Hey, I'm Jan. If you've been watching,

you know that we have been building a

whole new show. Every episode, we tackle

a topic from different angles and give

you space to process the stories behind

the headlines. And also, we have been

building a whole new studio. For the

past few months, people have been

digging up the floors, putting up walls,

putting in new furniture. I'm excited to

say that the moment has finally arrived.

Welcome to our new home. Welcome to the

rundown.

President Donald Trump recently

announced he'll introduce a 10% tariff

on eight allies who are opposed to US

control of Greenland. He threatened that

the tariff would rise to 25% if there's

no action by June. In response, Prime

Minister Mark Carney said the following.

We're concerned about this escalation.

We will always support sovereignty and

territorial integrity of countries

wherever their geographic location is.

Decisions about the future of Greenland

are for Greenland and Denmark to decide.

Trump is clearly not on the same page.

So, what role can and should Canada play

here? How can we protect our historical

alliances when our allies are so

dramatically at odds? I got insight from

Carrie Buck, former Canadian ambassador

to NATO, Global Mail columnist Andrew

Coin, and Seva Ganitki, an associate

professor of political science at the

University of Toronto.

I appreciate all three of you for

joining to unpack all of these

headlines. I want to start with a sort

of quick reaction. If I was to ask you a

month ago, how would you react if

someone told you that a bunch of NATO

countries were going to send troops uh

to Greenland uh to deter Trump's threats

to invade it or that he would threaten

them with tariffs? Andrew, what would

you say?

A month ago, I'm not sure I would have

been that surprised. He's been on an

escalatory spiral for some time. His

behavior's been getting worse and worse

and worse. And the best rule of thumb is

whatever you think it it's as bad as it

can get now, it's going to get worse

tomorrow. So, a year ago, if you'd asked

me, I would have said, "Oh, come on. Not

even Trump's that crazy." Uh, but we've

been watching over the last year how

much worse it's be it's becoming.

Zeba, was this on your bingo card?

Well, I agree with Andrew that uh this

is something he's been escalating

towards. So, a month ago, I wouldn't

have been as surprised. Maybe even a

year ago, I wouldn't be as surprised.

What I'm sort of pleasantly surprised at

is that the Europeans are taking this

seriously. And, you know, they're

sending troops. These are symbolic

numbers, but at the same time, it's

sending a message that we will stand up

to this. Uh we're not going to be

bullied. We have the political strength,

and strength is the only language Trump

understands. So hopefully that sends the

message that he needs to hear.

Gary,

uh I'm shocked, but not surprised. Uh

Trump has indeed gone on about

Greenland, but Greenland's also been uh

part of the security kind of

architecture of the US since the Cold

War. Um, but I'm shocked because this is

the first time the US has openly

threatened a military action against an

ally since well before uh the war. So an

odd direction that doesn't serve US

interests at all. Yes, the Europeans

have responded in a way. This is a

previously planned exercise and the main

message is to Russia. Uh but ancillary

messages to the US as well that NATO's

got this.

Should uh Canada be sending in troops?

First question is should anybody and

clearly yes. the Europeans need to uh

this is crossing all kinds of lines not

just visav in the United States, but also

they've got to be keeping one eye on

Russia as well. So as we said force is

the only language Trump understands they

tried appeasement and flattery and

bribery and none of those have worked.

So if the Europeans are going to be

sending troops there I think the

question is should Canada I think it has

to be yes. We need allies at this point

in time more than we ever have. Uh we've

not always been a good responsible ally.

We really need to step up and be a

responsible ally now. Uh, so if they're

sending troops, we have to as well.

Can we clarify how many troops are we

talking about at this moment? We're

We're talking handful.

Yeah, exactly. They are. I think it was

said there's some it's a symbolic force.

It's what they call a trip wire. Um, but

we'll see. It may go into a larger

force. The point is they want to make it

clear to Trump. This is not going to be,

you know, rolling in and taking out

Nicholas Maduro. If you're doing this,

you're you're facing military

consequences potentially, but certainly

you're facing all kinds of other

consequences in terms of trade policy,

in terms of um closing US bases, etc.,

etc.

Z um well, Carney is kind of an

impossible situation here. He has to

slowly distance himself from the US, but

still kind of maintain a pleasant facade

towards Trump. That's right.

It's kind of like, you know, you meet a

wild bear in the woods, you back away

slowly, but maintain eye contact or

he'll take that as weakness. So, as far

as sending troops, I don't know. I don't

know if it might be seen as a

provocation or if it would be helpful.

