OTTAWA — Canadians who are watching closely the results of the U.S. election are left wondering what exactly a Kamala Harris or Donald Trump victory would mean for them.
While some observers say a Trump victory could mean economic instability with hefty tariffs and brash decisions that could destabilize the world stage, others warn a Harris win would not be a walk in the park either for the United States’ friendly northern neighbour. But in addition to the presidential outcome, whether Democrats or Republicans will be controlling the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate will also influence the next four years.
The National Post spoke with Senator Peter Boehm, former ambassador and Canadian Sherpa for the G7 in Charlevoix, Louise Blais, former ambassador to the United Nations and now senior advisor to the Business Council of Canada, as well as Garry Keller, former chief of staff to Canada’s foreign affairs minister and vice president at StrategyCorp, to get their views on the challenges that lie ahead for Canadians in each scenario.
TARIFFS
Whatever the outcome of the U.S. election, one thing is clear: Canada will have to constantly remind its biggest trading partner that their economies are intertwined.
“The work that we have to do is always to remind Americans to take into consideration the fact that their supply chains are extremely integrated with Canada, that we make things together, and that Canada is their number one customer,” said Blais.
As described by Keller: “You have to say it over and over and over and over and over and over again. That’s just the reality.”
Trump has promised to impose a universal tariff of 10 per cent on all imports entering the United States and has suggested at times it could be 20 per cent. Until now, there is no indication that Canada will be exempted which would cost the economy tens of billions.
“We will definitely have to work for it. I don’t think we’re going to get a free pass just because we’re Canada,” said Blais.
Canada already has some experience responding to such threats. In 2018, Trump’s administration announced it would impose tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and Canada imposed similar trade countermeasures on carefully selected U.S. products.
Keller said the Canadian tariffs were targeted to hurt select politicians at a local level.
One of those products was Kentucky bourbon, which was meant to target the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, from Kentucky, in hopes that he would increase the pressure on Trump to back away from the tariffs. Canada and the U.S. came to an agreement to end those tariffs nearly a year later.
CUSMA REVIEW
In a carefully crafted statement to Michigan voters last month, Harris said she prides herself as being one of only 10 senators to have voted against the Canada-U.S.-Mexico free trade agreement and has vowed to use the review process to protect manufacturing jobs.
“I think Canadians are fooling themselves if they think a Kamala Harris presidency is a panacea,” said Keller.
That means that either administration will want to take a new look at CUSMA when it is scheduled for a review in 2026, and all bets are off as to which trade irritants could be on the table. Blais said it is not out of the question that Americans would use the threat of tariffs as a leverage in the discussions and conversations around the deal.
“We know that they disagree with the interpretation of the deal as it is made on rules of origin for automotives and we know that they’re still unhappy with our supply management on dairy, and now they’re really unhappy on the DST (Digital Services Tax),” said Blais.
The Canadian Senate is in the final stages of studying a Bloc Québécois bill that would protect farming sectors under supply management from future trade negotiations.
Boehm, who is chair of the Senate committee on foreign affairs and international trade, would not comment on that specific matter. But he has previously said in committee he opposes the bill as it would divide the agricultural community and would have implications for future trade negotiations, particularly the upcoming review of CUSMA.
The former diplomat however said tough talk during trade negotiations go both ways between Americans and Canadians.
“They’re always tough when they negotiate trade deals, and they are particularly tough with us, because they know that we’re tough too,” said Boehm.
DEFENCE SPENDING
Former U.S. ambassador to Canada Kelly Craft, who served under Trump, recently warned that Canada needs to spend more on defence, faster, if Trump becomes president. But that pressure is coming from both Republicans and Democrats south of the border.
“That’s an area where we’ve been successful in attracting bipartisan negative attention,” described Blais.
Following years of pressure from allies, Canada committed to reaching NATO’s spending target of two per cent of GDP on defence by 2032. The original deadline, which all alliance members including Canada agreed to in 2014, was to reach that goal by this year.
Blais said that while Trump has been more outspoken about it when he was in the White House, European allies have since stepped up and increased their defence spending.
“I think we have to understand the world is not a friendly place,” said Blais. “We need to protect our borders, and there are ways to do it in a way that we can actually boost our economy. So just we have to get the best minds around the table.”
Keller said that the issue came up last time he was in Washington D.C. and stakeholders were telling him “no matter who wins, just make the two per cent commitment.”
But adding billions to Canada’s defence budget is easier said than done. Keller said that no matter if it’s a Liberal or Conservative government, getting to that threshold would require a massive amount of spending. He also said there are many structural issues that would make it difficult to attain, including the Canadian Armed Forces’ lack of recruitment.
“If we go ahead and meet the two per cent procurement total over a short period of time, who’s going to operate all that equipment?”
IMMIGRATION POLICY
Trump has promised a sweeping overhaul of U.S. immigration policy if he wins, including mass deportations of millions of people and more resources at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Boehm said that the mass deportations strike him as “totally unworkable” and gave the failed example of the United Kingdom which tried to send illegal immigrants and asylum seekers to Rwanda. Ultimately, the Conservatives were defeated during this year’s election and the Labour Party announced that the Rwanda plan would be cancelled.
“How are you going to convince another country to simply take people that you are deporting?” asked Boehm.
It seems unlikely however that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will send out another tweet welcoming those fleeing war and persecution, as he did in 2017 after Trump issued a travel ban on Muslim-majority countries. That led to thousands of people crossing Roxham Road at the Canadian border in hopes of claiming asylum. Roxham Road has since been closed.
Keller said the Canadian government is probably preparing for another influx at the border.
“How the government is prepared to deal with that is the big question. We haven’t heard anything yet and I don’t blame the government for keeping those keeping that quiet in advance of the run-up to the election, but I think it’s a live issue,” he said.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Observers agree that a Harris administration would probably mean the status quo in dealing with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas war, but it will depend on who she will have selected to serve as her secretary of state.
“I think it would be steady on looking in the Middle East for a ceasefire, return of the remaining Israeli hostages — pretty much what we’ve seen during the Biden period, maybe with a bit more verve, with the election behind her, and again, depending on her senior team,” said Boehm.
Trump, he said, would continue to be “very supportive” of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, if not more supportive, having hosted him at his Mar-A-Lago estate in Florida earlier this year.
Another question on the foreign policy front is how Trump would end Russia’s war on Ukraine in “one day,” as he has repeatedly claimed he would do.
Boehm said that would mean Ukraine would surrender some territory to Russia. “In terms of my foreign policy experience, the only way to end that… is through an enforced peace that would let Russia keep the territory that it has, which is anathema to what Ukraine wants, what NATO wants, and certainly what the European Union wants,” he said.
If that happens, Keller said Canada could be called on by its European allies to play a bigger role financially to defend Ukraine or play a whisper campaign to try to convince Trump otherwise.
“Let’s not forget, (former U.S. President Barack) Obama basically did that with Crimea” said Blais. “There is a precedent, and the war will have to end at some point. And how it ends remains to be seen.”
Obama has previously defended his response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, saying that circumstances were different than Russia’s current invasion of Ukraine.
National Post
[email protected]
Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.