The history behind the merger of Canada with the USA: For a better understanding, we have to go more than a century back regarding the merger issues, etc. Some of the historical facts are listed below:
|
From the independence of the USA till date, Various movements within Canada have been recorded in favor of the U.S. annexation of parts of or all of Canada. |
In the early years of the USA, before and after the Civil War, many politicians in the USA were in favor of invading and annexing Canada. |
1837s: Historical annexationist movements inside Canada were recorded usually by dissatisfaction with Britain’s colonial government of Canada. |
1848 to 1854: Around 1850, there was a serious annexationist movement on the border region of Quebec's Eastern Townships (Canada), where the American-descended majority felt that union with the United States would end their economic isolation and stagnation as well as remove them from the growing threat of French Canadian political domination. In the mid-century, a small but organized group supported integrating the colonies into the United States.
The Montreal Annexation Manifesto was published in 1849. It was hoped that a merger with the United States would give Canada markets for its goods, ensure national security, and provide the finances to develop the West. A half measure was the Canadian–American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 which linked the two areas economically. However, the movement died out in 1854. Annexation was never a very popular choice. The American Civil War, further, convinced many Canadians that the American experiment was a failure.
|
|
1860 to 1879: United States Secretary of State William Seward predicted in 1860 that western British North America, from Manitoba to British Columbia, would with Russian Alaska join the United States. Many in Britain were pessimistic about the future of British North America and agreed with Seward. It is said that Britain would only object if the United States attempted to take the territory by force. In the late 1860s, residents of British Columbia, which was not yet a Canadian province, responded to the United States' purchase of Alaska with fear of being surrounded by American territory. Some residents wanted the colony to be the next American purchase. Local opinion was divided, as the three Vancouver Island newspapers supported annexation to the United States, while the three mainland newspapers rejected the idea. Even opponents of the annexation scheme admitted that Great Britain had neglected the region and that grievances were justified. Nonetheless, annexation sentiment disappeared within a few months and prominent leaders moved toward confederation with Canada. Most Canadians were strongly opposed to the prospect of American annexation.
Nonetheless, a substantial annexation movement existed in Nova Scotia, and to a lesser degree in New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario, during the 1860s. Nova Scotia anti-confederationists led by Joseph Howe felt that pro-confederation premier Charles Tupper had caused the province to agree to join Canada without popular support. Howe in London unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the government to free Nova Scotia from the pending British North America Act by threatening American annexation. A significant economic downturn occurred after the end of 1866 of the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854; the colony was heavily dependent on selling fish to Americans, causing many to believe that free trade with the United States was necessary for prosperity. Anti-confederationists won two seats in the 1867 provincial election; as in British Columbia, they did not necessarily support annexation. They again sent Howe to London to free Nova Scotia but in 1868 the British government again refused, believing that New Brunswick would likely follow Nova Scotia out of the dominion and cause the new nation to collapse. Angry Nova Scotians began talking seriously about annexation. An alarmed Howe—who wished Nova Scotia to be free of Canada but still with Britain—warned his supporters against disloyalty, dividing anti-confederationists.
The provincial government, dominated by extremists who now also opposed Howe, decided that if another appeal to London failed it would seize federal offices and unilaterally declare annexation, believing that Britain would not use force to stop Nova Scotia. Believing he had no choice, Howe left the anti-confederationists. Although he narrowly won reelection to his federal parliamentary seat in March 1869 as a confederationist, support for secession and annexation grew that year; however, by 1871 the movement had mostly disappeared. The federal government promised changes to taxes and tariffs, the economy was revived, and the United States agreed to free trade for Canadian fish. Much more serious were the Fenian raids made by Irish Americans across the border in 1866, which spurred a wave of patriotic feelings that helped the cause of Confederation. Reports of the Annexation Bill of 1866 — a bill that, contrary to myth, never came to a vote, might have been one of the many factors behind Canadian Confederation in 1867. Petitions circulated in favor of American annexation. The first, in 1867, was addressed to Queen Victoria, demanding that the British government assume the colony's debts and establish a steamer link, or allow the colony to join the U.S. In 1869, a second petition was addressed to President Ulysses S. Grant, asking him to negotiate American annexation of the territory from Britain. It was delivered to Grant by Vincent Colyer, Indian Commissioner for Alaska, on December 29, 1869. Both petitions were signed by only a small fraction of the colony's population, and British Columbia was ultimately admitted as a Canadian province in 1871.
