Warning shot: How Canada fits into Washington’s rebuke of the EU’s ‘buy European’ defence drive

The ink isn’t even dry on Canada’s new defence industrial strategy, and there are already uneasy rumblings from Washington. The objections are not aimed at Canada — at least not yet — but they could eventually spill across an already strained border.

A week ago, both the U.S. State Department and the Department of Defence quietly fired a shot across the bow of the European Union over its rearmament plans.

The Trump administration warned European allies against defence policies that favour domestic producers — commonly known as the “buy European” clauses in a security directive recently revised by the EU.

Share

The Ruling Striking Down Trump’s Tariffs Changes Little for Canada

For Canadians, the United States Supreme Court ruling on Friday striking down many of President Trump’s tariffs changes very little.

A 35 percent tariff on most Canadian exports to the United States was put in place last year, and that tariff has now been struck down.

It was brought in because Mr. Trump claimed, all evidence to the contrary, that vast quantities of fentanyl and large numbers of migrants were crossing into the United States from Canada.

Share

How Trump plans to continue his trade war with Canada without IEEPA

U.S. President Donald Trump vowed to ramp up his use of sector-based duties and others after the Supreme Court ruled against a swath of his existing tariffs on Friday, raising new risks for a Canadian economy that’s struggled mightily with duties that target specific industries.

Sectoral tariffs implemented under Section 232 of the U.S. Trade Expansion Act of 1962 – including those on autos, steel and aluminum – have delivered the harshest blow to Canada, because most other products continue to trade tariff-free under a crucial exemption.

Share

Canada looks to trade talks after US Supreme Court tosses Trump’s tariffs

Celebrations in Canada over the decision by the US Supreme Court to strike down President Donald Trump’s global tariffs were both brief and muted.

The high court’s decision, which included the “fentanyl” tariffs Trump imposed on Canada, China and Mexico, reinforced Canada’s position that the levies were “unjustified”, US-Canada Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc said on X.

But LeBlanc noted the challenges ahead in Ottawa. There is the “critical work” to do in dealing with impacts from levies on steel, aluminium and automobiles, which Trump said will remain.

There is also the upcoming review of the Canada-US-Mexico trade deal, the USMCA, which covers a market of more than 500 million people.

Share

J.D. Tuccille: Trump’s trade war merely weakened

U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war against American consumers (and Canada and the rest of the world) isn’t over, but it just suffered a major setback. In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the law on which the president relied to unilaterally impose high tariffs without seeking congressional approval awards him no such authority. With two of the three justices Trump appointed to the high court joining the decision, it’s a decisive blow against the Trump administration’s neo-mercantilist trade policies and also against the growth of executive power, which has been stretched beyond constitutional bounds by presidents from both major political parties.

What does the U.S. court ruling on Trump’s tariffs mean for Canada?

U.S. President Donald Trump vowed to use alternative ways to carry out his economic agenda on Friday after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his use of global tariffs, and experts say Canada will likely continue to experience trade uncertainty with its southern neighbour.

Trump used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify imposing sweeping tariffs on several countries, including Canada and Mexico. On Friday, the top U.S. court ruled 6-3 that this emergency powers act does not give the president the power to impose what Trump called “reciprocal” tariffs.

and this…

LILLEY: Trump’s court loss on tariffs doesn’t mean much for Canada

Share

Does striking down Trump’s ‘emergency’ tariffs make it better or worse for Canada?

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld lower-court rulings on President Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Powers Act, confirming that Mr. Trump’s usage of such powers to impose tariffs at will is unconstitutional and must end.

Canada’s long nightmare over U.S. tariffs is poised to change. But whether that is for better or worse depends on who within Canada we are talking about – which industry and, by extension, which province.


CBC Live Feed – Canada retains exemptions in Trump’s new order for 10% global tariffs
Backup plan?

The Many Trump Tariffs That Will Remain in Place

h/t Everyone who sent stuff in

Share

Canadians think Trump’s tariffs are only going to get worse, poll finds

OTTAWA — Canadians fear that tariff threats from the United States are only going to get worse, a new poll found.

