Western Premiers Demand Ottawa Normalize China Ties
Carney lays down mandate letter instructing ministers to diversify Canada's trade as Western provinces have hit out at federal policies.
This week’s edition of IPD’s Canada-China Brief covers Western Canada’s demands on Ottawa to reverse its tariff policy on China, Mark Carney’s damage control as well as his trade mandate to cabinet, and more.
Data Dive
IPD highlights the numbers that matter. See more data analysis below the paywall cut by subscribing now for just $5 a month.
The takeaways:
Average U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports have fallen from 126.5% to 51.1% since this month’s bilateral Geneva agreement
On the other hand, average Chinese tariffs on U.S. imports fell from 147.6% to 32.6%
Since the last crop year, Chinese purchases of Canadian canola have grown 35%, continuing to be Canada’s biggest market
China imports triple the amount of Canadian canola as Japan, Canada’s next largest buyer
From the Experts
On Mark Carney’s election and the future of Canada-China trade disputes:
Julian Karaguesian
Visiting Lecturer, McGill University; Former Special Advisor, OECD and Finance Canada
Towards the end of the English-language leaders’ debate on April 17th, the moderator asked each party leader what they thought was the biggest security threat facing Canada. Then-interim Prime Minister Mark Carney replied, “China”. It would be more than interesting to know whether Prime Minister Mark Carney truly believes that about China, or whether his reply was simply aimed at saying the right thing ahead of the April 28th election. But is naming China as the biggest security threat facing Canada the right thing to say any longer, or was it ever?
In my view, it never was. One of the silver linings in the many dark clouds we’ve seen thus far in the second Trump administration, particularly the on-again off-again aggression towards Canadian prosperity and sovereignty, is that it finally frees Canada from the Washington imperative — i.e., doing whatever Washington wants. With respect to China, this has meant — regardless of which party was in office — treating the once-friend and close-trading partner as a foe.
When one steps back and thinks about it, most (if not all) of Canada’s tensions with China originated in Washington: decoupling from Huawei’s 5G technology; the arrest of Meng Wanzhou at the request of the Trump administration, and the retaliatory arrest and detention of two Canadian citizens in China, along with tariffs on selective imports from Canada; and, the imposition of 100 per cent tariffs on China’s EVs in the fall of 2024 at the request of the Biden administration, and the resulting retaliatory tariffs imposed by China on imports of certain agricultural products from Canada earlier this year. These and other trade disputes have cost Canada — particularly exporters of agricultural products — hundreds of millions of dollars in lost earnings, not to mention lost opportunities to expand trade.
The pure Machiavellian question that presents itself here is, what did Canada get from such loyalty to Washington? After blindly complying with Washington’s demands, not only did we damage our trade and broader bilateral relations with one of the world’s most populous and economically significant countries, but we also were punished with tariffs and threats to our sovereignty — as opposed to being rewarded — by the very hegemon to whom we were so loyal. In short, Canada ended up with the worst outcome possible, alienating itself from China while effectively acting as vassal to Washington. Historically speaking, vassal states never get rewarded, only punished. So, what is clear with President Trump’s America First policy is that Canada is now free to pursue its own national interests — free of the Washington imperative.
Read the full commentary from Julian Karaguesian here:
Hugh Stephens
Advisor, Institute for Peace & Diplomacy; Former Assistant Deputy Minister, Global Affairs Canada
Resetting Canada's relationship with China has to be looked at in the context of all the other security and economic issues facing the new cabinet. Given the range of challenges, most particularly from the U.S., dealing with China, while important, is unlikely to be an immediate priority. The new Minister of Foreign Affairs, Anita Anand, is an experienced and pragmatic minister and will approach outreach to China carefully. It's worth noting that Prime Minister Carney identified China as Canada's most serious security threat during the election debate, a surprise to some (including the writer). With this as background, I believe attempts to find common ground with China will continue but don't expect any major shifts on policy.
Western Canadian farmers and Atlantic seafood producers are looking for some relief from the retaliatory tariffs imposed by Beijing in March 2025, in response to Canada's imposition of 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs and a 25% tariff on Chinese steel and aluminum products in October of last year. The imposition by Canada of these tariffs in order to stay in lockstep with the United States when it imposed identical tariffs on Chinese goods was a misguided attempt to avoid U.S. tariff action against exports of Canadian steel and aluminum to the U.S., and to maintain production of EVs in Canada for export to the U.S. This move clearly failed to protect Canada against unilateral American action initiated by the Trump administration.
