Friday, March 28, 2025

Trump’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian protesters signals a slide into fascist authoritarianism

This crackdown serves as a broader warning to all Americans: political dissent will not be tolerated.  If the government can detain and deport legal residents for exercising their rights, what protections remain for anyone else?
  
 
In recent months, a chilling pattern has emerged on American university campuses.   Students and faculty, many of whom hold green cards or student visas, are being arrested, detained, and threatened with deportation for participating in pro-Palestinian protests or speaking out against Israel’s genocidal crimes in Gaza.  These individuals, exercising their constitutionally protected right to free speech, have found themselves targeted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under the directives of the Trump administration for their political protests.  This is not merely a policy disagreement or an immigration enforcement issue — it is a stark demonstration of authoritarianism, one that echoes the repressive tactics of fascist and dictatorial regimes, and signals a dangerous erosion of democracy in the United States. 



The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to freedom speech, a cornerstone of American democracy.  Protests, even those that challenge government policies or those of powerful allies like Israel, are not only legal but are a vital part of the nation’s political fabric.  Yet, the Trump administration has chosen to weaponize an obscure law — one that allows the Secretary of State to deport non-citizens deemed a threat to US foreign policy — to silence dissent.  This law, rarely invoked in the past, was intended to address genuine national security risks, not to punish students and scholars for their political views.  By repurposing it to target pro-Palestinian voices, the administration reveals its true face, one that is fascist and racist, that intends to intimidate, suppress, and punish those who dare to criticize Israel’s crimes and US complicity, in what Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Court of Justice have described as a genocide in Gaza.

The number of protesters targeted are far greater than the few whose stories have been covered by the news media.  Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently disclosed that the State Department has revoked the visas of at least 300 foreign students, and many others are in the government’s sights.  This figure, however, likely underrepresents the full scope of the crackdown, as high-profile cases covered by the media — such as those of Mahmoud Khalil, Rumeysa Ozturk, Momodou Taal, and Yunseo Chung — are just the tip of the iceberg.  These individuals, all racialized immigrants with legal status in the US, have been singled out for their activism.  Their stories paint a grim picture of a government willing to trample constitutional rights and deploy Gestapo-like tactics to intimidate protesters and enforce ideological conformity.

Consider Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder married to an American, who led protests at Columbia University.  He now languishes in a Louisiana ICE detention center, his green card revoked, as the State Department seeks to deport him.  Or Rumeysa Ozturk, a Fulbright scholar and PhD student at Tufts University, detained by plain clothes ICE agents near her home for writing an op-ed critical of her university’s ties to companies supporting Israel.  Momodou Taal, a Cornell graduate student and dual UK-Gambia national, faces deportation proceedings after being a prominent voice in pro-Palestinian demonstrations.  And Yunseo Chung, a 21-year-old permanent resident who has lived in the US since she was seven, is now at risk of being deported to South Korea because of her constitutionally protected protest activities.  These are not isolated incidents but part of a systematic campaign targeting hundreds of students and faculty who have spoken out against the Gaza genocide.

The parallels between the actions of the Trump administration to authoritarian regimes are unmistakable.  In Russia or Communist China, dissenters are routinely “disappeared” into detention centres, their human rights denied under the guise of protecting state interests.  Today, the Trump administration is employing similar tactics, using ICE as a modern-day equivalent to the Soviet KGB to round up and silence those who challenge America’s support for Israel.  The racialized nature of these detentions — targeting people of colour — further underscores the administration’s fascist undertones, evoking the scapegoating and exclusionary policies of 20th-century fascist dictatorships.  What we are witnessing is not about national security, it is about control, power, and punishing those whose opinions and views with whom Trump disagrees or opposes.

Legal challenges are mounting as attorneys for those detained argue that the government’s actions violate the Constitution and represent egregious government overreach.  The use of a foreign policy statute to suppress free speech is a flimsy pretext, one that courts are likely to scrutinize closely.  Yet, the damage is already being done.  The chilling effect on campuses is very real — students and faculty, particularly those in the US on visas or green cards, now face a stark choice: speak out about Israel’s human rights crimes and risk detention, or remain silent and abandon their principles.  This is not the hallmark of a free society but of a dictatorship where dissent is met with retribution and imprisonment.

