'Warning shot': Inside MAGA’s scheme to destabilize Canada

U.S. President Donald Trump with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on June 16, 2025, in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok/Flickr)

Alex Henderson 

March 02, 2026

ALTERNET

For many years, Canada and the United States — both members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) since 1949 — were close allies and trading partners. But U.S./Canada relations took a turn for the worse when U.S. President Donald Trump threatened its northern neighbor with steep tariffs and called for Canada to become "the 51st state" — an idea that Prime Minister Mark Carney and millions of other Canadians are adamantly against.

But in an article published by The New Republic on March 2, Ottawa, Ontario-based journalist John Last details MAGA efforts to exploit separatists in Canada's Alberta province.

Last explains, "Recent months have seen the escalation of a brazen campaign by separatists in the oil-rich province of Alberta to dismember the country and lease its resources to an expansionist American regime, with direct support from officials in the U.S. government…. A recent push for a referendum on independence has achieved unprecedented success, in no small part due to tacit support from the Trump-aligned provincial government."

Last notes that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith "was one of the first Canadian officials to kiss the ring of Trump at Mar-a-Lago, and has long tested the limits of her powers to pursue his crusades and causes at home."

Duane Bratt, who teaches at Mount Royal University in Alberta, told The New Republic, "Since the moment Alberta became a province (in 1905), there's been a movement to separate…. There is an ideological alignment with Trump. On gun rights, climate change, trans rights, renewable energy, wokeness.… it's all consistent with American right-wing movements."

Patrick Lennox, a former intelligence officer for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, told The New Republic, "There's a real national security threat there. This is the perfect scenario for foreign interference."

Lennox views as the capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro as a "warning shot" for Canada and other countries rich in resources.

"The Trump Administration's crusade against Canada may have deeper causes," Last explains. "Figures like Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon, who has explicitly compared Canada to Ukraine, see Canada as a bastion of decadent liberalism in the West that must be broken and subdued, one way or another."

Key allies ditch Trump with new 'landmark' deal that ignores US in critical partnership

President Donald Trump with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the White House Oval Office on May 6, 2025 (The White House/Flickr)

Thomas Kika

March 02, 2026 

ALTERNET

Canada on Monday announced "landmark" new deals with India as it moves away from reliance on the U.S., per a report from The Daily Beast, as Donald Trump continued to alienate allies with his military strikes on Iran.

Per the report, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced a major 10-year "strategic energy partnership as well as agreements on technology, critical minerals, space, defense and education." The partnership will also include a free trade deal by the end of the year as both countries, who are ostensibly key allies of the U.S., seek to avoid exposure to Trump's sweeping global tariffs. The deal is intended to generate as much as $50 billion in bilateral trade between Canada and India.

Spurred into action by the unprecedented political and economic hostility from the U.S. during Trump's second term, Canada has been seeking new partnerships with other nations. Carney is scheduled to visit with two other key U.S. allies, Australia and Japan, in the coming days. Speaking about the new deal with India, the Canadian prime minister touted just how much engagement with India has resulted from Trump's aggressive global trade moves, and celebrated the two nations "charting our own course for the future."

"There has been more engagement between the Canadian and Indian governments in the last year than there has been in more than two decades combined," Carney said. "This is not merely the renewal of a relationship, it is the expansion of a valued partnership, with new ambition, focus and foresight. A partnership between two confident countries, charting our own course for the future."

The announcement came three days into Trump's unpopular military operation against Iran, conducted in cooperation with Israel. Polls have recently found that more Americans were opposed to the idea of military action against the Middle Eastern nation than supported it, with allies close to Trump worried that he will turn off his own MAGA base by focusing on foreign conflicts that they have long opposed.

As Canada creates new partnerships overseas, allies have also begun to distance themselves from Trump's operation in Iran. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Monday said that the country would not be aiding the U.S. in the campaign, stating that his government "does not believe in regime change from the skies." Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares said that the U.S. will not be allowed to use military bases in Spain to conduct operations in Iran, with the country's government condemning the strikes.

Trump Humiliated by Allies While He’s Busy Starting a War

Janna Brancolini
Mon, March 2, 2026 

DAILY BEAST


The Washington Post / The Washington Post via Getty Im(The Washington Post)


Canada reached a “landmark” deal on energy, technology, and innovation with India while President Donald Trump was busy ordering deadly strikes on Iran.

