Oh, Canada!

Commenting yesterday featured a Canadian commenter having a bit of a meltdown regarding America generally and DJT specifically. I understand. These tumultuous times are upsetting and it’s hardly surprising when less powerful nations that find themselves in the path of history are dismayed at the prospect of being absorbed into—or positioned in closer subordination to—an empire. Consider this example of an extreme and probably irrational reaction of a country—smaller in size than Canada, but quite similar in population—that finds itself in a difficult position after choosing the wrong side in a geopolitical conflict, instead of embracing neutrality:

Philip Pilkington @philippilk

Poland is moving pretty quickly to being a rogue state. Everyone agrees that the @realDonaldTrump and @JDVance administration needs to leave Europe to the Europeans. But some rules need to be laid down to ensure some players don’t become unstable regimes.

1:43 PM · Mar 7, 2025

Living in the past is not a solution to changing geopolitical realities.

Canada may think that living next door to America is a difficult position to be in, but things could be much worse from a geopolitical standpoint—like, living between Germany and Russia. Still, I have to wonder whether most Canadians actually understand DJT’s point of view. That’s not a knock on Canadians—few Americans understand the dynamics at play here either. Consider two fundamental points.

First, while Canadians probably see themselves as non-threatening with regard to America, the reality is that Canada is by far the major remaining outpost of a traditionally hostile empire—that is, hostile to America: The British Empire. No, most Americans don’t get that either—I mean, how many Americans are even aware of the Monarchy of Canada? As such, however, and whether or not Canadians like it or have chosen this status or not, Canada is also part of the shadow Anglo-Zionist Empire that includes the American Deep State, and which is implacably opposed to the American republican ideals that DJT claims to champion in his MAGA agenda. Independence of America from the toils of the British Empire goes hand in hand with revision of the relationship of America to the rest of the North American continent.

Second, DJT sees the world dividing into imperial zones of influence. That view is almost certainly correct, and is the reality that lies behind the concept of Multi-Polarity that is championed by certain other rising imperial powers. In such a world, America would be foolish indeed if it failed to reconsider its position. In such a world, North America is an extremely logical entity as a unity in one form or another. Consider Facts About The American Heartland. The Great Lakes system and the combined American Heartland waterways and the St. Lawrence Seaway are unparalleled economic resources anywhere else in the world. In world trade terms, a union of North America also makes extreme sense.

DJT may frame his position with regard to Canada, publicly, in terms of Canada being more of a taker than a giver in its relationship with America, but the reality is simply that these global considerations are things that Trump isn’t going to raise in public—not explicitly. Trump is struggling with serious adverse forces on a global battlefield and is trying to position America for success in the new world order that’s taking shape. Having a huge, de facto hostile, neighbor is not helpful in that regard—not to mention the logical nature of a greater North American union.

With that in mind, consider what this author—whom I take to be a non-American—has to say about the continuing, and largely non-public, negotiations between America and Canada. This seems so important to me that I’m including the full text. Please pay attention not only to economic considerations but also intel matters, which impact directly on .

---

ChrisO_wiki @ChrisO_wiki

1/ Donald Trump may be aiming to annex the Great Lakes – and possibly south-eastern Ontario in a maximalist scenario – and kick Canada out of NORAD, judging by first-hand accounts of talks between Canada and the Trump Administration.

2/ The New York Times reports on first-hand accounts of what has been said in trade talks between the US and Canada, which led to Canadian PM Justin Trudeau saying publicly on March 4th that he believed Trump wanted to annex Canada.

3/ According to the NYT, Trump has told Trudeau that "he did not believe that the treaty that demarcates the border between the two countries was valid and that he wants to revise the boundary. He offered no further explanation."

4/ "Mr. Trump also mentioned revisiting the sharing of lakes and rivers between the two nations, which is regulated by a number of treaties, a topic he’s expressed interest about in the past."

5/ Afterwards, according to the Canadian Toronto Star newspaper, Trudeau was overheard saying on a hot mic that "Trump came armed with a list of trade and other irritants, and pointed to a 1908 treaty between the United States and Great Britain that established …

6/ … the 49th parallel as the boundary between the U.S. and the then-Dominion of Canada, suggesting it could be erased."

7/ US Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick told Canadian finance minister Dominic LeBlanc that Trump "had come to realize that the relationship between the United States and Canada was governed by a slew of agreements and treaties that were easy to abandon."

