>> Prime Minister Mark Carney said it again last week. Canada's old relationship with the United States is over.

We saw just how true that was when US President Donald Trump later announced he was calling off trade negotiations.

Why? Because Ontario ran an anti-tariff ad for American viewers.

And not just any ad one featuring Ronald Reagan.

And because Ontario didn't immediately pull it off the air, even running it during the World Series, Trump said he'd be slapping us with an additional 10% tariff.

It sure seems like the only thing that's certain here is uncertainty, and the fact that Canada will have to chart a new course.

That means asking some big questions and making some bigger decisions like who to trade with, who to strengthen ties with, what our role is in the world.

Who are we on the global stage? If the US is no longer our closest ally and partner?

Welcome to The Rundown.

Canada was once known as a peacekeeping nation, but that reputation has faded in the age of Trump's America.

What part should we play?

I asked former Canadian Ambassador to the UN, Louise Blais and journalist Stephen Marche, host of the podcast Gloves Off.

Madame Blay. Stephen, thank you so much for joining us on the program.

Madame, I'm going to come to you first. How is Canada perceived by other nations right now?

>> Well, I mean, it's it's it's not universal, right?

Obviously there are some countries, but that will have different opinions.

But I think I travel quite a bit internationally.

And at the moment there's a little bit of a question mark that's being raised.

You know, when I'm in Mexico, for example, I hear, well, how are things going over there?

I mean, so I think around the world at the moment, it has been noticed that this relationship that we used to benefit from with our our closest ally and neighbour, the United States of America, has really fallen off a cliff.

I mean, I think the level of which we are now in a uncomfortable position in our relationship, I think is something that is definitely seen and it's not brand new.

I think, you know, we have disagreed in the past on a lot of international issues, but this kind of level, I think, and the nature of it, like the ad, for example, that is really that is really making the rounds around the world.

So we have to wait and see what that means.

Canada benefited internationally from our closeness to the Americans.

Can we stand on our own?

Are we an alternative to the Americans for the world?

I am unconvinced of that.

But Stephen might have a different, different opinion.

>> Well, Stephen, Canada has long been considered a middle power, even with our elbows up sort of mantra.

I am curious, is that still the case?

Are we still a middle power in this?

>> Well, I think we're sort of exiting the world where there are such things as middle powers.

I mean, even even the concept of a middle power implies a multilateral world order that simply has stopped existing.

You know, as to the question of whether Canada has to can stand by itself.

I mean, simple answer is it's going to have to because, you know, whatever our actions, the actions of America or the actions of a power hostile to us and a power that is certainly no longer reliable either as an ally or a trading partner.

So, you know, I don't think we're in a situation that we have control over, and I don't think we're in a situation where we should judge our politicians as if they had control over it.

We're just reacting to the breakdown of the United States as a world, as a world power, and ultimately as a nation and, and and surviving that collapse, that American collapse is the task of the next generation of Canadians.

>> All right. Madame Blay had mentioned the ad.

I think it's important that we show that ad.

This is an ad that was pulled.

President Trump had called off all trade talks because of this ad that was placed by the Ontario government.

Let's have a watch the clip here.

>> When someone says, let's impose tariffs on foreign imports, it looks like they're doing the patriotic thing by protecting American products and jobs throughout the world.

There's a growing realisation that the way to prosperity for all nations is rejecting protectionist legislation and promoting fair and free competition.

America's jobs and growth are at stake.

>> I am sure both of you have probably watched that ad a few times.

So I'm going to ask Madame Blay, was that the right play?

>> No, I don't think it was at all.

And for a couple of reasons.

First of all, I mean, using a previous president's words against the current president and the kind of relationship that we're in right now, I think is was extremely dangerous.

It was very imprudent.

And I don't think we'd like it if it was done to us.

And so I think that was point number one.

Point number two is one AD is not going to change even if it is being played in red states.

It's not going to change the reality. There's been a debate going on about trade and tariffs in the United States that's been raging.

It does not need this ad.

And this ad is not going to change hearts and minds to the degree that it would need to in order to really outweigh the risk.

And the risk have been clear.

And and I think I we feel comfortable as Canadians to do that.

And we go on their airwaves and we take every opportunity we have to try to give them our opinion.

And I think that's fine to give them our opinion, but I think we should be very careful to step into the political fray in the United States at a time where there is quite a bit of, of, of division and not be caught because we're going to get caught in the middle.