As the Trump administration’s “major combat operations” against Iran entered their third day Monday, Canada’s Mark Carney and India’s Narendra Modi announced a 10-year strategic energy partnership as well as agreements on technology, critical minerals, space, defense, and education, the BBC reported.

Donald Trump's previously warm relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has soured thanks to the president's tariffs and his false claims about negotiating a ceasefire between India and Pakistan. / JIM WATSON / AFP via Getty ImagesMore

They also agreed to conclude a free trade deal, which has been discussed on and off for the past 15 years, by the end of 2026.

The two countries hope to reach $50 billion in bilateral trade as they both look for ways to lessen the impact of Trump’s trade wars, according to the BBC.

After he leaves India, Carney is scheduled to travel to Australia and then Japan as part of his effort to diversify Canada’s trade after Trump, 79, imposed crushing tariffs on products from dozens of U.S. trade partners, including Canada.

The president is also considering blowing up the United-States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which he signed during his first term in office, to get back at Carney, who has responded forcefully to Trump’s threats to annex Canada and make it the 51st U.S. state.

Earlier this month, Trump raged at Carney for traveling to Beijing to negotiate a trade deal with China, which has spent the last year trying to present itself as a more reliable trading partner than the mercurial Trump.

Canada agreed to lower its tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles in return for China reducing its import taxes on Canadian farm products.

Donald Trump's Truth Social post about the Gordie Howe International Bridge. / Donald Trump/Truth Social

Trump was so upset about the deal that he brought it up during a completely unrelated conversation about the U.K. and China, and posted multiple Truth Socials about how China was “successfully and completely taking over” Canada and would “terminate ALL ice hockey” there.

He also threatened to prevent a new bridge from opening between Ontario and Michigan.

Those outbursts suggest the president will not be happy with Canada’s latest deal with India.

The U.S. and Israel carried out a fresh wave of attacks on targets in Iran's capital of Tehran on Sunday. / Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images

So far, though, he hasn’t weighed in. On Monday morning, the president took a rare break from posting on social media as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth held a press conference on the Iran strikes, which killed the country’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Four U.S. soldiers have been killed in retaliatory strikes across the Middle East

The Daily Beast has reached out to the White House for comment.

Please Advise! Is Trump’s Brain Totally Pucked?

Why else vow to block the Gordie Howe bridge while proclaiming China will ban the Stanley Cup?

Steve Burgess 

17 Feb 2026

The Tyee

Donald Trump’s threats to halt the opening of the Gordie Howe International Bridge would have drawn a sharp elbow from the hockey legend. Howe photo by Doug Ball, the Canadian Press. Trump photo via Shutterstock.

[Editor’s note: Steve Burgess is an accredited spin doctor with a PhD in Centrifugal Rhetoric from the University of SASE, situated on the lovely campus of PO Box 7650, Cayman Islands. In this space he dispenses PR advice to politicians, the rich and famous, the troubled and well-heeled, the wealthy and gullible.]

Dear Dr. Steve,

Donald Trump has threatened to block the opening of the new Gordie Howe International Bridge linking Detroit and Windsor over his continued complaints about Canada. “I will not allow this bridge to open until the United States is fully compensated for everything we have given them,” Trump wrote. The president posted his online rant shortly after Matthew Moroun, the billionaire owner of the nearby tolled Ambassador Bridge, met with U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick.

Will the bridge ever open, Dr. Steve?

Signed,

Red Kelly


Dear Red,

Before discussing this further, let’s pause first to consider Trump’s online post. Like farmers who learn to distinguish hail clouds from incipient tornadoes, we have all become unwilling experts in Trump storm fronts. At this point it’s common knowledge that, morally, Trump has no bottom, but that observation does not convey the astonishing breadth of his absurdity. This guy is giving dementia a bad name. His bridge babble was one for the ages.

After some preliminary spittle about perfidious, predatory Canada, the stupidity of “Barack Hussein Obama” and the absence of American poison from Canadian liquor store shelves, Trump’s Truth Social ramble turned to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s trade deal with China. “The first thing China will do is terminate ALL ice hockey being played in Canada, and permanently eliminate the Stanley Cup,” he wrote.

Eliminate the Stanley Cup? Why? Is China cutting a deal with Florida? And if China truly intends to destroy the game of hockey, could that explain what’s been going on with the Canucks? Did China trade Quinn Hughes to those troublemaking socialists in Minnesota?


Billionaires Don’t Control Us


Get The Tyee’s free daily newsletter in your inbox.

Journalism for readers, not profits.

EmailSubscribe

Trump also opined that China will “eat Canada alive! We’ll just get the leftovers.”

