Experts warn that 25% US tariffs, coupled with retaliatory measures from Canada, would significantly harm the economies of both nations. The trade disruption could lead to higher consumer prices, job losses, and a slowdown in cross-border commerce, affecting key industries in both countries.

As Donald Trump nears his inauguration on January 20, 2017, world leaders and policymakers are bracing for the dramatic changes that are expected to come with his “America First” approach to foreign policy. Trump’s presidency is poised to disrupt long-standing international relationships, redefine trade agreements, and alter the U.S.’s role on the global stage.

During his campaign, Trump repeatedly emphasized a commitment to prioritize American interests, a stance that has fueled concerns abroad about potential shifts in alliances and trade partnerships. One of the most immediate areas of focus is likely to be trade policy. Trump has signaled a willingness to renegotiate or abandon major trade agreements, including NAFTA, which he has criticized as being detrimental to American workers. With Canada and Mexico both relying heavily on trade with the U.S., any changes to NAFTA would have significant repercussions for the North American economy.

Trump’s foreign policy approach, characterized by skepticism toward multilateralism and an “America First” mentality, could also strain relationships with traditional allies. His skepticism about NATO and willingness to question the U.S.’s role in international organizations could lead to shifts in global alliances, especially in Europe. Furthermore, Trump has suggested that countries like Japan and South Korea may need to take on more responsibility for their own defense, potentially undermining longstanding security commitments.

In the Middle East, Trump’s stance on issues like the Iran nuclear deal and relations with Israel is expected to take a more hardline approach. His promised relocation of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and support for Israel could ignite tensions in the region, while his plans to take a tougher stance on Iran could further complicate relations with European allies, who have supported the nuclear agreement.

In Asia, Trump’s approach to trade and security, particularly with China, could redefine U.S.-China relations. Trump’s hard rhetoric on trade, particularly accusing China of unfair practices, has raised concerns about a potential trade war. At the same time, his views on North Korea’s nuclear ambitions may prompt more aggressive actions, further isolating the rogue state but possibly escalating tensions in the region.

At home, Trump’s domestic policies will likely follow his campaign promises, focusing on tax cuts, deregulation, and a renewed emphasis on energy independence. His proposals to limit immigration and reform healthcare will be central to his domestic agenda, potentially reshaping the American economy and society.

As the world watches, the next few months are expected to be pivotal in determining how Trump’s administration will reshape global dynamics. While uncertainty looms, what is clear is that Trump’s presidency will mark a significant departure from the policies of his predecessors, with profound consequences for both the U.S. and the world at large.

As Donald Trump prepares to take office, the global community remains uncertain about the full scope of his administration’s domestic and foreign policies. Many countries are closely monitoring how Trump’s “America First” rhetoric will translate into action, with potential consequences for global trade, international diplomacy, and security.

Trade Policy Shifts and Economic Impact

One of the most immediate changes anticipated under a Trump presidency is a shift in U.S. trade policy. Trump has vowed to address what he perceives as unfair trade deals that have hurt American workers, and this is likely to involve renegotiating or withdrawing from agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). For countries like Mexico and Canada, which have extensive trade relationships with the U.S., the potential for tariffs and trade barriers could significantly disrupt their economies. The U.S.’s decision to focus on bilateral agreements rather than multilateral trade pacts could also reshape global trade dynamics.

The European Union, which has long enjoyed strong trade ties with the U.S., is also facing uncertainty. Trump’s skepticism about the World Trade Organization (WTO) and his critique of the European Union’s economic policies have raised concerns about the future of U.S.-EU relations. For European leaders, Trump’s protectionist stance could mean a recalibration of their trade strategies, with efforts to strengthen ties within the EU and with other global powers, such as China.

Foreign Relations and Global Alliances

Trump’s approach to global diplomacy has sparked concerns among long-standing U.S. allies. His previous statements casting doubt on the value of alliances like NATO have created unease in Europe, where countries rely on the U.S. for defense and security. Trump’s insistence that NATO members should contribute more financially to the alliance could strain relations with European leaders who view the U.S. as a crucial security partner. Similarly, his tough stance on trade and defense could complicate relations with Japan and South Korea, which depend on the U.S. for military protection and economic support.

In the Middle East, Trump’s foreign policy is expected to be more aggressive and supportive of Israel. His decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the U.S. embassy there is already causing friction with Palestinian authorities and many Arab nations. Trump’s rhetoric toward Iran also signals a shift in U.S. policy, with a promise to dismantle the Iran nuclear deal and increase sanctions, which could escalate tensions in the region.

China and Asia-Pacific Strategy

Trump’s relationship with China is one of the most closely watched aspects of his foreign policy. During his campaign, he accused China of currency manipulation and unfair trade practices, and he has suggested the imposition of tariffs on Chinese imports. This could lead to a trade war between the two largest economies in the world, with profound consequences for global markets. In addition, Trump’s stance on North Korea’s nuclear program may involve more direct confrontation, with the potential for military intervention if diplomatic efforts fail.

In Southeast Asia, Trump’s withdrawal from the TPP was a major blow to regional trade cooperation, especially for countries like Japan, Vietnam, and Australia that had hoped to benefit from the agreement. The U.S. decision to step back from the TPP has left a vacuum that China has been eager to fill with its own regional trade initiatives, such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

Domestic Policies and Political Landscape

On the domestic front, Trump’s administration is expected to push forward with several key agenda items, including tax cuts, deregulation, and energy policy reform. His promised tax cuts for corporations and individuals could stimulate the U.S. economy in the short term, though critics warn that they could increase the national deficit. On energy, Trump has pledged to revitalize the coal industry and roll back environmental regulations, a move that could have significant consequences for global environmental efforts, particularly in terms of U.S. commitment to climate change agreements.

Trump’s stance on immigration, particularly his plans to build a border wall with Mexico, is likely to be one of the most contentious issues domestically. His proposed policies to limit immigration could have long-term effects on the labor market, especially in industries that rely heavily on foreign workers, such as agriculture, construction, and tech.

Uncertainty and Global Repercussions

As the world adjusts to the reality of a Trump presidency, many countries are adopting a cautious wait-and-see approach. While some hope that Trump’s promises of economic growth and job creation will lead to a stronger global economy, others fear that his policies could isolate the U.S. from the international community and lead to economic and geopolitical instability.

The coming months will be crucial in determining how Trump’s “America First” agenda plays out on the global stage. With unpredictable shifts in trade, defense, and diplomacy, both allies and adversaries are preparing for a new era in U.S. foreign relations, one that promises to reshape the global order and redefine America’s role in the world.

As Donald Trump takes office, his administration is expected to introduce a range of significant policy shifts, both domestically and abroad. With his “America First” platform, Trump aims to reduce U.S. involvement in international agreements and organizations, while prioritizing American interests. The global community is left to navigate the implications of his agenda, which could have far-reaching effects on trade, security, and diplomatic relations.

Impact on Global Trade

One of the primary areas of concern is the U.S.’s trade policy under Trump. During his campaign, he criticized free trade agreements such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), labeling them as harmful to American jobs and manufacturing. His administration is likely to seek renegotiations of existing agreements, and in some cases, may pursue tariffs on foreign goods to protect U.S. industries.

For countries like Mexico and Canada, this could significantly alter trade relations. Canada, for instance, may face challenges in securing favorable terms in any renegotiated trade deal, as Trump seeks to rebalance what he perceives as unfavorable trade imbalances. Similarly, China could be impacted by increased tariffs, which may lead to retaliatory actions, potentially sparking a trade war between the two largest economies in the world. Economists warn that such a scenario could disrupt global supply chains, increase prices for consumers, and slow economic growth in both countries.

The European Union may also face challenges, as Trump has expressed concerns about European trade practices and burdens on American businesses. His stance on tariffs and trade could strain U.S.-EU relations, leading to tension over issues like agricultural exports, industrial goods, and digital services. If the U.S. turns inward economically, it may prompt the EU to forge closer economic and trade ties with other global partners like China and India.

