The suggestion of a merged United States and Canada has been reiterated by Trump in light of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s resignation. While some view Trump’s proposal for Canada to become the “51st state” as a long-standing joke or simple posturing, others regard it as a politically unwise idea given Canada’s progressive leanings.
On Tuesday, Trump escalated his rhetoric, threatening to utilize “economic force” to annex the neighboring nation. His comments, which also included discussions of purchasing Greenland and controlling the Panama Canal, indicate a desire to enhance U.S. power after he assumes office.
However, this concept remains unpopular among Canadians. With Trudeau stepping down, the implications of Trump’s statements on U.S.-Canada relations under new leadership remain uncertain.
Historically, the notion of unification between the U.S. and Canada has existed for centuries. Early American leaders invaded Quebec during the American Revolution, and several decades later, the U.S. attempted an unsuccessful invasion of Canada during the War of 1812, driven by frustration over British naval actions that targeted American sailors.
Matthew Lebo, a political science professor at the University of Western Ontario, remarked on Trump’s proposal by highlighting the historical context: “Canada and the U.S. fought a war over this in 1812.”
Fears of annexation and invasion lingered throughout the American Civil War and during the U.S. expansion driven by the concept of Manifest Destiny. However, these anxieties subsided as the two nations became “fierce allies” in the 20th century, according to Duane Bratt, a political science professor specializing in Canadian foreign policy.
Bratt noted the evolution of military collaboration, citing that organizations like NORAD and NATO were established, and that soldiers from both nations fought side by side in various conflicts, including World Wars I and II, Korea, and the Gulf War. “American soldiers died for Canada. Canadian soldiers died for the United States,” he stated.
Presently, Canada and the U.S. have maintained a strong military and economic partnership for over a century. However, there are concerns that Trump’s comments toward a close ally might reflect ambitions for increased U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere. “Do we want to go back to 1812 or the 1860s? Maybe Trump does, but I’m not sure Americans or Canadians do,” Bratt added.
Trump’s discussions about annexation and merging are highly unpopular among Canadians, as recent polls indicate. A Leger poll reported by The Canadian Press revealed that 82% of Canadians opposed the notion of joining the U.S. as a state.
Another Leger poll from October showed that two-thirds of Canadians preferred Vice President Harris in the upcoming presidential race, with only 21% supporting Trump.
Bratt expressed skepticism about Trump’s understanding of Canadian politics, saying, “I don’t think he realizes that Canada would be a Democratic state that we would be a blue state the size of California.”
The logistical challenges of such a merger are also important, given that Canada operates as a constitutional monarchy while the U.S. is a republic, divided into ten provinces.
Although the two nations may appear similar on the surface, remarkable cultural differences exist, such as the French-speaking population in Quebec, which remains outside the Canadian Constitution and would resist inclusion in the American framework.
Despite the challenges, some individuals perceive potential benefits in Trump’s proposal. Canadian entrepreneur Kevin O’Leary, known for his role on “Shark Tank,” mentioned to “The Hill” on NewsNation that there are “some very interesting concepts” within the idea, including an “economic union.”
Nevertheless, observers have largely dismissed Trump’s remarks as mere jokes and braggadocio as he prepares to return to the Oval Office. Canadian Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc attended a dinner at Mar-a-Lago last month where Trump made the “51st state” comment, stating that the remarks were intended as humor.
Former top adviser to Trudeau, Gerald Butts, noted on LinkedIn that Trump frequently used the “51st state” line during his first term without any real intent behind it, suggesting it was meant to provoke Canadians. “When someone is trying to get you to freak out, don’t. #protip,” Butts advised.
However, Trump appeared to suggest seriousness behind his comments on Tuesday. During a press conference, he dismissed the idea of military annexation but threatened to use “economic force” to achieve his goals.
“Because Canada and the United States, that would really be something. You get rid of that artificially drawn line and you take a look at what that looks like, and it would also be much better for national security,” Trump said.
He humorously proposed that hockey legend Wayne Gretzky should run for prime minister of Canada, suggesting the title should be “governor” instead. In response, Trudeau firmly stated, “There isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell that Canada would become part of the United States,” emphasizing the mutual benefits derived from their longstanding trading and security partnership.
Trudeau announced his resignation as prime minister on Monday after growing dissatisfaction within his party and troubling poll numbers for the ruling Liberal Party. Experts had anticipated this move, but its timing followed Trump’s tariff threats and derogatory remarks referring to Trudeau as Canada’s “governor.”
After Trump threatened 25% tariffs to pressure Canada into enhancing border security and combating drug trafficking, Trudeau visited Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, a move that garnered criticism for portraying Trudeau as weak.
Bratt explained that Trudeau’s departure complicates Canada’s response, leaving him a lame-duck prime minister while Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre aims to end Liberal governance in the next election.
Bratt elaborated, “Between now and early May, Canada is kind of rudderless. Yes, we have a prime minister with all the powers and authority that go with that office, but without the political legitimacy.”
He added, “And now we’re dealing with potentially an existential, economic ,and perhaps political threat being posed by what we had thought was our closest ally via the United States, and we are in a very weak position to push back because of the domestic political crisis in this country.”
Following Trudeau’s resignation, Trump reiterated his assertion that “many people in Canada LOVE being the 51st State” and claimed that “Justin Trudeau knew this and resigned.” If Trump intends to increase pressure on Canada, he will soon have to engage with new leadership, while many Canadians have resoundingly rejected his proposals.
In an interview with CTV, Poilievre firmly stated, “My message to incoming President Trump is that first and foremost, Canada will never be the 51st state of the U.S.” Trump’s remarks about Canada coincide with his proposals for U.S. control of Greenland and the Panama Canal.
During his press conference, Trump ruled out military action against Canada but did not eliminate the possibility of military or economic coercion regarding Greenland or the Panama Canal, arguing, “we need them for economic security.”
While experts remain uncertain about the weight of Trump’s threats, his linkage of these regions has led some to believe he is serious about expanding U.S. influence in his second term, whatever that entails.
Lebo warned that Trump’s threats could deter investment decisions, as he noted, “By making threats like this, he might be scaring some companies about whether they’re choosing to invest in Canada versus the United States. And I’m sure he wants to put his thumb on the scales for the next Canadian election.”
Bratt interpreted Trump’s comments as signaling a change in his stance. “At what point is a joke not a joke? He went from talking about ‘Governor’ Trudeau and becoming the 51st state to today, talking about economic coercion, economic force. I guess we should just be happy he wasn’t talking about military force,” Bratt concluded.
