Alberta West News: Mark Carney's attempts to appease Trump is just leading to more bullying

Mark Carney's Approach to Trump: The Appeasement Critique

Your observation that Mark Carney's attempts to appease Donald Trump are leading to more bullying rather than concessions reflects a growing debate in Canadian politics and among Western allies about how to effectively deal with Trump's aggressive trade tactics.

The Pattern of Concessions Without Gains

Since becoming Canadian Prime Minister in March 2025, Carney has made a series of significant concessions to the Trump administration while securing few tangible benefits for Canada. Despite campaigning on an "elbows up" approach and promising "dollar-for-dollar" retaliation against Trump's tariffs, Carney's actual strategy has proven far more accommodating:bbc+3

Major Concessions Made:

Lifted most retaliatory tariffs on US goods by September 2025, removing counter-tariffs on approximately $60 billion worth of American productscbc+1
Abandoned the Digital Services Tax targeting US tech giants, which Trump had demanded be scrappedwinnipegsun+2
Scaled back from "dollar-for-dollar" retaliation, acknowledging this was unrealistic given the economic size disparitytorontosun
Offered promises of Canadian private sector investments totaling a trillion dollars in the US over five yearscbc+1

What Canada Has Received:

No removal of punishing US tariffs on steel (50%), aluminum (50%), and automobiles (25%)doanegrantthornton+2
Continued escalation of tariffs, including new 10% duties on lumber (bringing the total to 45%), plus 25% tariffs on furniture, and planned duties on heavy trucks and pharmaceuticalsnationalpost+2
Only 77-85% of Canadian goods now enter the US tariff-free under CUSMA/USMCA, down from nearly complete access beforepm+2

The Bullying Escalation

The evidence suggests that Carney's conciliatory approach has indeed emboldened rather than satisfied Trump. Each time Carney makes a concession, Trump responds with additional demands or new tariffs:cbc+2

Timeline of Escalation:

February 2025: Trump imposes 25% tariffs on most Canadian goods, 10% on energyblakes+1
March 2025: After initial Canadian retaliation, Trump adds tariffs on steel, aluminum, and autosdoanegrantthornton+1
September 2025: Carney lifts most counter-tariffs to restart negotiationscanada+2
October 2025: Trump increases lumber tariffs by 10% and announces new furniture and truck dutiescbc+2

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has repeatedly criticized this pattern, noting that "tariffs on Canada are twice as high as they were when you were elected, promising to eliminate them". Even Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, while praising Carney's rapport-building with Trump, acknowledged the approach involves "depositing credits into the bank account" without immediate returns.youtubecbc+1

The Domestic Political Backlash

Carney faces mounting pressure from multiple directions as his strategy appears ineffective:

Provincial Leaders:
Ontario Premier Doug Ford has become increasingly frustrated, stating: "I am sick and tired of sitting and rolling over. We need to fight back". Ford advocates for aggressive retaliatory tariffs if negotiations fail, arguing that playing "nice in the sandbox" while Trump continues imposing tariffs is unacceptable.chch+2

Public Opinion:
According to Angus Reid polling from October 2025, Canadian confidence in Carney's ability to deliver a good trade deal has declined from 43% in September to just 35%. Most Canadians (57%) believe Carney's positive tone toward Trump is merely "optics" and won't benefit dealmaking. Notably, 34% of those lacking confidence attribute it to Trump's unpredictability rather than Carney's competence (24%).angusreid

Opposition Attacks:
Poilievre has accused Carney of "pathetically" offering "subservience" to Trump and making concessions without securing anything in return. The Conservative leader sent Carney a scathing letter before his October White House meeting demanding "no more losing".cbc+1youtube

The Case for Confrontation: What Western Allies Are Considering

Your suggestion that Western allies should "take on Trump head-on" aligns with growing sentiment among analysts and some policymakers that appeasement strategies are fundamentally flawed when dealing with Trump's approach.blaynehaggart+2

The Academic Critique:
Several scholars have argued forcefully against Carney's strategy. Political scientist Blayne Haggart contends that seeking "comprehensive" agreements with an "obviously untrustworthy negotiating partner" representing a potentially authoritarian state makes no sense. He argues that "agreements with authoritarians aren't worth the paper they're written on" and that Trump seeks "domination, which is the new foundation of North American governance".blaynehaggart

The Coordinated Response Argument:
Experts increasingly advocate for coordinated action among US allies rather than individual appeasement. A joint analysis notes that "appeasement or fragmented, go-it-alone retaliation would be a strategic error" that would "only embolden further protectionism". The argument is that acting individually allows Trump to pick off allies one by one through bilateral pressure, whereas a unified front would impose prohibitive costs on American isolationism.cepr+1

Examples of Potential Collective Action:

