An interesting post on the year-end interview with PM Carney.

Of note, from the post … “There was one statement that I think really deserves attention in the exchange. It followed on from a question about what limits Canada should put in place when dealing with a country like China. Carney was ready with a ring-fencing answer. In any “rapprochement” (his word) with China, there will be areas where security concerns will prevent any deep engagement. He mentioned AI, critical minerals, defence. I am sure the list could have been longer.

But then Carney went on to say the most interesting thing in the interview. He contrasted the China situation with a willingness on the part of Canada to deal on such security-sensitive issues with the EU and the UK. No problem there. But what about the US?

Here’s the kicker.

Carney said: “we have a strategic question for our country.” The question: “how deep these relationships are in these areas [AI, critical minerals, defence, remember] with the United States.”

This language is, of course, a far cry from an earlier determination by the Carney government to pursue a ‘new, comprehensive economic and security partnership’ with the United States. A far cry from a nodding approval of Trump’s big, beautiful ”golden dome” missile defence system. I think it represents a significant learning curve, especially when it comes to the security “partnership,” and the extent to which it can ever be “comprehensive” again.”