Trump Ignores The Power Of Nationalism At His Peril

As he prepared for a trade war with Canada, Trump could have concentrated his fire on his enemies in the doomed Liberal government. Instead, he spent months insulting Canada's national identity. He repeatedly said Canada should be the“51st state of the US”, calling Trudeau“governor.”

Americans can dismiss Trump's talk of annexing Canada as a joke, but Canadians can't . Regardless of whether Trump would ever follow through with attempting an annexation, his language is an attack on Canadian sovereignty. No one with any sense of national pride would tolerate it.

An Angus Reid poll found the number of people saying they had a“deep emotional attachment” to Canada rose from 49% to 59% from December 2024 to February 2025. That emotional attachment is visible in everything from“buy Canadian” campaigns to Canadians booing the US national anthem at hockey games.

The Liberals, under new leader Mark Carney, are also experiencing a remarkable bounce-back in the polls.

Another Angus Reid poll shows that voting intention for the Liberals has surged from 16% in December to 42% now. They are now leading the Conservatives, who have 37% support. Some are now anticipating a snap election could be called in days.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who has sometimes been likened to Trump , has also led a ferocious pro-Canadian resistance to American tariffs, getting his own re-election boost .

Trump's defenders often claim his chaotic bluster is simply a negotiating tactic, a way of spooking others into accepting terms more favorable to him. If so, this tactic is backfiring in Canada.

Trade wars require sacrifices . Citizens must pay more for the sake of protecting their countries' industries. Canadians seem a lot more willing to make that sacrifice than Americans , who are mostly confused that their friendly neighbor has suddenly been recast as an enemy.

Other countries have shown they will not cave easily, either, as Trump puts their national identity at stake.

Demanding to buy another country's territory, as Trump keeps doing with Greenland , a self-governing territory under Danish control, may be even more insulting than threatening to take it, as he keeps doing with Panama . Each time Greenlanders , Danes and Panamanians refuse Trump, his credibility erodes further.

Trump talks about the territory of other countries in terms of“real estate”, even suggesting the United States should“redevelop” Gaza after evicting the Palestinians.

But sovereign land is not real estate. In a world of nation-states defined by territory, even sparsely inhabited territory has“sacred value”. This is particularly true for peoples seeking statehood on their land.

“Sacred values” are things people see as non-negotiable because they are linked to their sense of identity and moral order in the world. Researchers warn that offering money in exchange for sacred values is deeply offensive, and likely to harm, rather than help, negotiations.

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

• The Daily Report Start your day right with Asia Times' top stories
• AT Weekly Report A weekly roundup of Asia Times' most-read stories

There is a reason why governments hardly ever sell their territory to other countries anymore . Empires may have done in this in the past, but not nations. They view their lands, and the people who live on them, as inalienable from the nation.

Trump clearly doesn't understand this concept. He has shown no empathy for Ukraine, a country whose territory actually has been invaded. He accused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky of wanting to prolong the war so he could“keep the gravy train going”, as if harvesting US aid dollars was the real reason Ukrainians were fighting for their country's existence.

Trump's contempt for Ukraine, Canada, Greenland, Gaza, Denmark and Panama has reverberations far beyond these places. It signals that his brand of American nationalism has no place for anyone else's national aspirations or sovereignty.

This will not promote the deal-making Trump wants because no one trusts an unstable, imperial power to stick to its agreements. It would be painful for many countries to reduce their dependence on the United States , but it would be more painful to give away their national dignity.

David Smith is associate professor in American Politics and Foreign Policy, US Studies Centre, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .

Sign up here to comment on Asia Times stories Or Sign in to an existing accoun

Thank you for registering!

An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link.

• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)