With Donald Trump's storm clouds all over the place, a show of harmony can't hurt. So in this landmark season of our 150th anniversary, former U.S. presidents and Canadian prime ministers are getting together in forums to reminisce and sing the praises of the bilateral concord.
Stephen Harper and George W. Bush, who weren't terribly close while in office, held a 90-minute session at the Bush library in Dallas earlier this month. Speaking to business leaders at the unpublicized event, Mr. Bush spoke of how Canada is underappreciated in his country. The two leaders stated their support for the North American free-trade agreement. They didn't invoke the current president's name, but their differences with him were made amply clear.
Last week Jimmy Carter and Joe Clark, who hadn't shared a stage in the four decades since they each held power, got together in Atlanta. There's no need for a major NAFTA renegotiation, each said. They agreed that as little as 5 per cent of the accord needs changing.
Bill Clinton and Jean Chrétien (date to be finalized soon) will be up next to tout the accord and the importance of maintaining historical bilateral bonds.
Hopefully, word from the past leaders will get back to Mr. Trump, whose proclivities threaten economic as well as other ties. His nativist passions, his actions on trade, on global warming and on immigration all clash with Canadian interests.
They clash so much so that Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland announced recently that it's time for Canada to shift directions, to "set our own clear and sovereign course." It was more than just rhetoric: She called U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson a day in advance to brief him on what she was going to say.
But there is nothing unprecedented in this parting-of-the-ways type of approach. The earlier Trudeau government did the same when Richard Nixon was at work roiling the continent. Pierre Trudeau responded with what was called the third-option policy. It was a plan, chiefly in regard to trade, to diversify Canadian interests. It failed and was soon upended by Brian Mulroney's free-trade accord with the United States.
Ottawa is now in a better position to diversify. It has commendably done so with the European free-trade deal. Washington's opting out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership creates further opportunities for Canada in Asia.
But nothing Washington or Ottawa does can alter the bilateral reality of a mutually-assured trade reliance. Numbers with other trading partners are decidedly modest by comparison and will continue to be.
Ottawa cannot escape the American trade umbrella nor the defence umbrella. Despite the call for the latter in Ms. Freeland's speech, and despite Ottawa's plans for increased defence spending, such is the staggering American military might by comparison to our own that differences will be on the margins.
There's a continuity and constancy in the relationship and the coming together of the presidents and the prime ministers, organized the Canadian American Business Council, is a reminder for everyone, including the current president.
These leaders have been around a while. They have a sense of perspective and have experienced serious disruptions in the relationship. But such is the nature of the relationship that said disruptions are fleeting. There is never – though many Canadians might like to see one at this time – an enduring decoupling. The underlying dependencies are too strong. There's always a correction.
In the 1960s, John Diefenbaker's vanity and careening temperament sent the relationship off the tracks. Lester Pearson quickly patched it up. Mr. Trudeau's relationship with Ronald Reagan's White House descended into name calling, and then Mr. Mulroney came along. They are just two of several examples.
Try as he might, Mr. Trump won't be able to break the continental ties that bind. Try as it might, Ottawa won't be able to cut them either. They're 150 years in the making. They're too embedded.
Lawrence Martin