And that's exactly what happened.

>> All right, Stephen, your thoughts on the ad and a response to Madame Blay?

>> Well, there's no real way to tell if it was a good play or right play because you're dealing with a psychopath, like how you deal with a, you know, a meth head on the subway, like there's no rational pro or counter move that makes sense, right?

As for, like whether Canada should be interfering in American politics, we need to get very we need to start interfering in American politics very, very aggressively.

I mean, they are open for business.

They're very clear that the Chinese and the Russians are buying their politicians.

I mean, left, right and centre.

They themselves.

I mean, look what they just did in Argentina, like they interfere with sovereign states politics all the time.

And our national interest is absolutely, intimately bound up in interfering in American politics.

So we are going to be interfering in American politics if we want to survive.

You know, that's not something we have a choice about.

That is something that is simply part of the world that we're entering now.

>> Madam Blay, with that, do we need to try to build this relationship?

That's what what I'm gathering from you.

Or do we need to work on other relationships?

>> Well, this is where, you know, I kind of disagree a little bit with with with Stephen.

With all due respect, I don't think the United States is collapsing, I really don't.

And if they are, then, you know, God help us as well.

No, I think I think there are issues going on down south of the border.

But at the same time, nothing is going to change the fact that our prosperity will be tied to that of the Americans for the foreseeable future, no matter what we do.

And so we need to fix the relationship there.

And we've gone about it, I think, the wrong way.

We say one thing to the president. We play nice when we're in the Oval Office, but then we come home or we go around the world and we say, well, you know, we don't want to deal with anyone that's not reliable and we're looking for other partners.

You can't do that.

You have to be consistent and you have to not be seen to be two faced.

That is what the president, I think, accused Prime Minister Trudeau of doing.

You've got to build a relationship.

Look, the president is all over Asia signing deals and and the Japanese of all countries who are set in their ways are actually finding a way to work with this president, turning the page live in the real world, live in the world that we are in now and actually getting something out of it.

We cannot continue to have this uncertainty.

We're paying the price now.

Time is money, and I think we're going to have to find a way back to the negotiation table.

And I have to be realistic, and then we'll move on from there.

But I do agree that things have changed, and we do need to look to other markets in addition to that, the United States.

But we first have to fix the relationship there, and that will actually help us internationally, because if we ask countries around the world to make a choice between us and Canada and the United States, well, the size of the US market is simply too big.

>> Stephen, I'll.

>> Get to take.

>> Obviously, one thing is clear things are not the same, but the way that we go about it, I gather, is a little different.

>> What's the point in negotiating with a pirate?

I mean, any time that we come to an agreement, they'll just rip it up in the next five minutes.

We're dealing with we're not dealing with the America that we knew.

We are dealing with an authoritarian state that is explicitly talked about annexing us, which I mean, Her Excellency really does not seem to have processed like we're we are dealing with a threat to our security and to our sovereignty from the South, and the idea that we should just roll over and take it, and suddenly they'll come to their senses and treat us like the good little boys and girls that we are. If we just behave is laughable.

Like they they will take, they will take every advantage they can.

That's exactly what they've done.

The more vulnerable that we are, the more they will take.

We are not dealing with people who can be treated as reasonable human beings with with reasonable goals.

We are dealing with people who are annexationists are in the middle of a a breakdown.

So like that we do not have good choices.

Like I totally agree with that.

But the idea that we're going to go back and we're going to somehow come to some kind of arrangement if we just behave, this is the Canadian spirit that has actually got us into this mess.

We need to understand that the only response that will get any respect from authoritarians like Trump is one of great, great aggression.

And that is that is that is that is clear from every country that has ever lived beside an authoritarian society.

Finland doesn't try to make peace and make good with Russia.

They they come to their own arrangements and they make deals with other people.

And that is the world that we're in.

I wish we weren't.

I wish we were in the world where Americans were reasonable human beings we could talk to, but we're not.

>> Very good.

Madam, let's get you in here.

If that is the case that Stephen is painting right there, how does Canada maintain its middle power?

If we have a tenuous relationship with the US as it is?

>> Well, I, I don't know that the goal is to maintain or middle.

>> What is what is the goal?

>> Well, the goal is to actually, you know, and that I totally agree.

I mean, Canada's global interests are really twofold.