“The leftovers?” So Canada is a half-empty Styrofoam container of moo shu pork with a couple of stale wraps? In the world according to Trump, it seems the United States and China are a jackal and a hyena barking over a water buffalo carcass, or two drunken frat bros staring at the last remaining slice of Domino’s Pepperoni Feast. Canada is not the 51st state — we’re the fifth plate of jumbo shrimp at the Sizzler in Grand Rapids.

Trump’s latest Mad Libs effort apparently followed a conversation with Lutnick. The commerce secretary had been lobbied by Matthew Moroun, member of the Billionaire Brotherhood and owner of the Ambassador Bridge. The Gordie Howe International Bridge will cut into Moroun’s toll revenues, so Lutnick probably endorsed the plan to stop truck traffic over the new crossing. Considering the recent revelation that Lutnick was chummy with Jeffrey Epstein, you wouldn’t expect him to have a problem with trafficking. In fact they should probably call it the Epstein Bridge, since it’s sitting right there but Trump doesn’t want it open.

To be fair, Detroit-Windsor isn’t the only crossing point targeted for closure recently. Last week, airspace over El Paso, Texas, was briefly closed, apparently because U.S. Customs and Border Protection used lasers to shoot down some party balloons. Overreaction? Maybe. But maybe the party had been a quinceañera. Maybe they had been speaking Spanish and playing the music of Bad Bunny. For U.S. border agents, that’s triggering.



Trump’s America Comes for Alberta read more

As for Gordie Howe, he spoke Canadian, often with his fists. It was Howe who inspired the defiant “Elbows Up” slogan. Historically, he is Even Worse Bunny. Clearly, Trump has been triggered too.

How to placate the president? Qatar bribed Trump with a $400-million jet. The bridge reportedly cost $3.8 billion. Seems a bit much.

There’s another Gordie Howe Bridge in Saskatoon though. We could give him that and hope he won’t notice. Kind of like a box of Kirkland chocolates on Valentine’s Day. Just as good, really.

Trump says he will keep the Gordie Howe International Bridge closed until the U.S. is “fully compensated” for all they have given Canada. Great. Not only do we get more measles, but now we get charged for them too.

Come to think of it, maybe we need to rethink this. Maybe we need to seriously consider Trump’s remark about all we have received from the U.S. And maybe that bridge ought to stay closed. 

Steve Burgess writes about politics and culture for The Tyee. Read his previous articles.

Inside the Right-Wing Movement Pushing Alberta to Secede From Canada


Trump officials have repeatedly met with secessionist leaders from the province, which has large oil and gas deposits.

By Nora Loreto , 

Truthout

PublishedFebruary 9, 2026

A member of the public wears a "Make Alberta Great Again" hat during the Help Us Make Sovereignty for Alberta Happen event organized by the Alberta Prosperity Project in Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada, on March 16, 2025.

Artur Widak / NurPhoto via Getty Images


Honest, paywall-free news is rare. Please support our boldly independent journalism with a donation of any size.

Aseparation movement in the Canadian province of Alberta claims to be gaining steam, and its leaders say they now have a meeting booked with U.S. Treasury Department officials. They will be asking for a line of credit worth $500 billion in U.S. currency to help transition Alberta from a Canadian province into a U.S. state.

Led by businessman Mitch Sylvestre, the Alberta Prosperity Project has launched a petition through a campaign called Stay Free Alberta to build support for a referendum to separate from Canada. The group has no official support from any of the elected parties in Alberta.

Behind its rallying cry of faith, family, and freedom, the Alberta Prosperity Project wants a new constitution for Albertans — one “that recognizes the Supremacy of God as foundational to Civil Society and the Rule of Law.”

Unlike in the province of Quebec, where separatist leaders hold elected office, Alberta’s separatist movement has no formal foothold in its province’s politics. Quebec, an overwhelmingly French-speaking province, is the only jurisdiction in Canada with a sizable sovereignty movement. That province had referenda in 1980 and 1995 that asked whether or not Quebecers wanted to separate from Canada, the latter narrowly failing. The separatist political party, Parti Québécois, is expected to form the next provincial government, and has promised a referendum in its first mandate.

Officially, the governing United Conservative Party of Alberta (UCP) is not advocating for sovereignty. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says she wants Alberta to remain in Canada. However, the idea of sovereignty has been used by the UCP to try to push forward policies that the government of Alberta supports, especially related to oil and gas. On February 4, Smith issued a letter demanding that Alberta be given more say over judicial appointments. She also questioned why three judges of the nine on the nation’s Supreme Court came from Quebec (Quebec is governed under the Civil Code and not Common Law. As such, it has more representation at the Supreme Court for when Civil Code matters arise).