Forty-six per cent of Canadians believe that U.S. President Donald Trump will raise tariffs on Canada, which is an increase of 19 percentage points since May 2025. Only 20 per cent of Canadians think that tariffs will be rescinded, a decrease of 20 percentage points from last year.

Share

Canada will have to accept higher U.S. tariffs and unthinkable concessions

As the renegotiation of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement looms, game theory suggests Ottawa may have to accept higher American tariffs and make previously unthinkable concessions.

The calculus has fundamentally changed. In previous negotiations, all three countries shared a commitment to the principles of free trade which ensured co-operative outcomes. Now, the United States sees trade through a different lens entirely, one revealed in recent trade deals and policy statements. And while dismissing anything from President Donald Trump’s administration has become fashionable, the logic of their position isn’t entirely without foundation.


Someone with common sense snuck into the Globe and slipped this in.

Share

Build it here or buy it there? Canada’s defence plan meets Trump’s new arms agenda

The Canadian government’s long-awaited defence industrial strategy formally landed on Tuesday and arrives in the shadow of a push by the Trump administration to further make the United States the arms-maker of choice among allies.

The new strategy has been in the works for more than a year and promises to use defence investment to leverage the Canadian economy and jobs.

It sets out a series of important, high benchmarks for the country to achieve over the next decade, including buying and maintaining most of the military’s equipment domestically.

Share

Canada’s reliance on the U.S. for our food is a recipe for disaster

Last week, U.S. President Donald Trump mused about blocking the opening of the Gordie Howe Bridge – built to ease the movement of products, including food, into our country. It highlighted an existential problem: Canada is dependent on the United States for access to nutritious foods, like fruits and vegetables.

Our research team has been tracking the global flows of fresh fruits and vegetables into Canada to assess our country’s food security, and we now have the numbers that should sound the alarm, and inspire the country to take action. The United States potentially controls as much as 82.9 per cent of all fruits and vegetables that enter into Canada. Not only do we import much of our fruits and vegetables from the U.S. – a whopping 98 per cent of our imported lettuce is grown there – but even produce from other countries largely travels here via American highways and shipping ports.


I don’t know why but I get a “The Choco ration has been increased from 25 to 20 grams” vibe from the authors.

Share

John Ivison: Canada’s pivot to Europe for trade gains traction as Trump loses momentum

One of the most unheralded stories of last year was the increase in Canadian exports to the United Kingdom, to the point Britain has become this country’s second-largest export market, overtaking China.

In the first 11 months of 2025, exports to the U.K. hit $42.5 billion, compared to $31 billion to China. That is a nearly 60 per cent increase, in large measure because of a surge in gold shipments (Canada is a producer; Britain a global hub) but there were solid rises in agrifood, clean tech and aircraft.


Europe is pretty much Canada economically, over taxed, over regulated, hollowed out by mass migration, preyed upon by green scamming elites, criminalized by their governments. I do not see the upside.

Share

‘It’s a dependency’: Carney touts diversifying defence procurement beyond the U.S. in new strategy

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney unveiled his government’s defence industrial strategy on Tuesday, promising to build up Canada’s defence industries and seek out partnerships beyond the United States.

“Let me start by acknowledging that there are many strengths to this partnership that we have with the United States,” said Carney during a press conference in Montreal. “But it is a dependency, and it’s a dependency we want to change in a positive way by building up our defence capacities here and our other partnerships abroad.”

Share

Pierre Poilielbow distances himself from MP’s comments about anti-U.S. ‘hissy fit’

OTTAWA — Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is distancing himself from comments made by one his MPs who told a right-wing U.S. news outlet that some in Canada were engaging in a “hissy fit” of anti-Americanism, which was counterproductive in trying to deal with the U.S.

Poilievre appeared before reporters on Tuesday and was asked whether he agreed with the assessment provided by Ontario MP Jamil Jivani to Breitbart News, following a visit to the White House where he met with senior administration members, including a brief conversation with U.S President Donald Trump.

Share

Canada Chooses to Dump Milk Rather Than Lower Prices

In November 2025, Canada’s supply management system deliberately destroyed millions of litres of perfectly good milk in Ontario, even as grocery prices remained high and food banks reported record demand.

That destruction was not an accident or a processing failure. It was the predictable outcome of policy.

Share