent be increased to four percent so um so there you go on NATO um so using these two examples what conclusions or what just general observations can we draw about American foreign policy towards Canada under President Trump um and indeed I'm tempted to ask how will the remainder of his tenure as president be characterized when it comes to America's America's policy towards its other neighbor we don't know quite frankly yet we should in less than two weeks with the oak hopefully with with less than two weeks know what the outcome of the presidential election will be but I would suggest to you whether the president is here for another two weeks pardon me well through January rather or secures another four years in office I think that when we think of American foreign policy to our candidate as long as President Trump is there it's going to continue to be distinguished by efforts to advance American foreign interests through ongoing efforts to recraft existing and future arrangements that favor American businesses and workers um I don't think there's much uh doubt about that Colin Robertson who's a well-known observer of the Canada-US relationship worked at Canada's Department of Foreign Affairs for many years was the number two at the Canadian Embassy in Washington and as an avid writer recently observed in the globe in mail that consistency in American policy and bipartisan support for alliances no longer applies Canada and its allies need to adapt um and I think that's that's very clear um in fact I would suggest to you this afternoon that when most people once again are looking at America's foreign policy towards Canada and even more broadly the world I think the thing that we need to think about is yes on the Canada front there have clearly been some prickly situations that have emerged and the warm and fuzzy relationship that has been in place on many occasions currently is not um but I think that we need to understand that that is part of a broader world view that this president takes to the conduct of American formulations um I suppose the key question to ask this afternoon at the end is what about the future of Canada-US relations is are we going to continue to have this focus this focus rather on um what the former Canadian ambassador of Washington Derek Burney called the erratic American first impulses of Donald Trump are these going to persist after he leaves the White House whenever that might be um or um are we going to return to a more um regularized style of diplomacy well it's clear that Canada can't alter its geography management of relations with the United States for Canada will invariably be its predominant priority um and that's very clear from the from the statements of the prime minister and other party leaders in the Canadian cabinet this is something that Canada will have to by necessity continue to focus on I think most people are suggesting and maybe I'll wrap up on this before turning to questions um because I know one of the questions that generously sent in was asking about how should Joe Biden be elected president how will that impact the relationship with Canada I think most observers are of the opinion that that would turn the relationship in a more positive direction that the the voice is coming in it's not to say that uh it's going to be a love fest or anything but the truth is that um you have um you know on an ideological basis you have a president who is clearly more conservative in nature you have a prime minister who's decidedly more liberal in nature in terms of not only party affiliations but ideological predisposition um so you have some some differences there whereas Joe Biden is clearly more a more of a liberal a more of a centrist more of a democrat and I think there'd be certainly more common ground between himself and the prime minister they've had a very positive relationship in the past and Joe Biden had a very positive relationship not only when he served in the in the congress but um but served as president Obama's vice president toward Canada um so uh my guess is that you know if there is a change in january that change will be for a more positive direction in the relationship um and now I'll wrap up and I don't know I think Beth may be asking me questions or how do you want to proceed from here I'm delighted to answer the questions that have come in the chat so we discussed that uh I will be asking the questions that that's fine you aren't sure yep so the first one is do you see a day when Canada becomes a republic and if so what would that mean for Canada U.S. relations if any it's a very interesting question um first part of the question do I foresee a date I don't part of the reason for that is despite the fact that there are at times strong differences in the Canadian political federation between Ottawa and the various provinces in particular most notably Quebec and sometimes if I uh Alberta Alberta in the census a long-standing tradition in the Canadian political system of western regional alienation in the case of Quebec there have been episodes that go back starting in the late 60s with the advent of the quiet revolution in the 1960s through till recently where you've had two flirtations with referendums and two opportunities where Quebec is considered sovereign status within Canada separate status if you will political separation so I don't see that happening anytime soon because separation is no longer a burning issue in Quebec and I think the forces the concerns that Alberta have is very obvious if you look at Canada 338 seats in the Canadian House of Commons over roughly 200 of those are in the province of Ontario and Quebec so Alberta is not feeling part of the you know at least structurally uh deficient if you will in terms of representation so it's a concern and Bjorn what was the second part of the question please what would that mean if Canada would become a republic with a big affair what would that mean for Canada-US relations if any yeah I don't think we need to worry about it just a simple answer and a straightforward answer so next question um so and this is not me saying it I'm just reading the question when I was growing up in Saint John New Brunswick we used to say that when the US sneezes Canada catches a cold how would you characterize that adage now I think that adage is maybe a bit out of date which is to suggest that Canada doesn't catch a cold anymore I think Canada's economy is considerably stronger than it once was that's not to say that the disproportionate share of its exports continue to go to the United States they're not as high as they once were almost teetering if you can believe this on 90 percent it's more than 75 percent ballpark now and Canada has clearly some work to do it needs not only to diversify its trade markets but build up its internal trade market by taking down so many regulatory barriers to inter-preventual trade um so um I I don't quite think that's the case Canada was not as as