Uh, clearly there has to be something

more than saying nothing. Um, so, uh, I

think the the thing to do for Canada is

to keep strengthening, uh, military

presence in the Arctics sort of slowly

and patiently and increase surveillance

capabilities so that if US complains,

they can say, "Look, we are taking this

seriously." Uh, and I think that's the

the safe but boring way to go forward.

Carrie, I'll get you to add on that. If

it's not troops, what should Canada be

doing?

Well, I think the thing right now is to

deescalate uh deescalate with Trump, but

also to double down in the Arctic, as

Sea said, and to double down on uh

reinforcing the principles behind NATO.

So, to deescalate, uh I think sending

Canada sending troops this week would be

a mistake. Um we're vulnerable this week

after Carney's trip to China and waiting

to see how Trump reacts. So far, the

reaction's been fairly positive, but

we're more vulnerable right now. Uh, I

think slow and steady is the order of

the day. So, diplomacy centered around

NATO, centered around Arctic, and when

we do more in the Arctic, anchor it in

NATO because, as Andrew said, we need

allies to do anything and it's an

important political signal right now,

too.

Andrew, I'll get you take the word

diplomacy is thrown around, but we're

dealing with Trump here. So, if it's not

troops, what is it? Well, it's got to

be, if you're talking about Canada's

interest, it's got to be diplomacy.

Plus, we just being nice to Trump, uh,

is not going to do it. Just, you know,

talk softly, etc. We have to show that

we have allies. We have to show that we

have options. That's part of the point

of the China trip. We've got to show

that we're not to be messed with, that

we we we will be the porcupine, that if

you try to play with us, you're going to

get stung. Um, these all have to be part

of the P. You can wrap it in a cool,

calm demeanor. You can wrap it in

unprovocative language, but this the

message behind the scenes has got to be

sent is we're not going to be pushed

around as we have options. We have

abilities to make that point.

All right, Seb Greenland aside, uh the

recent arrest of President Maduro and

Venezuela. To what extent could it

embolden the Trump administration, Trump

himself to intervene in other countries?

We've heard a number of countries been

listed, Colombia, Mexico, Cuba, and of

course, Canada. What is this? What is

the message sent here?

Well, the the Madura operation was

designed to be quick and easy sort of,

right? Literally fly in, grab the guy

and his wife and fly out. Uh no

occupation, no no American casualties,

no American boots on the ground. That

seems to be the template that uh Trump

prefers. Keep it to a single news cycle.

Uh don't get bogged down in in something

that has where he has to spend political

capital. Uh so yes, we could see

something similar with maybe Cuba uh uh

some kind of leadership decapitation or

Colombia under the pretext of uh

fighting drug trafficking or something

like that. Uh but a real occupation

requires political stamina and frankly I

don't think the administration has the

attention span for something like that.

Uh Trump wants again wins that fit in a

in in a single news cycle.

Gary,

well Trump's definitely got the wind in

his sales. He sees using the military as

a uh tool to achieve some uh immediate

transactional benefits. Um he sees that

as a good thing. The problem is that

there's no one in his administration

that thinks through the second and third

order effects.

So even in V Venezuela, what was a short

sharp operation

um you know think through what's going

to happen over the medium term in

Venezuela and is that going to be in the

interest of the US. It's not clear that

it is. So, it's a conundrum because

there's no one left in the

administration who will tell Trump when

he's going in the wrong direction.

Second problem created for the American

military. You know, the Washington

treaty, the NATO treaty is the law of

the land in the US. So, if they were to

move militarily on Greenland, they're

violating American law as well as the

Washington treaty. How does that place

American military? Are they going to

obey those illegal orders? It's a really

hard place to put people in.

It It's been troubling because so far um

lower ranking officers have been obeying

illegal orders. The stuff in the

Caribbean, for example,

uh but invading Greenland, others have

made the point um all of the members of

the Joint Chiefs of Staff would have to

resign morally and legally uh in the

face of that kind of command. Whether

they will or not uh remains to be seen

if it comes to that u but you know

there's a tendency we always have to

guard against a tendency to ascribe

normaly to Trump to ascribe normal

motives normal assessments uh he's out

of his mind uh and he's surrounded by

people who are not clinically out of

their mind but are fanatics uh uh and

and cannot be assessed so yes he's he he

goes in for military operations that are

theatrical that look good on TV

and and usually I say with if you're

talking about any other leader, oh come

on, that's not how the world works. With

this, you have to really look at it

through that kind of lens.

Sea in in light of all of this, how

vulnerable to annexation is Canada's

Arctic region?

Well, Canada right now, I think, is

still in a different category than even

Greenland. And in fact, uh there was uh

some White House uh staffers said just

yesterday that when it comes to

conversations inside the Oval Office, uh

there's no talk of purchasing anything.