Mark Carney Warns “American Hegemony” Is Destroying World Order in Candid Speech
States like Canada have long known the current system of international rules-based order is a “fiction,” Carney said.  By Sharon Zhang , Truthout January 20, 2026

Smith is using the sovereigntist movement to try to extract gains from Ottawa but is not formally supporting the movement. When pressed by journalists about members of her caucus having signed the pro-separation petition, Smith told the Canadian press that she doesn’t “police” members of her caucus and they’re free to sign whatever petitions they would like.

At the end of 2022, the UCP passed an act called the Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act. It allows the Alberta government to challenge federal laws that it believes are an overreach into provincial jurisdiction (though the Canadian Constitution already allows for this). The UCP has also lowered the threshold of signatures required to trigger a referendum and extended the period of time to collect signatures. The separatists would need to have almost 178,000 signatures by May for a referendum to go ahead. There are 5 million people who live in the province.

The separatists would need to have almost 178,000 signatures by May for a referendum to go ahead.

Jeremy Appel, author of a forthcoming book about Smith, says there has been a sovereignty movement in Alberta going back to when the province first joined Canada in 1905. From the beginning, the movement was mostly concerned with fighting to maintain provincial control over Alberta’s resources. Then, the federal government created the National Energy Program in the 1980s, which gave Ottawa more control over oil and gas in Alberta, to the chagrin of many Albertans.

Appel believes that the sovereignty movement has its roots in this history but projects its discontent on the ruling status quo. “Canada’s state institutions have been completely hollowed out by neoliberalism and Smith is responding to this wave of anger and discontent stemming from that by … displacing the causes onto ‘woke’ liberals in Ottawa and Montreal,” he explained.

Separatist sentiment rises when Liberal Party politicians are elected in Ottawa, and they tend to be calmed when Conservative Party politicians are in office, he added.

While polls show that popular support for sovereignty in Alberta is on the rise, there is also considerable opposition. Former Progressive Conservative provincial representative for Alberta, Thomas Lukaszuk, recently filed a petition to remain part of Canada. His petition collected 438,568 signatures and was submitted to the legislative assembly on December 1, 2025, one month before the deadline. If it meets the deadline with the required number of signatures, the question about separatism will be put to Albertans in a referendum.

Alberta Prosperity Project leaders have met with U.S. State Department officials at least three times.

The Financial Times reports that Alberta Prosperity Project leaders have met with U.S. State Department officials at least three times.

Prime Minister Mark Carney reacted to the news that Trump officials had met with the sovereignty activists, saying, “I expect the U.S. administration to respect Canadian sovereignty.”

Appel points to the fact that it isn’t just separation activists who are meeting with U.S. officials. Premier Danielle Smith travelled to Mar-a-Lago in January 2025, 10 days before Donald Trump’s inauguration. Smith’s current Chief of Staff Rob Anderson is a former member of the province’s legislative assembly and an Albertan separatist who has an undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University in Utah. On social media, Anderson said the current movement to secede was triggered by Albertans’ hatred for former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

British Columbia Premier David Eby reacted to this news by saying this to CBC: “If you are crossing a border to seek the support of a foreign government to break up our country because you don’t have the support and the resources and the ability within our own country to advance that conversation, and you’re asking the Americans or any other government, I mean that is the definition of treason.”

Trump has consistently referred to Canada as the 51st state, and this group of separatist activists might give the president some of what he wants. With the U.S. administration already meddling in Venezuela over access to oil reserves, Alberta could serve a similar purpose for Trump, giving the United States access to another large deposit of oil and gas. Appel believes that this movement could easily serve as a toehold for the Trump administration to get into Canada.

Trump has consistently referred to Canada as the 51st state, and this group of separatist activists might give the president some of what he wants.

Canada and the United States have a deeply intertwined energy market. In 2023, 21 percent of all Canadian hydrocarbon exports went to the United States, worth some $163 billion in Canadian currency. Of the crude oil that the United States imported, nearly 60 percent came from Canada and almost 100 percent of the natural gas came from Canada.