|
|
1880s: A Quebec-born homeopathic physician, Prosper Bender, expressed disappointment with the Canadian experiment in the 1880s and 1890s. An author and the former host of a literary circle in Quebec City, Bender suddenly moved to Boston in 1882. After celebrating the promise of Confederation, he became a strong proponent of annexation to the United States and something of an intercultural broker; he helped interpret French-Canadian culture to American readers. Bender wrote in the North American Review in 1883 that many Canadians believed that annexation by the United States would occur "within the present generation, if not sooner". He believed that Irish Catholics—about one-quarter of Canada's population—would prefer annexation because of the British rule of Ireland. They would be joined by the majority of those under 40, who viewed the United States as a prosperous, fast-growing neighbor providing many opportunities. The author attributed the absence of an active annexation movement in part to many who would favor such an effort taking the "easiest and quietest method of securing the benefits of annexation, by themselves silently migrating to the Republic", as more than a million already had. Bender believed that Prime Minister John A. Macdonald's promise of a transcontinental railway linking eastern Canada to British Columbia to be overambitious and too expensive, and unfavorably compared the Canadian government's growing debt to the United States' rapid reduction of its Civil War debt. He stated that Canadian businesses would benefit from duty-free access to the American market, while "wondrous American enterprise, supported by illimitable capital" would rapidly prosper Canada, especially its vast undeveloped interior. Bender concluded with pessimism about the likelihood of success of a nation divided into two parts by 1,200 miles of "forbidding, silent wilderness stretching from the head-waters of the Ottawa to Thunder Bay, and thence to Manitoba".
|
1890s: In 1891, Goldwin Smith posited in his book Canada and the Canadian Question that Canada's eventual annexation by the United States was inevitable, and should be welcomed if Canadians genuinely believed in the ideal of democracy. His view did not receive widespread support.] In January 1893, concerned about Canada's possible annexation, a goal then being pursued by the Continental Union Association, a group of Ontario and Quebec Liberals, Prime Minister Sir John Thompson delivered a speech on tolerance, Canadian nationalism, and continued loyalty to Britain. Thompson eventually learned that the desire to make Canada part of the U.S. was confined to a small minority amongst the Liberals.
|
1900 to 2004: In 1901 W. T. Stead, a newspaper editor in London, England, discussed in The Americanization of the World possible annexations of Canada and Newfoundland. He believed that because of its size and strength Canada would likely be the last of Britain's possessions in the Americas to join the United States. Stead cited several reasons for why he believed annexation seemed "inevitable", however, including rapidly growing economic ties and migration between the two countries, the French Shore, and disputes over the Alaska boundary and fishing rights in the Atlantic. After discovering gold in the Yukon, many Canadians proposed annexing parts of Alaska currently controlled by the United States, by calling for a revision in the original map of the boundary line between the Russian Empire and the United States. The US offered to lease the territory but did not give it back. London and Washington agreed on arbitration, with one member of the panel from Canada. In 1903 the Chief Justice of Britain sided with the Americans to resolve the map dispute in favour of the United States. Many Canadians felt a sense of betrayal on the part of the British government, whose own national interest required close ties to the United States, regardless of the interests of Canada. The 1932 establishment of the International Peace Garden on the North Dakota–Manitoba border honored the long-lasting friendship between the two countries rather than attempts at annexation.
Newfoundland in the mid-20th century: While the Dominion of Newfoundland was still separate from Canada, before 1949, a party known as the Economic Union Party (EUP) sought closer ties with the United States. However, Canada objected to the possibility, and the British government, which administered the Dominion of Newfoundland as a de facto colony under an appointed Commission of Government, would not allow it to consider annexation with the United States in any referendum. Instead, the EUP sought to resume "responsible government" and would then explore American annexation. A referendum showed a plurality in support of independence, but not a majority; a runoff referendum resulted in Newfoundland instead confederating with Canada to become the tenth province.
Modern annexationist groups: Two modern provincial political parties have proposed that their province secede from Canada to join the United States. Neither attracted significant support. The Unionist Party was a provincial political party in Saskatchewan in 1980 that promoted the union of the western provinces with the United States. It was the most politically successful annexationist group, but its success was both short-lived and extremely limited in scope. The party briefly had two members in the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan, both of whom crossed the floor from another party, but dissolved within a few weeks after failing to qualify for official party status. The original Part 51 was a short-lived political party in Quebec in the 1980s that advocated Quebec's admission to the United States as the 51st state. The party won just 3,846 votes, or 0.11 percent of the popular vote in the province, in the 1989 election — fewer votes than the Marxist–Leninists or the satirical Lemon Party — and was dissolved the following year.