Canada would have been better served by taking the EU approach of actually evaluating the alleged level of subsidization and market distorting practices, (allowing for some potential adjustment) but regrettably did not do so. Given what has transpired between Canada and the U.S. since the EV and other tariffs were imposed, and the high stakes over the future of CUSMA, the Carney government has little to no flexibility on this matter. Thus, the likelihood of early relief for affected Canadian producers is slight. Some of the affected commodities may still find a market in China via alternate channels, as occurred during an earlier Chinese ban on canola. Despite the need for and rhetoric about trade diversification away from the U.S. market, the reality is that Canada (and other countries) will be constrained in their dealings with China by their existing dependence on the U.S. market, even as the Trump administration negotiates with China on an adjustment of reciprocal tariffs imposed by Trump and responded to by China.
Alex He
Senior Fellow, Centre for International Governance Innovation
A new Carney cabinet could present a chance to revisit and reset Canada-China relations. Four reasons support this. First, Carney’s earlier claim that China is a top security threat now seems like campaign rhetoric; he has since softened his stance and stressed the need to work with reliable partners in Europe and Asia in response to what he describes as America’s “betrayal.” Second, Carney’s track record show a pragmatic, pro-business approach to China, favoring economic and climate cooperation over ideological confrontation. Third, with the Trump tariffs pushing Canada to diversify trade, Carney stated that Canada could pursue certain engagements with China — its second-largest trading partner — indicating a willingness to explore renewed dialogue. Public support is also rising — 31% of Canadians now favor expanding trade ties with China, up from 7% in 2023. Fourth, China has signaled readiness to resolve trade disputes and improve relations.
A possible roadmap for resetting relations could begin at the upcoming G20 summit in South Africa this November. Initial steps could include working-level talks to lift mutual tariffs — such as those on Canadian canola oil and Chinese EVs. A Carney-Xi meeting on the summit’s sidelines would provide a valuable diplomatic opening. Historically, G20 summits have provided a critical platform for high-level bilateral meetings without either side appearing to lose face. Priority areas that could lay the groundwork for cooperation include expanding Canadian LNG exports to China and joint financing in clean tech and climate initiatives, where both nations share long-term interests.
Challenges like political interference and security concerns mean a reset won’t be easy. With the U.S. still buying 80% of Canadian exports, any move toward China must consider the state of Canada-U.S. trade talks. Therefore, any rapprochement with China is likely to remain limited in scope. Still, worsening ties with an unreliable Trump administration offer Ottawa a chance to end the unnecessarily strained China relationship that began with the Meng Wanzhou case and the subsequent detention of the two Michaels seven years ago.
The Word in China
IPD brings what scholars and opinion leaders in China have to say on Canada and the challenges both countries face. See more translated commentary below the paywall cut by subscribing now for just $5 a month.
Zheng Yongnian
Presidential Chair Professor and Director, Advanced Institute of Global and Contemporary China Studies, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen | READ
At the international level, Trump is also devoid of ideological overtones. This is fully reflected in his attitudes and policy intentions toward Europe, Russia, China, and other issues. Trump lacks the sentimental attachment to the "West" or "allies" that traditional American politicians often hold. As demonstrated by Vance’s recent speech on Europe, Trump’s stance is clear: he sees Europe as hypocritical—paying lip service to "shared values" and "alliance solidarity" while free-riding on U.S.-provided "international public goods." In Trump’s view, Europe is not only in decline but also dragging America down. This perception is the deep-seated reason behind the U.S. determination to overhaul its alliance policy.…
The core of Trump's diplomatic rhetoric on nearly all other issues revolves around interests. He wants Canada to become the 51st state of the United States, arguing economic benefits; incorporating Panama under U.S. control, his argument is economic interests; asserting control over Greenland, his reasoning is economic interests.
Fu Suixin
Associate Research Fellow, Institute of American Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences | READ
In response to Trump's unilateral launch of an all-out tariff war, some nations chose not to retaliate but instead directly capitulated, hoping this would lessen America's pressure. Some even attempted to sacrifice China's interests to appease Trump. However, China, the EU, Canada and others opted for countermeasures - with China in particular not only resisting the pressure but launching the world's most forceful retaliatory strikes against the U.S….
The reason Trump's coercive measures against other nations still retain some deterrent effect is simply because he dares to recklessly squander the hard and soft power that the United States has painstakingly accumulated over decades. However, on one hand, Trump overestimates America's hard power capabilities. While the U.S. remains the world's largest economy by GDP, it can no longer claim to be the indispensable core of the global economic system.