8/ Specifically, three issues have been raised:

"He wanted to eject Canada out of an intelligence-sharing group known as the Five Eyes that also includes Britain, Australia and New Zealand.

Five Eyes and other military/intel matters is/are a relic of the Anglo-Zionist Empire. They are entirely dispensable in the context of a new North American order and sphere of influence.

9/ "He wanted to tear up the Great Lakes agreements and conventions between the two nations that lay out how they share and manage Lakes Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie and Ontario.

10/ "And he is also reviewing military cooperation between the two countries, particularly the North American Aerospace Defense Command [NORAD].

11/ "In subsequent communications between senior Canadian officials and Trump advisers, this list of topics has come up again and again, making it hard for the Canadian government to dismiss them."

12/ The reference to the 1908 treaty is somewhat odd, as the National Post has pointed out: it was only one of a series of 11 treaties under which the US, Britain and Canada defined the border and divided up the management of boundary rivers and lakes.

13/ However, Trump has repeatedly brought up the issue of water, claiming falsely that there is a "very large faucet" in British Columbia that could be "turned on" to supply water to California. (He may be referring to the Columbia River, which is governed by a US-Canada treaty).

Fresh water is and always will remain the most precious resource on earth. As explained in the link above, no other continent on earth has anything to compare with the North American system of navigable lakes and rivers so conveniently located in the Heartland for human, industrial, agricultural, and transport use.

14/ Most of Canada's freshwater is in fact in the Great Lakes and the St Lawrence River. The Great Lakes (with the exception of Lake Michigan) are divided roughly down the middle between the US and Canada, which controls about 60% of their surface area.

15/ For the US to control more of the Great Lakes, it would either have to redraw the boundary along the north shores of Lakes Superior, Huron, Erie, and Ontario, or annex south-eastern Ontario, including Toronto, to gain total control of Lakes Erie and Ontario and most of Huron.

16/ Kicking Canada out of NORAD would be even less practical – most of the North Warning System to spot incoming missiles is in Canada, as are all of the Forward Operating Locations where fighter interceptors are based. However, practicality no longer seems to be a concern. /end

Impractical to kick Canada out of NORAD? Uh, not if there’s a major rearrangement of relations. In any event, all this remains open to resolution through negotiation, through deal making.

By the way, I’d bet dollars to donuts—you decide the relative value—that the Russians and Chinese are fully aware of all the above, and are not necessarily opposed to Trump’s vision. The key for Trump is breaking free from the Anglo-Zionist Empire.

For further and closely related reading—very brief excerpts only, ripped from the overall context:

WELCOME TO IMPERIAL AMERICA

Finally, the third and most important element of the American Sphere Doctrine is the United States’ growing emphasis on its own hemisphere. The emerging polycentric system has reinforced the Western Hemisphere’s position as the cornerstone of America’s empire, with the Atlantic Ocean as its natural strategic backyard — the domain it must secure at all costs, where its dominance remains non-negotiable.

The new direction originates from the Oval Office. Donald Trump’s pronouncements, often dismissed as erratic and uncouth, suggest an intuitive grasp of the evolving global strategic landscape. His calls to acquire Greenland from Denmark hint at the growing strategic relevance of the Arctic and its proximity to the Atlantic, as well as an unstated intention to revive the GIUK Gap as a geopolitical boundary for America’s redefined sphere of influence.

The emerging American Sphere Doctrine thus reflects America’s pragmatic recognition of its own constraints. The United States, while still immensely powerful, is no longer omnipotent. The days of unchallenged global hegemony are over, and Washington must adapt and make difficult choices about where to invest its resources. Reducing its global military footprint to consolidate its own sphere, compelling allies and partners to share the burden, and securing the Western Hemisphere and its critical chokepoints are not acts of retreat but of deliberate strategic realignment. In a world of rising powers and greater geopolitical uncertainty, the empire must fortify its core if it hopes to endure.

As the world fretfully watches this “Great Transition”, defenders of the old order must brace for a new reality. By abandoning moralism and ideology for interest, the American empire has found renewed vigor. Washington is no longer concealing its superior power — it is openly asserting it. The logic driving this change, though vexing to many, is sound. By redefining its ambitions and recalibrating its commitments, the United States is positioning itself not to retreat but to survive — and even thrive — in the new age of empires. The question now is not whether this shift can be reversed, but how the new Imperial America will wield its power — and what it will demand from those living in its shadow.