robust a country as it once was economically demographically politically socially I think it's much stronger than it once was so here's a little longer question although the relationship between the Canadian and US heads of government is currently strained there are many close and long-standing ties between Canadian provinces and US states does this bode well for future relations with Canada one of our most important allies the answer is absolutely yes it does I mean the range of connections family business social um political between various American states and Canadian provinces and territories is vast it's always been part of the fabric that's held the glue of Canada and the United States relationship together and that hasn't changed um and fortunately if anything it's it's expanded over time so no I that's that's really you know um and absolutely and I thank you very much for bringing that to my attention because I've sort of know I've talked about federal to federal relations here but that provincial state relationship including Vermont's relationship for example with most notably Quebec um but also Ontario and other places is pivotal how is the US MCA working out for Canada so far so good they would tell you um you know uh that there have been voices of concern in the province of Quebec in particular regarding the new provisions new dairy provisions in the agreement and what it means for increased competition from what we haven't I think it's fair to say if you go into a if you were able across the border and you were able to go into a grocery store a provigo for example or a metro in the province of Quebec you'd find that and you walked into the dairy section and it's not like there's been a tremendous change in the range of products or in the availability of American dairy products yet um that will take some time um um but uh it's something that I think Canadians would say they're fine with that their biggest concern in these re negotiations was making sure that whatever emerged something emerged because Canada needs to have that preferential access to its largest marketplace could you please comment on what appears to be a recent upsurge in protest activism and demands for justice by First Nations people in many parts of Canada wonderful question a lot of people look at the issue as much as the United States one of its principle if not its principal source of societal cleavages race uh in Canada it's um its treatment of indigenous peoples um and quite honestly this is a an issue that really gained a lot of traction in the last 12 or 15 years various prime ministers Paul Martin um Stephen Harper now Justin Trudeau have promised to address this there was an important uh truth and reconciliation commission that went on for several years in Canada looking at Canada's formal uh former rather policy of residential schools where they would take children away from um their families and move them south uh to a residential school system in which so horribly that so much abuse took place um amongst uh these poor children and frankly um that truth and reconciliation commission I believe in 2014 or 15 issued 94 recommendations the prime minister this was before his prime minister immediately embraced all 94 but it's clear that you know some of these are small like you know we need to have as we all know with Lake Champlain you need to have clean drinking water you know um and uh you don't want to have to go and boil your water 24 hours a day seven days a week um you know you want to have access to better health care you want to have access to job opportunities and it's it's going to remain I think the simplest way to put it is the government has made some um positive step forwards uh the chief of the assembly first nations in Canada's as prime minister Justin Trudeau has done more the indigenous peoples of Canada than any former prime minister um and the truth is there's so much more to be done it will remain front and center as the issue in Canada um as a point of societal clean so this is a follow-up question is this seen as a threat to Canada's national unity and security very good question um I don't think it is it could well have been had this pandemic not come along but I think if you talk to the average Canadian or you read the average Canadian newspaper or watch the average Canadian news broadcast you'll see that um this is a country even more so than the United far more so than the United States that have collectively come together and are collectively consumed by a desire to effectively address um uh the pandemic threat of COVID-19 so that's not to say that indigenous issues won't go away but rather it's sort of um taking in a bit of a second second row or of a back burner if you will um to the to the needs of the pandemic is the us mca treaty an improvement over nafta from us perspective and from Canada's perspective it's a great question um I think that if if you were to compare the two side by side there was there were clearly some um clearly some updates given the passage of time since 1994 that brought the treaty's terms and conditions up to speed um and I think that quite honestly the simple answer is yes I think there are provisions in there that benefit the United States and there are provisions in there that Canada it may not have advanced what Canada wanted but at least retained what Canada wanted um so that there are some you know things that Canada just was not willing to give in on um so I think you know it's one of those things that uh you would is it mutually optimal for these two partners no but was it mutually satisfactory the answers yes comment on relations between us and Canada during the Obama administration sure I think it's fair to say that during that period of time we had um a pretty warm relationship despite the fact that you had a prime minister who was clearly a conservative prime minister Stephen Harper uh and um Barack Obama is president of the United States who in terms of the conduct of American foreign policy um and its relationship with Canada it's a bit different um um than obviously the pathway chosen by a conservative prime minister in Canada um but during that period there were issues that came up um quite honestly in terms of uh certainly not with NAFTA and certainly not with NATO but but some other issues in terms of Canada's engagement continued engagement in Afghanistan as part of it I should say part of that NATO mission um but for the most part um the relationship was positive decidedly positive prime minister Trudeau has recently faced several ethical challenges how long do you foresee him being in office the ethical challenges that I appreciate you bring that to my attention this afternoon some of those challenges were you know um heading into the last election there were clear evidence that the prime minister had acted in a racially insensitive insensitive manner by donning black face or brown face at times he was also dogged by scandals