The EU, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and South Korea forming a strategic coalition to impose proportional, unified counter-tariffscepr
Coordinated messaging that frames retaliation as temporary measures designed to bring the US back to rules-based tradecepr
Using the EU's Anti-Coercion Instrument—described as a "bazooka"—to restrict US access to intellectual property rights, data services, and public procurementpolitico
Targeted boycotts of American products from Trump-supporting states like Kentucky bourbon or Florida orange juicepolitico

Europe's Awakening:
European allies are increasingly moving toward strategic independence rather than accommodation. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has declared his priority to be "achieving independence from the USA," while Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen stated: "In three to five years, we need to be totally able to defend ourselves in Europe". The EU is accelerating trade diversification with Japan, South Korea, Canada, and South America's Mercosur bloc.cfr+1

Why Appeasement Fails With Trump

Several factors explain why conciliatory strategies appear counterproductive with Trump:

1. Transactional, Not Relational: Trump views relationships transactionally rather than as long-term partnerships. Concessions are interpreted as weakness inviting further demands, not as goodwill gestures deserving reciprocation.winnipegsun+1

2. Unpredictability as Strategy: Trump's erratic approach—announcing, reversing, and increasing tariffs at unpredictable intervals—makes negotiated settlements unstable. Any agreement can be unilaterally abandoned, as he demonstrated by "ripping up" the USMCA/CUSMA that he himself negotiated.youtubenytimes+2

3. Political Incentives: Trump gains domestic political capital by appearing tough on trade partners. Making concessions to him provides him with victories he can showcase to his base without requiring him to moderate.hilltimes+1

4. Structural Power Imbalance: The US economy is ten times larger than Canada's, creating asymmetric dependence. Without collective action, individual countries lack sufficient leverage to impose meaningful costs on the US for its violations of trade agreements.torontosun+1

The Alternative: Strategic Confrontation

A confrontational approach advocated by critics of appeasement would involve:

Immediate Actions:

Reinstating and expanding retaliatory tariffs targeting politically sensitive US exports and districtsglobalnews+2
Coordinating with European and other allies to present a united front rather than seeking individual accommodationscfr+2
Implementing non-tariff barriers such as regulatory discrimination against US productspolitico
Restricting US access to critical Canadian resources like energy and mineralswikipedia

Medium-Term Strategy:

Accelerating trade diversification away from US dependence through agreements with Europe, Asia, and Latin Americaopencanada+2
Building "Buy Canadian" campaigns and reducing reliance on American goodsopencanada+1
Investing in east-west trade corridors and infrastructure to access global markets beyond the USopencanada
Developing independent defense capabilities to reduce security dependence on Washingtoncfr+1

Long-Term Vision:
Carney himself has acknowledged that "the old relationship we had with the United States, based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperation, is over". The question is whether to accept this reality through managed decline via appeasement, or to actively pivot toward a more sovereign, resilient position through confrontation and diversification.politico+2

The Risks of Both Approaches

Appeasement Risks:

Emboldening further demands and tariff escalationscbc+2
Undermining Canada's negotiating credibility with other partnershilltimes+1
Political vulnerability as voters perceive weaknesschch+2
Setting precedents for authoritarian coercion that damage the rules-based international orderblaynehaggart+1

Confrontation Risks:

Short-term economic pain from escalating trade warthedeepdive+2
Potential for Trump to impose even more punitive measurescnbc+1
Disruption to integrated supply chains built over decadeswikipedia+1
Political costs if voters blame the government for economic hardshipcbc

Conclusion: The Appeasement Trap

The evidence from Carney's first seven months as Prime Minister suggests that your assessment has merit: his conciliatory approach has yielded minimal tangible benefits while Trump continues to escalate tariffs and demands. As Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre noted sarcastically: "Give me a trillion dollars and even I will say something nice"—referring to Trump's praise of Carney after the Prime Minister promised massive private sector investments.nationalpost+4youtube

The fundamental problem, as critics argue, is that Trump's trade strategy is not genuinely about negotiating mutually beneficial agreements but about extracting maximal concessions through coercive leverage. In this context, each Canadian concession simply establishes a new baseline from which Trump demands more, creating a ratchet effect that steadily erodes Canadian interests.atlanticcouncil+2

A confrontational approach centered on coordinated action with European and other allies offers a different logic: by imposing costs on American unilateralism that exceed the benefits Trump derives from tariffs, it could force a return to rules-based trade. At minimum, it would position Canada and other allies to build greater economic and security independence from an increasingly unreliable partner.cepr+3

The historical parallel to 1930s appeasement that some analysts draw is sobering. As China's Commerce Ministry spokesperson stated in a different context: "Appeasement cannot bring peace and compromise cannot earn one respect". Whether this wisdom applies to trade negotiations with Trump remains contested, but the current trajectory suggests that Carney's strategy of accommodation is failing to achieve its stated objectives of tariff relief and stable trade relations.bbc+3

Alberta West News

Welcome To Alberta West Online News

Blog Archive

About Me

Friday, October 17, 2025

Mark Carney's attempts to appease Trump is just leading to more bullying