this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2025
47 points (98.0% liked)

World News

50503 readers
1529 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
lemmyAtom@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
47
Canada in ‘strategic partnership’ with China, minister says - National | Globalnews.ca (globalnews.ca)
submitted 1 day ago by schizoidman@lemmy.zip to c/world@lemmy.world
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/51612693

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Just three years after Canada called China a “disruptive global power,” Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand says Canada now views Beijing as a strategic partner in a dangerous world.

“We must be nuanced in our diplomacy. We must stress our concerns relating to security and public safety on the one hand, and we must seek to build additional supply chains on the other. That is pragmatism,” she said.

A much welcomed change given the US has tanked multiple parts of our economy within less than 9 months of this presidency. And strategic partnership is the right approach. We could also use this as leverage in our negotiations with the US. That is if negotiations resume after the abrupt bullshit Mango Mussolini pulled today.

Can't make this shit up:

[–] Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

We can't trust any negotiations we make with him long term anyways.

Quite frankly, in the absolute best case scenario, we have to hunker down, diversify trade, bolster our support systems, and hope to high heavens that our neighbours start back taking their lithium.

[–] randomname@scribe.disroot.org 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yeah, if the multi-polarity comes true, there will likely be several blocks (the EU, Mercosur, others) that will cooperate closely, while trusted partnerships will remain only among trusted countries (such as among democratic countries worldwide). Within these partnerships there could be free trade, between them, however, we'll likely see some sort of tit-for-tat economy - do trade where it fits and where it has no impact on our core interests regarding economy and security.

Canada's "strategic partnership" with China will be one of these tit-for-tat partnerships, but the country's future lies in collaborations with the EU, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and other democracies.

[Edit typo.]

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

...even after Ottawa emulated American restrictions on Chinese vehicles.

Those restrictions were not just about "emulating American restrictions"...they were also about protecting the Canadian automotive industry from trying to compete with cheap Chinese imports flooding the Canadian market. And at a time when our manufacturing industry is being hit hard by US tariffs, we need those restrictions more than ever.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

From what I've heard Canada doesn't even have an EV industry to protect.

[–] Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Partially because we allow every decent company that pops up here to be bought out by Americans.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

That's such a big problem...

[–] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Part of what Carney promised on the campaign trail was to continue to develop Canada's internal automotive manufacturing supply chains...which include all the necessary materials and components for our own EV's, right down to the battery technology.

Currently, everything is still in the investment and developmental stages, but the framework is there. Canada has all the rare earth elements to rival Chinese production...we just need to invest in the infrastructure to fully process them. This will take time and money.

Which is why allowing Chinese companies to enter our market at this stage, would derail the entire process. Why make the long-term investment in Canadian made products, when China can supply them for a fraction of the cost, right now? Our own capabilities would die before they have the chance to even get off the ground...and we would become dependent on China, right after declaring independence from the US.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

All true, however the consumers of the finished battery cells would be North American EV production, because there's large scale battery production in the rest of the world. Maybe the EU could import some. Or maybe they'll just want raw material for their battery factories. But on our end, as far as I'm aware everyone of the auto manufacturers here is cancelling or scaling down their Canadian EV plans. The EV landscape in the US doesn't look good either with Trump actively working to undermine them. Point being that without considering the Chinese EVs, the investments that haven't been cancelled yet, already are at risk. I expect investors being fickle as they are, especially during uncertainty and downturns, to cancel further supply chain investments, unless our gov't steps in. And I think our gov't should step in but less to prop them up and more to buy these projects and put them under a crown corp that develops these resources. That still leaves us with the problem of what to put those batteries in. Chinese EVs built here could fulfill that role. Any such work should start early so that it can be operational by the time the batt supply chain is up. As for direct imports, those would compete with ICE vehicles built in NA. That poses a risk to Canadian auto manufacturing since we only build ICE. But we do have a problem with auto prices the rest of the economy so the gov't has to consider that risk vs the risk of layoffs. For example the price of the F-150 used across the construction industry is a cost for the tradespeople working in it. Finally if we consider the worst case scenario where we get mass layoffs due to Trump's actions, then the high vehicle price problem would become more significant for a lot of people who have their incomes slashed. That's where cheaper direct imports could help dampen the impact on our car-dependent economy. If I were Carney, I'd probably model these scenarios and if here's a benefit, set appropriate taxes/quotas on these EVs to achieve it, and change it as needed to match the rest of the economic context. As for new factories, I'd start those yesterday.