Conrad Black: Liberals, not Trump, are the true threat to Canadian sovereignty
With only a little over a week to go before the federal election, and with the debates out of the way, the wheels of the Liberal campaign for a fourth-straight term are finally starting to wobble on their axles. The providential political fantasy land in which the Liberals launched the campaign — the complete fraud that Canada's continued existence was being threatened by the United States — has receded. U.S. President Donald Trump and his senior colleagues are now processing a queue of 130 countries filing into Washington offering concessions to contribute towards the elimination of the completely unnecessary United States trade deficit of around $1 trillion. Another resounding Trump victory is in the making and Canada is not an inordinately large part of it, although there will be challenging negotiations.
When former prime minister Justin Trudeau told Trump that 25 per cent American tariffs on Canada would cause the Canadian economy to collapse, Trump put that assertion together with the shameful record of Canada as a freeloading passenger in its own military defence, which in practice is almost entirely outsourced to the great military power of the United States, and concluded that if Canada was afraid of tariffs and couldn't make a serious contribution to its own national defence, it would be better off within the United States. Having uttered a great deal of fatuous nonsense about Canada being a post-national country and a vanguard for the realization of the Beatles' song about a world without nationalities or religions, Trudeau leapt with considerable spontaneity into promoting Trump's comments as a genuine threat to the continued existence of Canada as a sovereign state. As this week's events and exchanges confirmed, it remains the core of the Liberal campaign.
Somehow, we are to be persuaded that the United States is threatening Canada's existence, which it is not. Nothing Trump or any other American leader has said or done in nearly 200 years could be plausibly misconstrued to be a threat by the United States against the independence of Canada. It must be said that grasping at this unfeasible straw and waving it around through an election campaign like a bloody shirt has been a historic act of imaginative desperation in the interests of political survival. Trump did us a favour by pointing out the ludicrous anomaly of our agricultural price supports, which should be abolished and replaced, as appropriate, with straight income supplements to some categories of farmers. Beyond that, he seeks only reciprocally equal tariffs with Canada.
In Quebec, the issue has been a double-edged sword because Quebec nationalists have tended to regard Canada as an artificial country: a patching together of English Canada with a French Canada that would rather be independent and only joined Confederation because independence was not feasible in 1867 and Confederation with the English-Canadians was preferable to continuing in a colonial status or for Quebec to take its chances as the sole linguistic outsider in an English-speaking continent north of Mexico. In their more narcissistic and grandiose moments, French Quebec nationalists have pretended that English Canada is just a buffer zone of America to anaesthetize Quebec and to delay its rightful destiny as an independent French nation. This fabrication of a counterfeit fear of an American takeover has at least had the virtue of frightening Quebec into a heightened recognition of Canada's virtues.
It is galling that this waving about of the Maple Leaf flag has been conducted by the same party that has falsely accused Canada of cultural genocide against its Native people, although cultural genocide is not recognized by the United Nations. What is meant is an assimilation that immigrants to a society speaking a language other than their own voluntarily seek, but which was never attempted to be inflicted upon the Aboriginal peoples of Canada. And this is the same government that has po-facedly acquiesced in the attempted suppression of the English language in Quebec. If cultural genocide existed as a concept, the Government of Quebec under successive political parties has been guilty of attempting it against the principal language of this country and continent.
Apart from this slowly departing miasma of a supposed vocation to defend the ramparts of Canada against the American hordes (who are naturally oblivious to these suspicions since they are unfounded), the Liberal campaign is to forget about the innumerable failures and competitive debacle of Canada under 10 years of Liberal government. 'I just arrived,' said Liberal Leader Mark Carney. We are to place our confidence in someone with a confected CV, of no electoral experience, a controversial record in the private sector, a man immensely well-paid and under-taxed, someone who holds himself out as a Davos socialist truckling to the deprived with money taxed from those who've earned it while padding around the country goading the president of the United States as 'the orange man,' as he falsely accuses him of coveting the takeover of this country.
In this process, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has emerged as the best candidate. He is young but not too young in the Justin Trudeau manner, is a seasoned seven-term MP and has practical proposals for eliminating the grotesque Liberal deficit and restoring the competitive edge of Canada and its desirability as a place of investment and bootstrapping up its status as a NATO ally. It is no fault of Carney's that his grasp of French is inadequate for the office he seeks. Not everyone has had the privilege of learning two languages. But Canada cannot have a prime minister who sounds in one of the official languages like an Englishman trying to navigate a menu in Romania.
Polls indicate that something like 30 per cent of Quebecers and citizens of Saskatchewan and Alberta will entertain the separatist option if the Liberals are reelected. After nearly 160 years as an autonomous state, this country is in sight of dissolution. This is the product of 10 years of Justin Trudeau's assault upon the oil and gas and other natural resources industries, counselled by Mark Carney, who will continue and escalate that war. A vote for the Liberals on April 28 is a vote to play Russian roulette with Canadian Confederation. Don't do it.
