Can Doug Ford win over America? Or will he do more harm than good?

Article content

Sending Ford as a trade ambassador was risky, of course, but could he be Carney’s conservative foil?

Article content

“I think it’s possible,” said Sands, noting that the prime minister noticed how “Ford was a politician who had a populist ear, not unlike Trump, and whose message on Fox News or whatever outlet might cut through and convince some Americans that Canada’s not the enemy.”

Article content

Lawrence Herman, senior fellow at the C.D. Howe Institute who specializes in international trade and investment law, thinks Ford’s messaging has been good for Canada.

Article content

“It shows that Canada can speak with the same voice,” he said, noting that Ford is preferable to Alberta Premier Danielle Smith or Conservative MP Jamil Jivani “spreading the word about how Canada isn’t unified.”

Article content

Ford’s meetings, by all accounts, were positive, but his planned reception with Ross Perot Jr. at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Monday was cancelled — officially due to a scheduling conflict. The rumour, however, is that Trump’s team pressured the Chamber into cancelling what would have been a flashy moment for Ford with U.S. industry leaders.

Article content

Article content

Still, Ford had his meetings and TV interviews, sharing plugs for building a “Fortress North America,” a term used by both Ford and Carney in recent weeks. 

Article content

Essentially, the fortress idea is a growth plan centred on the principle that “economic security is national security,” which aims to create more jobs, lower prices and strengthen continental security. To get there requires renewing CUSMA and eliminating the Section 232 tariffs on steel, aluminum and auto.

Article content

“There’s going to be more jobs, more opportunities for everyone,” Ford told reporters on Tuesday. 

Article content

“We’re just sending a positive message. Let’s get this deal done.”

Article content

Keller said he believes the Fortress messaging is code for “no tariffs,” meaning that Canada may be willing to bend on its deal with China or on other issues so long as the sectoral tariffs disappear.

Article content

“I think that they’re throwing out trial balloons saying, ‘OK, if we go to Fortress North America, we’ll walk away from the Chinese, but then there’s got to be a lot in it for us.’”

Article content

But tariff elimination is unlikely, trade watchers say.

Article content

“I feel like tariffs are here to stay,” said Inu Manak, senior fellow for international trade at the Council on Foreign Relations, “and that it’s going to be challenging to have nothing on the books.”

Article content

Article content

“For consistency, USTR has to apply tariffs to Canada and Mexico, as a policy that tariffs apply to everyone.”

Article content

But how that’s implemented, Manak explained, is key. 

Article content

The proposed remedy from USTR for Section 301 tariffs over forced labour issues, for example, offers the same exemptions as the IEEPA tariffs did for CUSMA-compliant goods, meaning that more than 80 per cent of trade would remain tariff-free.

Article content

The real question, Manak said, is “how do they structure some of the exemptions to the tariffs that are coming down the line to ensure that they do not impact Canada’s trade with the United States?”

Article content

Whatever happens with the tariffs, a CUSMA renewal may not be in the cards. 

Article content

Neither Manak nor Eurasia Group’s Graeme Thompson believes a renewal is coming anytime soon. 

Article content

Thompson pointed to the likely zombification of the trade agreement.

Article content

“It looks quite unlikely,” he said, “that there will be a trilateral agreement … where all three leaders sit down and sign a document that agrees to extend USMCA for the statutory 16 years.”

Article content

That would lead to a process of annual reviews.

Article content

“If you’re in a constant negotiation where there’s no real certainty that the terms you’ve signed up to are, in effect, permanent,” said Thompson, “then there’s not really a trade deal as such. It’s dead.”