logo
Canadian Ambassador: My Countrymen Are Angry and Frustrated With the U.S.

Canadian Ambassador: My Countrymen Are Angry and Frustrated With the U.S.

The Atlantic09-05-2025

Out of nowhere, for reasons mainly unknown (or unexplained), President Donald Trump has spent the early days of his second term insulting Canada and threatening its sovereignty, repeatedly suggesting that Canada should, and would, become an American state. He has stoked an on-again, off-again trade war, risking $900 billion in trade between the two countries. Canada is not blameless in the relationship; it spends paltry sums on its own defense, traditionally preferring to have the U.S. taxpayer absorb that burden. At a recent Atlantic event, I spoke with the Canadian ambassador to the United States, Kirsten Hillman, about Trump's aggressively anti-Canadian posture, and about her country's defense spending and trade policies.
Jeffrey Goldberg: My colleague Anne Applebaum recently said something that struck me: Donald Trump has achieved the impossible. He's made Canadians angry. Are you angry at the way Canada is discussed by President Trump?
Kirsten Hillman: Well, first, thank you for having me, in my polite Canadian manner.
I think Canadians have gone through a range of emotions: surprise, disbelief, confusion, sadness. But we, I think, are angry and frustrated. Angry sometimes because we are unsettled by a behavior, in particular with respect to the tariffs, that is having serious and immediate impacts on our well-being, economically. It's having big impacts here as well, but it's having impacts on our well-being, and Canadians are like, 'Well, can we just talk about this? Because we don't think this makes sense for you, for us. This isn't how good friends work together. Let's get down and talk about it.' And we will. But I think, yes, Canadians have become very seized of this issue, very seized indeed.
Goldberg: How do you explain Trump to your colleagues in Ottawa? Do you tell them, 'Oh, he means it. He literally wants to make Canada a state'? Do you take him seriously but not literally?
Hillman: One: I think that it's clear that the president of the United States and his administration are seeking to transform, in particular, their economic relationship with the world and, therefore, very much with us. We have the single biggest trading relationship with you, of any country in the world; we're your biggest customer. We buy more from you than China, Japan, the U.K., and France combined. It's a huge relationship, in all ways, not just economic. And the president and his administration are seeking to change that in ways that I think are quite consequential. And that is what it is. It will change, and therefore we will change, and therefore we will move into something different than we have been in for a few generations.
In terms of taking the president seriously, Donald Trump is the president of the United States—of course we take him seriously. He's a man with enormous influence and power over this country and the world. And so yes, we take it seriously.
Goldberg: Among the things Donald Trump told The Atlantic in a recent interview is that the U.S. is 'subsidizing' Canada 'to the tune of $200 billion a year.' True or untrue?
Hillman: Untrue.
Canada and the U.S. have the biggest bilateral trading relationship in the world. We sell, back and forth, in goods and services, $2.5 billion a day. In that relationship, for those who are looking at this through the perspective of balanced trade, which the president most certainly does, Canada has a trade deficit—in other words, we buy more than we sell—of manufactured goods, of electronics, certainly of services, stuff that Americans make and manufacture, the things that the president is very deeply concerned about. We buy more of that from you than you buy from us. And we are about one-tenth your size, just to put that in perspective. Another thing to put in perspective is, in manufactured products for the United States, more than half of what you manufacture in the United States, you export. So, selling your manufactured products to other countries is very important for the jobs that the president wants to create. And I think 77 percent of your economy runs on services. Again, we are a huge consumer of American services.