Alberta produces around 84 percent of Canada’s crude oil. More than any other province, Alberta relies on the United States to purchase its oil.
First Nations leaders have been outspoken against the Alberta sovereignty movement. At a press conference, Trevor Mercredi, grand chief of Treaty 8 First Nations of Alberta, said: “Our treaties are with the imperial crown, not with the province of Alberta. Alberta has never been party to the treaties and has no jurisdiction over our lands.”

“I’m calling on all international nations and communities to support the First Nations movement in Alberta, to tell the Alberta government that what they are doing is unconstitutional, and that the foreign interference has to stop,” said Chief Allan Adam from the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation.

This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the terms of the license.

Nora Loreto is a writer and activist based in Quebec City. She is also the president of the Canadian Freelance Union.

Ex-leader Harper says Canada should make 'any sacrifice necessary' to preserve independence from US

ROB GILLIES
Tue, February 3, 2026 


Canada's former Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaks during a ceremony for his official portrait unveiling in Ottawa, Ontario, Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2026. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press via AP)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)

Former Prime Minister Stephen Harper is recognized in the House of Commons following Question Period on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Ontario, Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2026. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press via AP)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)


Canada's former Prime Minister Stephen Harper listens to a speaker during a ceremony for his official portrait unveiling in Ottawa, Ontario, Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2026. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press via AP)(ASSOCIATED PRESS)

TORONTO (AP) — Former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Tuesday the country should make “any sacrifice necessary” to preserve the independence of the country in the face of threats from U.S. President Donald Trump.

Harper, a Conservative prime minister for nearly a decade from 2006 to 2015, made the remarks in a speech during his official portrait unveiling.

Harper described the times as perilous and thanked current Prime Minister Mark Carney for attending the unveiling “at a time when challenges are unprecedented during our lives.”

Trump has talked about making Canada the 51st state and has threatened the country with tariffs.

The Republican president’s push to acquire Greenland strained the NATO alliance, alarming Canada, which shares a 3,000-kilometer (1,864 mile) maritime border with Greenland in the Arctic.

Harper didn’t mention Trump by name but urged Canada’s two major parties, the Liberals and Conservatives, to unify in the face of threats to the country’s sovereignty.

“We must make any sacrifice necessary to preserve the independence and the unity of this blessed land,” Harper said.

Harper said he hopes his portrait is only one of the many portraits of prime ministers of both parties that will continue to be exhibited for decades and centuries to come.

“But that will require that in these perilous times that both parties, whatever their other differences, come together against external forces that threaten our independence,” he said.

Harper also warned against “domestic policies that threaten our unity.” A separatist moment in Alberta could garner enough votes this spring to trigger a referendum for independence from Canada.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has said separatist support is about at 30%. Smith is pressuring the federal government and the British Columbia provincial government on the Pacific coast to approve a new oil pipeline to the Pacific.

Harper approved of Carney’s resume when Carney applied to be the head of Canada’s central bank during Harper's time as prime minister. He joked the then-young man “has apparently gone on to enjoy some success.”

Carney later became the head of the Bank of England in 2013 and prime minister of Canada last year.

Carney thanked Harper for denouncing those who are threatening Canada’s sovereignty as Canada was confronted with unprecedented attacks and trade pressures.

“He called on us to build a stronger Canada less dependent on the U.S.,” Carney said. “He also took the time to advise me which I have greatly appreciated.”

Carney also commended Harper for his economic stewardship during the 2008 financial crisis.

“He came to Ottawa as a balanced-budget conservative. He believed rightly that governments should live within their means. Yet when the financial crisis struck, he did not let ideology prevent him from doing what was necessary, running deficits for five years to support the Canadian economy through the worst global downturn in generations.,” Carney said.

“Mr. Harper understood that you build up strength in good times to have the capacity to act in bad times.”

 

TACO Time or Wartime? Examining Trump’s Latest Threats

By Mel Gurtov

February 2, 2026

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

Image credit: Wikimedia Commons, G. Edward Johnson, CC by 4.0. Donald Trump’s photo credit: Public Domain.

Donald Trump is on the warpath again, threatening Greenland, Iran, Canada, and Cuba. Will he be TACO—Trump Always Chickens Out—or will he carry through on the threats—seizing Greenland, seeking to overthrow the Iran and Cuba regimes, destabilizing Canada? Let’s take a look.

Greenland: A “Core National Security Interest”

Jeff Landry, the Trump administration’s envoy to Greenland—he’s also governor of Louisiana—has written an op-ed for the New York Times January 29 that tells us the US intends to dominate the island.

“When President Trump took office last year, he recognized an uncomfortable fact that many others have avoided: America must guarantee its own unfettered and uninterrupted access to key strategic territories in the Western Hemisphere, including both Greenland and the Panama Canal.”

