Commentary
Canada’s trade war with the United States has revived an old temptation in Ottawa: If Washington is no longer a reliable economic partner, perhaps Canada should turn increasingly toward China. The frustration is understandable. But Canada cannot escape economic dependence on Washington by creating a more dangerous dependence on Beijing.
The numbers demonstrate the scale of the challenge. In 2025, approximately 72 percent of Canadian merchandise exports went to the United States, compared with only about 4.4 percent to China. Two-way merchandise trade with China was nevertheless approximately $125 billion, making it an important economic relationship that Canada should expand where doing so serves our interests.
But trade diversification and strategic realignment are two very different things. The United States is not simply Canada’s largest customer. It is our neighbour, our principal military ally, our partner in NORAD, a fellow NATO member, and the country with which our economy, infrastructure, and continental security are more deeply integrated than with any other nation.
Geography matters. Canada shares the world’s longest international border with the United States, while our economies are connected by roads, railways, pipelines, electricity grids, and supply chains that have developed over generations. No political disagreement, even one as serious as the current trade confrontation, changes the fact that our national security and economic prosperity are inseparably connected to the North American continent.
China occupies an entirely different strategic position. It is an authoritarian state, a military competitor of the United States, and an increasingly assertive Pacific power. Beijing’s close relationships with Russia, Iran, and North Korea place it alongside countries whose strategic interests frequently conflict with those of Canada and our principal allies.
Canada should therefore resist the argument that deteriorating relations with Washington somehow make Beijing a natural alternative. China can be an important trading partner without becoming a strategic partner. Indeed, Canada’s own experience demonstrates that Beijing is willing to use trade, investment, and market access as instruments of political leverage when diplomatic relations deteriorate.
Critical minerals illustrate the danger particularly well. Canada possesses enormous deposits of minerals required for advanced manufacturing, defence, batteries, and emerging technologies. Developing those resources should be a national economic priority, but allowing Chinese state-linked companies to acquire strategic control over Canadian critical-mineral production would simply exchange one vulnerability for another.
The same principle should apply to telecommunications, artificial intelligence, advanced computing, ports, energy infrastructure, and defence-related technologies. Canada should welcome investment and international commerce, but national-security considerations must prevail where strategic assets are involved. Economic diversification should increase Canadian sovereignty, not diminish it.
China’s extraordinary industrial strength makes this distinction even more important. China accounts for roughly one-third of global manufacturing production, creating enormous commercial opportunities but also significant supply-chain vulnerabilities. Canada should sell China wheat, canola, potash, energy, and other products wherever commercially advantageous, while remaining cautious about becoming dependent on Chinese-controlled technology, infrastructure, or strategic supply chains.
The correct Canadian response to the American trade war is therefore not choosing between Washington and Beijing. It is building more choices. That means expanding trade with Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, and Southeast Asia while dramatically improving Canada’s ability to reach global markets. More pipelines, LNG terminals, ports, mines and transportation infrastructure would give Canadian exporters alternatives that decades of political rhetoric about diversification have failed to produce.
It also means recognizing an uncomfortable reality about the United States. Washington may presently be pursuing policies profoundly damaging to Canadian interests, and Canada should defend itself vigorously. But the United States remains a democracy, our neighbour, our military ally, and the indispensable partner in the defence of North America.
Prime Minister Mark Carney should therefore pursue a pragmatic relationship with Beijing while continuing to rebuild the relationship with Washington. Canada should trade with China where our interests coincide, protect strategic sectors where they do not, and build stronger economic relationships throughout the Indo-Pacific and beyond. Diversification should give Canada greater freedom of action rather than merely changing the country upon which we depend.
The present confrontation with Washington should finally persuade Canada to become economically stronger and strategically less vulnerable. It should not persuade us to abandon the geopolitical realities imposed by geography, history, and our own national interests.
Canada should trade with China, but we should never trade America for China.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