One is, is our economic security and the other one is security.

Security.

So both of them are fundamental.

We need to bring back our foreign policy on on those.

We have a, you know, borders to defend and we have an economy to build.

So I think we should be focusing on that going around the world and saying we're a middle power.

I just don't see the point of that.

I think at the moment we have to be I agree with Stephen.

We have to be realistic.

This is a difficult, tough, tough world, and Canada benefited from the genteel universe that we used to live in.

It's not like that anymore.

I think I'm a lot more worried about what could happen in the Arctic than I am on the southern border. Quite frankly,

I we we do have a we're very close to, to Russia, just like Finland.

And, and China has already expressed their, their interest in the Arctic.

They've already mapped the seafloor.

So I think we have to be very, very clear that we need to focus on us, need to focus on our own well-being.

And that doesn't mean we completely abandon human rights.

But I don't think we need to be the saviour of the world.

I think at the moment we should focus our energy on us.

>> If we are not the Saviour, then Stephen, what should Canada's role in the world be right now?

>> Oh, I don't think we should have a role in the world.

I think we should concentrate entirely on our own survival.

I think that is our own priority.

The idea that we're going to be global citizens and like, you know, sort of the virtuous, you know, the virtuous child at the at the adult table of, of global politics that that should end.

Like what we need to concentrate right now is on our material security, survival, survival.

I mean, we have massive gaps in our national infrastructure.

I mean, Madame Blay brought up the Arctic.

I mean, I could not agree more.

Like priority one, all other priorities rescinded.

But, you know, we don't have an effective security service security apparatus for our national interest.

We don't have an effective military that can protect us from from actual, you know, annexationist forces.

These are the priorities that we need to focus on, not, you know, the multilateral world that we came from and that, of course, we feel most comfortable in and that God knows I wish we were back in.

But, you know, I think in the at least in the short to medium term, but probably for the next couple of decades, our own survival as a democracy, as a multicultural democracy, and as a society in which education and and the values that we have aspired to can be maintained.

That needs to be our priority.

>> All right, Madam Blay, you get the last 30 seconds.

What does that role look like for Canada right now?

>> Well, I do agree.

I think I think in a sense we have to be careful not to.

I hear a lot of issues about a coalition of the willing and all of this.

I, I just don't see it.

And we've heard things like Canada should join the EU.

Look, we're not European.

And I, most Europeans I speak to don't think this is even feasible.

So no, I don't think we should look to join another club or create another club.

I think we should really focus on where we are.

I think there are alliances that we can build, there's no doubt about that.

And we can continue to be reliable partners around the world.

We need to look to markets, but I don't think we need to look for a, a policing role or or trying to replace the United States as, as the beacon of democratic values.

I think that that would be very difficult to achieve and also very dangerous.

So I think instead of of virtue signalling, let's focus on our interests.

>> Well, we are going to leave it there, Madame Bley.

Stephen, thank you very much for your time and your insights.

For decades. Brian Stewart reported from war zones and interviewed heads of state experiences captured in his new book, On the Ground My Life as a Foreign Correspondent.

He has a unique perspective on Canada and how it's perceived internationally.

So what does he think about our place in the world?

How many countries have we have we marked?

How many countries?

>> I never did, I never counted them all up.

But sometimes I'll hear a story from and I'll realise, my gosh, I was there, I think.

And it was, it was, it was I.

>> Brian, thank you so much for having us in your lovely home.

How are you doing?

>> Oh, great.

Thank you and my pleasure to have you here.

>> You write having a Canadian passport meant something looking just through your press passes. Just seeing the word Canada felt like there was some power to it.

Do you think it holds the same sway.

>> In some areas?

It does.

Canada is still a respected country, though. I think it's fallen.

It's still in the top ten of most respected countries, and that can really be very, very helpful for Canadians and Canada.

And certainly the government's hoping it will be very helpful as it looks for new trading partners.

But it doesn't have that same that same clout that it used to have when it was very big in peacekeeping, very big in foreign aid.

There was a period in the '80s.

Canadians may be surprised by this now, but we were often referred to as the Samaritan state, the state that always wanted to be out there helping others.

And that gave us a kind of a entrance over and over on the ground.

Even when I was working with the Americans, I could say, let's go the Canadian Embassy.

I think they'll be able to get us in where the American Embassy couldn't, you know, because of various suspicions or what have you.