But a third of what we sell you is energy, and a lot of that is oil, and the Canadian oil that we sell is transported down to the Gulf Coast, where it's refined. It is, frankly, according to many Canadian experts, sold at a discount. That product is then refined and resold at three times the price into the United States, to third-country markets, keeping your manufacturing costs down, right? So yes, we sell you more energy than you sell us—that is absolutely true. And because a third of what we sell to you is energy, overall, we have a trade deficit, but it's about $60 billion, not 200. But if the United States wants to balance trade with Canada, the only way to really do that—we can't buy that much more from you; we are 41 million people; there's only so much we can buy. We will have to sell you less energy. And I don't actually think that's what the administration wants.
Goldberg: So, when he says we don't need anything that you make, that is untrue?
Hillman: I believe that the U.S. benefits from the Canadian-energy relationship, from our manufacturing relationship. We sell you critical minerals. We sell you uranium. We sell you all sorts of products that, if you weren't buying them from us, and if you don't have them in the ground, if you don't actually have them, then you're going to buy them from someone else. And is it going to be Belarus or Venezuela? Why wouldn't you buy it from us? An ally, a steadfast ally and friend and an ideologically aligned country that wants democracy and rule of law.
So what does need mean? Does it mean the United States could survive without affordable Canadian energy? Probably. Does it mean that the price of all sorts of things would go up for Americans? Yes, it does. Does it mean you might buy it from Venezuela? Probably. Is that the objective? I don't think so.
Goldberg: Does the president understand economics?
Hillman: I think the president has a very specific vision of what he's trying to do in America. I think there are a lot of people that don't feel that the means by which he is seeking to do that make sense or are traditional. But he's undaunted.
Goldberg: Can you explain the Canadian position on these tariffs?
Hillman: Tariffs are a tax on anything that's imported into the country. And they serve a variety of purposes. They raise revenue. They disincentivize imports—they make imports more expensive—and by disincentivizing imports, they can potentially, I suppose, incentivize domestic production. All of that works in the abstract and sometimes in the concrete. But again, coming back to Canada-U.S., we are deeply integrated over generations to be as efficient and competitive as possible as neighbors and partners by using the comparative advantages of each country. So, we are a commodity country. I mean, we do lots of great stuff other than commodities, but in our relationship with the United States, largely what we do—70 percent of what we sell to you—are inputs that you put into products that you manufacture in the United States, and often sell back to us.
Goldberg: What does an angry Canadian look like?
Hillman: Well, did you watch that last hockey game?
Goldberg: What does an angry Canadian look like off the ice? We could make jokes about stereotypes, but at a certain point, you are discovering a national pride that has not been right up there on the surface, the way it is with some other countries, including the United States. Your conservative candidate lost because he was seen as too close to MAGA ideology. Would you really reorganize your economy to pull away from the United States, at a certain point? I mean, if you can't get what you consider to be a good deal, what does the future look like?
Hillman: I think that it's a question of mitigation. We will seek to strengthen our own economy, and we're doing that already. We will seek to reinforce relationships that we have all over the world. We have a trade agreement with Europe. We have a trade agreement in Asia. Canadian businesses are already giving me anecdotes about selling their product into those markets.
Goldberg: You're a two-ocean country, just like we are.
Hillman: Right. So the products that are not as competitive down here because of the tariffs, they're going to go to these other countries. The U.S. buyers aren't happy, but the Canadian sellers are doing what they have to do for business. But of course, we want to get to a place of sort of stability and predictability with the United States.
Goldberg: But what if you can't?
Hillman: You know what? I think we can. This administration has changed the paradigm about the role that it wants to play and how it proceeds in trade and economic discussions or relationships. There's no question about that. And we have to adapt. But the American people, the businesses here in America, consumers here in America, are better off with a more stable relationship with your biggest customer.
