Stand up for trade rules,

So now we have a much better idea of what Donald Trump’s vaunted “America First” rhetoric translates to in the real world.

It means, as of this week, that Bombardier Inc. may well be shut out of the giant American market as it attempts to sell its C Series commercial jet around the world. The U.S. Commerce Department’s decision to slap countervailing duties of almost 220 per cent on Bombardier’s jets would triple the price of the planes and make them impossible to sell south of the border.

Officially this is a business dispute between two private companies — Bombardier and Boeing Co., which complained that the Canadian firm is lavishly subsidized by Ottawa and Quebec, and has sold 75 C Series jets to Delta Air Lines for an “absurdly low” price.

But there’s no escaping the wider political context set by Trump’s promise to “fight for every last American job” — a pledge he repeated last February at (no coincidence, surely) the factory in South Carolina that assembles the Boeing Dreamliner passenger jet.

U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross lectured Canadians after the preliminary ruling that “even our closest allies must play by the rules.” And there’s little doubt that Boeing was encouraged by Trump’s aggressive language to seek the most punitive measures possible against Bombardier.

The stage is now set for a loud and potentially destructive battle between Canadian and U.S. interests, not just the companies involved but the governments as well — and this at a time when Ottawa and Washington (and Mexico) are locked in negotiations on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

The Boeing-Bombardier dispute underlines one issue clearly for Canadians. It’s more vital than ever that Ottawa resist calls from Washington to scrap the bi-national panels set up under NAFTA to referee the inevitable disputes that arise between trading partners in as neutral a way as possible.

Countries are always tempted to manipulate their own tribunals and trade panels in favour of their own companies. And the political climate inside a country can’t help but influence how arbitrators and judges reach their decisions. The Trump administration certainly can’t be trusted to resist pushing its trade agenda, no matter what.

Having a relatively neutral way to decide disputes is particularly important for the smaller country in any trade deal. Decisions should follow generally accepted rules, not just be dictated by the bigger partner. Canadian negotiators fought for that system in the 1980s and the Bombardier-Boeing spat makes it even more important to keep it.

It’s to be expected that Ottawa would stand up for Bombardier, especially since Boeing has taken such a tough line against the Canadian company. (For one thing, Boeing doesn’t even produce a commercial jet in the same class as the C Series, and it may be hard for it prove down the line that it has suffered actual damage from Bombardier’s sale to Delta.)

It’s also extremely rich for Boeing to moan about government aid to a small competitor when it has benefited from decades of lavish support from the U.S. defence department.

At the same time, though, Canadians need not rally unconditionally around Bombardier. This is a hard company to love; it has accepted support from the Quebec and Canadian governments while resisting legitimate demands that the families that control it loosen their grip.

As the Trudeau government grapples with this dispute, it should focus on the wider national issue in maintaining fair rules on trade — not only on the narrower interest represented by one company, however symbolic.

Trade decisions should follow generally accepted rules, not be dictated by the bigger partner