Pairing those two locations is revealing, since Landry proposes that “Greenland fits squarely within” the idea behind the Monroe Doctrine for Latin America. Now that Trump believes he has a “framework for a future deal” on Greenland, the US will use it to (in Landry’s words) “set the rules in one of the world’s most strategically consequential regions in perpetuity.”

“American dominance in the Arctic is nonnegotiable,” writes Landry. “Greenland is a core national security interest for the United States,” repeating what Trump said at Davos. That’s an extraordinary statement: It elevates Greenland to the level of Europe’s or the US homeland’s defense, among other national interests.

And it’s wrong. Chinese and Russian activities in and around Greenland hardly amount to a national security threat. Contrary to Trump’s statement in a January 9 press conference, there are no Chinese and Russian destroyers circling Greenland, nor “Russian submarines all over the place.” Nor, finally, are there any indications that Russia or China plans to “occupy” Greenland. All we see are Russian and Chinese fishing boats.

Nevertheless, the US is going to build more bases in Greenland, establish a “Golden Dome” missile defense, build more icebreakers, and vigorously patrol the Arctic waters to prevent a Russian or Chinese takeover. These plans may conceal a long-term design on Greenland and its mineral resources. After all, governments typically are prepared to go to war over “core national security interests.”

Iran: Make a Deal or Perish

Once again, President Trump is threatening to attack Iran. Just a few weeks ago, the threat turned on Iran’s reaction to massive protests and the possible execution of protesters. The US was “locked and loaded”; protesters could count on the US. But Trump was evidently persuaded by Arab countries and the US military not to attack.

Now Trump, having failed to back up his promises as thousands of protesters were killed or jailed, is saying Iran has revitalized its nuclear weapon capability. That’s the capability he had claimed was “obliterated” in US attacks last June. Trump has ordered US military vessels to the Middle East, saying that “like with Venezuela, it is ready, willing, and able to rapidly fulfill its mission, with speed and violence, if necessary.”

News reports indicate Trump is considering various options, including putting US troops into Iran. Evidently, Trump has become so enamored with the successful seizure of Venezuela’s leader that he thinks Iran can be as easily dealt with. Yet Trump also says he hopes to avoid the use of force. In short, more gunboat diplomacy.

Iran is responding, as in the past, with threats of its own and offers to talk. If the US attacks, Iran says it will spark a regional war and that Israel and US bases in the region will be targets.

But Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, has also said Iran was “ready to begin negotiations if they take place on an equal footing, based on mutual interests and mutual respect.” He said there were no immediate plans to meet with US officials, adding: “I want to state firmly that Iran’s defensive and missile capabilities will never be subject to negotiation.”

In the past, Iran has also said its nuclear enrichment program is off the bargaining table. That point collides with the demand made by Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special Middle East envoy, that Iran stop its enrichment program and transfer all its enriched uranium out of the country.

Will Trump order another attack on Iran? More bombing is certainly possible, whereas a direct intervention in Iran would invite disaster. Trump’s war threats have activated some in the Senate to craft a resolution that would remove US military forces “from hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran” unless authorized by Congress. Prospects for stopping Trump by resolution or the War Powers Act seem dim considering that these measures were not enacted to prevent his Venezuela adventure.

Canada: Squeezing with Separatism and Tariffs

Angered by Prime Minister Mark Carney’s upstaging him at Davos, Canada’s trade deal with China, and Canada’s supposed refusal to certify Gulfstream business jets, Trump’s team has looked for ways besides high tariffs to pressure Carney’s government. US treasury secretary Scott Bessent recently
suggested US support for a separatist group in Alberta, arguing that the province is a “natural partner” of the US.

That support apparently extends to the highest level of the US government, according to an account in The Daily Beast. “Very, very senior” officials in the Trump administration have had secret meetings with far-right Canadian separatists trying to shake the foundations of the country. The covert meetings between high-ranking U.S. officials and the Alberta Prosperity Project,” says the report, “have met U.S. State Department officials in Washington, D.C. three times in the last nine months.”

One member of that project who attended the meetings claimed: “The US is extremely enthusiastic about a free and independent Alberta. We’re meeting very, very senior people leaving our meetings to go directly to the Oval Office.” The group is hoping to place a referendum on independence on the ballot.

