Donald Trump, much like the Founding Fathers, shares an affinity for the idea of Canadian annexation. It comes as no surprise, given his lively discussions about potential expansions during his administration. Trump expressed an enthusiastic curiosity for the notion of incorporating Canada as the 51st State of the Union, alongside talking about possible acquisitions of Panama Canal and Greenland.
True to his audacious nature, Trump didn’t dismiss the thought of utilizing military force to achieve his goals with Greenland and Panama. However, his expectations for Canada were more cordial because he held firm to the conviction that Canadians are longing for the taste of American freedom. To Trump, healthcare reforms and casting off the vestiges of socialism were steps towards liberty, making Canada’s integration a natural progression.
Historically, the concept of ‘Every Canadian is an American at heart’, contrary to popular notions, predates the United States. Hence, Trump’s ambitious desires for Canada carry with them potent echoes of past endeavors, with some of them leading to less than successful outcomes for America.
The interest in Canadian annexation can be traced back to 1774, two years prior to when Thomas Jefferson drafted the prestigious Declaration of Independence. It was then that the U.S. first made an attempt to draw Canada into its fold by attempting to involve the province of Quebec in the protest against the British Parliament’s coercive actions. At that time, Quebec represented most of present-day Midwest Canada in addition to its place within the name ‘Canada’.
Despite the shared discontent of being denied the rights of Englishmen, Quebec, primarily a Francophone community under British rule since 1760, chose a different path. Their presence was conspicuously missing from Philadelphia as they felt more concerned about retaining their unique cultural and religious identities, rather than joining the fight for abstract notions of political liberty.
When American Patriots spearheaded an invasion of Quebec in 1775, it was not a liberation call that Canada answered. Their lukewarm sentiments towards the British rule did not equate to support for the secessionists. The Quebec Act, although ruffling American feathers by inhibiting their Western expansion, stabilized ties between Francophone Canadians and Britain, reinforcing French legal, religious, and feudal institutions predating the British conquest of New France.
Pockets of Canadians were unsure whether partnering with the invading New Englanders would bring them any real benefit. A siege on Quebec City led by American Generals Richard Montgomery and Benedict Arnold resulted in both victory for Montreal and defeat, with General Montgomery succumbing to a mortal injury in December 1775.
Undeterred by their initial setbacks, the American Continental Congress persisted in their belief that Canada would willingly join their nascent nation. The Articles of Confederation, drafted in 1777, even earmarked a spot for Canada as the 14th state, though their invitation went unanswered.
Such persistent advancements towards Canada can be attributed to a potent cocktail of ideological zeal and realpolitik. The American revolutionaries were passionately convinced that the revolutionary principles they embraced spelled progress and freedom for the world. But they also recognized that Quebec’s allegiance to the British Empire near the American border posed a latent national security threat.
The late 18th century witnessed a continuation of this shared narrative rooting for Canadian integration. An influx of Loyalists—American citizens remaining loyal to the British Crown—migrated northwards, fuelling the American aspiration that Canada would follow suit and join the Union.
Despite lingering territorial disputes throughout the 19th century, Canadian annexation lacked serious consideration. Even when President James K. Polk issued threats over the Oregon Country in the 1840s, American manifest destiny left Canada untouched. Throughout the 20th century, Canada and the U.S. solidified their alliances, with their soldiers fighting together in major conflicts stretching from World War I until the War on Terror.
Arriving at the Trump era, the past pattern of considering Canada as a close ally rather than a potential state to be annexed seemed to have shifted. Like the Founding Fathers, Trump appeared to believe that Canadians secretly harbored a desire of becoming Americans.
Some interpret Trump’s forthright discussions about Canada’s potential statehood as a strategy to negotiate better trade deals. Critics argue, however, that his assertive style may backfire, possibly stirring Canadian nationalism and fostering resentment towards the U.S., thereby further complicating trade negotiations.
Political analysts caution that Trump’s unyielding stance may inadvertently assist in the election of officials less inclined to sign off on any future trade agreements. This could even potentially encourage a resolute Canadian response in the scenario of a tariff war, despite the potential economic hardship.
Justin Trudeau, despite facing opposition on multiple fronts, expressed what’s likely a national sentiment in Canada regarding joining the Union. He quipped that the likelihood of Canada becoming the 51st state was as probable as a ‘snowball’s chance in hell’. Such reactions underline the weight of the intriguing historical discourse regarding Canada’s annexation.