Diplomatic and Security Relations

Trump’s foreign policy is expected to diverge significantly from traditional U.S. diplomacy. His skepticism toward multilateral institutions, including NATO and the United Nations, could undermine long-standing alliances. In particular, his questioning of NATO’s value raises the prospect of reduced U.S. commitment to European security, especially as the alliance faces challenges from Russia and other regional threats.

This shift could force NATO members to reassess their defense strategies and capabilities, potentially leading to greater military independence from the U.S. While some countries in Eastern Europe and the Baltics have expressed concern about Trump’s rhetoric toward NATO, others may see an opportunity to enhance their own military standing.

In the Middle East, Trump’s stance is expected to shift the balance of power. His promise to align more closely with Israel, particularly on contentious issues like Jerusalem, could inflame tensions with Palestinian authorities and Arab nations. Trump’s aggressive rhetoric toward Iran and his desire to abandon the Iran nuclear deal could result in increased instability in the region. If the U.S. opts for military intervention in Syria or seeks to confront Iran more directly, it could lead to further conflict.

China and Asia-Pacific Tensions

Trump’s approach to China could be one of the most unpredictable aspects of his presidency. With his focus on reducing the U.S. trade deficit, he may impose tariffs or restrictions on Chinese imports, escalating tensions between the two nations. This could provoke retaliation from China, potentially destabilizing the global economy. The trade war could also affect industries in both countries that rely on Chinese imports and American markets.

Moreover, Trump’s statements regarding U.S. military presence in the Asia-Pacific region have raised concerns in both China and neighboring countries. A shift in U.S. foreign policy could prompt China to assert its influence over disputed territories in the South China Sea and increase its regional military footprint. U.S. allies in Asia, like Japan and South Korea, may be forced to navigate a delicate balance between maintaining security ties with Washington and managing China’s growing power.

Domestic Agenda and Its Global Repercussions

On the domestic front, Trump’s economic policies are expected to focus on tax cuts, deregulation, and revitalizing the American manufacturing sector. His promise to reduce corporate taxes and remove regulatory burdens is likely to be welcomed by businesses, but critics argue that these policies could lead to increased income inequality and a rise in national debt.

Trump’s stance on energy could also have global repercussions. His emphasis on reviving the coal industry and supporting fossil fuel extraction could undermine global efforts to combat climate change. The U.S. may withdraw from the Paris Agreement, which would significantly impact international climate policy and set back global efforts to address environmental challenges.

Furthermore, Trump’s tough stance on immigration and border security, including his plan to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, will shape domestic and international relations. Tensions with Mexico, along with the status of undocumented immigrants in the U.S., could sour diplomatic relations with neighboring countries. The U.S. also risks losing vital labor forces in industries like agriculture and construction, which rely heavily on immigrant workers.

Global Uncertainty and the Changing Role of the U.S.

As the world watches, the U.S. under Trump’s leadership is likely to become more insular and less predictable. While some may welcome the president’s push for economic nationalism and a stronger focus on domestic concerns, others fear that U.S. isolationism could diminish its global influence. This shift could leave a vacuum that other powers, particularly China and Russia, may be eager to fill.

In the years to come, the U.S. will likely play a diminished role in shaping international norms and agreements, leaving the responsibility for global leadership to regional powers and multilateral organizations. As the U.S. pivots inward, the world will be forced to adapt to a new geopolitical reality, where America’s influence may no longer serve as the dominant force in global affairs.

Ultimately, the first months of Trump’s presidency will set the tone for the future of U.S. foreign relations and its place in the global order. While his policies promise significant changes, the outcome of these shifts remains uncertain. The global community will continue to monitor Trump’s moves closely, as they will undoubtedly reshape not only U.S. relations with its allies but also the broader international system.

As Donald Trump’s administration takes shape, both domestically and internationally, the world faces an uncertain future with numerous potential shifts in foreign relations, economic policies, and global security dynamics. His “America First” platform is poised to challenge long-established alliances, trade agreements, and international institutions, making the coming years crucial for both the U.S. and the broader global community.

Trade and Economic Implications

In the area of trade, Trump’s promise to overhaul trade deals that he believes disadvantage the U.S. will have profound implications not only for the U.S. economy but for international trade practices. The potential for protectionist policies, including increased tariffs on Chinese goods and a renegotiation of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), could disrupt established global supply chains. While some U.S. businesses and workers may benefit from a more insular trade policy, the broader global economy could experience significant ripple effects.

The U.S. is deeply integrated into the global market, and any tariffs or trade barriers could result in higher consumer prices, reduced exports, and possible job losses in sectors heavily reliant on foreign markets. Furthermore, countries that are major trading partners of the U.S. – such as Canada, Mexico, and China – could retaliate, creating a climate of uncertainty and potentially escalating trade tensions into a full-blown trade war.

Trump’s desire to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. could result in re-shoring efforts, but experts warn that this would be a long-term process, requiring significant investment in infrastructure and workforce development. In the meantime, industries such as technology, agriculture, and automotive manufacturing could feel the strain of shifting trade policies.

Geopolitical Shifts and Security Concerns

Trump’s foreign policy rhetoric has signaled a shift toward a more transactional approach to international relations. In his “America First” framework, Trump has emphasized that U.S. alliances, like NATO, should come with a clearer return on investment, and he has questioned whether the U.S. should continue to bear the cost of global security in regions such as Europe and the Asia-Pacific. This has raised concerns among NATO allies, particularly those in Eastern Europe, who rely heavily on U.S. military protection in the face of Russian aggression.

A reduced U.S. role in international security could embolden regional powers, such as Russia and China, to assert themselves more aggressively. In the Middle East, Trump’s “America First” policy could lead to a recalibration of U.S. engagement, particularly in Syria and Iran. With Trump’s isolationist instincts, traditional allies like the U.K. and France may need to step up their own defense efforts, further complicating international diplomacy.

On the other hand, some countries may see an opportunity in a less interventionist U.S. to pursue their own strategic interests. China, for example, is already expanding its influence in the South China Sea, and Russia has been active in Ukraine and Syria. Without the counterbalance of U.S. power, these regional actors may feel emboldened.

Environmental Policy and Global Climate Impact

Trump’s stance on environmental issues is another area where his administration is expected to break from international norms. His skepticism about climate change and his commitment to rolling back Obama-era environmental regulations are likely to have both domestic and global consequences.

Trump has already indicated that he plans to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement, which could deal a significant blow to global efforts to combat climate change. As one of the world’s largest carbon emitters, the U.S. plays a crucial role in global environmental initiatives. If the U.S. steps back, other nations may struggle to meet the ambitious targets set in the agreement, undermining progress toward reducing global emissions and limiting temperature rise.

Additionally, the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement could embolden other countries, such as China and India, to continue with their own fossil fuel-intensive growth models. Conversely, it could encourage Europe and other environmentally-conscious nations to take a leadership role in setting global climate policies, potentially leading to a splintering of the international community on climate issues.

Middle East and Iran: Escalating Tensions

Trump’s hardline approach to Iran, including his pledge to abandon the Iran nuclear deal, is likely to escalate tensions in the Middle East. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was negotiated by the Obama administration, is viewed by Trump as a flawed agreement that ultimately allows Iran to develop nuclear weapons. The U.S. withdrawal from the deal could prompt Iran to resume its nuclear program, potentially igniting a nuclear arms race in the region and drawing the U.S. back into military engagements in the Middle East.

Moreover, Trump’s warm relationship with Israel could further complicate efforts to address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and support for Israeli settlements in the West Bank has alienated many Arab nations and threatens to unravel years of diplomacy aimed at achieving a two-state solution. As U.S. policy becomes more aligned with Israeli interests, tensions between Israel and its neighbors could deepen, threatening regional stability.

Immigration and Domestic Security

Domestically, Trump’s hardline stance on immigration has already begun to shape his administration’s policies. His promise to build a border wall with Mexico and reduce immigration from countries he deems high-risk could lead to a significant redefinition of U.S. immigration policy.