US officials deny supporting this movement, but the State Department acknowledges that meetings did take place. The US officials’ denials ring hollow. The very fact that US officials would engage with Canadian separatists is a shocking level of interference in Canadian affairs. It shows that if Trump cannot fulfill his dream of making Canada the 51st state, he may still try to pry off one province.

Cuba: Economic Warfare or Regime Change?

Following up on Marco Rubio’s threats to Cuba, the island’s oil imports are drying up. Trump has made sure Venezuelan oil is no longer available, threatening to raise tariffs on any country that might provide it. Cuba’s usual sources of oil, Mexico and Angola among them, are being closed down, almost certainly under US pressure.

Mexico’s President Claudia Scheinbaum insists the decision is a sovereign one, and that Mexico will continue to provide oil as humanitarian assistance. But when we consider that Trump has threatened to go after drug cartels in Mexico, and that the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement is up for renewal shortly, it is hard to credit Scheinbaum’s claim.

Trump has made clear the US strategy for regime change: an economic blockade. “Cuba will be failing pretty soon,” he boasted. Indeed, by some estimates, Cuba has only about 3 weeks of oil, after which a humanitarian crisis is being predicted. Diesel is essential to producing electricity and for transportation, water delivery, and agriculture.

During the Cold War, the US embargo of Cuba was justified by Cuba’s support of revolutionary movements in Latin America and Africa. Now the pretext is that Cuba is a national security threat because it provides “a safe haven for transnational terrorist groups, such as Hezbollah and Hamas”. No evidence has been offered in support of this charge—and I doubt any evidence exists.

TACO Time?

A president who began his second term riveted on dismantling democracy and doing away with the rule of law has now become an imperialist, with military interventions and weaponizing tariffs the main instruments for accomplishing US goals. How far will he go in each of the four cases?

Trump has a history of backing off from threats, but the Venezuela experience has clearly made him think he has license to intervene abroad with impunity, especially in Latin America where weak regimes are in no position to resist. There’s a good chance he will overreach, as imperialists do, facing pushback that he and his advisers had not foreseen in Greenland and NATO, in Iran, and in Canada.
He will also face domestic political costs as independents and even some MAGA supporters resent his overseas adventures for taking money and attention away from a corroding economy. So, TACO time or wartime?

Either way, Trump will threaten world peace and stability, alienate traditional friends, and possibly spark new wars. Increasingly unpopular at home, he may just be desperate enough to authorize more outrageous actions abroad.

Mel Gurtov, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Portland State University.

Venezuela and Iran: Oil and Survival

The global energy map is being redefined and brings Tehran and Caracas together: gaining control of their oil wells requires military power. January 2026 marks a turning point: Venezuela’s Acting President Delcy Rodríguez and President Donald Trump both held key meetings with the hydrocarbon business sectors, confirming what had been hinted at for some time in analyses: the US needs to take control, by any means possible, of Venezuela and Iran’s oil resources. In Venezuela, after a disproportionate attack, they managed to force a reform of the Hydrocarbons Law, which had already been relaxed in practice under the confidentiality of the “Anti-Blockade Law.”

By Carmen Navas Reyes

February 2, 2026

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

A Final Toast – by Mr. Fish

Venezuela, under threat following the attacks of January 3, and in perspective alongside the historical mirror that is Iran, allows us to study the models of classic oil nationalism and pragmatic resistance. But beyond the economy, some analysts have put forward the theory that Venezuelan and Iranian oil is not just a business, but vital ammunition in the war scenario being proposed by the United States.

The 2026 Reform: Privatization or Tactical Lifeline?

To understand the current reform, we must look at the red numbers. In 2014, Venezuela had annual oil revenues of close to $40 billion. Following US sanctions and the financial blockade, that figure plummeted to just $740 million in 2020. The state, owner of the resource, was left without the capacity to extract it and without banks to collect payment.

The response was the Anti-Blockade Law of 2020, which gave rise to the Petroleum Participation Contracts (CPP). According to the inputs from the recent high-level meeting, CPPs are not traditional concessions. They are service agreements where the private sector invests and operates, collecting its investment directly through physical production (barrels), eliminating the financial transaction that the US could block.

The government defends the success of the model: revenues in five years increased to a record $14 billion in 2025, which, although far from historical revenues, were considerably higher than the $740 million at the worst point in 2019. The reform now seeks to give this mechanism legal status, removing it from the realm of exceptionality, which often placed the Venezuelan state at a disadvantage. Jorge Rodríguez, president of the National Assembly, sums it up as a “flexibilization of tariffs” in which the private sector provides the capital and the state maintains sovereignty over the oil field. While Caracas discusses the new legal basis for adapting to the new conditions of energy relations with the US, Donald Trump sent a message from Washington on 23 January confirming the US president’s change of stance on oil geopolitics: “Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world… larger than Saudi Arabia’s,” suggesting that the US could make “a lot of money” from this pragmatic relationship.

