In looking at President Trump’s actions, it seems that all is chaos. But there are consistent elements in an approach which is transactional to the core.

The first consistent element is that History has no meaning and the future is another country. But relationships between countries aren’t like that. A leader has to think about the health of the overall relationship. Sometimes considerations of “winning” and “losing” over a single issue take on a different meaning. Short-term gains are negated if the longer-term relationship is badly damaged. Similarly, if history has no meaning, then, if you think it suits your purpose today to denigrate the efforts of your allies in Afghanistan, go ahead. But, here too, re-writing history for short-term objectives damages relationships if it insults people you will need tomorrow.

Of course, if you are sufficiently powerful, you may feel you can dispense with considerations of the past and the future. But when those you humiliate learn that this is not an occasional thing, but the way they will be treated every time, the realization comes home that accommodating a bully in the hope of peace is useless. America’s allies reached that realization over Greenland.

The second consistent element is that No one is ever grateful enough and no deal is ever good enough. In Davos, Trump argued this over and over; after all the US has done for NATO, all we want is a little piece of ice. This theme underpinned the shocking exchange with the Ukrainian President in February of 2025 when Trump and his henchman Vance, berated Zelensky for insufficient gratitude.  

This makes an outlandish request seem somehow reasonable. After all we’ve done for you, giving up part of your country is a small thing.  How can you possibly say no? You must be deeply ungrateful, and I am justified in bullying you in consequence. Similarly, he feels justified in re-opening any deal at any time, for any reason. He can do this because the US is owed for all the wonderful things it does for everyone. 

The third consistent element is that Everything is a threat to national security. We need Greenland for national security; the few ounces of fentanyl from Canada is a threat to national security; trade deficits are a threat to national security. On and on it goes. In each case, Trump is justified in imposing tariffs or trying to seize land because he is defending US national security.

This line is an attempt to get around the illegality of his actions. A US President cannot simply impose tariffs wherever he pleases. Congress has a role – unless it’s a matter of national security, when the President has extraordinary powers to defend the US. These powers are not unlimited; the President eventually has to get Congress to agree that there is a national security threat. But he can act first, and then browbeat Congress into submission. That is what the case before the Supreme Court is all about.

The final consistent element is that Reality is what I need it to be when the channel needs to be changed. Canada’s recent deal with China to reduce specific tariffs is a case in point. The deal is limited and specific. It has nothing to do with a broader free trade agreement. When it was first announced, Trump praised it and said it was exactly what Carney should be doing. Fast forward to Carney’s speech at Davos and Trump’s Greenland climb-down and Trump suddenly needs to act tough – so the China deal is a THREAT TO THE US; 100% tariffs are in store!!! CANADA HAS MADE THE WORST DEAL EVER AND IS DESTROYING ITSELF!!!  

Except 100% tariffs really aren’t going to happen because Trump’s Treasury Secretary made clear that this fate would only be realized if Canada signed a full free trade deal with China. That was never in the cards. Much like the Chinese ships “all over the place” around Greenland, which aren’t there, the entire thing is manufactured as a way to show Trump’s toughness and determination to “defend” the US. When Canada duly says that it will not sign a free trade deal with China, Trump claims he stopped it; he threatened, and Carney came to heel.

What does this mean for Canada?  If we really are next on his menu, we can expect some signs:

• The extraordinary history between our two countries will mean nothing and he won’t care what damage his offensive bluster causes;
• We can never be grateful enough for the privilege of living next door to the US (after all, Canada only exists because the US allows it to) and no deal will ever be final; 
• Whatever he is asking for, be it economic subservience or a piece of our Arctic, will be “essential” to US national security; and,
• Any reality can be changed if it suits him, and will be, if he needs to show some fake toughness to impress his base back home.  

It’s a tired, well-worn pack of lies, but Greenland seems to show that Trump will back down, though we don’t know the details yet. Serious damage to relationships is done in these stand-offs, but the key is to stand firm, not lose one’s cool, and work with a growing list of allies prepared to push back economically. Above all, rely on the fact that he has almost zero support from the American people when he threatens allies.  

And whatever damage he does to our economy, he also does to his own. We cannot hurt him as much as he can hurt us, of course, but really upending the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) will have a devastating impact on hundreds of thousands of American jobs. Given a national debt teetering on the edge of catastrophe and international bond markets that are fed-up with Trump’s antics, can he really push this as far as he will threaten?  

So, Canada, the bullying is about to begin in earnest. It’s going to be nasty and there will be threats. He will find whatever weak points he can and viciously exploit them without regard to any friendship which once existed between our countries.  

But take a deep breath. Trump’s lies are well worn and he has fewer cards than he claims. And he knows it. After the seeming Greenland climb-down, we all know it too.