While the immigration system overhaul may be popular with Trump’s base, it could have unintended consequences for the U.S. labor market, which depends heavily on immigrant workers in sectors like agriculture, healthcare, and technology. Reduced immigration could create labor shortages and potentially increase costs for consumers. Additionally, the U.S. could face international criticism for its treatment of refugees and migrants, particularly if families are separated or subjected to harsh conditions at the border.

Trump’s rhetoric surrounding immigration, combined with his focus on “law and order,” could also impact domestic security policies. The U.S. may take a more aggressive approach to combatting domestic terrorism and gang violence, which could raise civil liberties concerns, particularly in communities already facing increased surveillance and policing.

Technology and Cybersecurity

Another key area of focus for Trump’s presidency will be cybersecurity and the role of technology in national security. Trump has been vocal about his concerns over cyber threats from countries like Russia and China, and his administration will likely prioritize bolstering U.S. cybersecurity infrastructure. This could involve increased government oversight and more stringent regulations on tech companies operating within the U.S.

On the global stage, Trump’s stance on technology policy could complicate relations with China, as both countries vie for dominance in emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, 5G, and quantum computing. The U.S. and China are already engaged in a technology cold war, and Trump’s policies could either escalate tensions or provide opportunities for technological collaboration.

The Path Forward

Ultimately, the success or failure of Trump’s foreign and domestic policies will depend on how well he balances his America First agenda with the realities of an interconnected world. His administration will need to navigate complex international relationships, economic challenges, and security threats while trying to uphold his promises to U.S. voters. As the first months of Trump’s presidency unfold, the global community will be closely watching how the U.S. redefines its role in world affairs.

In this era of uncertainty, diplomatic and economic strategies will likely become more unpredictable, with both allies and adversaries adjusting to a new and less conventional American leadership. The unfolding global order could see the U.S. take a step back from its role as the world’s primary leader, paving the way for new geopolitical alignments and shifting power dynamics in international relations.

Domestic Challenges and Political Landscape

On the domestic front, Trump’s administration will also face significant challenges, particularly in navigating the partisan divides that have deepened over recent years. While he enjoys strong support from his base, his leadership is often criticized by the left, and his tenure may see continued political polarization. Key issues such as healthcare, taxation, and education are likely to dominate domestic debates.

Healthcare: One of Trump’s promises during his campaign was to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA), known as Obamacare. While Republicans have repeatedly tried to dismantle ACA, efforts have stalled in Congress, and it remains to be seen whether the Trump administration can successfully introduce a replacement. If significant changes are made to healthcare policy, it could lead to wider access to insurance for some but possibly result in increased costs for others, particularly those with pre-existing conditions or low incomes. A potential rollback of Medicaid expansion in certain states could also exacerbate health inequalities.

Taxation: Trump has also proposed tax cuts for corporations and high-income earners as part of his broader economic strategy. His administration’s tax reform plans may be aimed at stimulating growth, but critics argue that such cuts may disproportionately benefit the wealthy and add to the national deficit. With Republicans in control of Congress, the tax reform agenda could progress, but any policy shifts will likely be met with resistance from Democrats, especially regarding the potential erosion of social safety nets.

Education: Education policy is expected to be another battleground, particularly in terms of school choice and funding for public education. Trump’s appointments of figures like Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education have sparked debates over the role of charter schools and privatization. Critics argue that such moves could weaken public schools, particularly in low-income areas, while proponents believe they could lead to improved educational outcomes by fostering competition. The question of how education will be funded at the state and federal levels remains central to these discussions.

Immigration and National Identity: Trump’s tough stance on immigration will undoubtedly shape the national conversation. The proposed border wall with Mexico, the focus on ending sanctuary city policies, and curbing refugee admissions could spark widespread protests and legal challenges. Immigration reform remains a contentious issue, with debates over how to treat undocumented immigrants already in the U.S. and what path, if any, they should have to citizenship. The U.S.’s long-standing identity as a nation built by immigrants faces a critical moment of reckoning under the Trump administration.

Race Relations and Social Issues: Racial tensions and social justice issues are also likely to remain at the forefront of American domestic policy under Trump’s leadership. His responses to protests, such as the Black Lives Matter movement and calls for police reform, will likely play a critical role in shaping race relations. The administration’s stance on issues like voting rights, healthcare disparities, and criminal justice reform will either exacerbate or alleviate some of the deep societal divides in America.

A New Era in International Trade and Economics

Trump’s “America First” stance has significant implications for international trade and economic relations. His criticism of multi-national trade deals, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and his insistence on renegotiating NAFTA are signs of his protectionist trade agenda. These moves will fundamentally challenge the established global trade order and have both short- and long-term consequences for economies worldwide.

The North American Trade Environment: The renegotiation of NAFTA, a cornerstone of North American trade, could lead to both positive and negative outcomes. On one hand, the U.S. could achieve better terms on issues like labor standards, intellectual property, and trade imbalances. On the other hand, a more adversarial approach could strain relationships with Canada and Mexico, disrupting the trade flow of goods like automotive parts, agricultural products, and energy resources. Increased tariffs or restrictions could reduce trade volumes and drive up costs for U.S. consumers.

China and Global Economic Shifts: Trump’s administration is expected to focus heavily on reducing the trade deficit with China, particularly through tariffs on Chinese goods. While this is popular among certain segments of the American population, it risks igniting a trade war that could disrupt the global supply chain, as China is a key manufacturer of goods exported around the world. A full-scale trade war with China could lead to higher prices for U.S. consumers, supply chain disruptions, and slower global growth.

EU and the Rise of Protectionism: The European Union has already expressed concern over Trump’s protectionist rhetoric, particularly with regard to trade tariffs on EU goods, such as steel and aluminum. If the U.S. imposes tariffs or withdraws from international trade agreements, the EU may be forced to look for new trade partnerships in Asia or Africa, reshaping global economic relationships. Trump’s attitude toward the EU, alongside the ongoing Brexit situation, could lead to a more fragmented global trading system.

Global Supply Chains: The re-shoring of manufacturing jobs promised by Trump could have major consequences for global supply chains. While it may bring some jobs back to the U.S., this shift could displace workers in other parts of the world, particularly in developing economies where many manufacturing jobs are currently located. Furthermore, trade disruptions could hinder the smooth flow of raw materials and finished products, increasing costs for companies and consumers alike.

Global Diplomacy and Alliances: Shifting Dynamics

Trump’s approach to diplomacy is centered on a more transactional view of international relations, focusing on what he sees as fair and beneficial for the U.S. This could strain long-standing alliances, particularly in Europe, while creating new opportunities for unconventional partnerships with countries like Russia or even North Korea.

Europe and NATO: NATO has been a pillar of U.S. foreign policy for decades, but Trump’s criticism of NATO’s burden-sharing and calls for European countries to increase their defense spending could strain transatlantic relations. NATO’s role in deterring Russian aggression in Eastern Europe could be jeopardized, leaving vulnerable nations like Poland and the Baltic states exposed to potential threats. If the U.S. steps back from its commitments, Europe may need to assume greater responsibility for its own defense, potentially leading to the formation of new defense alliances or strategies.

The Middle East and Israel: Trump’s close relationship with Israel and his endorsement of its policies, particularly regarding Jerusalem, has already created tensions with Palestinian authorities and other Middle Eastern countries. While some countries in the region may appreciate Trump’s hardline stance on Iran and Islamic extremism, others could view it as undermining the prospects for peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem has heightened tensions and further complicated the peace process.

Asia and China: Trump’s stance on China will undoubtedly define the geopolitical future of Asia. His confrontational approach on trade and the South China Sea may inflame tensions with Beijing, resulting in trade tariffs or military standoffs. However, Trump’s unorthodox approach may also open new doors for dialogue, as evidenced by his meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The broader Indo-Pacific region, including Japan, South Korea, and India, will have to navigate this new reality, recalibrating their own foreign policies in response to U.S. leadership.