The Trump administration’s motivations appear twofold.  First, it is signalling unwavering loyalty to Israel and its influential Zionist supporters in the US, who have loudly condemned the protests.  By cracking down on pro-Palestinian activism, Trump is doing the bidding of a foreign government and its domestic allies, prioritizing their interests over the basic rights of individuals in the US.  Second, this crackdown serves as a broader warning to all Americans: political dissent will not be tolerated.  If the government can detain and deport legal residents for exercising their rights, what protections remain for anyone else?   This is the behaviour of a dictator who believes he is above the law, unbound by the Constitution, and free to act with impunity.

The administration’s defenders might argue that these measures are necessary to maintain order or protect US foreign policy interests.  But such claims crumble under scrutiny.  The protests have been overwhelmingly peaceful, and the individuals targeted pose no credible threat to national security.  Mahmoud Khalil is not a terrorist, he is a husband and human rights activist.  Rumeysa Ozturk is not a spy, she is a scholar who wrote an editorial in a university newspaper.  The government’s actions are not about safety — they are about silencing voices that challenge the status quo.  This is the essence of authoritarianism — the use of state power to crush opposition and criticism, regardless of legality or morality.

The implications extend far beyond the current moment.  If the Trump administration succeeds in normalizing these tactics, the precedent will be set for future crackdowns on any group or cause deemed inconvenient.  Environmental activists, racial justice advocates, or critics of US militarism could be next.  The erosion of free speech and assembly rights does not stop with one issue — it metastasizes, undermining the democratic foundations of the nation.  What we are witnessing in the US is not a temporary overreaction but a deliberate step toward a fascist state where dissent is criminalized, human rights are ignored, and the government operates without accountability.

The American public must recognize this for what it is, a betrayal of the values the US  claims to uphold.  The Constitution is not a suggestion, it is the bedrock of the nation’s identity.  By targeting pro-Palestinian protesters, the Trump administration is not just attacking a specific group of people — it is attacking the very idea of freedom.  The detained students and faculty are not the only victims, every American who cherishes their rights is at risk.  Silence in the face of the Trump administration’s overreach is complicity. 


History offers a sobering lesson.  Regimes that begin by targeting minority and marginalized groups — immigrants, students, religious communities — rarely stop there.  The Gestapo in Nazi Germany did not emerge overnight.  It was built through incremental steps, each one justified as necessary until dissent was extinguished entirely.  The US is not yet Nazi Germany, but the parallels are too close for comfort.  The arrest and detention of legal residents for exercising their rights, the use of immigration laws as a political weapon, and the blatant disregard for constitutional protections, are the hallmarks of a government sliding into fascist authoritarianism.

The Trump administration’s actions demand a forceful response.  America’s Courts must strike down these abuses of power, Congress must investigate and hold those responsible accountable, and citizens must raise their voices — on campuses, in the streets, and at the ballot box — to reject this descent into fascism.  The detained students and faculty are not threats to America they are its conscience, reminding Americans of the principles they risk losing.  If Americans allow these voices to be silenced, they will forfeit the claim to being a free nation.  The time to act is now, before the last vestiges of democracy are swept away by a dangerous regime that day by day is showing that it knows no bounds and will tolerate no dissent.
 
© 2025 The View From Here.  © 2025 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

Wednesday, March 26, 2025

It’s unthinkable, but Trump could resort to military force in his bid to annex Canada

Before Russia’s 2022 assault on Ukraine, the Russian president spent years laying groundwork — claiming historical rights, questioning borders, and using economic pressure to destabilize Kyiv.  Trump is taking a similar approach . . . 
 
 
For a century and a half, Canada and the United States have shared a peaceful border, rooted in mutual respect, economic ties, and democratic values. The last hints of American aggression toward Canada faded after the Civil War, when fear of invasion helped unite British North American colonies into Canada in 1867.  Now, that dormant threat has reemerged under US President Donald Trump. His erratic behaviour, inflammatory rhetoric, and willingness to unravel longstanding treaties signals a danger that Canada cannot ignore.  As a result, Ottawa must prepare for the unthinkable – a military incursion from the south, driven by a deranged leader whose actions echo Russia’s prelude to invading Ukraine.


