The Straits Times of Singapore wrote on September 13: "After the breakdown of trade negotiations between the United States and Canada, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau boldly challenged the U.S., retaliating against American tariffs. He has done what many of America’s allies have so far dared not to do: endure economic pain rather than yield to tariff threats. Yet, given Canada's heavy reliance on the U.S. economy, is Trudeau’s move self-destructive—or a blueprint for global resistance against President Trump’s trade bullying?"
The article from Singapore's Today raises a central issue in today's international politics: when the U.S. weaponizes even its alliance relationships, how should a nation deeply dependent on it respond—by submitting or by resisting? Trudeau’s choice is less a path to self-destruction than a high-risk strategic breakout amid the collapse of the old order.
Trudeau’s retaliation is grounded in a clear logical chain, far from impulsive.
At the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos, Trudeau had already clearly assessed that the rules-based international order has fractured, and middle powers must unite to avoid becoming sacrificial pawns. Retaliatory measures against the U.S. represent a strategic shift—from rhetoric to actual cost-bearing implementation of this principle.
Trudeau’s firm stance is backed by strong domestic consensus, not reckless desperation. Polls show about 85% of Canadians support their government rejecting U.S. terms, and around 80% back imposing retaliatory tariffs. This nationwide unity—“everyone stepping onto the ice”—is his greatest strength.
Canada is not blindly engaging in full-scale confrontation. Its retaliatory tariffs target approximately $20 billion worth of American goods, focusing on key constituencies crucial to the upcoming U.S. midterm elections, aiming to transform economic hardship into political pressure within the U.S., thereby forcing Washington back to the negotiating table.
Trudeau’s approach offers a reference “blueprint” for global resistance against trade bullying.
As one of America’s closest allies, Canada’s willingness to retaliate in kind shatters the psychological norm that “allies dare not counter America,” proving that dependency is not the only option.
Canada’s uniqueness lies in its position as a neighbor within America’s “backyard,” with deep security entanglements; thus, its retaliation is more of an instinctive reaction born out of being cornered. For middle powers in Europe or Asia, with different geopolitical contexts and security pressures, direct imitation is difficult.
The essence of Trudeau’s move lies in exploring an extremely narrow middle path—between unconditional following and complete disengagement. The destination of this path does not depend on whether Canada can “win” the trade war against the U.S., but on whether it can successfully transform this crisis into an opportunity to advance economic diversification and reshape strategic autonomy.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1876195370866699/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s).