The Future of U.S. Global Influence

As Trump’s presidency unfolds, the world will be watching closely to see how the U.S. navigates the challenges of a changing global order. Will the U.S. retreat into isolationism, or will it maintain its role as a superpower with the ability to shape global events? The answers to these questions will impact not only the U.S. but the entire global community.

With an inward-facing policy, coupled with a growing nationalism and focus on domestic issues, Trump’s America could see its global influence diminish, giving rise to other powers, such as China or Russia, who may be more eager to assert their influence on the world stage. However, the success of Trump’s policies will depend largely on his ability to balance domestic and foreign priorities while managing the complex web of international relations that has long defined U.S. leadership. Only time will tell if Trump’s vision for America aligns with the broader world’s needs and realities.

COURTESY: Global News

References

1. ^
   • Mckenna, Peter (1999). “Canada, the United States, and the Organization of American States”. American Review of Canadian Studies. 29 (3): 473–493. doi:10.1080/02722019909481638. ISSN 0272-2011. this important and complex relationship,
   • “Reconcilable Differences: A History of Canada-US Relations”. Oxford University Press. Reconcilable Differences provides students with a contemporary look at the often complex relationship between Canada and the United States from 1763 to today, using the most recent scholarship available.
   • “Canada and the United States”. The Canadian Encyclopedia. June 11, 2020. “The Americans are our best friends whether we like it or not.” This statement, uttered in the House of Commons by Robert Thompson, the leader of the Social Credit Party early in the 1960s, perhaps best captures the essence of Canada’s complex relationship with its nearest neighbor.
   • Shull, Aaron; Tandt, Michael Den (December 13, 2021). “Is US President Joe Biden Good or Bad for Canada?”. Centre for International Governance Innovation. Canadians have a complex relationship with the United States.
   • “Dispute Resolution in the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement: One Element of a Complex Relationship”. McGill Law Journal. September 18, 2018.
   • Hale, Geoffrey (November 1, 2012). “So Near Yet So Far”. UBC Press. How do politicians, diplomats, and interest groups negotiate the tangled web of Canada–US relations? So Near Yet So Far provides an in-depth look at the multiple dimensions of this complex relationship..
   • “A Canadian Agenda for the USA: Obama and Beyond”. Canadian Global Affairs Institute. August 1, 2018. Complex and Complicated but Mutually-Beneficial Relationship Ours is a very complex relationship building, as John F. Kennedy remarked, on ties of history, geography, economics, security, and deep people-to-people relationships.
   • “”The U.S. Studies Program at The University of British Columbia will significantly increase our understanding of the United States and its institutions and policies through critical research, teaching, and public outreach, making a tremendous contribution to Canada’s complex relationship with the U.S.””. usstudies. January 16, 2013.
2. ^
   • Canada, Global Affairs (November 24, 2022). “Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy”. GAC. Retrieved October 21, 2023.
   • House, The White (February 24, 2021). “Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada in Joint Press Statements”. The White House. Retrieved October 21, 2023.
3. ^“The Canada–U.S. border: by the numbers”. cbc.ca. CBC/Radio-Canada. December 7, 2011. Retrieved March 23, 2016.
   • “The world’s longest border”. Archived from the original on July 4, 2015. Retrieved April 1, 2008.
4. ^ Cudmore, James. “Canadian military explored plan to fully integrate forces with U.S. – Politics – CBC News”. Cbc.ca. Retrieved January 4, 2017.
5. ^ Poushter, Jacob (October 6, 2015). “Canadians Satisfied with U.S. Relationship”. Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. Retrieved October 21, 2023.
6. ^ Brenan, Megan (March 21, 2023). “Canada, Britain Favored Most in U.S.; Russia, N. Korea Least”. Gallup, Inc. Retrieved October 21, 2023.
7. ^ “State of Trade 2024: Supply chains”. GAC. August 28, 2023. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
8. ^ “Canada-United States relations”. GAC. March 28, 2019. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
9. ^ “Canada-United States relations”. GAC. March 28, 2019. Retrieved December 20, 2024.
10. ^ “U.S. Relations With Canada”. United States Department of State. September 30, 2022. Retrieved December 20, 2024.
11. ^ “Canada and the United States”. The Canadian Encyclopedia. June 11, 2020. Retrieved December 20, 2024.
12. ^
    • Mingst, K.; Karns, M.P. (2019). The United Nations In The Post-cold War Era, Second Edition. Taylor & Francis. p. 63. ISBN 978-1-000-30674-3.
    • Massie, Justin (April 30, 2019). “Why Canada Goes to War: Explaining Combat Participation in US-led Coalitions”. Canadian Journal of Political Science. 52 (3). Cambridge University Press (CUP): 575–594. doi:10.1017/s0008423919000040.
13. ^ Jump up to:^a b c Massie, Justin (April 30, 2019). “Why Canada Goes to War: Explaining Combat Participation in US-led Coalitions”. Canadian Journal of Political Science. 52 (3). Cambridge University Press (CUP): 575–594. doi:10.1017/s0008423919000040. ISSN 0008-4239.
14. ^ Gutiérrez-Haces, Maria Teresa (November 6, 2018). Identity and Otherness in Canadian Foreign Policy. Collection internationale d’Études canadiennes | International Canadian Studies Series. University of Ottawa Press. pp. 231–250. ISBN 978-0-7766-2722-9.
15. ^ Carroll, Michael K (2016). “Peacekeeping: Canada’s past, but not its present and future?”. International Journal. 71 (1). [Sage Publications, Ltd., Canadian International Council]: 167–176. doi:10.1177/0020702015619857. ISSN 0020-7020. JSTOR 44631172. Retrieved February 28, 2024.
16. ^ “Canada’s Current Role in World” (PDF). Environics Institute for Survey Research.
17. ^ Jump up to:^a b Doran, Charles F.; Sewell, James Patrick (1988). “Anti-Americanism in Canada?”. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 497. [Sage Publications, Inc., American Academy of Political and Social Science]: 105–119. doi:10.1177/0002716288497001009. ISSN 0002-7162. JSTOR 1045764.
18. ^ Jump up to:^a b Kim Richard Nossal (2007). “Anti-Americanism in Canada,” in Brendon O’Connor, ed., Anti-Americanism: History, Causes, and Themes” (PDF). Oxford/Westport: Greenwood World Publishing}. pp. 59, 76.
19. ^ “War of 1812”. www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca. Retrieved October 25, 2023.
20. ^ John Herd Thompson, Canada and the United States: ambivalent allies (2008).
21. ^ Thomas Morgan, William (1926). “The Five Nations and Queen Anne”. Mississippi Valley Historical Review. 13 (2): 169–189. doi:10.2307/1891955. JSTOR 1891955.
22. ^ June Namias, White Captives: Gender and Ethnicity on the American Frontier (1993)
23. ^ Howard H. Peckham, The Colonial Wars (1965)
24. ^ Chard, Donald F. (1975). “The Impact of French Privateering on New England, 1689–1713”. American Neptune. 35 (3): 153–165.
25. ^ Shortt, S. E. D. (1972). “Conflict and Identity in Massachusetts: The Louisbourg Expedition of 1745”. Social History/Histoire Sociale. 5 (10): 165–185.
26. ^ Johnston, A. J. B. (2008). “D-Day at Louisbourg”. Beaver. 88 (3): 16–23.
27. ^ “The Loyalist Flag”. UELAC. December 6, 2021. Retrieved December 26, 2024.
28. ^ Mason Wade, The French Canadians, 1760–1945 (1955) p. 74.