© Image Comics.  SOURCE: https://gizmodo.com/us-canada-invasion-comic-trump-tariffs-sales-image-2000561632
 
Trump seems to be following Vladimir Putin’s playbook.  Before Russia’s 2022 assault on Ukraine, the Russian president spent years laying groundwork — claiming historical rights, questioning borders, and using economic pressure to destabilize Kyiv.  Trump is taking a similar approach by challenging the 1908 Canada–US border treaty, calling it outdated and asserting American claims to Canadian land, water, and the Great Lakes.  On March 4, 2025, he launched a trade war by imposing a 25% tariff on Canadian goods despite a free trade agreement he signed with Canada in 2020.  Following a tense phone call with Trump the following day Prime Minister Justin Trudeau decided to warn Canadians that the tariffs were a prelude aimed to weaken Canada’s economy with the goal of annexation by the US.

If one looks closely Trump’s actions fit the pattern Putin used – economic leverage and territorial claims to justify aggression.  His concerns about illegal migrants and fentanyl originating from Canada have evolved into trade warfare and hints of military action. Should Trump escalate his approach, he might consider deploying US troops to “secure” what he perceives as American interests on Canadian soil.  This potential aggression necessitates that Canada begin preparations for a possible military incursion.

While the likelihood of a US military incursion into Canada is remote, it is not outside the realm of possibility. Speculation about a potential US invasion has emerged in both Canadian and US media.  History has shown that trade wars can escalate into military conflicts, with the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 serving as a prime example.  This series of tariffs aimed to protect the US economy resulted in retaliatory tariffs that severely hampered global trade and played a significant role in the onset of the Great Depression.  Ultimately, this paved the way for protectionism, nationalism, and the conditions which led to the outbreak of World War II.

If the US occupied Canada it would be disastrous for both nations according to defence experts.  It could provoke a prolonged insurgency, as the sheer size and resilience of the Canadian population would make it difficult for US forces to maintain control.  If just 1% of Canada’s 41 million citizens took up arms – 410,000 people – that would dwarf the Taliban’s forces in Afghanistan.  Guerrilla tactics, engaging in hit-and-run operations rather than conventional warfare, against American targets would define the Canadian resistance

Canadians, despite our reputation for politeness, possess a resilient spirit, which is already surfacing amid a wave of patriotism.  Historical precedents, such as the American experiences in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, show that occupations often ignite defiance instead of submission.  An invasion of Canada could turn into a quagmire for the US, diverting resources while emboldening Russian and Chinese expansionist ambitions.

Furthermore, Canada cannot assume it would stand alone.  As a NATO member, the expectation would be for allies such as the UK, France, and Germany to respond.  However, NATO is already strained by tensions with Russia in Eastern Europe, and in recent meetings with the leaders of France and the UK, the new prime minister Mark Carney did not get any overt statements of support, suggesting that a North American crisis could weaken the alliance and potentially fracture it in the face of a US attack on Canada.  While Commonwealth countries such as the UK, Australia, and New Zealand might offer support, their capacity to assist Canada militarily would be limited.

The circumstances in which Canada finds itself demands self-reliance.  Ottawa should move immediately to fund modernization of the military, increase military recruitment and troop readiness, and stockpile supplies while strengthening infrastructure, energy independence, and civilian defence.  In addition, Canadian leaders must rally global condemnation of Trump’s annexation threats to isolate the US politically.  But preparation must go beyond words, because if tariffs are Trump’s opening salvo Canada should not wait to see what comes next.

Canada would suffer greatly but it would endure.  Trump seems blind to the prospect of mutual destruction.  But Trump’s actions suggest he is unbound by sanity or history.  Canada can’t dismiss him as eccentric, and based on his words and actions over the past few months, must now treat him and the US as an aggressor.  The US hasn’t been Canada’s enemy since the 19th century, but under Trump, that has changed in the span of a few months.

The Canadian government must act to strengthen the country’s defences, rally allies, and prepare Canadians for a fight we hope to avoid.  Failing to do so would further risk our sovereignty and Canada’s survival as an independent nation.
  
© 2025 The View From Here.  © 2025 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.


Saturday, March 15, 2025

OP-ED -- Canadians are mad as hell and ready for a battle over Trump tariffs

 
From the frozen and sparsely populated northern territories to Toronto’s crowded streets, and from Newfoundland to Vancouver, a storm of fury is building in Canada. It’s not aimed at Americans — our friends and neighbors — but at President Trump and the enablers who are helping facilitate an economic disaster of his making. 