Goldberg: Has Canada made any mistakes along the way in managing its relationship with the United States?
Hillman: That's a good question. I mean, we all make mistakes, don't we? I'm not sure I would characterize it as a mistake. I think that what Canada and probably all of America's allies around the world have to continually make sure we fully understand is that the U.S. is seeking to play a different kind of role, to do things differently. We have to actually act in a way that fully recognizes that, and relate to this administration from where they are, right? They want to transform the way the U.S. relates to the world. They will do that, and we will therefore have to do the same.
Goldberg: Let me ask one specific question on the subject of noneconomic relationships. Your military is very small. You have, I think, 68,000 active-duty soldiers, airmen—
Hillman: 70,000.
Goldberg: You don't spend even 2 percent of GDP on defense, although you're trying to move it slowly. Isn't there a legitimate reason for Americans to say, 'Canada, like many European countries, just hasn't pulled its NATO weight.' I mean, I'm wondering if that's something that stimulates some American resentment of Canada.
Hillman: I think that there's no question that not just the U.S., but all of our NATO allies are eager to see Canada spend more and faster. We have tripled our spending in the last 10 years or so, but yes, we can do more and we will do more. We just had an election yesterday. I anticipate that that will be something that our new prime minister will speak to soon. So yeah, I think that that's a fair point. But I guess the other thing that I would say—so, absolutely a fair point—where we are trying to really orient ourselves in our defense priorities, is toward things that we can do that are specific to Canada.
Goldberg: Under pressure, Canadian patriotism is becoming a thing. Do you feel differently now as a Canadian than you did six months ago?
Hillman: Not me. I represent Canada in a foreign land. And I am every single day reminded of my Canadian-ness. It's a big part of my job to understand that and to express who we are as a nation to you here in the United States. We're a deeply patriotic country with a strong sense of our values, who we are, and our hopes and dreams. But more to your beginning point, we're a quieter bunch about it. We are not born of revolution. We are born of negotiation. We are born of a much more gentle birth, if you will, than the one you encountered. And I think that—
Goldberg: You were kind of ambivalent about King George III. We get it. [ Laughing. ] 'There are good people on both sides.'
Hillman: Our founding nations are France, the U.K., but of course, our First Nations, our Native people, were there, who remain a huge part of our cultural reality and important to our cultural identity. So we're just a different country, but we're the less rowdy cousin at the Thanksgiving table.
Goldberg: Right.
Hillman: But not today. Not today.
Goldberg: Not today?
Hillman: Getting rowdier.
Goldberg: And my final question: When you met Donald Trump five years ago, when you first came to Washington to do this job, did you think that he was anti-Canadian? Did anything suggest that, oh, there's trouble afoot here?
Hillman: No, in fact, I met President Trump during the NAFTA renegotiation a few times and then over the course of the COVID crisis, when we had to slow down the border. And on the contrary, I think he is very supportive of Canada-U.S., very supportive of us. I don't think that President Trump is anti-Canada, just to be clear. I don't think President Trump is anti-Canada at all. And Canada's not anti–United States. We love you guys. You're our neighbors and our friends. I mean, you were talking about the military: We fought and died together in all the wars—First World War, Second World War, Korea, Afghanistan, all over the world. So there is no greater partnership. We have almost half a million people go between our two countries every day. Not, maybe, lately. But truly, we have an enormous amount of interconnection. If you ask me why I'm confident that we will figure this out, it's because of that. It's because of the half a million people almost every day; it's because of all of this. We have to—those of us who represent our people—our job is to figure it out, and we will. And I'm convinced that the president will be happy to do so, or will certainly do so.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ahmedabad Air India Plane Crash: Former Gujarat CM Vijay Rupani confirmed dead
Ahmedabad Air India Plane Crash: Former Gujarat CM Vijay Rupani confirmed dead

