Genius dealmaker, or gullible rube? Washington weighs Trump’s deal with Canada

Donald Trump: Brilliant dealmaker who wrung Canada dry? Or a gullible chump who got duped by old promises repackaged in fresh paint?

Trying to follow the Washington reaction to the tariff-pausing deal between Canada and the U.S. might give you whiplash.

The reaction here is as polarized as the politics. To the right, Trump is a negotiating genius who achieved big wins. To the left, he’s a self-obsessed sucker desperate to declare a win. Just look at Wednesday’s caucus meetings on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers served up wildly different takes to reporters, depending on their party.

“The days of America getting walked all over — my friends, those days are gone,” said Lisa McClain, chair of the House Republican conference. “In just his second week, President Trump’s deals with Canada and Mexico show his effectiveness.”

This gusher of praise coursed through Republican Washington, with Trump aide Peter Navarro crowing in a panel with Politico: “Art of the deal … Trust in Trump. He’s earned that.”

You’ll be shocked to hear Democrats disagree. The Internet is similarly awash in memes mocking Trump for settling for a sucker’s deal.

“He backed down because of the reaction from the stock market, the reaction from the American people,” said Ted Lieu, vice-chair of House Democrats. “Basically Canada and Mexico are doing what they said they were already going to do. So, essentially Donald Trump simply folded.”

Some Canadians have been eager to get in on the fun. Comments from NDP MP Charlie Angus even made a headline in a Capitol Hill newspaper: Canadian Lawmaker On Trump Tariff Delay: ‘He Choked.’ 

Here’s the painful truth: Most people in Washington opining on this have virtually no clue about Canada’s border policy and don’t know what they’re talking about. That’s underscored by the fact that even Canadians who’ve spent their career working on these issues have been scrambling for details of this deal.

Canada’s deal contains significant changes

They learned more after the publication late Tuesday of an intelligence order by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that establishes several policy changes.

The general reaction from several Canadian experts interviewed by CBC News can be summarized in three takeaways. 

First, these changes are significant. Second, there’s a lingering flaw that could still hamper criminal prosecutions. Third, Trump forced action.

“I haven’t seen anything like this in decades. There’s some meaningful initiatives,” said Calvin Chrustie, a former RCMP superintendent in Vancouver who has investigated transnational crime networks on cross-border cases.

“After a decade-plus of U.S. frustrations and concerns being expressed in more discrete, diplomatic and low-profile settings … [this has] brought Canadians to the table to have serious, meaningful and substantive conversations about national security, public safety and economic security.”

What’s less agreed-upon is whether Trump scorched way more earth than he had to. Whether he was needlessly destructive; whether he could have achieved the same thing without threats, or, at least, by dropping the threats weeks ago. 

Did it really have to get to the point that Canadians were booing the Star Spangled Banner at sporting events, vowing retaliatory revenge and watching a market selloff?

“I don’t know,” said Stephanie Carvin, a former analyst at Canada’s intelligence service, CSIS, and professor at Carleton University. “It is unfortunate.” 

What’s clear, she says, is that Canada should have acted long ago. She says the country does have a problem with international criminal groups, money-laundering and fentanyl, despite the oft-repeated stat that drug busts are rare.

It’s equally clear that Trump’s pressure played a role in Ottawa’s belated action: “If anything it might have expedited things.”

What happened: A timeline

Trump’s browbeating sparked a frenzy in Ottawa, with most Canadian moves made weeks ago. Amid an ugly final few days, Ottawa announced some extra measures. 

Here’s what the timeline shows.

Trump originally threatened massive tariffs on Canada and Mexico in November, citing migration and the scourge of fentanyl at the border.

When Trudeau and several ministers met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago later that month, he made clear that fentanyl was his main priority.

Within weeks, the Canadian government had announced a slew of changes. It tightened migration and visas. It budgeted $1.3 billion in border measures, including new helicopters, and announced legal and regulatory changes to fight money-laundering. It proposed a so-called Canada-U.S. police strike force and 24-hour-a-day border monitoring.

Trump’s team even publicly celebrated these changes. But he, personally, did not budge. The tariffs were still on, and were set to take effect Tuesday.

Trudeau said he couldn’t even get Trump on the phone for days. Finally, the president agreed to talk to both other North American leaders Monday, the day before the tariffs were to strike.

Trudeau added some final sweeteners: Canada would appoint a new fentanyl czar, list cartels as terrorist organizations and publish a new intelligence policy. And that was enough for Trump to declare a 30-day pause on tariffs.

This intelligence order establishes fentanyl-fighting as a priority for Canada’s intelligence community, with $200 million in funding.

It orders Canada’s electronic-intelligence agency to track and disrupt cross-border drug operations; co-ordinates multiple police, border, intelligence and other agencies in one hub; demands agencies work with each other and U.S. counterparts; and warns against operating in silos.

These silos are a problem. 

The flaw in the plan

There’s a persistent source of frustration in law enforcement, with Canada’s struggle to use intelligence materials in prosecutions, because of a cumbersome process required by a Supreme Court decision.

Chrustie laments that there’s one department name missing from Trudeau’s new hub of Canadian organizations that will pool intelligence: the Justice Department. 

“There’s still a gap in the conversation,” he said. Carvin concurs: “We haven’t solved this problem.”

What might help in Trudeau’s order, she says, is that it places Canada’s signals-intelligence service, known as the Communications Security Establishment, inside the same hub as police and border agencies, which she said could be useful in preventing a criminal plan.

As for actually using that intelligence in court cases, she says, Canada needs a new law. Others say it might be even harder than that, and could perhaps require a constitutional amendment.

Upon reviewing Trudeau’s national-security order on Wednesday afternoon, the former head of Canada’s intelligence service says it looks serious.

“They haven’t left any stone unturned. And they want to make sure the folks south of the border see it as a positive sign,” said former CSIS director Ward Elcock. “It’s not insignificant.” 

But is it significant enough to warrant a transcontinental psychodrama? Maybe not. “Are these huge giveaways to the United States? Not really,” Elcock said.

From Chrustie’s standpoint, though, Trump deserves credit for prompting much-needed change. Even if Canadians are furious about the president’s behaviour, Chrustie predicted this will lead to a better North America in the long run.

“Not everyone you fight with is your enemy,” he said. “And not everyone that helps is your friend.”