America's designs on annexing Canada have a long history − and record of political failures
The president's rhetoric about making Canada 'the 51st state' may seem to project confidence, a 21st-century vision of manifest destiny, a belief in the United States' right and obligation to expand.
Trump is not the first American leader to dream of northern expansion. To me, a historian of early U.S.-Canadian relations, these designs suggest not power, but weakness and simmering divisions inside the United States.
Even before independence, social conflict helped turn American eyes northward. Throughout the 18th century, England's Colonial population in North America doubled every 25 years. Successive generations of Colonists along the Eastern Seaboard had to compete with each other, and with Indigenous people, for resources, arable land and trade.
These unhappy, land-hungry Colonists clamored for expansion, instigating a series of wars against both the French and Spanish empires for control of the northeastern half of the continent, culminating in the French and Indian War, from 1754 to 1763.
While these Colonists were animated by their thirst for expansion, they had little else unifying them. Many Americans today are familiar with the 'Join, or Die' cartoon Ben Franklin printed, featuring a segmented snake with each section representing one of the Colonies. However, few realize that it was not crafted during the Revolution to unite Colonists against Britain, but in 1754, to rally divided British Colonists in their war against France.
Britain finished conquering Canada in 1763, but the empire never fully supported Colonial expansion northward. In the 1750s and 1760s, British troops forcibly removed French colonists from Acadia in Nova Scotia and recruited thousands of Colonists from neighboring New England to move north. These settlers had long imagined the region rich in fishing and timber to be a land of opportunity. But disillusioned by the financial cost of sustaining their settlements, many of these Colonists returned to New England by the early 1770s.
Attempts to settle other lands ceded by France were no more successful. Fearful that Colonists might provoke a costly war with Indigenous people, Parliament issued the Proclamation of 1763, which attempted to protect native land by discouraging Colonial expansion westward. Many Colonists turned against Britain in response, especially those like George Washington, who had speculated in the land west of the Appalachian Mountains.
In the earliest months of the Revolution, the Continental Congress authorized an American invasion of British-occupied Quebec. In a letter addressed to 'Friends and Brethren' of Canada, Washington himself implored Canadians to join invading troops. 'The Cause of America, and of Liberty, is the Cause of every virtuous American Citizen,' he wrote. 'Come then, ye generous Citizens, range yourselves under the Standard of general Liberty.'
But at home, Colonists were far from united in their rebellion. Historians estimate that around 20% of the white Colonial population, more than 500,000 people, remained loyal to Britain, and an even larger number hoped to remain neutral.
The difficult realities of conquest also turned many soldiers against the invasion of Canada. In late October 1775, nearly a quarter of the underfed and overworked troops under the command of soon-to-be turncoat Benedict Arnold abandoned their arduous journey through interior Maine toward Canada. The soldiers who carried on prayed these deserters 'might die by the way, or meet with some disaster, Equal to the Cowardly dastardly and unfriendly Spirit they discover'd in returning Back without orders.'
The more resilient troops who reached Quebec were emphatically defeated by British forces in December, making Washington skeptical of any future efforts to attack Canada.
Following American independence, tens of thousands of loyal Colonists sailed north to Canada, determined to build British colonies that would become what one of these refugees called 'the envy of the American States.' Their presence on the contested northern border was an unsettling reminder to the new American nation about the power Britain still exerted on the continent.
Conflict with Britain over land and trade in the early 1800s reopened old divisions among Americans. Virginia Congressman John Randolph expressed his frustrations with renewed calls for a northern invasion. 'We have but one word, like the whip-poor-will, but one eternal monstrous tone,' an exasperated Randolph noted, 'Canada! Canada! Canada!'
The debate over Canada was one of many issues dividing the nation, and as President James Madison would later explain, he hoped that war would help unify a polarized nation. His gamble paid off, but only after opponents from New England flirted with the idea of secession to negotiate their own end to conflict.
When the popular editor and columnist John O'Sullivan called for the annexation of Texas and war with Mexico in 1845, he also suggested the annexation of Canada would naturally follow. The anti-expansionist response united pacifists, abolitionists and a variety of religious and literary figures, helping deepen the divides that would lead to the Civil War.