about a Quebec one of the world's largest engineering companies based out of Montreal SNC Lavelay there were concerns that they had overcharged dramatically for work in in in Libya and that uh there was going to be some there was a judicial proceeding going on and that the prime minister intervened uh with regard to two well one in particular uh cabinet minister she actually resigned a second cabinet minister also resigned um to try and work out a deal with SNC Lavelay or for SNC Lavelay so it was a sort of political interference or intervention in what was going to be a judicial process and also there was some concern quite honestly with regard to um something called the weed charity in terms of the possibility well that it's clear the number show it that the prime minister's family particularly um uh his mom and brother were were being paid for appearances and things like that and we had secured a very large contract last summer from the federal government to run a student program during the pandemic that was subsequently canceled and so on but um I think the prime one of his jobs right now is prime minister because there's sort of no time clock uh no term limit on how long he can be prime minister if the Canadian public decides to reelect your party and you're the leader of that party you become the prime minister if you've got a majority or even in some cases as they currently have a minority um so he wants to rehabilitate his image in a more uh public way that will will will result in greater support so this is a follow-up question if the new opposition leader or tool were to become prime minister how would this likely impact Canada's relationship with the U.S. well Erin O'Toole who recently became the leader of the conservative party of Canada which has the second largest number of seats in the Canadian House of Commons informs her majesty's loyal opposition it's sort of an unknown figure in Canada a few asked most Canadians who this gentleman is and what he stands for and how he impacts the Canadian or should say the conservative party platform most people won't know quite honestly it's true it's still too early if Mr O'Toole were to become at some point Canada's prime minister if there's a general election called um uh I don't think um uh from what I understand that it would have a consequential impact on the direction of the relationship one way or the other um although Canada now has a spike in COVID cases in general it has fared much better than the U.S. why is this I hope you have hours for me to explain this but we were fortunate a few weeks ago here at the Center for the Study of Canada to have as part of our Zoom conversations like you're doing we have a series called Conversations on Canada and Andre Picard who's a good friend of mine Andre is the national calmness for the Canadian newspaper the Globe and Mail on Health and has done terrific reporting on this subject um and talk to us that day about you know what's going on in Canada what's going on in the U.S. why is Canada seemingly fared much better than the U.S. part of it quite simply put as he explains it um is that Canada started earlier um that there was the the the process of addressing as he puts it the the healthcare challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic were never politicized in Canada this never became a political football a political issue um in fact as he points out you know you have strong ideological differences between various premiers of provinces and the and Prime Minister Trudeau but all the provinces the territories and the federal government were all on the same page they were united in terms of the need to place this issue number one not you know not withstanding concerns about keeping economies moving along and so on and so forth but this never became a political football everybody there was a strong and remains a strong consensus in Canada unlike in the United States that everybody needs to wear masks and I'm not just talking about you know if you're going into a store I'm talking about if you're out walking on the street um people understand six feet apart means six feet apart and that you've got to wash your hands and you've got to you know maintain proper hygiene and when I talk to family and friends who live in Canada they're amazed they're amazed at how lax the typical American is towards this whole thing they really find it to be really disturbed and and that may be a bit of a generalization but the fact is is that Canada has done plus the government has gotten squarely behind the federal and provincial governments squarely behind and work together to develop and to make sure that there was and is sufficient amounts of protective equipment um and that hospitals have what they need so you know it's in some ways you can say well why is all this and you can simply say well you know if you look back to what the founding sort of principles of the two nations are what does Canada say to its citizens it says it's going to give you peace order and good government it takes a very collective response a collective approach to dealing with um everything north of the border what do you what are you promised what what what's the sort of foundational principles in the United States well it's you know it's um you go back to the Declaration of Independence go back and you look at it's you know it's it's your rights and it's your liberty it's your freedom it's a very individual rights approach so you should expect to have somebody in one town or city or in a different state with a different governor sort of saying oh you know these mass things eh you know i'm not so sure um whereas somebody says oh yeah you need them so i think that that's part of the reason Canada has done at least to this point considerably better Christopher thank you so so much this was very educational loved it you're welcome do i have a chance do i have a chance to answer one more quick response super quick okay this was from Beth she wanted to know you see a painting over my shoulder um in my office here in Platsburg and she was wondering about that when i moved here in 2002 i'm not an abstract or contemporary paint painter lover nine i recognize this painting right away and it was in the foyer where you know the wind and the cold were getting to it and it wasn't protected and i recognized who it was and and that it was quite valuable um in the sense that this is a piece that could hang in the National Gallery of Canada it's painted by a Canadian painter called William Ronald it's a six figure painting and nobody knew that and i was like what is this doing here let's get this out of here so i'm although i'm i'm i have a different taste in art style i really recommend it and and and recognize the need to protect this kind of stuff so anyway thanks for asking that fun question and if i can thank you all whoever's here today thank you all it's been a really wonderful chance to speak with you today thank well thank you