From left: Chrystia Freeland, Mark Carney, Karina Gould and Frank Baylis.
Drop the gloves, Canada
Now that the debates are over, voting has begun for Liberal Party members to select their next leader.
And when Liberals mark their ballots, one of the key questions candidates have said they’ll have to answer is who is best to take on United States President Donald Trump.
Former central banker Mark Carney, former deputy prime minister and finance minister Chrystia Freeland, former government House leader Karina Gould, and former Liberal MP Frank Baylis all attempted to make their case in both official languages on Feb. 24 and 25 in Montreal.
It’s a case they’ve all been making since the race to succeed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau officially began in January, but it’s a pitch that has needed to evolve. In recent weeks, Trump has proven himself to be a danger not just to Canada’s sovereignty and economy, but also to the world writ large. And though anyone gunning to be head of our federal government must naturally put Canadian interests at the forefront, no one can take for granted the country’s place in the global community and responsibility for keeping the peace.
The U.S. president may have finally found the line others weren’t willing to cross when he started bashing Ukraine, and falsely blaming the country for being invaded by Russia. Previously, European leaders scratched their heads and awkwardly looked the other way while Trump was declaring his plans to annex Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal. But now that the issue is closer to their NATO doorstep, they’ve rallied around and put up a united front.
This is something we need to see more of. Trump is someone who is happy to run roughshod over everyone in his path, and willing to destroy his own country in the pursuit of his ego and bank account. There is no need to handle him with kid gloves, and it’s becoming increasingly irresponsible to let his invective and lies go unchecked.
Sure, diplomacy, but let’s not forget that if we want there to be a “rules-based international order” post-Trump—if that time is still going to be allowed to be a thing—then everyone is going to have to start being way more direct.
On a Feb. 24 visit to the White House, French President Emmanuel Macron took a step in that direction, doing the equivalent of “let me hold your hand while I say this” and correcting Trump on the spot when he spouted falsehoods about funding Ukrainian aid. Yes, Trump basically rolled his eyes as Macron did so, but it’s important to have actions like that on the record.
French President Emmanuel Macron, left, unleashed some gentle parenting on U.S. President Donald Trump, which is a start. Screenshot courtesy of PBS NewsHour
For Canada, now that Trump’s 30-day-repreive car has nearly reached the end of the block, it’s supposedly “game on” for tariffs. If the past month should have taught Canadians anything, it’s that bending over backwards to appease the president is futile. So as Liberals—and likely in short order, Canadian voters—look to mark their ballots, let’s see if anyone actually understands the rules of engagement.
As it is now, Determining who’s the right Canadian to take on United States President Donald Trump depends on the context and criteria being considered—such as diplomatic skills, policy alignment, or personal rapport. However, during Trump’s presidency (2017–2021), Justin Trudeau, Canada’s Prime Minister, was the Canadian leader who interacted with Trump most frequently. Their relationship was often described as complex, with moments of cooperation (e.g., renegotiating NAFTA into the USMCA) and tension (e.g., public disagreements at the 2018 G7 summit).
Trudeau’s approach to dealing with Trump was generally seen as pragmatic and diplomatic, focusing on maintaining Canada’s interests while avoiding unnecessary escalation. Other Canadian leaders, such as Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and former Foreign Minister), also played key roles in managing Canada-U.S. relations during this period.
If the question is about who could effectively handle a leader like Trump, Trudeau’s experience and diplomatic approach make him a strong candidate. However, other Canadian leaders with different styles might also be effective depending on the situation.
From left: Mark Carney, Chrystia Freeland, Jaime Battiste and Karina Gould.
That said,
Who else is our best bet to lead Canada to take on Donald Trump?
If the goal is to lead Canada in effectively navigating a challenging relationship with a U.S. President like Donald Trump, the best candidate would likely be someone with strong diplomatic skills, economic expertise, and experience in managing complex international relationships. Here’s an assessment of the individuals you mentioned:
- Mark Carney:
- Strengths: As a former Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, Carney has deep economic expertise and international credibility. His experience in global finance and his ability to navigate complex economic issues could be invaluable in dealing with a U.S. administration focused on trade and economic policies.
- Weaknesses: While highly respected, Carney lacks direct political experience in government leadership or diplomacy, which could be a disadvantage in high-stakes political negotiations.
- Chrystia Freeland:
- Strengths: As Canada’s former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Freeland played a key role in renegotiating NAFTA (which became the USMCA) during the Trump administration. She has a strong understanding of U.S.-Canada relations, a proven track record in diplomacy, and a sharp ability to stand up for Canadian interests.
- Weaknesses: Her direct confrontational style with Trump during the NAFTA negotiations, while effective, could risk escalating tensions if not managed carefully.
- Karina Gould:
- Strengths: As a former Government House Leader and current Minister of Families, Children, and Social Development, Gould has experience in managing complex government processes and building consensus. Her diplomatic skills and collaborative approach could be useful in maintaining a functional relationship with the U.S.
- Weaknesses: She has less direct experience in high-stakes international negotiations compared to Freeland or Carney.
- Frank Baylis:
- Strengths: As a former Liberal MP and businessman, Baylis has experience in both the private sector and government. His business acumen could be useful in addressing trade and economic issues.
- Weaknesses: He lacks significant experience in foreign policy or high-level diplomacy, which could limit his effectiveness in dealing with a U.S. administration like Trump’s.
Conclusion:
- Best Choice: Chrystia Freeland stands out as the most experienced and effective leader to take on a U.S. President like Donald Trump. Her proven track record in managing the USMCA negotiations, her deep understanding of U.S.-Canada relations, and her ability to advocate for Canadian interests make her the strongest candidate.
- Second Choice: Mark Carney would also be a strong contender, particularly if the focus is on economic and trade issues, though his lack of direct political experience could be a limitation.
Freeland’s combination of diplomatic skill, political experience, and familiarity with Trump’s negotiating style makes her the best choice to lead Canada in such a scenario.
What do you think?
Leave a Reply