The guest in the gallery
Ursula von der Leyen spoke in Strasbourg. The occasion was her annual State of the Union address, a set piece speech where the European Commission president maps the path ahead for the bloc. She spoke on 16 September. Before the European Parliament, she addressed a continent grappling with migration, climate change and Russia’s long war in Ukraine. This is the routine of Brussels power.
The real news was not at the podium. It was in the gallery. Sat as a special guest was Mark Carney, the prime minister of Canada. He was there to listen. His presence was a message. A non European leader does not attend the State of the Union address by accident, and Carney’s attendance was a carefully calibrated piece of political signalling directed across the Atlantic Ocean.
It was aimed at Washington.
The visit represents a calculated and public pivot by Ottawa, a direct consequence of growing hostility from the administration of United States president Donald Trump. Canada is actively seeking closer ties with the European Union because its oldest and most important relationship has become dangerously unreliable. This is not a subtle diplomatic shift. It is a search for new anchors in a storm. The attendance of a Canadian prime minister at this particular EU event, a moment of internal reflection for the union, would have been unthinkable a decade ago. It breaks with the entire post war tradition of North American solidarity.
Carney’s government is looking for more than just friendly photo opportunities. Ottawa has a specific agenda. It wants a deeper partnership with Brussels on defence, on the complex world of digital regulation, and on trade. His attendance in Strasbourg is the opening move in a strategy to secure these goals. The speech by von der Leyen provided the stage, but the drama was the sight of a Canadian prime minister turning his chair away from Washington and pointing it, deliberately, towards Europe. A realignment is under way. It is happening in plain sight.
A neighbour turns hostile
The shift is born of necessity. Canada did not choose this path. It was forced onto it. The relationship with its southern neighbour, for so long the unshakeable foundation of its foreign and economic policy, has become a source of profound instability and deep strategic anxiety for officials in Ottawa. The direct cause is the administration in the White House. Donald Trump’s presidency has been characterised by what observers call growing tensions with Ottawa. It has also been defined by outright repeated threats. This is not the normal friction of international relations. This is not a disagreement over lumber tariffs, a familiar squabble that has long punctuated the alliance. This is different. This is hostile. The language from Washington has fundamentally altered the calculus for a nation that shares a 5,525 mile land border, the longest in the world, with the United States.
The threats were repeated. That repetition is critical. It signals not a temporary fit of presidential anger but a sustained and deliberate policy of aggression, a conscious effort to turn a historic partner into a subordinate. For a country as economically integrated with the US as Canada, this environment of perpetual unpredictability is a national security crisis in itself. Ottawa had no choice but to react to a consistent pattern of behaviour from Washington that has made long term planning almost impossible and turned routine diplomatic contact into a hazardous exercise. The old certainties are gone. A new reality has arrived. Everything is now in question.
For generations, Canadian leaders have operated on the core assumption that the United States, regardless of who was president, was a fundamentally rational and reliable actor that would ultimately operate within established norms. That assumption is now broken. The constant threats emanating from the Trump White House are not simply rhetoric to be weathered or ignored. They are perceived in Ottawa as a genuine and present danger to the Canadian national interest. They create an environment where painstakingly negotiated international deals can be torn up without warning. They suggest that longstanding security guarantees are no longer guaranteed. They make the world’s most successful and integrated trading relationship feel dangerously fragile. This is the new American posture.
This sustained pressure from Washington has therefore forced a strategic rethink of a magnitude unseen in Canada since the Second World War. The country must now operate as if its primary partner is also a potential adversary. Nothing works the same way. The entire architecture of Canadian statecraft, which was designed almost exclusively to manage a single, overwhelmingly important relationship, must be rebuilt from the foundations up. It must be diversified. This is the cold, hard logic driving Mark Carney to a guest’s seat in the European Parliament in Strasbourg. He is there because the house next door feels like it might burn down, and he urgently needs to find out who else will answer the phone. The threats were not isolated incidents. They were a campaign. Canada is now looking for other options. It is looking for shelter from the storm.