Trump's posturing has served to unite Canadians and revive Canadian nationalism. In the U.S., most people seem to understand the practical hurdles of adding a new state or dismiss the idea altogether.
One example of annexation talk from the 20th century, however, might serve as a warning to Trump, showing how aggressive rhetoric toward Canada has led to political defeat. In 1911, a bill creating free trade with Canada passed Congress with the support of President William Taft, despite objections from protectionists in both parties.
In an attempt to have the agreement defeated in the Canadian Parliament, U.S. opponents from both sides of the aisle attempted to stir popular sentiment against the U.S. in Canada. Champ Clark, the Democratic speaker of the House and a front-runner for the presidential nomination in 1912, seized on the moment.
'I hope to see the day when the American flag will float over every square foot of the British North American possessions, clear to the North Pole,' Champ proclaimed on the House floor. William Stiles Bennet, a Republican, proposed a resolution that would authorize the president to begin negotiations for annexation.
Their approach to defeating the trade agreement worked, at least in Canada. In the general election of September 1911, worried Canadian voters ousted the Liberal Party, which had supported free trade, and the new Conservative majority rejected the agreement.
Back home, however, the plan backfired. Woodrow Wilson, not Clark, secured the Democratic nomination in 1912 and would go on to defeat both the incumbent Taft and former President Theodore Roosevelt. The bluster led not to success and victory, but loss and defeat.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: G. Patrick O'Brien, University of Tampa
Read more:
Canada and Greenland aren't likely to join the US anytime soon – but 'GrAmeriCa' is a revealing thought experiment
Trudeau taps out: How Trump's taunts and tariff threats added to domestic woes confronting Canada's long-standing PM
If US attempts World Bank retreat, the China-led AIIB could be poised to step in – and provide a model of global cooperation
G. Patrick O'Brien does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNN
29 minutes ago
- CNN
Hong Kong pro-democracy activists granted asylum in Australia and Britain
Immigration Asia China UKFacebookTweetLink Follow A Hong Kong pro-democracy activist and a former lawmaker who are wanted by the city's authorities have been granted asylum in Great Britain and Australia, respectively. Tony Chung, an activist who was imprisoned under Hong Kong's sweeping national security law, and Ted Hui, a former lawmaker who was facing trial for his role in anti-government protests in 2019, both announced over the weekend that they have received asylum in the countries where they now live. They are among dozens of activists on the run from Hong Kong authorities. Civil liberties in the city have been greatly eroded since Beijing in 2020 imposed a national security law essentially criminalizing dissent in the former British colony. Both Beijing and Hong Kong have hailed the security law as bringing stability to the financial hub. Hui, who fled Hong Kong in December 2020, is part of a group of overseas activists who are targeted by police bounties of up to 1 million Hong Kong dollars ($127,800). The former lawmaker is now working as a lawyer in Adelaide. He announced on Facebook on Saturday that he and his family have been granted protection visas. 'I express my sincere gratitude to the Government of Australia – both present and former – for recognising our need for asylum and granting us this protection,' Hui wrote. 'This decision reflects values of freedom, justice, and compassion that my family will never take for granted.' While in Hong Kong, Hui had been an outspoken pro-democracy lawmaker. He was also known for disrupting a legislative session after he threw a rotten plant in the chamber to stop a debate of the national anthem bill — controversial legislation making it illegal to insult the Chinese national anthem. He was subsequently fined 52,000 Hong Kong dollars ($6,600) for the act. Chung, who had advocated for Hong Kong's independence, was sentenced to almost four years in prison for secession and money laundering in 2020. He was released on a supervision order, during which he traveled to Japan, from where he fled to Britain seeking asylum. In a post on social media platform Threads on Sunday, he expressed his excitement at receiving refugee status in Britain along with a five-year resident permit. He said that despite his challenges over the past few years, including persistent mental health problems, he remains committed to his activism. British and Australian authorities didn't immediately comment on the activists' statuses. Hong Kong's government did not comment directly on the cases but issued a statement on Saturday condemning 'the harbouring of criminals in any form by any country.' 'Any country that harbours Hong Kong criminals in any form shows contempt for the rule of law, grossly disrespects Hong Kong's legal systems and barbarically interferes in the affairs of Hong Kong,' the statement read.

