Will Trump dominate the October election campaign?
Customarily, questions about international politics have played only a minor role in previous Canadian election campaigns. So what are the chances that foreign policy issues could dominate the October federal electoral contest?
For the first time that I can recall, though there was a whole debate dedicated to foreign affairs in the 2015 federal election. It didn’t amount to much, and there were not huge differences between the party leaders, but there were some interesting exchanges around multilateralism, peacekeeping and the United Nations.
Is it possible, then, that Canada’s relations with China will unexpectedly rise to the top of the election agenda? Could we see discussion of international climate change impacts as frontand-centre in the election media coverage? Or, will U.S. President Donald Trump become a central campaign issue?
It is instructive to note that inserting Canada-U.S. relations into a federal election campaign is not an entirely foreign idea. Indeed, issues around bilateral relations and U.S. interference were certainly a key part of the 1962 and, especially, the 1963 federal election campaigns.
Significantly, the 1963 federal election saw U.S. interference rise to unprecedented levels.
As was the case in 1962, Kennedy gave permission for his personal pollster, Lou Harris, to assist Liberal leader Lester Pearson’s campaign operations— much to the chagrin of Diefenbaker.
More important, the U.S. State Department released a press statement in early January 1963 essentially calling Diefenbaker a bold-faced liar for his comments in the House of Commons about the deployment of nuclear weapons on Canadian soil (and seriously called into question Canada’s commitment to the defence of North America).
And to add insult to injury, the U.S. ambassador to Canada engaged in a series of anti-Diefenbaker media interviews in the basement of the U.S. embassy in Ottawa.
It was no wonder, then, that Canada’s ambassador to the U.S. was summarily recalled from Washington. But even that unusual diplomatic measure was unable to save Diefenbaker in the 1963 campaign, which he lost to Pearson.
Of course, there is the possibility that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau could make Trump a campaign talking point, too. He has lately taken a somewhat tougher line on Trump’s public comments and tweets — as we saw in his response to the president’s recent racist remarks about four Democratic congresswomen of colour.
As Trudeau went on to explain: “I think the comments made were hurtful, wrong and completely unacceptable. He then added pointedly: “I want everyone in Canada to know these comments are completely unacceptable and should not be allowed or encouraged in Canada.”
But if Trudeau does go nuclear on The Donald, what will Conservative leader Andrew Scheer do in response? Will he try to one-up Trudeau with his own anti-Trump rhetoric or will he take Trudeau down a peg or two for dissing our closest neighbour and best customer?
Curiously, in a July 9 commentary in The Chronicle Herald, Scheer talked loudly that Canada “should not roll over for anybody,” should “stand up for Canada’s economic interests” and “there’s one thing Donald Trump understands, it’s strength.”
Is Canada now suddenly going to flex its military muscle vis-àvis Trump’s America?
As a keen follower of Canada-U.S. relations, these are extraordinarily reckless, disturbing and dangerous comments from a top-level Canadian politician.
Of course, “standing up to the United States” is normally a political winner in Canada. But when you think of Donald Trump, it’s clear that we’re not living in normal or ordinary times.
Still, going negative on Trump is sure to score some political points in what is anticipated to be a close electoral race in October. So I wouldn’t at all be surprised if Trudeau resorts to anti-Trump language to bolster his left flank and galvanize his Liberal party base. But I would advise him to think twice and think about “Dief the Chief” first.