2001 to 2004: |
|
2013: Summary from the book: Merger of the Century: Why Canada and America Should Become One Country: (It is written by Diane Francis (Author) and its first edition was published in October 2013): Geopolitics expert and award-winning journalist Diane Francis presents a compelling political argument and business case for merging America and Canada into a geographical, political, and economic superpower. No two nations in the world are as integrated, economically and socially, as are the United States and Canada. We share geography, values, and the largest unprotected border in the world. Regardless of this close friendship, our two countries are on a slow-motion collision course—with each other and with the rest of the world. While we wrestle with internal political gridlock and fiscal challenges and clash over border problems, the economies of the larger world change and flourish. Emerging economies sailed through the financial meltdown of 2008. The International Monetary Fund forecasts that by 2018, China’s economy will be bigger than that of the United States; when combined with India, Japan, and the four Asian Tigers—South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong. China’s economy will be bigger than that of the G8 (minus Japan). Rather than continuing on this road to mutual decline, our two nations should chart a new course. Bestselling author Diane Francis proposes a simple and obvious solution: What if the United States and Canada merged into one country? The most audacious initiative since the Louisiana Purchase would solve the biggest problems each country expects to face: the U.S.’s national security threats and declining living standards; and Canada’s difficulty controlling and developing its huge landmass, stemming from a lack of capital, workers, technology and military might. Merger of the Century builds both a strong political argument and a compelling business case, treating our two countries not only as sovereign entities but as merging companies. We stand on the cusp of a new world order. Together, by marshaling resources and combining efforts, Canada and America have a greater chance of succeeding. As separate nations, the future is in much greater doubt indeed.
2014: Discussion on the above book ("Merger of the Century: Why Canada and America Should Become One Country"): Hosted By Canada Institute The mission of the Wilson Center's Canada Institute is to raise the level of knowledge of Canada in the United States, particularly within the Washington, DC policy community. Diane Francis, author of this book and Editor-at-Large, The Nationa Post. David Biette, Director, Canada Institute, Wilson Center.
Diane Francis began the discussion of her book “Merger of the Century: Why Canada and America Should Become One Country”, by outlining the existential challenges facing the United States and Canada.
For the United States, she foresees a “Cold War 2.0”, wherein capitalist and former communist countries with state-controlled industries continue to grow rapidly, threatening Western economies and thereby necessitating a merger. Francis then summarized the problems facing Canada, namely its inability to develop its resources (especially in the Arctic), the brain drain to the United States, the thickening of the border, and Canada’s potential demotion from the G20 in the next 10 years. She asserted that the Canada-U.S. border has continuously thickened since 2001 and has led to a 30% decrease in tourism to Canada and noted, on the energy side, that no border would mean no impediments to energy infrastructure projects like Keystone XL. In conclusion, she stated: “Let’s fast-track integration with the United States and eliminate some of these problems.”
Panel One – Merger of the Century: The New North America: Diane Francis, Editor-at-Large, The National Post Michael Geary, Global Fellow, Global Europe Program, Wilson Center Kevin Lees, Founder and Editor, Suffragio
Michael Geary, Global Fellow, Global Europe Program, Wilson Cente: Michael Geary began the first panel by offering his response to the claims Francis made in her book. Primarily, Geary advocated for “enhanced cooperation” on a variety of economic initiatives, rather than a merger. He believes the most promising area of advancement is in the consolidation of a trade relationship that takes the form of a partnership. Geary used the European Union as a point of comparison for lessons on integration and argued that the federalism experiment in the EU was largely a failure. He does note, however, that the EU has been successful in the areas of justice and home affairs and so asserts that the United States and Canada would do well to work together more on the border and the Arctic.
Kevin Lees, Founder and Editor, Suffragio: Kevin Lees followed up on Geary’s remarks by noting that a Canada-U.S. merger would be politically untenable, but that there is low-hanging fruit from which both countries could benefit. He advocated for a North American economic zone, similar to Schengen. Reinforcing his idea that a merger was infeasible, he also outlined the key difference between Canada and the United States: Canada was born of evolution, while America was born from revolution. Citing the book, The Big Shift, by Darrel Bricker and John Ibbitson, Lees also discussed the growing polarization within Canada, between the East and the West, as well as the growing political importance of immigrant communities, noting that this could bring additional complications to any idea of a merger.