Ottawa's shopping list
Ottawa has a list. It is a precise and strategic shopping list for a new kind of alliance. Canada is seeking much closer ties with the European Union on three specific fronts: defence, digital regulation and trade. These are not separate diplomatic initiatives. They are the interlocking components of a single, coherent plan born of necessity, a grand strategy designed to build a Canada that is less vulnerable to the whims of a hostile American president. Every item is a direct reaction to a specific threat from Washington. Every negotiation is a step away from a dependence that now feels perilous. This is a search for ballast.
Trade is the most urgent priority. The economic relationship is paramount. Canada and the European Union are already linked by the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, known as CETA, a deal that eliminated most tariffs years ago. That agreement now looks like a foundation upon which a fortress can be built. But it is not enough. Ottawa is looking for something deeper than market access, seeking to hardwire Canadian supply chains into the European industrial system as a buffer against American protectionism. This would mean aligning standards on green hydrogen, collaborating on the production of electric vehicle batteries, and guaranteeing the flow of Canadian critical minerals to European factories. It is a plan to reorient the entire gravitational pull of the Canadian economy away from its traditional north south axis. The goal is insulation. A future where a sudden tweet from the White House cannot shatter Canadian industries overnight is the ultimate prize.
Then there is the digital world. Here, Canada and the EU are natural partners, sharing a regulatory philosophy that stands in stark contrast to the permissive, corporate led model of the United States. It is a shared belief. Brussels has its General Data Protection Regulation and its Digital Services Act. Ottawa has pursued similar legislation. A deeper partnership would mean creating a unified front on the next wave of challenges, especially the regulation of artificial intelligence. By aligning their rules, they could create a combined transatlantic market of nearly 500 million people where tech giants from Silicon Valley would be forced to operate under European and Canadian terms. This has power. It would establish a de facto global standard for data privacy and AI ethics, exporting their values and pushing back against both the American and Chinese models of technological development. The effort is political.
The final piece is defence. This is the most delicate file. Canada remains a core member of NATO, but the repeated threats from Donald Trump have shaken Ottawa’s faith in the absolute reliability of the American security guarantee. Trust has evaporated. Seeking closer defence ties with the EU is not about replacing the Atlantic alliance. It is about creating a backup system. This could mean Canada participating directly in the EU’s own defence projects, collaborating on military procurement to reduce dependence on American arms manufacturers, and embedding Canadian officers within the EU’s military command structures. It would almost certainly mean sharing intelligence far more deeply with EU institutions, not just with traditional partners in Paris or Berlin. This is about sovereignty. It is a quiet recognition that in a dangerous world, Canada can no longer afford to have only one powerful friend.
Brussels sees an opportunity
The invitation to Mark Carney was a deliberate act. Brussels sees an opening. For an institution currently managing crises from the war in Ukraine to climate change, the prospect of a dependable new partner is an invaluable asset. A very valuable asset. The presence of the Canadian prime minister in the Strasbourg chamber is much more than diplomatic politeness, it is a calculated response to a changing world and a moment of opportunity the European Union does not intend to miss. Securing a strong relationship with a stable G7 nation, while its southern neighbour retreats into protectionist hostility, presents a clear strategic advantage for the European Commission. The gain is obvious.
This alignment directly bolsters the EU’s global agenda. Look at the files. On climate change, where Brussels has staked enormous political capital on its green transition, a committed Canadian partner adds significant weight to international negotiations and reinforces the global drive towards decarbonisation. This matters. A united EU and Canada can form a powerful bloc, pushing back against nations that are less ambitious and creating a larger, more attractive market for green technology and sustainable investment. The same logic applies directly to the war in Ukraine. Canada has been a firm supporter of Kyiv from the beginning, and its formal alignment with the European position strengthens the international coalition against Russian aggression, providing another influential voice for sanctions and sustained military aid. It provides leverage.
