Greg Anderson, left, Laura Dawson, Nathan Skolski (moderator), Jen Gerson and Renaud-Philippe Garner participate in UBCO Debates: Canada–USA: Allies or Adversaries? at the Kelowna Community Theatre.
Before a word was spoken, the audience at Tuesday’s Canada–USA: Allies or Adversaries? debate set the tone: nearly 70 per cent said they’re taking an “elbows up, gloves off” attitude toward the United States.
Held at Kelowna Community Theatre and hosted by UBC Okanagan, the debate brought together four prominent voices to consider whether Canada should treat the United States as a steadfast ally—or strategic adversary.
The sold-out crowd warmed quickly to the adversaries’ arguments.
“Complacency keeps us weak. Complacency keeps us dependent,” warned Jen Gerson, journalist and co-founder of The Line. “We’re not naive for trusting America—we’re naive if we think nothing has changed.”
Throughout the night, audience members participated in live online polling, offering real-time insights into how public opinion shifted in response to the arguments on stage.
By the end, one response dominated: “This is Canada’s time on the world stage.”
Adversaries: No illusions, no comfort
Dr. Renaud-Philippe Garner, a philosophy professor at UBC Okanagan, argued that the Canada–US relationship must be re-evaluated with eyes wide open.
“If the Americans are after their own self-interest, well, at some point, it’s a zero-sum game,” Garner said. “They’re not going to fall on their sword so we can go home happy. If you think they will, I have a bridge to sell you.”
Gerson challenged the idea that this is a momentary disturbance in an otherwise solid friendship.
She noted that Canada stood by the U.S. when Americans invoked Article 5 of the NATO treaty after 9/11, eventually sending 40,000 Canadian soldiers to Afghanistan.
“One of my colleagues died in that war. Another was blown up by an IED. And now we’re sitting here being told that this is somehow our fault?” she asked. “That we were too weak or too naive to see it coming?”
Garner added philosophical weight to the adversary position. He framed the current relationship as deeply imbalanced. “We have to take this seriously—even if the Americans don’t realize there’s a conflict, that doesn’t mean we aren’t already in one.”
Allies: Alliances are messy, but essential
In contrast, Laura Dawson, executive director of the Future Borders Coalition and a veteran of bilateral diplomacy, stressed the durability of institutional ties and person-to-person relationships.
“The relationship between Americans and Canadians is not defined by the White House or Parliament Hill,” she said. “It’s defined by the relationships between millions of cousins, friends, neighbours, siblings.”
Dawson acknowledged the chaos in current US politics—but argued that there’s room for Canada to act.
“Complain less, compete more,” she said. “We need to open new markets and make it easier for small businesses to export. But let’s not forget: the U.S. remains our closest, biggest, and often easiest customer.”
She warned that if the US abandons WTO norms and moves fully into reciprocal tariffs, it risks becoming “a very expensive, very protective, very isolated economy.”
Greg Anderson, professor of political science at the University of Alberta, brought a historical lens.
“We’ve seen this movie before,” he said. “From the Nixon shocks to the cancellation of the Reciprocity Treaty—every time, there’s outrage, and every time, it passes. Canada’s prosperity is built on trading with the colossus to the south.”
Anderson admitted that the shared postwar purpose that once bound the two countries is fading—but argued that what remains is still meaningful.
“There’s still a big, undefended border. There’s still privileged access. There are still enormous structural advantages to this relationship.”
What comes next for Canada–US relations?
What set this debate apart wasn’t the clash of ideologies, but how closely the arguments mirrored the public mood. Online polling conducted during the debate showed a crowd increasingly open to uncomfortable truths, willing to accept hardships and tired of polite deflection.
“It won’t be like the past, but it will be something mutually respectful. And it will be better than going it alone,” Anderson said.