36 minutes ago
California Democrats' push for redistricting faces a tight legislative deadline
SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- California Democrats are making a partisan push to draw new congressional districts and reshape the state's U.S. House representation in their favor, but to pull it off, lawmakers returning to the Capitol on Monday face a tight deadline and must still win voters' approval. Limits on federal immigration raids and advancing racial justice efforts are also among the hundreds of proposals the Legislature will vote on before the session ends in September. Here's a look at what's ahead for lawmakers in their last month in session: Lawmakers are expected to spend the first week back after summer break advancing the new congressional map at the urging of Gov. Gavin Newsom. The new map aims at winning Democrats five more U.S. House seats in the 2026 midterms and is a direct response to President Donald Trump's efforts to redraw Texas' map to help Republicans retain their control of the U.S. House. So far, California is the only state beyond Texas that has officially waded into the redistricting fight, although others have signaled they might launch their own efforts. California Democrats, who hold supermajorities in both chambers, unveiled the new map Friday. State lawmakers in both houses will hold hearings on the map and vote to put it to voters in a special election in November. If voters agree, the new map would replace the one drawn by an independent commission that took effect in 2022. The new map would only take effect if Texas or another Republican-led state moves forward with their own mid-decade redistricting and would remain through the 2030 elections. Democrats said they will return the map-making power to the commission after the next census. The current effort is to save democracy and counter Trump's agenda, they said. State Republicans vowed to legally challenge the effort, arguing that voters in 2010 already voted to remove partisan influence from how maps are drawn. State lawmakers are contending with how to balance meeting the state's climate goals with lowering utility and gas prices. Those discussions have been colored by the planned closures of two oil refineries that account for nearly 18% of the state's refining capacity, according to air regulators. The Legislature will have to respond to those concerns when it debates whether to reauthorize the state's cap-and-trade program, which is set to expire in 2030. The program allows large greenhouse gas emitters to buy allowances from the state equivalent to what they plan to emit. Over time, fewer allowances are made available with the goal of spurring companies to pollute less. A large portion of revenues from the program goes into a fund that helps pay for climate, affordable housing and transportation projects. The program also funds a credit that Californians receive twice a year on their utility bills. Newsom wants lawmakers to extend the program through 2045, commit $1 billion annually from the fund for the state's long-delayed high-speed rail project and set aside $1.5 billion a year for state fire response. Many environmental groups want the state to update the program by ending free allowances for industrial emitters, ensuring low-income households receive a higher credit on their utility bills, and ending or strengthening an offset program that helps companies comply by supporting projects aimed at reducing planet-warming emissions. Lawmakers will vote on a host of proposals introduced in response to the escalation of federal immigration crackdowns in Los Angeles and across the state. That includes legislation that would make it a misdemeanor for local, state and federal law enforcement officers to cover their faces while conducting official business. The proposal makes exceptions for officers wearing a medical grade mask, coverings designed to protect against exposure to smoke during a wildfire, and other protective gear used by SWAT officers while performing their duties. Proponents said the measure would boost transparency and public trust in law enforcement while also preventing people from trying to impersonate law enforcement. Opponents, including law enforcement, said the bill would disrupt local undercover operations without addressing the issue because California doesn't have authority over federal agents. Another proposal would require law enforcement to identify themselves during official business. State Democrats are also championing several proposals that would limit immigration agents without warrants from entering school campuses, hospitals and homeless or domestic violence shelters. A first-in-the-nation state task force released a report in 2023 with more than 100 recommendations for how the state should repair historic wrongdoings against Black Californians descended from enslaved people. The California Legislative Black Caucus introduced a reparations package last year inspired by that work, but the measures did not include direct payments for descendants, and the most ambitious proposals were blocked. The caucus introduced another package this year aimed at offering redress to Black Californians. One of the bills would authorize universities to give admissions priority to descendants of enslaved people. Another would ensure 10% of funds from a state program providing loans to first-time homebuyers goes to descendants. A third would allow the state to set aside $6 million to fund research by California State University on how to confirm residents' eligibility for any reparations programs. Some reparations advocates say the proposals fall short. They say many of the measures are ways to delay implementing one of the task force's key recommendations: direct compensation to descendants of slavery.

