So the Peace Arch pretty much stands for nothing then, and when Canada flat out says hell no to all demands, what occurs next?
Afterall it's sovereignty that's been battled out on only whitepaper and pen for now. When the pens drop, what would continental defence truly mean then?
Instead of viewing it as a poison that is killing our relationship, look at it as a perception issue. Our relationship with America has always existed as an Overton window, where a range of emotional responses and practical alignments were the norm, even if the reality encompassed a much wider range of perspectives. Trump has managed to shift the Overton window to a much more negative place, which will be most obvious as a generalized view, and will still encompass many individual examples of positivity. Overton windows normally shift slowly, and it's perfectly reasonable to be dismayed that one man and his administration managed to shift the window so abruptly, but we have to remember that the window does not limit the range of perspectives and relationships involved, and the sheer amount of positivity we have built over generations will not disappear overnight, or even over the course of 4 years. Once the wrecking ball has left the room, the generations of good relations will exert its influence again, and the window will slowly move back towards positivity again. Only a continued political death spiral (which seems entirely possible at this point...) will prevent it.
There is a generational change happening within the US DOD. Cool heads are not cool anymore and many of the best have been shown the door. What subordinate is going to buck his boss and say that the allies are actually good buddies? The thought process is modified and will be that way for a long time. It's time to look at the relationships that still exist and those that still matter. If that Venn diagram slice is smaller than it was and shows signs of getting smaller, why waste time thinking about it getting bigger? It's a long way off and Canada has many things to do to assert sovereignty and solidarity with the D7 (see note below). Canada is now part of the problem and not part of the solution in the eyes of the USA. Give them a smart salute and move on.
If they read that article, the Global South would feel there is no place for them at the table. Are there any other African, Asian, Central American, or South American Nations that could be added to the D7, or are they all flawed democracies or autocracies? I think you would not want to leave out any democracy.
Absolutely right. Brazil, Indonesia and the Philippines would add almost a billion people. India is already a billion. 1 out of those 4 is a pretty solid democracy, and the others could be convinced that the advantages of democracy and alignment with the D7. I think there was a throw away line in his essay that others would be welcomed as long as there was broad agreement with democratic principles.
Healthy relationships are those that lean towards interdependence, whereas the U.S.-Canadian relationship heavily skews towards Canadian dependence on U.S. as far as all things defence and security is concerned. Perhaps, developing a range of sovereign Canadian capabilities and even developing our critical minerals supply chains where the offtake remains in Canada would help rebalance the relationship over the long-term. Perhaps investing now for a better balanced relationship over the long-term is worth the fraught relations today, which frankly, has little potential to improve regardless short of handing over the NWP (given we are essentially already handing over our raw critical minerals). All to say, we can only improve relations on the side of Canadian interests if we have things to bring to the table to negotiate with. Otherwise, good relations is when we put up and shut up.
So the Peace Arch pretty much stands for nothing then, and when Canada flat out says hell no to all demands, what occurs next?
Afterall it's sovereignty that's been battled out on only whitepaper and pen for now. When the pens drop, what would continental defence truly mean then?
Instead of viewing it as a poison that is killing our relationship, look at it as a perception issue. Our relationship with America has always existed as an Overton window, where a range of emotional responses and practical alignments were the norm, even if the reality encompassed a much wider range of perspectives. Trump has managed to shift the Overton window to a much more negative place, which will be most obvious as a generalized view, and will still encompass many individual examples of positivity. Overton windows normally shift slowly, and it's perfectly reasonable to be dismayed that one man and his administration managed to shift the window so abruptly, but we have to remember that the window does not limit the range of perspectives and relationships involved, and the sheer amount of positivity we have built over generations will not disappear overnight, or even over the course of 4 years. Once the wrecking ball has left the room, the generations of good relations will exert its influence again, and the window will slowly move back towards positivity again. Only a continued political death spiral (which seems entirely possible at this point...) will prevent it.
There is a generational change happening within the US DOD. Cool heads are not cool anymore and many of the best have been shown the door. What subordinate is going to buck his boss and say that the allies are actually good buddies? The thought process is modified and will be that way for a long time. It's time to look at the relationships that still exist and those that still matter. If that Venn diagram slice is smaller than it was and shows signs of getting smaller, why waste time thinking about it getting bigger? It's a long way off and Canada has many things to do to assert sovereignty and solidarity with the D7 (see note below). Canada is now part of the problem and not part of the solution in the eyes of the USA. Give them a smart salute and move on.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen
https://thenextmove.substack.com/p/the-democratic-world-needs-a-d7?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=x56vk
If they read that article, the Global South would feel there is no place for them at the table. Are there any other African, Asian, Central American, or South American Nations that could be added to the D7, or are they all flawed democracies or autocracies? I think you would not want to leave out any democracy.
Absolutely right. Brazil, Indonesia and the Philippines would add almost a billion people. India is already a billion. 1 out of those 4 is a pretty solid democracy, and the others could be convinced that the advantages of democracy and alignment with the D7. I think there was a throw away line in his essay that others would be welcomed as long as there was broad agreement with democratic principles.
Healthy relationships are those that lean towards interdependence, whereas the U.S.-Canadian relationship heavily skews towards Canadian dependence on U.S. as far as all things defence and security is concerned. Perhaps, developing a range of sovereign Canadian capabilities and even developing our critical minerals supply chains where the offtake remains in Canada would help rebalance the relationship over the long-term. Perhaps investing now for a better balanced relationship over the long-term is worth the fraught relations today, which frankly, has little potential to improve regardless short of handing over the NWP (given we are essentially already handing over our raw critical minerals). All to say, we can only improve relations on the side of Canadian interests if we have things to bring to the table to negotiate with. Otherwise, good relations is when we put up and shut up.