There's no talk of invading anything

Canadian related. Uh but that doesn't

mean things can't change obviously. Uh

it doesn't mean Canada can't relax that

there's still you know continuing

economic diplomatic pressure. There's

still the possibility of that. Uh so the

threat is not so much you know tanks

rolling over the borders but you know

that does not mean that there's no

threat and it's something that Canada

should must continue to take seriously.

Absolutely. Carrie.

Yeah. There's no immediate military

threat in our Arctic from anyone

primarily because the operating

environment makes it too hard. But

that's not a static thing. And with

melting of sea ice, um that will change

over time. There are number of points of

vulnerability for Canada. The Northwest

Passage and contested views of who owns

that. Uh I could see Trump wanting to

own that. Um and we also haven't done

enough traditionally the last few

decades in the Arctic. So, as Seb said

earlier, we really need to double down

and increase our uh military and

civilian security uh apparatus in the

Arctic. So, we project Canadian

sovereignty and send a message to uh

adversaries that we've got this, but

also it's like defense against help,

unwanted help from the US. And that's

really important.

All right, we talked about this a little

bit. um sort of that tight rope uh that

Canada has to sort of walk between being

a good NATO ally, an honorable player on

the world stage, but not damaging sort

of the already touchy relationship with

the US. How do we do that?

I I'm not sure that we can avoid quote

unquote damaging the relationship. The

relationship has been damaged. When

you've got the president of the United

States talking about annexing Canada,

you're not in normal times,

right? Um uh so I I think the two are

actually linked is by being a

responsible ally to other countries we

are sending the right signal to the

United States. We don't have to be

aggressive about it. We don't have to be

belligerent about it but we can be firm

about it. Um and that is as I say it's

been said already that that is really

the only language uh that he

understands. Um, but patiently promoting

our interests, making it clear that that

uh that we're not simply going to roll

over. The minute you send that signal,

thinking you're going to get short-term

relief, you're just buying yourself more

long-term pain.

Okay, Seb.

Yeah, I mean, I agree. Canada has to

hedge given the situation and uh try to

seek closer relationships with other

countries, whether it's China or the EU

or maybe India down the road. Um, you

know, Carne comes from the finance

world, so he knows if your if your

biggest stock is tanking, the stock

being the Canadian-American

relationship, you have to diversify your

portfolio. You don't need to be in

finance to know that. Uh, so Canada and

other countries too will will continue

to try to become less dependent on the

US given the continuing unpredictability

of Trump's foreign policy, that's not

going away in the short term. So, in

that sense, Canada's strategy, I think,

is the right one.

All right, we'll get to China. just uh I

want to get curious on uh being sure

balancing that tight

sure diversify our trade and economic

relationships but at the same time don't

do it as a one-off set of transactions

because then you fall into a Trump trap

behaving like Trump

well you need alliances

you need allies who will come if you get

into trouble for instance in the Arctic

or on you know trading relationships and

tariffs and in order to do that you have

to uh reinforce some of those tables

where we already have allies like NATO

and parts of the UN, I'd say, um, and

build new alliances with countries that

are natural allies, but we've let lieow,

like Mexico and South Korea, and they're

doing some of that. So, build that up so

you've got friends when something bad

hits the fan. Um, and at the same time,

you know, geography matters and it's

inescapable for us. And they're always

going to be a big trading relationship.

They're always going to be a big

security partner. The US is. So there

are parts of the US system that I hope

are waking up to the uh outrageous

position that Trump's taking on

Greenland.

Greenland has served a a valuable

purpose in that it has I think woken

people up and it is I think forced some

people to work and move together.

Where Trump succeeds is when he can keep

people isolated and pick them off and

play them off against each other.

whether you're talking domestic politics

or internationally and both domestically

and internationally there is I think a

growing cohesion still a long way to go

perhaps but a growing cohesion of of

realizing that we have to all you know

as Ben Ben Franklin said hang together

or we'll all hang separately

there we go uh let's talk a little bit

about uh the diversification of our

trade prime minister Carney of course uh

was just in China to reset our

relationships there step in the right

direction I assume

depending on how big a step uh you the

the value in it. The validity is

reducing your dependence on the United

States, which is a matter not so much

now of the of economics but of national

security. We cannot be so dependent on

them they can use that against us. But

we don't want to fall into the equal and

opposite trap of becoming overly

dependent on China because China will

certainly use against us. So we want to

have some equipoise balancing off

against each other having other players

as well. India was mentioned, Europe of

course. Uh so as long as it's that as

long as we don't we're not rushing into

the arms of China but simply trying to

prudently diversify our portfolio then I

think it's a good a step in the right

direction.