29. ^ George W. Geib (1987). “The Old Northwest Under British Control, 1763–1783” and “Indiana A Part of the Old Northwest, 1783–1800”. Butler University. pp. 42–44.
30. ^ Thomas B. Allen, Tories: Fighting for the King in America’s First Civil War (2011) p. xviii
31. ^ Bradford Perkins, The First Rapprochement: England and the United States, 1795–1805 (1955)
32. ^ Rawlyk, George A. (1994). The Canada Fire: Radical Evangelicalism in British North America, 1775–1812. McGill-Queen’s Press. p. 122. ISBN 9780773512214. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
33. ^ Alan Taylor, The Civil War of 1812: American Citizens, British Subjects, Irish Rebels, & Indian Allies (2010).
34. ^ Stagg 2012, pp. 5–6.
35. ^ George F. G. Stanley, 1983, p. 32 ^{[full citation needed]}
36. ^ David Heidler, Jeanne T. Heidler, The War of 1812, pg4 ^{[full citation needed]}
37. ^ Tucker 2011, p. 236.
38. ^ Nugent 2008, p. 73, 75.
39. ^ Mark Zuehlke, For Honour’s Sake: The War of 1812 and the Brokering of an Uneasy Peace (2007) is a Canadian perspective.
40. ^ W.L. Morton, The Kingdom of Canada (1969) ch 12
41. ^ Cleves, Rachel Hope; Eustace, Nicole; Gilje, Paul; Hale, Matthew Rainbow; Morgan, Cecilia; Opal, Jason M.; Peskin, Lawrence A.; Taylor, Alan (2012). “Interchange: The War of 1812”. The Journal of American History. 99 (2). [Oxford University Press, Organization of American Historians]: 520–555. doi:10.1093/jahist/jas236. ISSN 0021-8723. JSTOR 44306807. Retrieved April 4, 2024.
42. ^ Wood, James A. (2010). Militia Myths (PDF). Vancouver: UBC Press. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-7748-1765-3. OCLC 473375581.
43. ^ Dunning, Tom (2009). “The Canadian Rebellions of 1837 and 1838 as a Borderland War: A Retrospective”. Ontario History. 101 (2): 129–141. doi:10.7202/1065615ar.
44. ^ Orrin Edward Tiffany, The Relations of the United States to the Canadian Rebellion of 1837–1838 (1905). excerpt and text search
45. ^ Cross, L.D. (2010). The Underground Railroad: The long journey to freedom in Canada. Amazing Stories. James Lorimer Limited, Publishers. p. intro. ISBN 978-1-55277-581-3.
46. ^ “Underground Railroad”. CBC. Retrieved April 4, 2024.
47. ^ Robin W. Winks, “The Creation of a Myth: ‘Canadian’ Enlistments in the Northern Armies during the American Civil War”, Canadian Historical Review, 1958 39(1): 24–40.
48. ^ Adam Mayers, Dixie & the Dominion: Canada, the Confederacy, and the War for the Union (2003)
49. ^ Jump up to:^a b c “Alabama Claims, 1862–1872”. GlobalSecurity.org.
50. ^ Mayers, Dixie & the Dominion pp 105–116.
51. ^ Congressional series of United States public documents. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1870. p. 71.
52. ^ David Keys (June 24, 2014). “Historians reveal secrets of UK gun-running which lengthened the American civil war by two years”. The Independent.
53. ^ Paul Hendren (April 1933). “The Confederate Blockade Runners”. United States Naval Institute.
54. ^ Sexton, Jay (2005). Debtor Diplomacy: Finance and American Foreign Relations in the Civil War Era, 1837–1873. Oxford University Press. p. 206. ISBN 9780199281039. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
55. ^ Theodore C. Blegen, “A Plan for the Union of British North America and the United States, 1866”. Mississippi Valley Historical Review 4.4 (1918): 470–483 online.
56. ^ Doris W. Dashew, “The Story of An Illusion: The Plan To Trade ‘Alabama’ Claims For Canada”, Civil War History, December 1969, Vol. 15 Issue 4, pp 332–348
57. ^ Shi, David E. (1978). “Seward’s Attempt to Annex British Columbia, 1865–1869”. Pacific Historical Review. 47 (2): 217–238. doi:10.2307/3637972. JSTOR 3637972.
58. ^ Shain, Yossi (1999). Marketing the American Creed Abroad: Diasporas in the U.S. and Their Homelands. Cambridge U.P. p. 53. ISBN 9780521642255. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
59. ^ David Sim, “Filibusters, Fenians, and a Contested Neutrality: The Irish Question and US Diplomacy, 1848–1871”. American Nineteenth Century History 12.3 (2011): 265–287.
60. ^ Robert M. Groceman, “Patriot War and the Fenian Raids: Case Studies in Border Security on the US Canada Border in the Nineteenth Century” (US Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth United States, 2017) online Archived November 13, 2020, at the Wayback Machine.
61. ^ Kurlansky, Mark (1998). Cod: A Biography of the Fish That Changed the World. Penguin. p. 117. ISBN 9781440672873. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
62. ^ Munro, John A. (1965). “English-Canadianism and the Demand for Canadian Autonomy: Ontario’s Response to the Alaska Boundary Decision, 1903”. Ontario History. 57 (4): 189–203.
63. ^ David G. Haglund, and Tudor Onea. “Victory without Triumph: Theodore Roosevelt, Honour, and the Alaska Panhandle Boundary Dispute”. Diplomacy and Statecraft 19.1 (2008): 20-41.
64. ^ Tucker, Spencer (2011). World War II at Sea: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. p. 142. ISBN 9781598844573.
65. ^ Baker, W. M. (1970). “A Case Study of Anti-Americanism in English-Speaking Canada: The Election Campaign of 1911”. Canadian Historical Review. 51 (4): 426–449. doi:10.3138/chr-051-04-04. S2CID 161614104.
66. ^ Clements, Kendrick A. (1973). “Manifest Destiny and Canadian Reciprocity in 1911”. Pacific Historical Review. 42 (1): 32–52. doi:10.2307/3637741. JSTOR 3637741.
67. ^ Ellis, Lewis E. (1968). Reciprocity, 1911: a study in Canadian–American relations. Greenwood.
68. ^ Paolo E. Coletta, The Presidency of William Howard Taft (1973) pp. 141–152.
69. ^ Hugh Ll. Keenleyside, Canada and the United States (1929) p 373. online
70. ^ Warren G. Harding & Stanley Park. The History of Metropolitan Vancouver. Vancouver.ca [1] Archived September 16, 2015, at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved June 11, 2017
71. ^ Richard N. Kottman, “Herbert Hoover and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff: Canada, A Case Study”, Journal of American History, Vol. 62, No. 3 (December 1975), pp. 609–635 in JSTOR
72. ^ McDonald, Judith; et al. (1997). “Trade Wars: Canada’s Reaction to the Smoot–Hawley Tariff”, (1997)”. Journal of Economic History. 57 (4): 802–826. doi:10.1017/S0022050700019549. JSTOR 2951161. S2CID 154380335.
73. ^ Carlson, Peter (December 30, 2005). “Raiding the Icebox”. The Washington Post.
74. ^ Bell, Christopher M. (1997). “Thinking the Unthinkable: British and American Naval Strategies for an Anglo-American War, 1918–1931”. International History Review. 19 (4): 789–808. doi:10.1080/07075332.1997.9640804.
75. ^ Arnold A. Offner, American Appeasement: United States Foreign Policy and Germany, 1933–1938 (1969) p. 256
76. ^ Galen Roger Perras, Franklin Roosevelt and the Origins of the Canadian-American Security Alliance, 1933–1945 (1998)
77. ^ Richard Jensen, “Nationalism and Civic Duty in Wartime: Comparing World Wars in Canada and America”, Canadian Issues / Thèmes Canadiens, December 2004, pp 6–10
78. ^ Rachel Lea Heide, “Allies in Complicity: The United States, Canada, and the Clayton Knight Committee’s Clandestine Recruiting of Americans for the Royal Canadian Air Force, 1940–1942”, Journal of the Canadian Historical Association, 2004, Vol. 15, pp 207–230
79. ^ Galen Roger Perras, “Who Will Defend British Columbia? Unity of Command on the West Coast, 1934–1942”, Pacific Northwest Quarterly, Spring 1997, Vol. 88 Issue 2, pp 59–69
80. ^ McNeil Earle, Karl (1998). “Cousins of a Kind: The Newfoundland and Labrador Relationship with the United States”. American Review of Canadian Studies. 28 (4): 387–411. doi:10.1080/02722019809481611.
