Geopolitics with Frank McKenna
Sep 25, 2026 · 40 min · 14 segments
In Episode 82, Frank provides his grade score on the recent Canada Investment Summit hosted by Prime Minister Carney with two thumbs up for a job well done. He addresses the standoff on tariff…
Frank McKennaGuestPeter HainesHost
Well, we're at an impasse at the present time, but the differences are not vast.
A big one was around the definition of automotive as to whether it included like trucks or not, for example.
And then the question of whether or not any agreement that we reached would be binding or have a dispute mechanism.
The United States basically seemed to want to have the ability to change the terms at any time and also effectively have veto power over our ability to do trade deals with other countries.
So it wouldn't surprise me if we're able to bridge our differences and get to a deal.
What's happening now is not good for either country, and it's certainly creating a tailwind of popularity for the government in Canada and a headwind for the government in the United States, which might even affect two or three of the Senate races or other races that are taking place.
So I think there's some motivation to try to get to a deal, and I'm guardedly optimistic that we will end up bridging our differences and get there.
Okay, I'm going to just double click on something you just said there about how this has been arguably helping the popularity of the leadership, current leadership in Canada and harming the popularity of the current leadership in the U.S. On that same vein, the U.S. does continue to rattle cages with threats on banning diesel exports, going to Belarus for cheaper potash and so on.
And on the flip side, Prime Minister Carney's become a little bit more playful with the media in response to questions about the president.
Do you buy into the fact that the criticism from the right will be that Carney has in fact manufactured this dispute with the U.S. over tariffs to help keep inflation artificially higher, to impact midterms, and also to help the commodity-sensitive Canadian economy? Is there any justification to this argument?
Certainly the government is popular, but on the other hand, they're going to put a lot of that capital at work in their legislative agenda this fall.
I think, quite frankly, the prime minister is just trying to be an adult in the relationship.
But I think at the end of the day, we have to look through, if I can use that expression, all of that rhetoric, which is part of the approach of the president, and get to the substance.
And substantively, the logic of this... having a strong trade relationship is compelling.
Well, we're at an impasse at the present time, but the differences are not vast.
A big one was around the definition of automotive as to whether it included like trucks or not, for example.
And then the question of whether or not any agreement that we reached would be binding or have a dispute mechanism.
The United States basically seemed to want to have the ability to change the terms at any time and also effectively have veto power over our ability to do trade deals with other countries.
So it wouldn't surprise me if we're able to bridge our differences and get to a deal.
What's happening now is not good for either country, and it's certainly creating a tailwind of popularity for the government in Canada and a headwind for the government in the United States, which might even affect two or three of the Senate races or other races that are taking place.
So I think there's some motivation to try to get to a deal, and I'm guardedly optimistic that we will end up bridging our differences and get there.
Okay, I'm going to just double click on something you just said there about how this has been arguably helping the popularity of the leadership, current leadership in Canada and harming the popularity of the current leadership in the U.S. On that same vein, the U.S. does continue to rattle cages with threats on banning diesel exports, going to Belarus for cheaper potash and so on.
And on the flip side, Prime Minister Carney's become a little bit more playful with the media in response to questions about the president.
Do you buy into the fact that the criticism from the right will be that Carney has in fact manufactured this dispute with the U.S. over tariffs to help keep inflation artificially higher, to impact midterms, and also to help the commodity-sensitive Canadian economy? Is there any justification to this argument?
Certainly the government is popular, but on the other hand, they're going to put a lot of that capital at work in their legislative agenda this fall.
I think, quite frankly, the prime minister is just trying to be an adult in the relationship.
But I think at the end of the day, we have to look through, if I can use that expression, all of that rhetoric, which is part of the approach of the president, and get to the substance.
And substantively, the logic of this... having a strong trade relationship is compelling.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.