Why Mark Carney Should Play Trump’s Game—and Win

Canada has no time for ideological purity. It needs leverage, jobs, and air defense.

It’s still early.

Just under 100 days since he became Prime Minister of Canada. Whatever Mark Carney has done—or said—so far must be treated not as final moves, but as signals. Perhaps even pre-signals. The kind you see in the opening moments of a chess game—first, the tension before the clocks start ticking, then the first five minutes as the board begins to take shape. Except this isn't chess. This is national, geopolitical, and security chess. And in this game, early signals matter more than most people realize.

Biden and Trump offer perfect case studies in how interpreting early signals could have spared the world a great deal of heartache.

Very early into the Russian invasion, President Biden received the Lend-Lease bill delivered by Texas Senator John Cornyn. It gave him sweeping authority to deliver a decisive defeat to the Russian army. He ignored it. Pretended it didn’t exist. That was the first—and clearest—signal of where the Biden administration stood. And from that moment on, it only went in one direction.

The Trump administration was even more brazen. Its clearest signal came on February 28th and in the days that followed. They tariffed the entire world—but not a single tariff on the great invader. Trump personally asked GOP senators not to introduce a Russia sanctions bill. He needs an eternal “two weeks” to make a decision. And so, to this day, he hasn’t.

These nuances matter.

And the early signals from the Carney administration have raised my hopes—for Canada, and for the democratic world. He is not naive. He is not using his office to blur moral lines. He is deliberately steering clear of political convenience. And that in my book carries a ton of value.

In a recent address, Prime Minister Carney spoke directly to Canadians. No euphemisms. No illusions. He told them they stood at the doorstep of a generational pivot:

“The global economy is fundamentally different today than it was yesterday.
The system of global trade anchored on the United States—a system that, while not perfect, has delivered prosperity for our country since the end of the Second World War—is over.

Our old relationship of steadily deepening integration with the United States is over.

The 80-year period when the United States embraced the mantle of global economic leadership—when it forged alliances rooted in trust and mutual respect, and championed the free and open exchange of goods and services—is over.

This is a tragedy. But it is also our new reality.”

Here he is showing clear undestanding of the situation. There is literally nothing to read between the lines. Then how do you reconcile what he said above with the following.

When Mark Carney was asked by a reporter in May whether Canada would join the Donald Trump’s proposed Golden Dome missile defence system, he said.

I'm not going to put a price tag.

We are conscious that we have an ability, if we so choose, to complete the Golden Dome with investments and partnership.

But I'm not sure one negotiates on this. These are these are military decisions. And we will evaluate it accordingly.

The Golden Dome missile defense system is still in its infancy. God knows what the current American administration is thinking. But the idea is clear: a multi-layered air-defense shield designed to protect the United States—and, if Canada joins, both nations.

Share the costs, share the protection.

So why would Carney declare that “our old relationship of steadily deepening integration with the United States is over,” and then signal openness to joining Donald Trump’s Golden Dome?

You know what? If I were advising the Prime Minister, I’d tell him to make full use of this opening. Exploit it. Don’t hesitate. Engage.

Why is it acceptable for Turkey to host fleeing Russian troops from Syria while helping Ukraine build warships at its ports? Why is it fine for India to protect its American-made C-17 Globemasters with Russian S-400 air defense systems?

Why can’t Canada reduce its exports to the United States, diversify its customer base, and still buy American weapons?

If it serves Canada’s national interest, that’s exactly what Carney should do. Every country bordering the Arctic is heading for trouble sooner or later. And if Ukraine has taught us anything, it’s this: drones are the future, and without air defense, you’re just waiting to be cooked from the outside in.

For all their flaws, American weapons systems are still the best in the world. Unlike Europe, Canada doesn’t have the full-spectrum development capability to produce them independently. Europe does—and should—start reducing its dependence on U.S. arms. Not down to zero, but it needs limits. Canada, however, is in a different position. It’s not going to build everything on its own. That’s a fantasy. Not feasible, and frankly, not worth the effort. The options are simple: buy from Europe—which is still a decade away from hitting its export stride—or buy from the United States.

Right now, the American defense industry is suffering from a trust deficit. Europe will slowly move away. This is the perfect moment for Canada to use its buying power to negotiate strong, forward-looking contracts. If there's a kill switch, write into the contract exactly what happens in case of a conflict between the U.S. and Canada. Ask them to move production to Canadian soil. Create jobs. Lock them into long-term deals. Work the paper. If the deal is good and the price is right, take it.

If not, say au revoir and walk away.

But to reject this opportunity because it’s politically inconvenient—or because you’re clinging to an ideology—would be a mistake. That’s exactly the mistake the far right and the far left want governments to make: lock themselves into purity politics so the ideologues can exploit power, money, and the rest of the chocolates.

Western governments should never fall into that trap.

Carney has made it clear: he wants to diversify Canada’s trade routes. He’s pushing for a pivot—from a U.S.-centric export model to a more global strategy. He wants to open the door to energy exports to Asia, and he’s signaled a willingness to compete, not comply. And for every step he takes, the United States will try to throw a wrench into it. So what better way to toss that wrench right back at the MAGA crowd than by seriously negotiating Canada’s role in the Golden Dome missile defense shield?

Let’s be honest. I’m not sure how effective the Trump administration is at actually building anything. He talks a lot. So does the GOP. But aside from tax cuts, they’ve rarely delivered. The COVID-19 vaccine development was a rare exception—and credit is due there. But beyond that, the GOP has produced very little of lasting value for a long time.

That’s one concern. The other is cost overruns—something the U.S. weapons industry has turned into an Olympic sport. But beyond those two risks, I see no compelling reason for Carney to dismiss Trump’s proposal outright. In fact, it would be a mistake.

This is a rare opening—a strategic one. A chance to anchor Canada inside a major continental defense program while extracting real industrial and diplomatic leverage. If Carney is serious about safeguarding Canada’s future—economically, militarily, and geopolitically—then this move is worth the risk, as long as he stays aggressive about tilting the energy hose even slightly away from the United States.

Because in the real world, power comes not from purity, but from leverage.

---

The Concis has one of the highest engagement rates on Substack—beating even some of the biggest names. But its reach is still limited. Why? Because we haven’t crossed the 10,000-subscriber mark yet.

Right now, we’re at 7140

Every new subscriber doesn’t just grow this platform—it helps push stories like this one further into the global conversation. Stories that cut through propaganda. Stories that track the truth, not the trend.

Your subscription fuels The Concis to fly the flag for Ukraine and global democracy with even more force.