The Clash of Visions and Internal Criticism

The reform has sparked some criticism. Former oil minister Rafael Ramírez, who faces corruption charges in Venezuela, described the measure on January 27 as a “repeal of the 1976 nationalization.” For those who have historically defended oil nationalism, the CPPs, within the framework of the reform of the Hydrocarbons Law, hand over operational control—which they consider to be the real value—to transnational corporations.

The government counters with “war pragmatism”: the 2006 model (with 90 percent of revenue going to the state) was ideal in peacetime, but unviable under siege. The new scheme ensures between 65-70 percent of revenue and, most importantly, keeps the industry alive. This represents a forced retreat due to circumstances in order to avoid total suffocation.

The New Cold War: the China factor

This is where the global dimension comes into play. Why are Donald Trump and Washington now showing tacit tolerance for this Venezuelan model (as seen through the licenses granted to Chevron) while maintaining their tough rhetoric? The answer may lie in the goal of containing China.

Several analyses, including those by conservatives such as Tucker Carlson, have put forward a thesis that resonates in the media and geopolitical think tanks: the United States is preparing for a large-scale kinetic or trade conflict with China. In this scenario, control of Venezuelan oil reserves ceases to be a market issue and becomes a matter of pure national security.

Carlson warns that the Trump administration finds it unacceptable that the world’s largest reserves (Venezuela) and one of the keys to the Persian Gulf (Iran) are supplying China. “The oil is going to China… it should be coming to us,” is the underlying interpretation of Washington’s new doctrine.

From this perspective:

Cutting off resources to the enemy: The goal is no longer just to “change the regime” in Caracas for “democratic” reasons, but to decouple Venezuela from China. If the CPPs and licenses allow Venezuelan crude to flow to the Gulf of Mexico (US) instead of Shanghai, Washington wins a strategic battle without firing a bullet.

The Iranian Case: With Iran, the situation is more volatile. Carlson suggests that hostility toward Tehran seeks to cut off China’s main secure energy artery in the Middle East. Controlling or neutralizing Iranian oil leaves China’s industrial and military machinery vulnerable to a naval blockade. And at the same time, controlling the supply routes.

This “New Cold War” explains the current paradox: the US, while turning the Caribbean into a large military base, is allowing Venezuela to breathe economically (through Chevron and, in the future, the participation of other large US companies), because it prefers a pragmatic Venezuela that sells to the North, rather than an unaligned Venezuela that is a secure energy supplier to China and, financially, contributes to putting the nail in the coffin of the dollar as a global currency.

The Historical Mirror: Iran and Venezuela (The “Petroleumscape”)

This dynamic is not new. Venezuela and Iran share a historical “petroleum landscape.” Both suffered Western-orchestrated coups when they attempted to nationalize their resources (1948 and 1953). Both founded OPEC in 1960 to defend themselves.

In recent years, the Caracas-Tehran alliance has been existential. Iran taught Venezuela how to navigate sanctions (covert fleets, refinery repairs, among others). Now, both countries find themselves in the vortex of the US-China dispute. The legal reform in Venezuela is, at its core, a maneuver to survive on this chessboard: ensuring its own cash flow to alleviate the US threat, even though the geopolitical gravity inevitably pushes for greater pressure from Washington on both countries.

This Story Has Been Going On For More Than 100 Years.

The partial reform of the Hydrocarbons Law is much more than a technical adjustment; it is an act of survival on the eve of a major global conflict. Venezuela is sacrificing part of its income and operational control (which it was already doing via the CPP with the Anti-Blockade Law) to reinsert itself into the Western market and try to circumvent the blockade.

Ultimately, in the war for global hegemony waged by Washington, which sees Beijing as its main contender, Venezuelan and Iranian oil are the ultimate strategic trophies. Venezuela and its 100-year history of oil, as we began to study, is one of the battlefields.

Carmen Navas Reyes is a Venezuelan political scientist with a master’s degree in Ecology for Human Development (UNESR). She is currently pursuing a doctorate in Our America Studies at the Rómulo Gallegos Foundation Center for Latin American Studies (CELARG) in Venezuela. She is a member of the International Advisory Council of the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research.

This article was written by Globetrotter.