Panel Two – The Outcome of a Canada-U.S. Merger
Diane Francis, Editor-at-Large, The National Post Kent Hughes, Public Policy Scholar, Wilson Center Christopher Wilson, Associate, Mexico Institute, Wilson Center
Kent Hughes, Public Policy Scholar, Wilson Center: Kent Hughes discussed the outcome of a united Canada and the United States and argued that the merger of the two countries would have a greater effect on politics than on the economy. Furthermore, Hughes asserts that the adaptation of universal health care would increase the merged country’s soft power and that moving “back to our shared pragmatic past” would make it easier to respond to “miracle East Asian countries.”
Christopher Wilson, Associate, Mexico Institute, Wilson Center: Chris Wilson then analyzed Mexico’s role in North American integration. He noted that “for dual-bilateralism to function without tearing apart what we’ve created in North America, we need to ensure that we are on the same track, and the only way to make sure we are on the same track is to have a strategic vision.” Wilson argued that any discussion of a future North American topography needs to include Mexico, so that “it doesn’t happen in a way that is divergent, but convergent, in the long term.” Wilson commended Francis for emphasizing the importance of strong relationships with our shared neighbors but asserted that Mexico cannot be ignored.
|
|
2016: Hans Mercier, a pro-American lawyer from Saint-Georges, Quebec, revived the party again. Mercier told La Presse that the times have changed since the party's previous era, as Quebec sovereigntism has waned in popularity. Mercier argued that Americans would be welcoming of a new Quebec state, and pointed to a survey taken during the administration of George W. Bush that suggested nearly 34 percent of Quebecers would support joining the United States. The revived party ran five candidates and received just 1,117 votes provincewide in the 2018 Quebec general election, representing 0.03 percent of the province-wide popular vote.
The party ran again and received just 689 votes provincewide in the 2022 Quebec general election, representing 0.02 percent of the province-wide popular vote.
Pro-annexation rhetoric: While talking with a guest on Tucker Carlson, in January of 2023, American commentator Tucker Carlson provocatively questioned, "We’re spending all this money to liberate Ukraine from the Russians, why are we not sending an armed force north to liberate Canada from Trudeau?" Carlson laughed at his remark, describing it as a "frenzy."
|
December 2024: President-elect Donald Trump suggested Canada consider becoming the 51st U.S. state during a tense meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over trade deficits and border security. He later referred to Trudeau as the “Governor Justin Trudeau of the Great State of Canada.” During an appearance on Fox News, Ontario Premier Doug Ford jokingly stated that this was Trump's attempt at revenge for the War of 1812 by saying; "I guess he’s still upset that in 1812 we burned down the White House and he’s holding a grudge after 212 years. He’s a funny guy".
December 18th, 2024: President-elect Trump suggested on his social media platform, Truth Social, that Canada should become the 51st State of the United States. He expressed displeasure in his belief of the US over subsidizing Canada. No one can answer why we subsidize Canada to the tune of over $100,000,000 a year. Makes no sense! Many Canadians want Canada to become the 51st State. They would save massively on taxes and military protection. I think it is a great idea. 51st State!!! — Donald J. Trump, Truth Social.
|
January 2025: President-elect Trump and his supporters continued talking about the idea of Canada joining the United States. On January 7th, 2025, during a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, President-elect Trump reiterated his position that Canada should become the 51st State but ruled out the use of military force to annex or acquire Canada, stating that he would instead use "economic force" to pressure Canada into joining the United States. He further commented, "You get rid of that artificially drawn line, and you take a look at what that looks like, And it would also be much better for national security. They’re great, but we’re spending hundreds of billions here to protect it." In the press conference, he again referred to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as "Governor Trudeau." Trump's comments on using economic force to annex Canada have been widely condemned by Canadian Politicians, Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that there wasn't "not a snowball's chance in hell" of Canada joining the United States. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre commented, "Canada will never be the 51st state, We are a great and independent country." New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh responded with "Cut the crap, Donald. No Canadian wants to join you." and later referred to the President-Elect as a "bully." Statements criticizing Trump's comments on Canada joining the US have also been made by other federal and provincial leaders and politicians.
|