His policy of 25 percent tariffs on Canadian exports to the U.S. has sparked a needless trade war with America’s closest friend and ally. Canadians are not going to sip maple syrup and just take it. This is a betrayal, plain and simple. We are done being polite and pretending otherwise.
 
Let us start with Trump’s absurd claims about the U.S. getting a raw deal from Canada. He negotiated the U.S., Mexico, Canada Trade Agreement, crowed that it was the best trade deal ever, and signed it in 2020. Now, he is torching it with tariffs built on lies and bluster. He gripes about dairy, claiming Canada slaps 390 percent tariffs on U.S. imports. The reality? It’s only 250 percent, and that’s only above a quota negotiated by Trump that the American dairy industry hasn’t even hit since the deal began. So there have been no tariffs triggered yet — none.
 
Then there is the laughable claim that the U.S. subsidizes Canada. Subsidizes us? American firms own chunks of our economy — our own fault, sure, but it’s the truth. Meanwhile, we have sold you cheap electricity for decades, propping up your electrical grids and your economy. So, who is subsidizing whom? It’s maddening to hear Trump administration officials whine when the U.S. is getting a deal that many Canadian hydro consumers would relish. This is another Trump lie for which Americans and Canadians will pay the price.
 
The rage of Canadians isn’t targeted at the American people but at your leader, whose irrationality seems to have no limits, and toward the sycophants propping him up. Those who voted for him also own this. You elected him again, and now he’s smashing a bond that’s benefitted both countries for generations. Canada is not mere collateral damage. We’re the target, and we’re not going to take it sitting down.
 
Canadian steel and aluminum is also a target where tariffs could severely damage the U.S. economy by disrupting integrated North American supply chains that support millions of jobs. Canada is the largest supplier of these materials with exports valued at over $35 billion annually, feeding the automotive, construction and aerospace sectors which rely on these exports for production. Imposing tariffs would feed inflation and trigger retaliatory measures from Canada.
 
Canada’s retaliation to this trade war has become personal for millions of Canadians. Consumer boycotts of U.S. goods are reshaping store shelves in Canada — not out of spite, but because no one is buying. Canadian retailers are dropping American produce, wines and spirits, and other products and finding alternatives. Lower prices once drove us to your fruits and vegetables, but sourcing elsewhere at a slightly higher price isn’t the hit we feared. Your farmers though, they are going to watch crops rot as markets vanish — just ask Jack Daniel’s what’s happening with their whiskey, which sits on pallets unsold.
 
Energy is a bigger issue. We supply 60 percent of your crude oil, for which your refineries are specifically built. Swapping out Canadian crude for Saudi or Venezuelan won’t help if we cut off oil exports. And then there are autos. Parts can cross the Detroit-Windsor border as many as eight times before a car is completed. That is a business decision made by Ford, GM, and Stellantis, not Canada. Trump’s tariffs are clogging a system that has powered both our economies for decades to the benefit of both nations. But now his tariffs will kill jobs not save them.
 
Canadian travel to the U.S. is also plummeting. Canadians are the No. 1 visitors to the U.S. spending over $20 billion annually but Canadians don’t want to spend their dollars in a nation led by a man that is threatening our country with annexation. Canada will never be the 51st state, and Americans need to accept this.
 
A trillion-dollar trade relationship is coming apart. Although it will sting us, it will cost the U.S. far more. Factories don’t appear overnight, and Trump’s “reciprocal tariff” fallacy won’t balance anything. This slow-motion train wreck is Trump’s doing and Americans will pay a steep price for his economic vandalism.
 
But the real pain comes from the betrayal. Canada has stood with you through wars and other crises. We’re not just neighbours, we’re family. Yet Trump and his cheerleaders treat us like a punching bag, egged on by MAGA cultists who swallowed his nonsense whole. His enablers in Congress and the media parrot every lie, while his base cheers a policy as stupid as it is mean spirited. This isn’t leadership — it’s sowing pandemonium.
 
We don’t want this fight. Stop this insanity and our counter-tariffs vanish fast. We’ll apologize for the corner you boxed us into — not from weakness, but because we cherish what we had. We’ll stay your friends if you want but until then our anger will burn bright — not at Americans, but at the madness you’ve unleashed and the system sustaining him. Trump isn’t just bullying Canada, he is attacking sanity, and we’re not backing down as long as he continues.
 
