In a political landscape marked by dramatic shifts and international turbulence, Mark Carney’s ascent to Canada’s highest political office in the spring of 2025 has signaled a new era for the country. The former central banker, with a pedigree from both Harvard and Oxford, stepped into the role of Liberal Party leader and prime minister after Justin Trudeau’s resignation in March, following a period of intense political volatility and a reversal of fortunes for Canada’s major parties.
Until early 2025, the Conservative Party, under Pierre Poilièvre, appeared poised for victory, dominating the polls and setting the tone for national debate. However, everything changed on January 20, 2025, when Donald Trump was sworn in for his second term as President of the United States. According to Snopes, the moment Trump took office, the Canadian Conservatives’ popularity plummeted, with critics branding Poilièvre as a "Trump Light" figure—an association that, rather than bolstering his prospects, proved politically toxic north of the border.
Mark Carney, who had been chairing the Liberal economic task force, was thrust into the spotlight as Trudeau stepped down. Drawing on his experience as governor of the Bank of Canada from 2008 to 2013 and the Bank of England from 2013 to 2020, Carney’s reputation as a steady hand during crises resonated with voters seeking stability amid uncertainty. As Snopes notes, his credentials as a Harvard- and Oxford-trained economist only strengthened his appeal.
Carney’s victory in the general election marked a dramatic turnaround for the Liberals. But the story of Canada in 2025 is about more than just electoral numbers—it’s about a nation coming to terms with its place in a rapidly changing world, and the profound impact of its southern neighbor’s political choices.
Nowhere was this more evident than at the G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, in June 2025, where Prime Minister Carney and President Trump met face-to-face. The summit, covered by The Globe and Mail, became a symbol of the new dynamic between the countries: a Canada more wary, more independent, and, perhaps, more united than it had been in decades.
Lawrence Martin, writing for The Globe and Mail, observed that Trump’s annexation threats and economic saber-rattling had stirred a wave of patriotism in Canada, reminiscent of the surge during the 1972 Canada-Soviet hockey series. Jeff Buckstein, a reader from Ottawa, echoed this sentiment, noting, “I sincerely hope that the changes we are seeing now in Canada—including the desire for greater economic independence, greater military recruitment and pride, and a stronger sense of who we are and what we have to offer the world—are permanent.”
But this new patriotism is not without its anxieties. As Martin warned, even if Trumpism is defeated in the 2028 U.S. presidential election, the damage to cross-border trust may linger. The United States, he argued, has shown itself capable of swinging sharply against Canada in any given four-year cycle, regardless of the long, peaceful history the two countries share. With the world’s longest undefended border, Canadians are wrestling with the realization that old certainties may no longer hold.
This sense of uncertainty has spilled over into debates about Canada’s future direction. Calls for greater military spending—on new airplanes and submarines—have sparked public conversations about the price of security. Charles J. Krebs of North Saanich, B.C., writing in The Globe and Mail, pointedly remarked, “I am hoping that all those calling enthusiastically for the military to obtain new airplanes and submarines are also happy to pay an additional 10 to 20 per cent in their taxes to support this effort. Or is this to be a legacy for our grandchildren to cover?” His comment captured the tension between aspirations for a stronger national defense and the practical realities of funding it.
Meanwhile, broader questions about Canadian identity and values are being debated in the public sphere. Pete Pynenburg of Toronto challenged the notion that Canada’s democratic systems are above reproach, urging a closer examination of the country’s own history and institutions. W.E. Hildreth, a retired lawyer from Picton, Ontario, pointed out that while slavery was abolished in British North America in 1834, Canada has its own complicated legacy—including the transportation of over 100,000 “Home Children” from Britain between 1869 and 1948, many of whom lived as indentured servants.
Economic independence is not just a political slogan but a pressing policy issue. The energy sector, long a pillar of Canada’s economy, is at a crossroads. Valerie Endicott of Belle Cote, Cape Breton, N.S., argued in The Globe and Mail that the continued emphasis on exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Asia is increasingly untenable. She cited the International Energy Agency’s assessment that renewables are “unstoppable,” and pointed to the International Court of Justice’s warning that countries expanding fossil fuel production risk lawsuits from those harmed by climate change. “Our money and brainpower would be better spent building up renewable energy and our international reputation would be better served by being a global leader in doing so,” Endicott wrote.
Against this backdrop, Carney’s technocratic background may prove both an asset and a challenge. His tenure as a central banker was marked by cautious pragmatism and a focus on stability. Now, as prime minister, he faces a country grappling with rising tax bills, inflationary pressures, and the need to reconcile economic growth with environmental responsibility. The public debate, as seen in The Globe and Mail’s letters section, reflects a nation in the midst of self-examination—questioning not just policy, but the very nature of Canadian identity, democracy, and purpose in a world where old alliances are being tested.
Yet, for all the uncertainty, there is a sense of resolve. Canadians, confronted with external threats and internal debates, are rediscovering what binds them together. As Buckstein put it, the current surge in patriotism is not just a response to American politics, but a deeper reckoning with what Canada stands for and what it wants to become. Whether this moment of unity and self-reflection endures remains to be seen, but for now, the country appears determined to chart its own course—no matter what storms may gather on the horizon.