The opportunity extends deep into the architecture of global governance. It is about power. An erratic Washington under Donald Trump has created a vacuum within multilateral institutions like the G7, and European leaders in Brussels see a chance to fill it with a partner that shares their core values on trade and international law. It is a fundamental shift. A functioning working alliance with Ottawa allows the EU to bypass potential American obstructionism on a range of key issues, effectively creating a caucus of like minded states within the broader western alliance. This is not about replacing America. It is about building a hedge against its contemporary unreliability and insulating European priorities from the political volatility in Washington.
Ultimately, for Ursula von der Leyen and the leaders in Brussels, this is a moment to reshape the transatlantic relationship on their own terms. The old order is gone. For decades, Europe was often the junior partner in an alliance completely dominated by Washington, but a hostile American administration has fractured that old certainty and given the EU a rare chance to assert its own sovereignty. Bringing Canada closer into its orbit is a crucial part of that grand project. It is a sophisticated move that secures a valuable economic and diplomatic ally, expands European regulatory influence across the Atlantic, and builds a more resilient international system that is far less dependent on the whims of a single American president. It is smart politics. The benefits are immense.
The alliance is changing
The central question is one of permanence. Is this a temporary diplomatic manoeuvre, a piece of political theatre designed to manage a uniquely hostile American president, or is it something more profound. The answer will define the western alliance for a generation. On one reading, Mark Carney’s trip to Strasbourg is a simple act of pragmatism driven entirely by the actions of Donald Trump, whose aggressive rhetoric has forced Ottawa to seek shelter with other allies. It is a reaction. A different occupant in the White House, one committed to traditional diplomacy and mutual respect, could conceivably reverse the entire process, drawing Canada back into Washington’s exclusive orbit with promises of stability and a return to the status quo. The old bonds are strong.
Geography has not changed. The United States remains Canada’s neighbour, its largest trading partner, and its most critical security guarantor by an immense margin. The deep economic and cultural integration between the two countries, built over more than a century, cannot be dismantled by a single presidential term or a new friendship with Brussels. Proximity matters. From this perspective, the outreach to the European Union is a hedging strategy, a necessary but ultimately temporary diversification designed to create leverage and wait out the political storm across the border. It is a sensible insurance policy. Once the immediate threat from Washington recedes, so too might the urgency of Ottawa’s European pivot, with the gravitational pull of the American market proving irresistible once more. Business is business. The relationship is too important to abandon.
This view, however, may be too optimistic. It fails to recognise that Donald Trump might not be an aberration but a symptom of a deeper, more lasting political volatility within the United States. Future administrations could be just as unpredictable. For Canadian policymakers, the lesson of the Trump presidency is that relying so heavily on a single, increasingly unreliable partner is a critical strategic vulnerability. Trust has been broken. The European Union, for all its internal disagreements on issues like migration, offers something the modern United States cannot, which is long term regulatory and political stability. An alliance with Brussels is an alliance with a system, not a single individual. Once Ottawa formalises new partnerships on defence and aligns its digital economy with European standards, those structures become deeply embedded. They are not easily unwound.
This is the beginning of a permanent realignment. It is not a full divorce from Washington, but an end to the era of exclusive dependency. The experience of American hostility, even if it proves temporary, will institutionalise a new caution within the Canadian state. It will become a core principle of Ottawa’s foreign policy to maintain a powerful counterweight to American influence, and the European Union is the only plausible candidate for that role. The western alliance is therefore not fracturing. It is rebalancing. The old hierarchical structure, with Washington at its undisputed apex and allies like Canada in subordinate roles, is giving way to a more complex system of interlocking, sometimes competing, partnerships. The old certainties are gone. A new map of power is being drawn.
Sources. Guardian World: Von der Leyen to set out challenges and opportunities for EU in ‘state of the Union’ speech – Europe live. France 24: Live: EU chief Ursula von der Leyen gives State of the Union address.
Analysis. Drafted with AI assistance from the sources listed above and reviewed by an editor before publication. Jnews links to the organisations it writes about.