Fareed Khan is a government relations and public policy professional with over three decades of experience addressing a broad spectrum of domestic and international public policy issues. His op-eds and analyses of public policy have been published in newspapers across Canada.
 
© 1998 - 2025 Nexstar Media Inc. | All Rights Reserved.
© 2025 The View From Here.  © 2025 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

Thursday, March 13, 2025

OP-ED -- Trump’s tariff policies could lead to world-wide recession and political instability

History has shown us that trade wars escalate global instability and can often be a prelude to open conflict.
 
 
 
Since Donald Trump’s re-election as president of the United States a storm of economic and political turmoil has loomed over Canada and the world, driven by Trump’s determination to impose aggressive tariff policies on America’s friends and allies. The 25 per cent tariffs that went into effect on March 4 on imports from Canada, Mexico, and China — America’s largest trading partners — alongside threats of tariffs against the European Union and other nations, risks plunging the global economy into a deep recession, if not an outright economic depression. 

  
If we take lessons from history such economic upheaval could ignite political instability and possible military conflict, but with the US positioned as the antagonist this time against its long-standing friends and allies.

The historical parallels between Trump’s trade policies and the economic protectionism of the early 20th century are alarming and unmistakable. In the aftermath of World War I, the US enacted a series of tariffs aimed at protecting its economy. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 raised duties on hundreds of imports, prompting retaliatory tariffs from other nations and severely constricted global trade. These measures contributed significantly to the onset of the Great Depression, which ultimately became a catalyst for protectionism, resulting in the rise of nationalism and fascism, which led to World War II.

The interconnectedness of national economies around the world demonstrated that the economic volatility generated by those tariffs had far-reaching and lethal consequences.

Economists and historians alike agree that historically there has been a clear connection between trade wars and military conflicts. French economist Frédéric Bastiat is often quoted for his insight that “when goods do not cross frontiers, armies will.” 

His words resonate today when we consider the possible repercussions of the trade war initiated by the Trump administration. When economic ties fray and nations retreat into isolationism, a vacuum is created, one that can be easily filled by inflamed nationalist sentiments. If we look at the reaction of many Americans on social media to Trump’s denigrating remarks about Canada and his repeated comments about annexing the country as the 51st state, we will find many instances of chauvinistic nationalism with militaristic narratives targeting Canada by Trump’s MAGA loyalists.

Economists have consistently warned that the consequences of Trump’s tariffs will not be confined to the countries directly affected. Increased costs on imports will destabilize local economies, raise consumer prices, and ultimately diminish the purchasing power of consumers both in the US, Canada and any other nations targeted by tariffs. Key industries will find demand for their products from export markets reduced significantly as countries which are their primary foreign markets retaliate with tariffs of their own.

The potential for an inflationary spiral also looms large as tariffs will increase the costs of goods in all sectors of the economy, which will be felt by consumers. Coupled with reduced spending power, this could easily push the American and Canadian economy into recession, and the downturn would ripple through global markets given that the US accounts for 26.1 per cent of the world’s GDP. American families, far from reaping the promised benefits of Trump’s tariff policy, will likely face higher unemployment and suffer a decline in living standards instead.

In addition, one cannot overlook the broader geopolitical implications of Trump upending decades of American foreign policy. While casting traditional friends and allies like Canada in an adversarial role, the Trump administration has extended an olive branch to Russia — a nation that historically embodies potential threats to US and European security and to democracy. This inversion of relationships has created a precarious diplomatic landscape, wherein mutual trust and cooperation have been eroded, and the alliance that preserved peace in Europe since World War II has been shaken to core.

With Trump appearing more inclined to treat Russia as a partner while labeling Canada and its European allies as economic adversaries, the global political order has reached an unsettling and critical inflection point with broad implications for the global political order. Just as tariffs have the potential to economically destabilize countries, the geopolitical tensions resulting from this seismic shift in US foreign policy could eventually ignite conflicts that run far deeper and wider than trade concerns.

This begs the question whether there is a path forward to restore economic stability and the international order that has maintained economic stability and an uneasy global peace since World War II. The answer is that there is and it is the US Congress, which would need to take decisive action to reign in a president who is shredding relationships that have been built over eight decades. Because while Trump may wield power through executive orders to impose tariffs, Congress possesses the authority to repeal the laws enabling such actions. But it will take a united stand by courageous members of Congress and Senators against a president pursuing policies that are contrary to the interests of the US and its allies.