an hour ago
South Korean and US militaries begin summertime drills
SEOUL, South Korea -- South Korea and the United States began their annual large-scale joint military exercise on Monday to better cope with threats by nuclear-armed North Korea, which has warned the drills would deepen regional tensions and vowed to respond to 'any provocation' against its territory. The 11-day Ulchi Freedom Shield, the second of two large-scale exercises held annually in South Korea, after another set in March, will involve 21,000 soldiers, including 18,000 South Koreans, in computer-simulated command post operations and field training. The drills, which the allies describe as defensive, could trigger a response from North Korea, which has long portrayed the allies' exercises as invasion rehearsals and has often used them as a pretext for military demonstrations and weapons tests aimed at advancing its nuclear program. In a statement last week, North Korean Defense Minister No Kwang Chol said the drills show the allies' stance of 'military confrontation' with the North and declared that its forces would be ready to counteract 'any provocation going beyond the boundary line.' Ulchi Freedom Shield comes at a pivotal moment for South Korea's new liberal President Lee Jae Myung, who is preparing for an Aug. 25 summit with U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington. Trump has raised concerns in Seoul that he may shake up the decades-old alliance by demanding higher payments for the American troop presence in South Korea and possibly reducing it as Washington shifts its focus more toward China. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula remain high as North Korea has brushed aside Lee's calls to resume diplomacy with its war-divided rival, with relations having soured in recent years as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un accelerated his weapons program and deepened alignment with Moscow following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. 'What's needed now is the courage to steadily take steps toward easing tensions, grounded in a firmly maintained state of ironclad security readiness,' Lee said during a Cabinet meeting on Monday. South Korea also on Monday began a four-day civil defense drill involving thousands of public workers, often scheduled alongside the allies' summertime military exercises. Seoul's previous conservative government responded to North Korean threats by expanding military exercises with the United States and seeking stronger U.S. assurances for nuclear deterrence, drawing an angry reaction from Kim, who last year renounced long-term reconciliation goals and rewrote the North's constitution to label the South a permanent enemy. In his latest message to Pyongyang on Friday, Lee, who took office in June, said he would seek to restore a 2018-inter-Korean military agreement designed to reduce border tensions and called for North Korea to respond to the South's efforts to rebuild trust and revive talks. The 2018 military agreement, reached during a brief period of diplomacy between the Koreas, created buffer zones on land and sea and no-fly zones above the border to prevent clashes. But South Korea suspended the deal in 2024, citing tensions over North Korea's launches of trash-laden balloons toward the South, and moved to resume frontline military activities and propaganda campaigns. The step came after North Korea had already declared it would no longer abide by the agreement. When asked whether the Lee government's steps to restore the agreement would affect the allies' drills, the South's Defense Ministry said Monday that there are no immediate plans to suspend live-fire training near the Koreas' disputed western maritime border. While the allies have postponed half of Ulchi Freedom Shield's originally planned 44 field training programs to September, U.S. military officials denied South Korean media speculation that the scaled-back drills were meant to make room for diplomacy with the North, citing heat concerns and flood damage to some training fields. Dating back to his first term, Trump has regularly called for South Korea to pay more for the 28,500 American troops stationed on its soil. Public comments by senior Trump administration officials, including Undersecretary of Defense Elbridge Colby, have suggested a push to restructure the alliance, which some experts say could potentially affect the size and role of U.S. forces in South Korea. Under this approach, South Korea would take a greater role in countering North Korean threats while U.S. forces focus more on China, possibly leaving Seoul to face reduced benefits but increased costs and risks, experts say. In a recent meeting with reporters, Gen. Xavier Brunson, commander of U.S. Forces Korea, stressed the need to 'modernize' the alliance to address the evolving security environment, including North Korea's nuclear ambitions, its deepening alignment with Russia, and what he called Chinese threats to a 'free and open Indo-Pacific.'