81. ^ C. P. Stacey, Canada and the Age of Conflict: A History of Canadian External Policies. Volume 2, 1921–1948: The Mackenzie King Era (1982) pp 420–424.
82. ^ Hector Mackenzie, “Golden Decade (s)? Reappraising Canada’s International Relations in the 1940s and 1950s”. British Journal of Canadian Studies 23.2 (2010): 179–206.
83. ^ Don Munton and John Kirton, eds. Cases and Readings in Canadian Foreign Policy Since World War II (1992) pp 2–18.
84. ^ Stewart, Luke (2018). “‘Hell, they’re your problem, not ours’: Draft Dodgers, Military Deserters and Canada–United States Relations in the Vietnam War Era”. Études Canadiennes / Canadian Studies (85). Open Edition: 67–96. doi:10.4000/eccs.1479. S2CID 181777562.
85. ^ Bruce Muirhead, “From Special Relationship to Third Option: Canada, the U.S., and the Nixon Shock”, American Review of Canadian Studies, Vol. 34, 2004 online edition Archived March 23, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
86. ^ Lily Gardner Feldman, “Canada and the United States in the 1970s: Rift and Reconciliation”. The World Today 34.12 (1978): 484–492. online
87. ^ Hills, Carla A. “NAFTA’s Economic Upsides: The View from the United States”. Foreign Affairs 93 (2014): 122. online
88. ^ Wilson, Michael. “NAFTA’s Unfinished Business: The View from Canada”. Foreign Affairs 93 (2014): 128. online
89. ^ Marcus Lee Hansen, The Mingling of the Canadian and American Peoples. Vol. 1: Historical (1940)
90. ^ John Brebner, The Neutral Yankees of Nova Scotia: A Marginal Colony During the Revolutionary Years (1937)
91. ^ Marcus Lee Hansen, The Mingling of the Canadian and American Peoples. Vol. 1: Historical (1940); David D. Harvey, Americans in Canada: Migration and Settlement since 1840 (1991)
92. ^ Renee Kasinsky, “Refugees from Militarism: Draft Age Americans in Canada (1976)
93. ^ Jump up to:^a b Barkan, Elliott Robert (1980). “French Canadians”. In Thernstrom, Stephan; Orlov, Ann; Handlin, Oscar (eds.). Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups. Harvard University Press. p. 392. ISBN 0674375122. OCLC 1038430174.
94. ^ John J. Bukowczyk et al. Permeable Border: The Great Lakes Region as Transnational Region, 1650–1990 (University of Pittsburgh Press. 2005)
95. ^ J. Castell Hopkins, The Canadian Annual Review of Public Affairs: 1902 (1903), p. 327.
96. ^ Yves Roby, The Franco-Americans of New England (2004)
97. ^ Brookes, Alan A. (1980). “Canadians, British”. In Thernstrom, Stephan; Orlov, Ann; Handlin, Oscar (eds.). Harvard Encyclopedia of American Ethnic Groups. Harvard University Press. p. 191. ISBN 0674375122. OCLC 1038430174.
98. ^ Soloman Gabriel, Foreign Policy of Canada: A Study in Diefenbaker’s Years (1987).
99. ^ Potter, Mitch (November 18, 2013). “JFK’s war with Diefenbaker”. The Toronto Star. Retrieved June 12, 2018.
100. ^ Preston, Andrew (2003). “Balancing War and Peace: Canadian Foreign Policy and the Vietnam War, 1961–1965”. Diplomatic History. 27: 73–111. doi:10.1111/1467-7709.00340.
101. ^ Brean, Joseph (November 17, 2014). “‘I’ve been called worse things by better people: A history of Canadian PMs’ not-so-diplomatic one-liners”. National Post. National Post. Retrieved June 13, 2018.
102. ^ Grande, Peggy (2017). “8: Rawhide’s Ranch”. The president will see you now: my stories and lessons from Ronald Reagan’s final years (First ed.). New York. ISBN 9780316396455. OCLC 951764632.
103. ^ “The President’s News Conference With Prime Minister Jean Chretien of Canada”. The American Presidency Project. April 8, 1997. Retrieved May 16, 2018.
104. ^ Jehl, Douglas (February 24, 1995). “Clinton, in Talk to Canadians, Opposes Quebec Separation”. The New York Times.
105. ^ Drache, Daniel (2008). Big Picture Realities: Canada and Mexico at the Crossroads. Wilfrid Laurier U.P. p. 115. ISBN 9781554582334. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
106. ^ “Prime ministers and presidents”. CBC News. February 18, 2009.
107. ^ “Guest column: Time, Canada, to negotiate the Northwest Passage”. CBC News. Retrieved July 18, 2017.
108. ^ “Obama to visit Canada Feb. 19, PMO confirms – CTV News”. Ctv.ca. January 28, 2009. Archived from the original on June 6, 2009. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
109. ^ “Obama loses boozy bet with Harper”. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
110. ^ “Barack Obama follows through on Olympic beer bet”. canoe.ca. Archived from the original on February 25, 2014. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
111. ^ “Joint Statement by President Obama and Prime Minister Harper of Canada on Regulatory Cooperation”. whitehouse.gov. February 4, 2011. Retrieved February 26, 2011 – via National Archives.
112. ^ “PM and U.S. President Obama announce shared vision for perimeter security and economic competitiveness between Canada and the United States”. Office of the Prime Minister of Canada. February 4, 2011. Archived from the original on September 10, 2013. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
113. ^ “United States–Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) Joint Action Plan: Developing and implementing the Joint Action Plan”. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Prime Minister of Canada. December 7, 2011. Archived from the original on July 29, 2013.
114. ^ “Notice: Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) Over-the-Counter (OTC) Products: Common Monograph Working Group: Selection of a Monograph for Alignment”. Canada’s Action Plan. Government of Canada. January 10, 2013. Archived from the original on November 8, 2014. Retrieved February 15, 2013.
115. ^ “Canada–U.S. border agreement a good thing”. The Globe and Mail. Toronto. September 6, 2012.
116. ^ Jordan, Roger (November 20, 2015). “Trudeau promises Obama an enhanced Canada–US partnership”. World Socialist Web Site. International Committee of the Fourth International. Retrieved January 2, 2016.
117. ^ Harris, Kathleen (November 6, 2015). “Justin Trudeau ‘disappointed’ with U.S. rejection of Keystone XL”. CBC News. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved January 2, 2016.
118. ^ Hall, Chris (November 20, 2015). “Trudeau warmly embraced by Obama, but don’t expect concessions from U.S.” CBC News. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved January 2, 2016.
119. ^ Cullen, Catherine (November 17, 2015). “Justin Trudeau says Canada to increase the number of training troops in Iraq”. CBC News. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved January 2, 2016.
120. ^ “Barack Obama and Justin Trudeau set a date for the first meeting in Washington”. Toronto Star. The Canadian Press. December 28, 2015. Retrieved January 2, 2016.
121. ^ “Obama welcomes Trudeau to White House, ‘About time, eh?'”. thestar.com. March 10, 2016. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
122. ^ “Obama on growing friendship with Trudeau – ‘What’s not to like?'”. SWI swissinfo.ch. Archived from the original on March 18, 2016. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
123. ^ Harris, Kathleen (November 10, 2016). “Justin Trudeau invites Donald Trump to visit Canada during the call that marks ‘strong beginning'”. CBC News. Retrieved November 11, 2016.
124. ^ “It’s Trudeau’s move after Trump goes from tough talk to action with lumber duties: Chris Hall”. CBC News. Retrieved April 26, 2017.
125. ^ “Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks with United States President Donald Trump”. Prime Minister of Canada. April 25, 2017. Retrieved April 26, 2017.
126. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Trump Signs Trade Deal With Canada and Mexico”. The New York Times. January 29, 2020.