National Post
NP View: What Pierre Poilievre's massive rallies tell us about the election
Michael Taube: Are cracks developing in the Liberal strategy to lionize the progressive vote?
Hashtags

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

Miami Herald
8 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Why Ukraine Fell Down the Agenda at the NATO Summit
KYIV, Ukraine -- It was yet another grim sign for Ukraine. Russia's invasion of the country, the main topic of recent NATO summits, seemed to slide down the list of priorities at this year's annual meeting, which ended Wednesday. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine was not feted as in years past. He was not even the center of attention. Instead, President Donald Trump took main stage at The Hague, where the summit was held. Trump has made no secret of his disdain for NATO, his desire for members to stop relying too heavily on U.S. military support and his admiration of President Vladimir Putin of Russia. The summit's official declaration mentioned nothing about Ukraine joining the alliance, a long-standing point of discussion. A meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump yielded no specific promises about peace talks, although Trump said it was possible that the United States would send more Patriot air defense systems to Ukraine. 'Ukraine? What's Ukraine?' quipped Michael John Williams, a former adviser to NATO and now a professor of international relations at Syracuse University who attended the summit. 'The Europeans were saying how committed they are to Ukraine, especially the British, which is no surprise. But there was also really an attempt to keep controversial issues off the table. Ukraine wasn't the front-and-center discussion it has been.' Everyone at the two-day meeting seemed to be trying to please Trump. Zelenskyy even wore a black suit jacket to meet with him, a rare abandonment of his military-style outfit -- a fashion choice that has stuck in the craw of Trump and his allies in the past. The two leaders met for 50 minutes; it was their second meeting since their disastrous encounter at the White House in late February, when Trump publicly berated the Ukrainian president. Zelenskyy said the talks were 'long and meaningful' and thanked Trump. The U.S. president said Zelenskyy 'couldn't have been nicer' but added that they did not discuss a ceasefire. In recent weeks, the news has also been bad for Ukraine on the ground. Russia has intensified attacks on civilians. A barrage of ballistic missiles Tuesday killed at least 20 people and injured more than 300 others in the eastern Ukrainian city of Dnipro, according to Ukrainian officials. Aerial attacks Monday killed at least 10 people in Kyiv, Ukraine's capital, Ukrainian officials said. On Wednesday, the United Nations said the number of civilian casualties in the first five months of 2025 was nearly 50% higher than in the same period in 2024. Russia's summer offensive is gaining territory on the battlefield, with small groups of troops crossing into the Dnipropetrovsk region of eastern Ukraine for the first time in three years. Halyna Konovalova, 75, who lives in Druzhkivka, a town about 15 miles from the front lines in the Donetsk region, said recently that she worried the fighting would soon reach her. The distant booms of artillery already echoed every few minutes in her garden, where she grows parsley, cucumbers and tomatoes. 'We need help,' she said. 'Weapons to defend ourselves with. And what will we defend ourselves with if America won't help?' Last week, the crisis in the Middle East overshadowed Ukraine's pleas for help at the meeting of the Group of 7 major industrialized nations in Canada. Trump left the meeting early to deal with the Israel-Iran conflict and canceled a meeting with Zelenskyy. He also rejected the idea of issuing a joint statement in support of Ukraine. Many in Ukraine saw the U.S. decision to enter Israel's war with Iran, even briefly, by striking three Iranian nuclear enrichment sites Sunday as a sign that the United States was walking away from the war in Ukraine. The United States, once Ukraine's biggest supporter, has not announced any new military aid packages for the country in nearly five months -- since Trump took office. The military aid authorized under former President Joe Biden is expected to run out this summer. European allies have promised more help, and Ukraine is producing more of its own weapons, particularly drones. But those weapons are not enough to make up the gap, military experts say. 'America won't help us until we do something ourselves,' said Nataliia Babych, 37, who sells hot dogs in Kyiv and started crying when she talked about the missile and drone attack Monday. 'But we just don't have the strength right now.' 'People are dying every day,' she continued, 'both civilians and soldiers. I don't think America will help us at all, because now they're focused on Iran.' For months, Ukrainians had hoped that Trump would pressure Russia to end the war, which Moscow started with its full-scale invasion in February 2022. But after months of fits and starts, peace talks have stalled. Almost a month ago, on May 28, Trump gave Putin another two-week deadline when asked whether he believed the Russian leader truly wanted the war to end. That deadline came and went. One Ukrainian lawmaker, Oleksandr Merezhko, said he felt as if Trump was blaming Ukraine for the war that Russia started. Merezhko, who nominated Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize in November largely because of the president's promise to end the conflict, decided to rescind that nomination Monday. He said Trump had engaged in double standards by attacking Iran. 'He's decisive in reacting against the authoritarian regime in Iran, but he doesn't do anything like that with regard to Putin,' Merezhko said. 