So I had many reasons to really appreciate that Canadian clout before.

I think we have wonderful people abroad.

And I have to underscore that.

I think our reporters that are abroad now are as good as any in history, and I think we still have some extremely good diplomats, but we have to rebuild the strength, you know, more better, more bureaus and more more logistical support all the way through.

>> I want to pick up on the Samaritan state.

I think we're looking on the inside out.

We can be critical of ourselves and be extra critical.

I'm curious, what do other countries do you think view us as?

>> I think other countries, from what I gather, you know, tend to feel that we, we, we own the podium in a kind of non-sports way, a non swaggering way, but in a kind of diplomatic, friendly way.

And we sort of stepped down from that podium and were content to go for bronze again.

You know, there was a time when Canadian Sports Canada was known as the bronze medal nation, right?

Well, we're not anymore.

We're up there often for gold and silvers and all that.

Well, the same way with in our journalism and our diplomacy and the rest of it, we really were did manage to get on the podium in the '80s and '90s through that period and then gave a lot of it up.

So they think that for a period we lost focus.

We didn't seem to have a coherent message quite often, or we would have a bumper sticker slogan as a message and people say, well, what does that mean, really?

What are you actually going to give?

What kind of people are you going to send abroad?

How come you used to have, you know, 1200 peacekeepers in the world?

Now you've got 25, right?

I mean, at some stage it becomes almost a little bit laughable.

Now, having said that, I think there's a big change in the Canadian mood that I feel in the last year.

And I think Canada Canadians want to get back and know they have to get back.

I really think is very important.

It's not just a wish to be well-liked.

It's a wish to be influential again, to be able to be. At the signing of documents.

Notice Canada wanted to fly into Egypt for the signing of the cease fire agreement over Gaza.

It you know, our Prime Minister phoned up and said, I want to come to be there.

I'm not sure we would have done that before.

So I think there's much more of Canada taking a we're in centre stage again role.

And I'm very impressed by the amount of media coverage Canada tends to get now in the last six months or so.

Over that before.

>> How OSAP, I suppose?

>> Yes.

Well, that was even though the elbows aren't quite as high up as they were.

And yeah.

>> There are places around the world that got lost in the news cycle and we can kind of talk about how inundated people are with headlines just because of technology.

But what are your thoughts on what could be done to help bring attention to places that are not getting well?

>> I think I think, first of all, networks have to be guilted back into realising, you know, what you're doing is ridiculous.

I mean, I'll give you one horrible example that Ethiopia fell back into a civil war in recent years for about three year period when it's estimated that somewhere between half a million and 600,000 people died.

That's more people than died in Gaza and Ukraine combined, yet got almost no coverage in the media.

Very, very little coverage except in maybe the British and Al Jazeera and English and the French gave it more coverage.

But basically we've turned we've just gone away from covering stories because they seem complex, more costly to go there. And how would you support a team in the field?

We don't do front line coverage in wars like Ukraine anymore, because the insurance is so high, and so we were sort of backing off, covering a lot of areas of the world.

We don't cover Latin America nearly as much as we were doing so 20 years ago.

This needs to be explained more, but I think the networks have to be somewhat guilted back and guilt themselves back.

And I'm hoping that this, this whole era we're going into now where Canada is really realising we're not just Canada, US in terms of importance, we're Canada and a lot of other countries that we better get to know about much more than we do and have been reporting on in recent years.

And we're scandalously unaware, really. You know, the big picture in India or Indonesia, Latin America, Africa.

I don't think there's a single Canadian broadcast correspondent in Africa at the moment, which is just crazy.

So that would help it.

And then then putting the resources into the coverage, making the coverage good and interesting, which foreign news tends to be. And then at the base itself, you need experienced people able to interpret what's going on in a lesson. It's always a crisis mode.

>> Do you think people are tired or overwhelmed by seeing images?

Oh yeah.

And do you think there might be reason to?

Why?

Maybe.

>> I think that is a massive problem.

I worried even back in 1984, all those years ago, that the images we were sending out, at what point would people just say, you know, I don't want to live with these kind of images, you know, I want a better peaceful images and I can't fault them, you know?

I mean, there are certain times when I'm watching images of coverage from afar where I just I think I'll miss that tonight.

I'll watch something else.

It's understandable.

It's human nature.

I don't know what.