127. ^ Long, Heather. “The USMCA is finally done. Here’s what is in it”. Washington Post.
128. ^ Lea, Brittany De (November 30, 2018). “NAFTA 2.0: What to know”. FOXBusiness.
129. ^ Montes, Juan (February 13, 2019). “Strikes at Low-Wage Plants Signal Revival of Labor Demands in Mexico”. Wall Street Journal – via www.wsj.com.
130. ^ Swanson, Ana; Tankersley, Jim (January 29, 2020). “Trump Just Signed the U.S.M.C.A. Here’s What’s in the New NAFTA”. The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 2, 2020.
131. ^ “Under USMCA, Canada rolls with ‘new NAFTA'”. FreightWaves. July 1, 2020. Retrieved July 2, 2020.
132. ^ “‘Very dishonest & weak’: Trump lashes out at Trudeau following G7 summit”. thejournal.ie. Associated Press. June 10, 2018. Retrieved June 10, 2018.
133. ^ Watkins, Eli (June 10, 2018). “Trump’s top economic aide on Trudeau: ‘It was a betrayal'”. CNN. Retrieved June 13, 2018.
134. ^ Dangerfield, Katie. “Donald Trump slams Trudeau (again), says PM will cost Canadians a lot of money”. Global News. Retrieved June 13, 2018.
135. ^ “The US is picking a fight with Canada over a thawing Arctic shipping route”. Quartz. June 27, 2019.
136. ^ “Readout of President Joe Biden Call with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada”. The White House. January 22, 2021.
137. ^ “Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada Before Virtual Bilateral Meeting”. The White House. February 23, 2021.
138. ^ Vaillancourt, William (November 29, 2024). “Donald Trump Dines With Justin Trudeau at Mar-a-Lago After Tariff Threat”. The Daily Beast. Retrieved December 3, 2024.
139. ^ “Trump praises ‘very productive’ Mar-a-Lago meeting with Trudeau”. www.bbc.com. Retrieved December 17, 2024.
140. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Trudeau says Americans are realizing Trump’s tariffs on Canada would make life a lot more expensive”. ABC News. December 10, 2024.
141. ^ Jump up to:^a b “Trump’s apparent joke about Canada becoming 51st state draws range of reaction in B.C.” British Columbia. December 3, 2024. Retrieved December 10, 2024.
142. ^ Panetta, Alexander (December 17, 2024). “Trump trash talks Freeland in blast from her political past”. CBC News. Retrieved December 17, 2024.
143. ^ “Donald Trump says Canada becoming 51st U.S. state is ‘a great idea.’ Jean Charest calls the comment a ‘wake-up call'”. CTVNews. December 18, 2024. Retrieved December 18, 2024.
144. ^ Mingst, K.; Karns, M.P. (2019). The United Nations In The Post-cold War Era, Second Edition. Taylor & Francis. p. 63. ISBN 978-1-000-30674-3.
145. ^ Background note on Canada, U.S. State Department
146. ^ Lennox, Patrick (2009). At Home and Abroad: Canada–US Relationship and Canada’s Place in the World. UBC Press. p. 107. ISBN 9780774859073. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
147. ^ Canadian Peace Research Institute (2006). Peace Research. Canadian Peace Research and Education Association. Retrieved November 6, 2015. vol 38 page 8
148. ^ Webcast Panel Discussion Archived July 4, 2013, at the Wayback Machine “Ties That Bind” at the Pritzker Military Library on August 17, 2012
149. ^ Romero, Dennis; Alba, Monica (February 12, 2023). “U.S. shoots down the unidentified object in Canadian airspace”. nbcnews.
150. ^ See Congressional Research Service. Canada–U.S. Relations (Congressional Research Service, 2021) 2021 Report, by an agency of the U.S. Congress; Updated February 10, 2021.
151. ^ “Canada and the Arctic: The Issue of Northern Sovereignty | Wilson Center”. www.wilsoncenter.org. Retrieved September 7, 2023.
152. ^ Pharand, Donat (1989). “Canada’s Sovereignty Over the Northwest Passage”. Michigan Journal of International Law. 10 (2).
153. ^ says, Teknoloji Alemi (April 8, 2020). “The U.S. – Canada Northwest Passage Dispute”. Brown Political Review. Retrieved September 7, 2023.
154. ^ Herrmann, Thomas (June 27, 2019). “Shipping Through the Northwest Passage: A Policy Brief”. University of Washington. Retrieved September 7, 2023.
155. ^ Rothwell, Donald R. (1993). “The Canadian-U.S. Northwest Passage Dispute: A Reassessment”. Cornell International Law Journal. 26 (2).
156. ^ Charron, Andrea (2005). “The Northwest Passage: Is Canada’s Sovereignty Floating Away?”. International Journal. 60 (3): 831–848. doi:10.2307/40204066. ISSN 0020-7020. JSTOR 40204066.
157. ^ “A Classic Case of Deception — Central Intelligence Agency”. www.cia.gov. Archived from the original on February 19, 2013. Retrieved September 24, 2022.
158. ^ Gervais, Marty (March 28, 1981). “Iran Rescue: Our Bashful Heroes”. Windsor Star. p. C8. Retrieved February 24, 2013.
159. ^ “U.S. ‘friendly fire’ pilot won’t face court martial”. CBC News. July 6, 2004. Retrieved January 28, 2004.
160. ^ “Pilots blamed for ‘friendly fire’ deaths”. BBC News. August 22, 2002. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
161. ^ “CANADIAN NAVY TEAMS UP WITH U.S. CARRIER BATTLE GROUPS”. Department of National Defence. September 25, 2006. Archived from the original on April 5, 2007. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
162. ^ Cox, Wayne S.; Charbonneau, Bruno (2010). Locating Global Order: American Power and Canadian Security After 9/11. UBC Press. p. 119. ISBN 9780774859660. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
163. ^ Harper, Tim (March 22, 2003). “Canadians back Chrétien on war, poll finds”. Toronto Star. Retrieved January 12, 2009.
164. ^ Spector, Norman (November 20, 2006). “Clinton speaks on Afghanistan, and Canada listens”. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
165. ^ “Ministers Dion and Sajjan meet U.S. special envoy for Global Coalition to Counter ISIL”. Global Affairs Canada. October 6, 2016. Archived from the original on October 10, 2016. Retrieved October 10, 2016.
166. ^ “U.S. warns Canada against easing pot laws”. Cbc.ca. May 2, 2003. Archived from the original on March 24, 2009. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
167. ^ Canada, Health (January 23, 2020). “Cannabis laws and regulations”. aem. Retrieved March 13, 2021.
168. ^ “ETA Canada Visa Application – Apply for Canadian E-Visa Online”.
169. ^ Miller, Eric (2002). The Outlier Sectors: Areas of Non-free Trade in the North American Free Trade Agreement. BID-INTAL. p. 19. ISBN 9789507381287. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
170. ^ Giddens, David. “How Canada invented ‘American’ football, baseball, basketball and hockey”. CBC Sports.
171. ^ GMcKeating. “The Embassy of the U.S.A., Ottawa – United States – Canada Relations”. Archived from the original on May 27, 2010. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
172. ^ “Clean Air Markets”. August 12, 2014. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
173. ^ “Environment and Climate Change Canada – Air – Canada- United States Air Quality Agreement”. January 25, 2005. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
174. ^ “Exclusive Interview: Brian Mulroney remembers his friend Ronald Reagan”. News.nationalpost.com. February 4, 2011.
175. ^ Freed, Kenneth; Gerstenzang, James (April 6, 1987). “Mulroney Asks Reagan for Treaty on Acid Rain”. Los Angeles Times.
176. ^ Cassedy, Edward S.; Grossman, Peter Z. (1998). Introduction to Energy: Resources, Technology, and Society. Cambridge U.P. p. 157. ISBN 9780521637671. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
177. ^ “COMMISSION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION”. Archived from the original on May 11, 2015. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
178. ^ “Canada’s environment policy to follow the U.S.: Minister”. Archived from the original on July 6, 2011. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