Sema

um yeah so I don't know if if if it's

right to call it the right step or the

wrong step. It's sort of a necessary

step at this point uh given the

situation that comes with with its own

costs as already been mentioned. Uh but

Canada's overleveraged on relationship

with the US. I think that's that's fair

to say. And so reaching out to China is

not anti-Americanism. That's just basic

risk management at this point. I think

uh now the problem for for Carney and

for Canada is that you don't want to get

into this spiral where you hedge away

from America and Trump sees that as an

insult and puts more pressure which

forces Canada to hedge more. That's not

a sustainable spiral, not not a

sustainable cycle. Uh so Carney has to

keep threading that needle basically of

uh you know diversify enough to have

options and to show that we have options

but not so much that it becomes a source

of grievance for Trump who is

essentially driven by grievances

personal grievances for his foreign

policy.

Sure.

Um so Canada was the first of

Washington's allies to reach out in this

kind of structured way to put the

relationship with China back on some

kind of footing. So I think that's an

important message to the US. I agree

that the pragmatic areas that the PM and

the government has picked out to

cooperate with China make a lot of sense

right now. The challenge will be keeping

it in that box. And I'm not convinced

that China has the same understanding of

what the limits and the guard rails are

for that relationship. And you know the

China that interfered in domestic

affairs prior to the deal is the same

China that will do it afterwards.

The good thing is that there'll be a lot

more channels to talk to China about

these worries. Um, but the difficult

thing to manage is that we've got more

invested now and they're bigger than us.

And so it'll be really hard um pushing

back when China wants to do something

that's not in Canada's interest.

Okay, early days. We have a minute left.

I have one question for all of you. Um,

out of 10, how would you uh rate Canada?

And it's uh foreign policy right now.

Seb,

oh, it's very hard for me to reduce that

to a number. I I mean, I grade my

students papers, so maybe I should

That's why I go to you first.

Yeah. Uh I mean, it's it Canada right

now is being very pragmatic and not

being sort of splashy rhetorically,

which is the right thing. It's doing

what it should be doing. I I'm not sure

I can put a number on that, but I that

that's my evaluation.

Ken,

uh I think they're doing a really good

job at threading a needle. Um

the challenge right now is that there

are some principles that are important

and in Canada's interests that haven't

been spoken about a lot. Uh sovereign

equality, uh democracy,

um and those kind of values that get us

the allies we need, um and that are

really compelling. So that's an area

where I'd give them maybe a six out of

10, but on the rest of it, I'd give them

an eight and a half out of 10. Sure.

Sure.

Principles and values are very

important, but we're also faced with a

series of judgment calls. There's no

kind of,

you know, out of the box policy that you

can enact here that will solve this.

When you're dealing with a one-off, a

one-of-a-kind like Trump, uh, who just

does not react the way any normal world

leader does. Uh, I would I would cut a

lot of slack to anybody who is in the

prime minister's job. But it really

places a premium on judgment uh, and and

and leadership. And that's that's really

what how we're going to assess him going

forward and of course weighing him

against other potential leaders in that

regard.

And that's unfortunately where we're

going to leave it. I'm sure we will have

this conversation at another time.

Andrew SA Carrie, thank you so much.

Really appreciate it.

Very good.

Thank you.

And that's unfortunately where we're

going to leave it. I'm sure we will have

this conversation at another time.

Andrew SA Carrie, thank you so much.

Really appreciate it.

Very good.

Thank you.

Since late December, Iranians have been

taking to the streets protesting dire

economic conditions and calling for an

end to the Islamic Republic government.

The regime has responded with brutal

crackdowns, reportedly killing

thousands. US President Donald Trump has

pledged to help the protesters, and

military action seems to be a real

possibility. I sat down with Moral

Karimi, a faculty lecturer at the

Toronto Metropolitan University, who was

born in Iran soon after the 1979

revolution. We talked about whether US

intervention could help or hurt the

cause, what our own government should be

doing, and how Iranians in Canada are

coping.

Things are things are obviously tense uh

when we talk about Iran right now. Can

you give us a sense of the toll on the

Iranian community here in Canada?

Obviously not a monolith uh but can you

give some stories? What are we hearing?

Are people uh trying to get in touch

with family? What is that? What are the

conversations you're hearing?

Well, the community, as you said, is is

quite tense. that they're worried about

loved ones back home as the um lines of

communication are slowly being

reestablished and most of the time it's

only phone and it's only one way they

can uh connect with uh loved ones. Often

times they're horror stories of uh very

short conversations. Uh sometimes the

news is I talk to my dad or my mom or my

cousin and

yesterday I read a family has lost 10

members.

