Smith shouldn’t be so quick to validate Trump’s border concerns

All of Canada seems to be panicking over United States (U.S.) President-elect Donald Trump’s threat of imposing 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian imports. But Premier Danielle Smith’s initial reaction was to validate Trump’s concerns about the Canadian border. On top of that, she has announced $29 million to crackdown on the border. This represents a miscalculated and potentially damaging choice for both Alberta’s economy and Canada’s diplomatic relationship with the U.S..

Smith’s endorsement may appear politically motivated, potentially aimed at reinforcing partisan divisions or capitalizing on an opportunity to critique Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. However, it does not come without consequences. Ultimately, this approach fails to address the root causes of these issues. 

It’s true that unlawful crossings at the Canada-U.S. border have more than doubled over the past two years. Between October 2023 and July 2024, there were 19,498 crossings, largely along Quebec’s border with Vermont and New York (N.Y.). That’s up from 7,630 in the previous year. However, the total number remains significantly lower than that of the U.S.-Mexico border. Even with the uptick in crossing at the Canadian border, the northern border is still much less of a pressure point for the U.S. than its southern counterpart. For every illegal crossing from Canada, there are approximately 10 from Mexico. It’s clear that illegal crossings at the northern border aren’t a major source of migration for the U.S.. Yet, Trump is threatening tariffs over it. 

Additionally, Trump has cited concerns about opioids entering the U.S. over the Canadian border. U.S. Customs and Border Protections seized less than 20 kilograms of fentanyl at the Canada-U.S. border in 2023. In stark contrast, over 9,000 kilograms were seized at the U.S.-Mexico border.

By validating Trump’s framing of the situation as a real threat, Smith could inadvertently make things worse. Her comments could add to the mounting tension between Canada and the U.S., straining relations over a problem that is not proportionate to the proposed response. 

One of the most concerning elements of Smith’s support for Trump’s border concerns is that it’s the reason for the threatened 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian imports. Alberta’s economy is deeply reliant on trade with the U.S.. The U.S. is Alberta’s top trading partner, with exports to the U.S. reaching $77.5 billion in 2020. The energy, agriculture, and manufacturing sectors are particularly vulnerable to disruptions in cross-border trade. Smith’s response doesn’t exactly do much to convince Trump that the tariffs aren’t necessary. 

Imposing a 25 per cent tariff would dramatically increase the costs of Alberta’s exports, reducing the competitiveness of key industries that rely on smooth access to the U.S. market. Such tariffs would likely provoke retaliatory measures from Canada, further escalating the trade conflict and potentially leading to a protracted economic downturn. Businesses in Alberta, especially those in the agriculture and energy sectors, would face higher production costs and reduced market access. That could result in higher costs for people, including students, who are already struggling with the cost-of-living.

The imposition of tariffs would also strain the broader Canadian economy, especially considering the volume of trade between the two countries. That bilateral trade relationship amounts to almost $2.5 billion every day in products and services. Rather than enhancing security, tariffs would undermine Alberta’s economic strength and place unnecessary pressure on its industries. Making this clear should be Smith’s priority, not validating concerns that aren’t backed up by data. 

Border security is undoubtedly important for both countries. But an approach that prioritizes punitive measures like tariffs over co-operative solutions risks future diplomatic efforts. Canada-U.S. relations are built on shared interests and collaboration. Adding to unnecessary tensions by validating Trump’s stance could have long-term consequences. The best way forward is through co-operative, data-driven solutions that consider both national security concerns and the economic interests of both nations. 

Smith’s validation of Trump’s concerns about border security is short-sighted and could have detrimental effects on Alberta’s economy and Canada-U.S. relations. Considering a 25 per cent tariff is at stake, leaders need to carefully think through their responses. Alberta’s future economic stability, as well as the integrity of Canada’s diplomatic relationships, depends on it.