179. ^ “Resources – Climate Prosperity”. Archived from the original on July 6, 2011. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
180. ^ Montgomery, Marc (October 1, 2015). “Canada has water, the U.S wants it”. RCI English. Radio Canada International. Retrieved April 4, 2022.
181. ^ Michael Rheta Martin (1978). Dictionary of American History: With the Complete Text of the Constitution of the United States. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 227. ISBN 9780822601241. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
182. ^ Murphy, Orville T. (1965). “The Comte De Vergennes, The Newfoundland Fisheries And The Peace Negotiation Of 1783: A Reconsideration”. Canadian Historical Review. 46 (1): 32–46. doi:10.3138/chr-046-01-02. S2CID 143808239.
183. ^ Golladay, V. Dennis (1973). “The United States and British North American Fisheries, 1815–1818”. American Neptune. 33 (4): 246–257.
184. ^ Alvin, C. Gluek Jr (1976). “Programmed Diplomacy: The Settlement of the North Atlantic Fisheries Question, 1907–12”. Acadiensis. 6 (1): 43–70.
185. ^ Kurkpatrick Dorsey (2009). The Dawn of Conservation Diplomacy: U.S.-Canadian wildlife protection treaties in the progressive era. University of Washington Press. p. 19ff. ISBN 9780295989792. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
186. ^ Matthew Carnaghan, Allison Goody, “Canadian Arctic Sovereignty” Archived March 4, 2012, at the Wayback Machine (Library of Parliament: Political and Social Affairs Division, January 26, 2006); 2006 news
187. ^ “Cellucci: Canada should control Northwest Passage”. CTV.ca. Archived from the original on February 22, 2011. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
188. ^ Histor!ca “Election of 1891: A Question of Loyalty” Archived April 6, 2008, at the Wayback Machine, James Marsh.
189. ^ Donald Creighton, John A. Macdonald: The Old Chieftain (1955) p. 497
190. ^ Council on Foreign Relations, Documents on American foreign relations (1957) Volume 9 p 558
191. ^ John F. Kennedy. Address Before the Canadian Parliament in Ottawa. The American Presidency Project.
192. ^ “The Embassy of the U.S.A., Ottawa – United States – Canada Relations”. Canada.usembassy.gov. Archived from the original on March 23, 2009. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
193. ^ From a speech by Trudeau to the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on March 25, 1969
194. ^ J. L. Granatstein and Robert Bothwell, Pirouette: Pierre Trudeau and Canadian Foreign Policy (1991) p. 51
195. ^ J. L. Granatstein and Robert Bothwell, Pirouette: Pierre Trudeau and Canadian Foreign Policy (1991) p. 195
196. ^ J. L. Granatstein and Robert Bothwell, Pirouette: Pierre Trudeau and Canadian Foreign Policy (1991) p. 71
197. ^ “The Rhetoric of 9/11: President George W. Bush – Address to Joint Session of Congress and the American People (9-20-01)”. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
198. ^ Frum, David (September 9, 2011). “David Frum: Why Bush didn’t mention Canada in his 9/20 speech”. National Post. Retrieved October 12, 2016.
199. ^ “Statement by Prime Minister Stephen Harper”. Office of the Prime Minister of Canada. January 20, 2009. Archived from the original on January 13, 2010. Retrieved January 21, 2009.
200. ^ “Obama declares love for Canada, banishes Bush era”. Reuters. February 19, 2009.
201. ^ “Remarks by President Biden in Address to the Canadian Parliament”. whitehouse.gov. March 24, 2023.
202. ^ Waugh, Basil (July 7, 2011). “Canadians and Americans are more similar than assumed”. News.ubc.ca. Archived from the original on September 1, 2020. Retrieved July 18, 2016.
203. ^ “Canadians and Americans think a lot alike”. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved September 8, 2019.
204. ^ “United North America”. Unitednorthamerica.org. Archived from the original on July 25, 2016. Retrieved July 18, 2016.
205. ^ “In U.S., Canada Places First in Image Contest; Iran Last”. Gallup.com. February 19, 2010. Retrieved February 26, 2011. published in 2010.
206. ^ Americans Give Record-High Ratings to Several U.S. Allies Gallup
207. ^ See Jacob Poushter and Bruce Drake, “Americans’ views of Mexico, Canada diverge as Obama attends ‘Three Amigos’ summit” Pew research Center February 19, 2014
208. ^ “US Image Report” (PDF). June 26, 2017. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 21, 2017.
209. ^ “World’s Approval of U.S. Leadership Drops to New Low”. Gallup. January 18, 2018. Retrieved August 18, 2018.
210. ^ Jump up to:^a b “America’s Image Abroad Rebounds with Transition from Trump to Biden”. June 10, 2021.
211. ^ David Stephen Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler, Encyclopedia of the War of 1812 (2004) p. 194
212. ^ J. L. Granatstein, Yankee Go Home: Canadians and Anti-Americanism (1997)
213. ^ Damien-Claude Bélanger, Prejudice and Pride: Canadian Intellectuals Confront the United States, 1891–1945 (University of Toronto Press, 2011), pp 16, 180
214. ^ Richard Collins, Culture, Communication, and National Identity: The Case of Canadian Television (U. of Toronto Press, 1990) p. 25
215. ^ David Meren, “‘Plus que jamais nécessaires’: Cultural Relations, Nationalism and the State in Canada–Quebec–France Triangle, 1945–1960”, Journal of the Canadian Historical Association, 2009, Vol. 19 Issue 1, pp 279–305,
216. ^ Jump up to:^a b Paula Ruth Gilbert, Violence and the Female Imagination: Quebec’s Women Writers (2006) p. 114
217. ^ Groseclose, Barbara S.; Wierich, Jochen (2009). Internationalizing the History of American Art: Views. Penn State Press. p. 105. ISBN 978-0271032009. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
218. ^ Glazov, Jamie (2002). Canadian Policy Toward Khrushchev’s Soviet Union. McGill-Queens. p. 138. ISBN 9780773522763. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
219. ^ Bumsted, J. M. (1999). Magocsi, Paul (ed.). Encyclopedia of Canada’s Peoples. University of Toronto Press. p. 197. ISBN 9780802029386. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
220. ^ Wennersten, John R. (2008). Leaving America: The New Expatriate Generation. Greenwood. p. 44. ISBN 9780313345067. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
221. ^ O’Connor, Brendon (2007). Anti-Americanism: Comparative perspectives. Greenwood. p. 60. ISBN 9781846450266. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
222. ^ Lipset, Seymour Martin (1990). Continental Divide: The Values and Institutions of the United States and Canada. Routledge. ISBN 9780415903097. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
223. ^ La Bossière, Camille R. (1994). Context North America: Canadian/U.S. Literary Relations. U. of Ottawa Press. p. 11. ISBN 9780776603605. Retrieved November 6, 2015.
224. ^ “Poll: Deep anti-Bush sentiment in Canada”. Arizona Daily Sun. October 20, 2004. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
225. ^ Wike, Richard; Poushter, Jacob; Zainulbhai, Hani (June 29, 2016). “2. Obama’s international image remains strong in Europe and Asia”. Pewglobal.org.
226. ^ “Who do Canadians want to vote for? Barack Obama”. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved April 27, 2016.
227. ^ “Canadians rooting for Hillary Clinton to become president: poll”. Global News. November 6, 2016.
228. ^ “Majority of Canadians don’t trust Trump: Poll”. Toronto Sun. Retrieved May 18, 2017.
229. ^ “Nearly 8 in 10 Canadians prefer Dems over Trump; Sanders, Biden most popular: poll”. CTV News. July 21, 2019.
230. ^ Canada, Global Affairs (April 29, 2021). “Embassy of Canada to the United States, in Washington, D.C.” GAC.
231. ^ “Embassy of the United States in Ottawa”.