Business Upturn

time14 minutes ago

  • Business Upturn

Ahmedabad Air India Plane Crash: Former Gujarat CM Vijay Rupani confirmed dead

In a heartbreaking development, it has now been reportedly confirmed that former Gujarat Chief Minister Vijay Rupani was among the victims of the Air India flight AI171 crash near Ahmedabad on Wednesday, June 12. Parimal Nathwani, Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha, had earlier posted a condolence message on social media confirming the demise of former Gujarat Chief Minister Vijay Rupani in the tragic Air India plane crash near Ahmedabad. However, the tweet was subsequently deleted, sparking speculation and raising questions about the official status of Rupani's presence on the flight and his condition. Authorities have yet to release an official confirmation, and the situation remains unclear. Rupani, along with several members of his team, was onboard the Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft that was operating the Ahmedabad to London (Gatwick) route. The plane crashed shortly after takeoff from the Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport, falling in the Meghani Nagar area, causing a massive blaze and widespread destruction. Initial reports had speculated Rupani's presence on the passenger manifest, which was later verified by both state authorities and Air India sources. The confirmation marks a deep political and personal loss for the state and the country. Rupani, a prominent BJP leader, served as Gujarat's Chief Minister from 2016 to 2021. As per official data, the aircraft was carrying 242 individuals, including 53 British nationals, 169 Indian nationals, 1 Canadian, and 7 Portuguese citizens. The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) confirmed the plane gave a MAYDAY call moments after takeoff but failed to respond thereafter. The Indian government has initiated a high-level inquiry into the incident, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi has dispatched senior ministers to oversee the response efforts in Ahmedabad. More updates are awaited as rescue and recovery operations continue. Aditya Bhagchandani serves as the Senior Editor and Writer at Business Upturn, where he leads coverage across the Business, Finance, Corporate, and Stock Market segments. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to journalistic integrity, he not only contributes insightful articles but also oversees editorial direction for the reporting team.

Wright, Burgum tout LNG deals with Japanese company
Wright, Burgum tout LNG deals with Japanese company

E&E News

time18 minutes ago

  • E&E News

Wright, Burgum tout LNG deals with Japanese company

Leaders of the Trump administration's National Energy Dominance Council convened Wednesday to laud four deals between Japan's largest power generator and U.S. suppliers of liquefied natural gas. The agreements each involve JERA, which produces about 30 percent of Japan's electricity, and companies with LNG export projects in Texas and Louisiana. Through the new and pending deals, JERA plans to buy up to 5.5 million metric tons a year of the supercooled gas over 20 years. JERA is the 'single largest LNG buyer in the global market,' said Yukio Kani, the company's global CEO and chair, at the Department of Energy's James V. Forrestal Building. Advertisement There — before Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum — Kani praised the leadership of President Donald Trump and said the various agreements mark an 'even deeper commitment to the U.S. energy sector.' The Trump administration said the new deals are projected to support over 50,000 U.S. jobs and add more than $200 billion to U.S. gross domestic product — though not all of the deals are final.

National Guard authorized to detain ICE attackers, DHS says
National Guard authorized to detain ICE attackers, DHS says

Fox News

time18 minutes ago

  • Fox News

National Guard authorized to detain ICE attackers, DHS says

National Guardsmen deployed to Los Angeles have the authority to temporarily detain anti-ICE rioters in Los Angeles, the Department of Homeland Security says. President Donald Trump has deployed some 4,000 National Guardsmen to the city as the riots continue, but Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman said on Wednesday that there have only been a small number of cases where they have detained civilians. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin says the troops are on the ground to provide protection for ICE agents and other federal law enforcement groups. "If any rioters attack ICE law enforcement officers, military personnel have the authority to temporarily detain them until law enforcement makes the arrest," McLaughlin told Axios in a statement. Sherman told the Associated Press on Wednesday that about 500 National Guard troops have been trained so far to help agents carry out immigration operations in Los Angeles. Immigration officials have already circulated photos of soldiers from the National Guard providing security for Department of Homeland Security agents. He told the AP that over the past few days, National Guard soldiers have temporarily detained anti-ICE protesters, though there have not been many as of late because things have calmed down. Sherman also said the soldiers did not participate in the arrests or law enforcement activities. Instead, he added, they let the agitators go once police take them into custody. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has had a public feud with the Trump administration, accusing the president of having "commandeered" 2,000 of the state's National Guard members "illegally, for no reason" without consulting with California's law enforcement leaders. The Trump administration, meanwhile, said its ICE operations are aiming to get "criminal illegal immigrant killers, rapists, gangbangers, drug dealers, human traffickers and domestic abusers off the streets."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store