Mhm.

Um in the protest um and or uh you know

we're all good but there is a blood

bath. We've seen things that we can

never forget and we need the

international community to help us. One

of the voices that has sort of come up

through through this conversation but

through the headlines is actually exiled

crown uh Prince Raza Palavi. He's

outlined his aspirations if the Iran

theocracy was to be toppled. What's on

his what's on the top of his list?

Well, your guess is almost as good as

mine, Jan. It's over the years um Raza

Palvi has flip-flopped uh from uh I'm

just an inspirational leader to um I'm

the crown prince to I can um I I can

only lead I would only lead the

transition to sometimes even you know

people will vote and we'll find out. So

we're not sure exactly his latest

iteration is that um I am going to lead

this um uprising and uh however um we

don't it's unclear where he got his

mandate from or whom he got it from.

The exiled crown prince Raza Palavi has

has mentioned that uh he does not want a

pursuit of nuclear weapons. He wants to

confront drug trafficking, an immediate

uh recognition of the state of Israel.

Some experts have pointed out that the

exiled crown prince's aspirations are

exactly what Donald Trump wants to hear.

Your thoughts?

Sounds well, he is aligned. He has

largely aligned himself with the Israeli

right and the American right. the two

groups that uh have the most potential

to support him to uh reinstate monarchy

or lead Iran. Which brings me to my

previous point of um it is difficult to

to trust a figure that on the one hand,

excuse me, um states that um he is only

the uh wants to be the um transitional

leader and on the other hand the points

that he puts forward are more uh likely

uh they're they're the the aspirations

of a leader of a long-term leader and

And let me remind you that we in the

recent history we've had a very similar

figure figure called Ayati. And I've

studied and I've and I discuss in my

book uh the rhetoric of Ayati both prior

to the 79 revolution and after and

that's exactly what he talks about. I'm

just a spiritual leader. I'm just a

clergy. uh people want me to lead this

this this movement now and once I go

home and the revolution is victorious

I'm going to back go back to the

seminaries and um you know not

be involved in politics and we also know

transition governments have immense

powers and this is all assuming that the

regime will fall which is unlikely. um

they're the ones who um for example put

together a um a group of people, a

coalition um to write the future

constitution. They're the ones who

decide what the structures um and

institutions of the future government

are going to be. So it's not just a

simple um leading the transition. It it

doesn't stop there. Donald Trump has

some say egged on protesters uh in Iran

and has said help is on the way. In one

of his social media posts, he even uh

wrote mega m i ga make Iran great again

of course reference to MAGA make America

great again. Iran has warned that any

attack on the country's supreme leader

would be a declaration of war. How do

you see this all playing out where

things are changing so quickly? Uh

what's what happens next?

Well, I think we can agree that the only

consistent thing about Donald Trump is

that he's inconsistent.

However, Trump, I think what we know of

him is he is he looks for quick wins

and right now that quick win seems to be

Greenland. His focus is on that. Iran is

going to be an extremely tough pill to

swallow for him. To the west of Iran,

there is Iraq and we all know what

happened there once US invaded. And to

the to east of Iran is Afghanistan.

Still same story. And and uh Iran is

much stronger in terms of its military

and and political institutions um and

the opposition as those two. So, it's

not an easy. He doesn't have an endgame

in Iran.

So, there are at least 3,000 Canadian

citizens and permanent residents in Iran

at the moment. As we know, Canada and

Iran do not have any diplomatic

relations in more than a decade or so.

What does how does this limit what

Canada can do for those who are there?

I think um Canada actually can play a

significant role. we can uh back channel

through the diplomatic means with our

allies who do have um um embassies and

consulates in Iran um and kind of try to

get our citizens out and also try to

deescalate these threats that Israel and

the United States pose on Iran, the

threats of bombings and you know

invasion which just escalate the crisis

more. very quickly. A couple seconds

left, but uh want to hopefully leave on

some hope uh with where we are right

now, but uh how are you watching this

and and what do you hope uh comes as a

resolution?

Well, this is a marathon, not a sprint.

This is clearly a devastating setback uh

for the people of Iran and their

aspirations, but they've been doing this

for over a century and a half. We're

adept at fighting and this quest for

democracy in dignity is clearly not

going anywhere.

Well, thank you so much. Really

appreciate it.

Thank you for having me.

We want this show to be for you and the

things that matter to you. What do you

want us to cover and dig into? Let us

know by going to tbbo.org/runddown

feedback or leave us a comment on

YouTube. Until then, see you tomorrow.