History serves as a stern reminder of the devastation wrought by trade wars. If Trump’s “America first” approach to international trade compels other nations to adopt more protectionist stances, economic systems around the world will destabilize, while political extremism rises, and the spectre of military aggression looms ever larger. The connection between trade and peace has been articulated by thinkers like Immanuel Kant, whose assertion still holds water today, that the spirit of trade is synonymous with prosperity, while the absence of commerce could facilitate war.

If Canada wishes to avert the potential catastrophic outcomes associated with trade wars — outcomes that our history has painfully illustrated — it is imperative for our leaders to recognize the urgency of the moment. As the world stands at an inflection point in history, Canada and its allies need to push back hard against American tariffs, and recommit to diplomacy and trade while opposing division and hostility. Just as the present is informed by the lessons of the past, it is up to our leaders to remember that history and ensure that we chart a course that will avoid a potential conflict which would have global ramifications.
 
Fareed Khan is a government relations and strategic communications professional with more than 30 years of experience addressing public policy issues across a broad spectrum of porttfolios.  He has written and commented extensively about public policy issues in Canada and internationally.
 
© 2025 Rabble.ca.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
© 2025 The View From Here.  © 2025 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.


Saturday, March 08, 2025

If Pierre Poilievre becomes prime minister he would threaten Canada’s Future

The last thing that Canada needs is to imitate the failures of our neighbour. Unfortunately, Pierre Poilievre is poised to take us in precisely that direction should he become prime minister.

 
Canada, we need to talk — no sugar-coating, no half-measures. As we stand on the brink of another federal election, the future of our nation hangs in the balance. If we don’t pay attention to the risks that lie ahead, we might very well watch our country succumb to the same harmful ideology and political chaos sweeping across the United States under Donald Trump. So as we look at the options available to Canadians it should be noted that a vote for Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre is not a vote for change as he claims.  Rather, it is a direct invitation for Trumpism to take root in Canada.


Let’s look south at the transformation of American politics under Donald Trump. His return to the presidency of the US has ushered in an era defined by misinformation, corruption, extremism and chaos, all of which threaten the very fabric of democracy. Trump’s brand of populism seems to have captivated millions of Americans, leading them to embrace narratives detached from reality — ones that rationalizes hate and bigotry, dismantle democratic norms, and champion chaos. The last thing that Canada needs is to imitate the failures of our neighbour. Unfortunately, Pierre Poilievre is poised to take us in precisely that direction should he become prime minister.

Make no mistake, Poilievre is not your typical politician, he is a wannabe disciple of the MAGA (Make America Great Again) cult, despite claiming otherwise. He offers a brand of far-right conservatism that is distinctly American in its origins, while proposing policies that would corrode the very values Canadians hold dear. The political platform he has been pushing since he became Conservative leader appears less concerned with the welfare of ordinary Canadians and more aligned with the interests of wealthy elites and far right elements in Canada. Poilievre’s rhetoric about “freedom” is hollow since that freedom would only be for those who align with his world view.  But his policies would inevitably erode the rights of a vast majority of Canadians and dismantle policies and programs that sustain them.

There is also the matter of one of the cornerstones of Canadian identity – publicly funded healthcare – an issue on which Poilievre has signalled a willingness to embrace American-style privatization. His cozy relationships with those who champion profits over patient care should alarm anyone who believes that healthcare should be a universal right. Under his leadership, we may witness the slow deconstruction of Canada’s healthcare system as we know it, pushing us towards a society where access to quality care is determined by one’s ability to pay — a far cry from the equitable access that Canadians cherish.

Poilievre was also a very vocal supporter of the so-called “Freedom Convoy,” a movement that was a threat to our democratic institutions, which became synonymous with disinformation, extremism, and even white supremacy. Supporting such a divisive movement was not only a support for insurrection, because of their call to overthrow the federal government, it was also indicative of the dangerous ideology that he is likely to embrace should the Conservatives become the government. Canada cannot afford to have a leader who panders to extremists, racists and bigots who are willing to threaten the collective well-being of Canadians.

