CALGARY — A prolonged trade war between Canada and the United States could run the risk of deepening Western alienation and strengthening Alberta’s independence movement if Ottawa attempts to tax or restrict the province’s oil exports, according to University of Calgary political scientist Tom Flanagan.His warning comes after the Liberal government announced dollar-for-dollar counter-tariffs on $27.6 billion worth of US goods, beginning September 8, along with $7.5 billion in support for Canadian workers and businesses affected by the dispute.While Ottawa’s counter-tariffs are set to target products including steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, plastics and electronics, Alberta energy has been left off the table by Prime Minister Mark Carney so far, despite calls from political figures such as Ontario Premier Doug Ford and former Alberta premier Alison Redford to use it as a bargaining chip.Flanagan, a former adviser to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, said Carney’s current reluctance to leverage oil exports shows Ottawa’s awareness that using Alberta’s resources as a weapon against Washington could create another national unity crisis.“If the federal government tried to put an export tax on Alberta oil or tried to limit exports in some way, I think it would have an effect,” Flanagan told the Western Standard.“I imagine that’s part of the reasoning of the federal government for doing what it’s doing, which is levelling the counter-tariffs on manufactured goods but leaving energy pretty much out of it.”.Smith says cutting off Alberta's energy exports is not a viable option .Premier Danielle Smith has repeatedly opposed restricting energy exports or imposing an export tax on Alberta oil, arguing the province should not be forced to bear a disproportionate share of the cost of a national trade dispute.“Cutting off Alberta energy exports to the US would be extremely harmful to Canadians and is not a viable option,” Smith said on Monday.Flanagan said Smith has so far successfully navigated the competing pressures by protecting Alberta’s energy interests without appearing to side with the US against Canada.“She’s done well. She’s caught between conflicting pressures,” he said.“Her first responsibility is to Alberta, and so I think she has manoeuvred astutely to help prevent Alberta’s exports from being caught up in this battle, but at the same time she can’t appear to be on the side of the Americans.”Fergus Hodgson, director of Econ Americas and publisher of Impunity Observer, said the ongoing trade conflict is exposing what he sees as an increasing divide between Alberta’s economic interests and those of Eastern Canada.“We’re seeing a divergence in the interests of Laurentian or central Canada versus Alberta, not just in political values, but in economic terms,” Hodgson told the Western Standard, adding that the division could eventually result in the emergence of a political party focused exclusively on Alberta, comparable to the Bloc Québécois.“There’s going to be a Bloc Québécois for Alberta,” he said.“It seems like a natural growth to me — a natural outcome.”He did, however, say the escalating trade dispute could work both ways for the independence movement, as some Albertans may view the trade war and Ottawa’s response as further evidence that Alberta’s interests are incompatible with those of the rest of Canada, while others may rally around the Canadian flag in response to the confrontation with Washington.“When people feel afraid, they naturally rally around whoever is in power at present,” Hodgson said.“So even though it’s not a kinetic war with the United States, the idea that there’s an imagined war could actually drive many people to rally around the maple leaf and join this whole Team Canada idea.”.Liberals say Canadians must wait until fall budget for cost of retaliatory tariffs.Ottawa’s financial support for tariff-exposed industries in Ontario and Quebec could also become another source of resentment in Alberta, especially if massive amounts of taxpayer money flow into those provinces.When asked if Alberta should be concerned about subsidizing those industries with more tax dollars, Flanagan said Ottawa can’t afford to do so indefinitely.“There’s a limit to how many chosen industries you can support forever, and I think Ontario manufacturing is just too big to be subsidized forever,” he said, pointing to previous federal commitments to electric vehicle and battery plants and describing them as “money promised and poured down the drain.”“It’s one more headache for the country. It’s easy enough to declare war, if you want to call it that, but how do you get out of it? You have to be willing to sign some kind of peace deal at some point because we’re not going to be able to bear the expense.”Hodgson also warned the conflict could accelerate the movement of skilled workers and businesses from Canada to the US while making domestic industries more dependent on government support.“My biggest concern with this damage to Canada is just the long-term bleeding of talent,” he said, adding that trade tensions will continue as long as Ottawa refuses to reconsider policies opposed by Washington.“I don’t see this trade dispute as a one-off thing. I think it’s just a long-term escalation,” Hodgson stated.“I suspect this tension will just continue for years to come.”