I don't know what the answer to that is, except to put more reporting and less of the image in, like, you know,

I think longer stand ups by experienced reporters in the field that are less the vivid images, but more the verbal explanation, longer interviews with people who know what they're talking about.

And there are so many of those, I mean, they're always good experts. Wherever you go in the world, those things can be more compelling at times than the endless images of problems.

And the other thing that I think is critically important.

One lesson I learned in Ethiopia was of a very old Irish priest, came up to me in a feeding centre and said, you know, you media are just wonderful at coming into crises.

You run in, you do three days of footage and then you fly away again and you don't come back and we have to stay on afterwards, of course.

And the world gets an image that this was a hopeless country of hopeless people who never managed to get off their knees.

And you create this wrong impression of complete devastation.

You're not around to see people NEIGHBOURS come back together.

Schools reopen, people form alliances and start helping each other.

You miss that.

So I went back to CBC and said, you know, he has a real point, and I think CBC's duty must be to go back and do recovery stories a great deal.

And they did.

Said they started to send me back almost every two years to Ethiopia, where I could focus on the kind of things that gave people encouragement to realise, you know, these horrible scenes you're seeing.

They need not be the same scenes six months from now.

If the world responds and the country is given a chance.

That's why, in a way, I have to say I'm rather old now.

I look forward to seeing the rebuilding of Gaza, you know, not just because it's the most wrecked place I've ever seen on Earth, but it's a place that will show that people can, with the proper help, come back as they do come back from so many places.

I look forward to seeing the rebuilding of Gaza, you know, not just because it's the most wrecked place I've ever seen on Earth, but it's a place that will show that people can, with the proper help, come back as they do come back from so many places.

>> I want to pick up on Gaza.

Like we've mentioned, you have been witness to some of the biggest moments in history.

What do you make of the current moment that we are in right now?

>> Well, I think we have a ceasefire.

We don't have a peace agreement.

We have a ceasefire agreement.

You could say it's a small step, but, you know, all peace treaties begin.

Small people say, oh, well, it's only a small element.

Well, you have to start somewhere.

And that small element can become the key building block down the road.

So I try to be hopeful because I've seen wonderful, hopeful stories.

I don't want to give people the impression I've only seen misery in life.

I've seen a lot of wonderful recovery and new beginnings life.

And, you know, I think back even to my childhood as a young child with Europe recovering from the Second World War, people do recover.

So I think there's a lot of difficulty now to go on to the next phase, the intervention force.

What's it going to be made of?

Who's going to volunteer to go into that?

How are you going to bring a Palestinian Authority into work with that intervention force?

How are you going to get Hamas to disarm?

How are you going to get the Israelis to fully pull back all these stage by stage things that that need a lot of push and pressure?

And the good thing I feel what I think is essential is that finally, all the countries around are saying, that's it, we've had it.

This has to stop.

And, you know, it was very interesting that session in Egypt when 20 leaders of nations got together, because I think that's going to be needed.

Pressure can maintained on Israel, pressure maintained on Hamas as well, that you've got to disarm.

You've got to leave government.

>> Brian, I have one question left for you.

I know you are retired now, but clearly you are not that far removed from what's happening in the world.

But I have to ask, with all the images that you have seen, that you have reported on, when you go to bed, when you close your eyes, is there an image that sticks with you?

But I have to ask, with all the images that you have seen, that you have reported on, when you go to bed, when you close your eyes, is there an image that sticks with you?

>> The image I always fall asleep to is the shelter people or myself coming to a warm shelter and my sound machine? I have rain outside so they're coming in from a scary situation, or a rainy situation or a turbulent situation, but they're finding peace and shelter inside.

And I think the fact that millions of people can be brought to peace, shelter and calm can be brought out of their own nightmares is something that kind of inspires me all the time to maintain an interest in the world.

Otherwise I would have given up.

But boy, I've seen a lot of evil people in my life, but also a lot of saints.

A lot of magnificent, heroic people I write about.

And that's what I like to fall asleep to, is that comforting image of there's a shelter in the world for everybody, right?

>> Thank you so much.

I really appreciate that.

>> Thank you very much.

>> We're building this show for you and we want you to build it with us.

What issues do you want to know more about?

What do you like or not like about what we're doing so far?

Let us know.

Send an email at therundown@tvo.org or contact me on Instagram @jeyanjeganathan and we'll see you next week.