Donald Trump’s ‘Art of the Deal’ Means Reneging on Them. That’s Why Canada Cannot Capitulate
Lead image by VisualAviation / iStock
By Eric Van Rythoven
Donald Trump’s administration has announced plans for fresh tariffs on hundreds of Canadian goods. Covering , and with none of the exemptions previously covered under the , the new tariffs are a clear escalation in the American president’s beef with Canada.
This move has reignited calls for Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government to strike a deal with the United States to end the ongoing trade war. Some are even calling for Canada to if it will help secure a trade deal.
The problem, however, is that Trump’s deals don’t amount to much.
The issue is not that Trump’s deals are typically short on detail — though they are. Nor is the issue that they contain vague and ambiguous language — though they do. Nor is it that they have tenuous relationship to law — none of Trump’s trade deals during his second term have been ratified by U.S. Congress.
The problem is that Trump himself never feels constrained by any deal he makes.
Countries that sign deals with the Trump administration are quickly finding out that the stability and certainty they hoped to purchase was an illusion.
A tenuous deal with the EU
Last summer, the U.S. and the European Union reached what was called after months of conflict over trade. As part of the deal, the EU would accept a punishing U.S. tariff of 15 per cent and commit to purchasing hundreds of billions in American goods and energy.
Despite this, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen praised the deal as delivering
That stability was short-lived. Months later, Trump and threatened new tariffs on EU members who opposed him. Only after EU members mulled activating the — more colloquially known as the “trade bazooka” — did Trump back off.
During the U.S. war with Iran, Trump singled out European allies he perceived as unhelpful. Spain, in particular,
More recently, Trump has threatened fresh tariffs after the . If the Trump administration follows through on its threats, it could spell the death of the Turnberry deal.
A 24-hour deal
The . The deal would have expanded co-operation on nuclear power and allowed Saudi Arabia to construct its own domestic nuclear enrichment facility.
The morning after the deal was announced, however, Trump .
Saudi Arabia would have to join the — a series of joint agreements brokered by the U.S. between Israel and several nations: the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan — and normalize its relations with Israel. The Saudis have refused in the absence of a guaranteed path to Palestinian statehood. Trump also denied the agreement would include nuclear enrichment.
One Democratic senator, Chris Van Hollen, slammed the deal as a last-minute attempt on the Saudis.
Violating Iran ceasefire deal
In mid-June, Iran and the U.S. signed a . The memorandum itself, however, was with vague and ambiguous passages and virtually none of the monitoring and dispute resolution mechanisms typical of modern ceasefire agreements.
Who exactly bears responsibility for the collapse of the ceasefire will determined by historians. What is clear, however, is that Trump began violating the agreement almost immediately.
The first article of the memorandum states that the parties will On June 21, just days after signing the deal, Trump posted on his Truth Social account threatening to .
The Gordie Howe Bridge shakedown
After long delays, the was supposed to open on June 12, 2026. Under the original agreement, Canada would finance the construction costs and the toll revenue would be split 50/50 between Canada and the U.S. after Canada recouped the initial construction costs.
Citing “unfair trade practices,” the Trump administration intervened at the last moment and blocked the opening of the bridge. Holding the $6.4 billion bridge hostage, the Trump officials leveraged a new agreement, one in which the U.S. will . The result is that it will take Canada longer to recoup its initial construction costs.
What’s in a deal?
International deals typically evoke a specific image: dense agreements spanning hundreds of pages, painstakingly negotiated over years by diplomats, trade specialists and lawyers. These binding treaties are backed by domestic and international law, carrying severe reputational consequences for non-compliance.
It’s precisely these features that make a deal a key source of confidence, certainty and stability — not just for today, but for years to come.
The Trump administration provides none of that. Any sense of binding obligation can be wiped away with a few choice words on Truth Social. This is true regardless of whether the deal was signed by Trump personally or simply inherited from his predecessors.
Canadians rightly want an end to the exhausting melodrama of the last 18 months. And a grand bargain with the U.S. offers the alluring promise of a reset in the relationship.
But they should always remember that for the Trump administration, a deal is generally not worth the paper it’s written on.
–
Eric Van Rythoven is an instructor in political science at ÐÓ°ÉÔ´´ University.
This article is  from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. All photos provided by  from various from various sources.
Related Stories
Mark Carney’s Defiance: Canada Shows the World How To Respond to Donald Trump’s Threats
Canadian Prime Minister Carney has announced the suspension of Canada-United States trade talks, citing “last-minute changes” made by American negotiators that “were unfair, uneconomic and…
Is Mark Carney’s ‘Canada Strong’ Brand Starting To Wane? Blame Brand Politics if So
In March 2025, a month before Canada’s federal election, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre accused Mark Carney of plagiarizing his policy ideas. Sure enough, Carney soon…
Homebuyers Are Choosing Homes With Much Higher Carbon Footprints Than They Realize
When people shop for a home, they tend to focus on the information listings put front and centre: price, floor area, number of bedrooms and…