If you feel uneasy thinking about this trajectory, you’re not alone. The spectre of American politics is already casting a shadow over Canada. We are faced with the possibility of being engulfed by a divisive and fractious political culture — one where loyalty to a personality supersedes loyalty to principles and Canadian values. Under Poilievre’s watch Canada could find itself marooned in a cycle of misinformation and hyper partisan belligerence, much like what we see unfolding in the US.

Conversely, there is a viable alternative on the political horizon: Mark Carney, the former Bank of Canada governor. Carney embodies the qualities that Canada so desperately needs — a steady hand, intelligence, international experience, and, crucially, a commitment to preserving the integrity of our democracy. He could be the leader that will stand as a bulwark against the toxic influences that threaten to infiltrate our political landscape. Unlike Poilievre, he isn’t a disingenuous figure shouting about “wokeism” and denying the effects of climate change while giving blank cheques to elites.  Canada needs a serious leader for serious times and it looks like Carney might be that person.



Canadians are living through an inflection point in history, a time where we need leadership grounded in reality rather than deceptive and performative politics. Carney is someone who, based on his experience, seems to embody a grounded approach, and understands the complexities of a global economy. In his role as Bank of Canada governor he prioritized the needs of Canadians, and his recent public statements during the Liberal leadership campaign indicate that he is committed to safeguarding Canada’s sovereignty from the corrosive influence of American extremism. If we are to avoid the fate of our neighbours to the south then Carney appears to be the man for the job.

The stakes for Canada have never been higher, and Canadians have one shot to halt the encroachment of a Trump-like agenda into our government and politics. History has shown us the dangers of ignorance and complacency, and as we watch Americans deal with the erosion of their democracy and the destabilization of their institutions we must heed the lesson from their example and not allow ourselves to be lulled into a state of apathy or indifference.

So, as the next federal election looms, think carefully about the future you wish to forge for yourself, your family, and your country. A vote for Pierre Poilievre is a vote to endorse the very ideologies that are tearing the US apart. For the sake of our future we cannot afford to make such a grave error, and we must take note of what is happening to our southern neighbour, and reject any path that leads us in the direction of societal division, economic chaos, and despair.

Wake up, Canada. The time to act is now. Let's choose hope, integrity, and leadership that upholds our democratic values.  The future of our nation depends on it.
 
© 2025 The View From Here.  © 2025 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.

Tuesday, March 04, 2025

OP-ED -- Trump’s meeting with Zelensky was a display of abuse and sociopathy

Donald Trump’s attacks on Zelensky are an example of how he dehumanizes those who confront him.
 
 
Originally published on:
 
The February 28 Oval Office meeting between US president Donald Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, a meeting which was broadcast to the world, was a reprehensible display of manipulation and psychological abuse that revealed the unvarnished ugliness and sociopathic personality of the man leading the world’s most powerful nation.
 
 
Observing the disconcerting dynamics of the meeting it becomes strikingly evident that Trump’s approach to Zelensky reflected a mindset reminiscent of abusers in toxic interpersonal relationships. The tactics employed were not merely diplomatic manoeuvres, but rather an approach that belittled, blamed, and bullied a leader who was advocating for his besieged nation.

One of the most troubling aspects of Trump’s approach was his blatant victim-blaming, which is a tactic rooted in abuse. At the heart of the meeting was Trump’s chilling dismissal of Zelensky’s plight as a leader defending his nation against aggression when he asserted, “You have allowed yourself to be in a very bad position.” This statement encapsulates the pervasive nature of victim-blaming, a hallmark of abusive relationships. By placing the responsibility of Ukraine’s dire circumstances on Zelensky, Trump effectively stripped away the accountability that should be directed toward the aggressor in this scenario — Russia. This rhetorical tactic not only ignored the reality of Russian aggression but also reinforced a narrative that denied Zelensky agency in his own nation’s defence.

Another alarming moment came when US vice-president J.D. Vance insisted that Zelensky express gratitude for US support. He insisted that Zelensky say “thank you” for aid that had been provided, ignoring the fact that Zelensky has thanked the US publicly many times in the past, including during his address to a joint meeting of the US Congress on December 21, 2022. Forcing someone in a subordinate position to show appreciation for that which they desperately need is a manipulative tactic often employed by abusers. This coerced gratitude exemplifies a toxic relationship and positions Zelensky in a vulnerable space — suggesting that any criticism or assertion of agency by Zelensky would be met with accusations of ingratitude. By setting this stage, Trump was not fostering a partnership but rather establishing a power dynamic permeated by manipulation.