'To me, it's not consistent.' The contrast between last year's NATO summit in Washington and this week's in the Netherlands was striking. Last year, the United States and its European allies agreed that Ukraine should have an 'irreversible' path to membership of the alliance. At this year's summit, there was no such guarantee, likely because Trump opposes it. Mark Rutte, secretary-general of NATO, said in a news conference that the alliance continued to support Ukraine 'on its irreversible path to NATO membership.' But the official declaration only restated the alliance's 'enduring sovereign commitments to provide support to Ukraine, whose security contributes to ours.' Last year, Russian missiles killed at least 41 civilians in Ukraine the day before the summit began. Jens Stoltenberg, then NATO's secretary-general, explicitly condemned the 'horrendous missile attacks against Ukrainian cities, killing innocent civilians, including children.' The NATO-Ukraine Council, made up of heads of state and government, issued a statement that decried 'in the strongest possible terms Russia's horrific attacks on the Ukrainian people.' This year, NATO allies did not collectively condemn Russia's missile attack in Dnipro on Tuesday, the first day of the summit. In addition to the 20 fatalities and 300 injured people, the attack damaged almost 50 apartment buildings, 40 educational institutions, eight medical facilities and one train. Some countries, like France, did condemn the attack. On Monday, Rutte warned that Russia remains the alliance's biggest threat. On Wednesday, at a news conference, Trump said 'it's possible' that Putin had ambitions beyond Ukraine. But he declined to call the Russian president an enemy. 'I consider him a person that's, I think, been misguided,' Trump said. This year's summit ended with a commitment from most NATO allies to raise their military spending to 5% of their economic output over the next 10 years. Danylo Yakovlev, 30, a soldier in the Ukrainian army, said that if Kyiv fell, the next targets would be countries such as Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova and Poland. Europe needed to step up, he added. 'At the end of the day, we must rely first and foremost on ourselves,' Yakovlev said. 'We cannot assume anyone will come and save us. But at the same time, we need to make it absolutely clear to all other countries: If Ukraine falls, they could be next. And they may not even have a tomorrow.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025


Bloomberg
9 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
NATO's New Defense Spending Target Is a Big, Beautiful Number
NATO wrapped up two days of meetings in the Hague yesterday, with members of the security pact agreeing to one of President Donald Trump's longtime demands. Bloomberg TV's Oliver Crook examines the deal. Plus: America's top consumer-sentiment economist says the vibes are off. If this email was forwarded to you, click here to sign up.
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Vessels near Strait of Hormuz transmit unusual messages to prevent attacks
By Georgina McCartney and Arathy Somasekhar HOUSTON (Reuters) -Vessels near the Strait of Hormuz have been broadcasting unusual messages concerning nationality in a bid to avoid being attacked as doubts linger over the ceasefire between Israel and Iran, according to maritime risk analytics firm Windward and ship tracking data on Thursday. The signals have been used since conflict broke out between Israel and Iran early this month, which led the U.S. to strike Iranian nuclear sites. U.S. President Donald Trump brokered a ceasefire after 12 days of war but the maritime threat remains elevated, the Joint Maritime Information Center (JMIC) said. "The perception among shipowners is that due to the convoluted nature of shipping it's hard to know or ascertain clearly a chain of ownership to nationalities which may be under higher threat in shipping, namely the UK, U.S. and Israel," said Ami Daniel, chief executive officer of Windward. Fifty-five vessels transmitted 101 atypical messages across the Gulf and Red Sea from June 12-24, Windward said, including "China owned" and "Russian crude", in the hope of preventing attacks because those countries are less likely to be targeted than Western ships. Commercial maritime traffic surged 30% on June 24, the day after the ceasefire, according to the JMIC. Roughly a fifth of the world's fuel and oil consumption moves through the Strait of Hormuz. Vessels typically broadcast their destinations or say "For Orders". Occasionally, vessels also transmit messages such as "Armed Guards on Board" to deter pirates or other attacks. Unusual messages were almost only seen in the Red Sea before June 12, said Windward's Daniel. The Red Sea had been the focus of a series of attacks by Houthi rebels since the Israel-Gaza war broke out. "I've never seen it in the Persian Gulf," Daniel said. Panama-flagged container ship Yuan Xiang Fa Zhan, bound for Pakistan, was broadcasting "PKKHI all Chinese" on Thursday as it crossed the Strait of Hormuz, according to LSEG data. China-flagged supertanker Yuan Yang Hu was broadcasting "Chinese ship" on Thursday morning while crossing the Strait of Hormuz. Carrying crude oil from Saudi Arabia to China, the signal changed to "CN NBG", the Chinese Port of Ningbo-Zhoushan, once the vessel had cleared the Strait. Singapore-flagged container ship Kota Cabar was signalling "Vsl no link Israel" as it sailed through the Red Sea. JMIC also warned of electronic interference in the region affecting Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). A jammed GNSS can cause ships to go off course, increasing the risk of collision with other vessels or obstacles.