Top Story
Western Canada Lashes Out at Ottawa’s China Policy
Western provinces hit feds — Provincial governments west of Ontario have all bristled at federal counterparts’ posture toward China:
Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe published ten demands for Mark Carney last week, with the key ask topping his list an explicit call for Ottawa to “immediately begin negotiations with China to remove Chinese tariffs on Canadian agri-food products.”
Earlier this month, Moe disclosed that he has “been in contact with the Canadian ambassador to China, the Chinese ambassador to Canada and we have formally now contacted and written letters to a number of sub-national leaders in China” to find a way out of the trade row.
Alberta’s Danielle Smith echoed the same, telling media that “all of the western premiers who have a large canola industry in their provinces, and that is regardless of political stripe, have raised it directly with the Prime Minister” and that Ottawa’s levies on China “protect an EV industry in Ontario that doesn’t exist.”
In more recent remarks, Smith acknowledged that the U.S. may have a say on Canada’s trade direction with Beijing, noting that “I think that the Americans, as part of a condition to getting access to their market, are increasingly going to be asking for restrictions on how much trade we do with China.”
She added that “[Manitoba’s] Wab Kinew, Scott Moe, and myself have all asked the federal government if they could try to figure out a pathway that we would be able to normalize relationships with China again because it does have a massive impact on our agricultural communities.”
‘Redefine relationships’ — In his mandate letter to Canada’s newly-appointed cabinet this week, Prime Minister Mark Carney set out his mission statement:
“The global trading system – which has helped power Canada’s prosperity for decades – is undergoing the biggest transformation since the fall of the Berlin Wall…. we must redefine Canada’s international, commercial, and security relationships. “
This goal, however, was followed by instructions for his government to work on “establishing a new economic and security relationship with the United States and strengthening our collaboration with reliable trading partners and allies around the world.”
In a press interview, Agriculture Minister Heath MacDonald vowed that a resolution on electric vehicle and agrifood tariff disputes with China would be “front and center and it will be front and center from me towards the prime minister's office.”
The promise comes as Canada’s western premiers convened in Yellowknife in the lead-up to a Saskatoon summit of all provincial leaders and PM Carney, with Smith attacking the “damaging federal policies [that] impact the upward trajectory of our economies.”
Ambassador tours the prairies — China’s top diplomat in Ottawa Wang Di took to Saskatchewan to speak on tariff offramps:
In a tour of Canada’s canola basket this month, Ambassador Wang met with Saskatchewan’s Scott Moe, who in an embassy readout “stressed that Saskatchewan attaches importance to its relations with China and is ready to continue to strengthen practical cooperation.”
Speaking in a local press interview, Wang stated that “if the Canadian federal government removes the tariffs on Chinese products, China can also adjust its policies,” noting that the Trump administration has already revoked 90% of its applied tariffs on Beijing in its recent talks with Chinese counterparts in Geneva.
Wang also repeated his offer to once again pick up bilateral free trade negotiations that have been frozen for nearly a decade, saying that “China is ready to continue to uphold and advance free trade and we are open to enter a free trade deal with Canada.”
What commentators are saying — Observers in Western Canada have all reflected on the absence of federal willpower to revisit trade with China:
Greg Cherewyk, President of Pulse Canada, argued that “the ball is in Canada’s court now,” and noted that Ottawa’s Chinese EV tariffs are about “industries that are located in vote-rich Quebec and Ontario. It would be political suicide” but that now is a time to “have a more constructive conversation about a path forward.”
John Rustad, opposition leader of BC’s Conservative Party, noted on China that "if we're being blocked by the largest economy, being the Americans, and we're ignoring the second-largest economy, that is very limiting for British Columbians to be able to grow our economy.”
Sam Roscoe, Lecturer at UBC’s Sauder School of Business, observed that “I’m not seeing leaders push for diversification as a core part of our industrial strategy. China, in particular, is now actively pursuing trade deals with partners like the E.U., so there’s no reason they wouldn’t consider one with Canada.”
Roscoe went on to say that “we need to move past the idea that China is the enemy. In reality, it’s looking like a more stable trading partner than the U.S. — which I never thought I’d say… Why not formalize that and make it more economically feasible?”
If you enjoy our work, please consider contributing:
Join a free trial now for full access to Data Dive and The Word in China coverage below, including extended data analysis and translated expert commentary
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Canada-China Brief to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.