Peace, a concept traditionally hailed as a universal goal, was also twisted in this meeting to serve the interests of power. Trump claimed that Zelensky was “not ready for peace,” but in reality, what he meant was that Ukraine should capitulate to Russian demands. This tactic — substituting the idea of just peace with the notion of surrender — is a common manipulation strategy. In pressing for a twisted notion of peace, Trump was advocating for a situation that would leave Ukraine even more vulnerable, effectively portraying surrender as a viable alternative. Such a tactic is a common strategy used by abusers to manipulate their victims into accepting less than they deserve.

Throughout the meeting, Trump repeatedly asserted that Zelensky had “no cards to play” and that “without us, you have nothing.” These statements are indicative of psychological tactics used by abusers to undermine their victims’ reality. By portraying Zelensky’s authority as nonexistent, Trump sought to establish dominance, rendering the Ukrainian leader a mere vassal dependent on American benevolence.

In an attempt to bargain, Trump not only targeted Zelensky but also devalued the lives of the Ukrainian people when he said, “If you get a ceasefire, you must accept it so that bullets stop flying and your people stop dying.” This reductionist viewpoint neglected the complex realities surrounding ceasefires in volatile conflicts, and ignored the reality that a deal without guarantees would set the stage for further Russian aggression and additional loss of Ukrainian life. In doing so, this comment belittled the Ukrainian lives lost in the conflict as mere collateral.

Trump’s frequent interruptions when Zelensky was speaking — exclaiming, “No, no, you’ve already said enough,” and “You’re not in a position to dictate to us” — further illustrated Trump’s intent to exert psychological pressure and control and reinforce a toxic power dynamic, rendering Zelensky’s perspective as inconsequential. Such behaviour is emblematic of abusive dynamics, wherein one party seeks to monopolize the conversation and diminish the contributions of the other. Trump’s blatant disregard for Zelensky’s attempts to advocate for his country signalled an effort to position himself as the only one concerned with seeking peace.

The idea that “the path to peace lies through diplomacy” uttered by Vance, was another tactic used to obscure the aggressive nature of Trump’s demands. This diplomatic coercion, masquerading as a pursuit of peace and stability, implied that Zelensky should navigate an impossible diplomatic landscape created by an aggressor, framing Ukraine’s capitulation as a means to achieve peace.

A particularly perverse comment was Trump’s irresponsible declaration that “You are playing with the lives of millions of people,” which serves as a classic example of projection, wherein the abuser deflects their own culpability onto the victim. The reality is that it is Trump and his administration that are playing with Ukrainian lives, and control the critical military and economic support needed for Ukraine’s survival.

Lastly, it is vital to note that framing American military and economic assistance as a debt owed shreds decades of US policy where they have given aid to friends and allies in their time of need and seen it as investments in peace and stability. Trump’s assertion that “if it weren’t for our weapons, this war would have ended in two weeks” attempts to erase Ukraine’s resilience and agency. The narrative that Ukraine will receive nothing unless they bow to Trump’s demands underlines a relationship built not on partnership but on coercion.

An analysis of this meeting reveals that the tactics employed by Trump and Vance were a masterclass in abusive tactics including: gas-lighting, victim-blaming, and coercive manipulation. This meeting was not a negotiation but an attempt by Trump to force President Zelensky to bow to Russian demands.

As the world reflects on this interaction, it is imperative to recognize that true diplomacy arises out of respect, agency, and mutual understanding — qualities starkly absent in Trump’s treatment of Zelensky. What the world saw transpire in the Oval Office was a signal that the Trump administration values power and control over traditional diplomacy, and that manipulation, degradation and dominance are the tools he will use when dealing with other nations. In doing so Trump has shown that he is no longer part of the Western alliance and has chosen to side with the enemy of Canada and its allies, and this requires them to rethink how they will deal with this new world order in the years to come.
 
Fareed Khan is a government relations and strategic communications professional with more than 30 years of experience addressing public policy issues across a broad spectrum of portfolios.  He has written and commented extensively about public policy issues in Canada and internationally.
 
© 2025 Rabble.ca.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
© 2025 The View From Here.  © 2025 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.