Compass Points from PBS News

Love, hate, relationship, behind closed diplomatic doors.

Donald Trump’s America is viewed as a, quote, "Unreliable boyfriend," a security threat, even open to corruption, at least by some of the U.S.’s closest allies.

Tonight, a former senior Canadian official shares a blunt warning to Americans.

The world’s disappointment with the U.S.

will have long lasting consequences.

Coming up, I’m "Compass Points."

♪ Announcer: Support for "Compass Points" has been provided by... the Judy and Peter Blum Kovler Foundation, Camilla and George Smith, the Dorney Koppel Foundation, the Gruber Family Foundation, and Cap and Margaret Anne Eschenroeder.

The Judy and Peter Blum Kovler Foundation.

Upholding freedom by strengthening democracies at home and abroad.

Additional support is provided by Friends of the News Hour.

♪ Announcer: This program was made possible by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you.

Thank you.

Once again, from the David M. Rubenstein Studio at WETA in Washington, moderator Nick Schifrin.

Hello and welcome to "Compass Points."

It is a cliché to call it the world’s largest undefended border, 5500 miles of geography that in the words of John F. Kennedy made the U.S.

and Canada neighbors, while history made us friends and necessity made us allies, at least until recently.

President Trump’s talk of Canada becoming the 51st state and the U.S.

instigated tariff war has ruptured the relationship.

And for many in Canada and Europe, called into question the U.S.

as an ally.

Chrystia Freeland has had a front row seat to this as Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and Finance Minister.

And she writes about her experiences in her new book, "Unreliable Boyfriend: "An insider’s view of dealing with a chaotic superpower, "plutocrats, and other complicated people."

And she joins me now.

Chrystia Freeland, thanks very much.

It’s great to be here.

Schifrin: Your book, you say, is a love letter to America.

But you have a very blunt warning.

This is what you write.

"Canadians and many of our allies in Europe and Asia "now see the United States "not only as utterly untrustworthy, "but as actually dangerous.

"We believe the city on a hill," of course, reference to Reagan, "has become at best an illiberal democracy, "and it worse in authoritarian regime."

Why such harsh words?

I think it’s important to be clear about what’s happening.

And I think a lot of people are scared.

A lot of people are scared about naming what is going on.

They’re scared because it could hurt their business interests.

They’re scared because it could provoke retaliation against their country.

And I think also there’s kind of this internal resistance because, you know, so many of us around the world grew up admiring so much about America, admiring American ideals.

And it’s hard to really name what is happening.

But, you know, and I don’t use those words lightly.

I know that you have kind of a nerdy audience.

Schifrin: [Laughs] Freeland: So for people... Schifrin: I hope to take that as a compliment.

Freeland: I would see it as a compliment.

I consider myself a nerd in a good way.

For people who are kind of interested in political theory.

One of my best friends, who I went to university with, is now a professor, who I went to university in the United States with, is now a professor at the U of T. His name is Lucan A. Way.

And he, together with a Harvard professor, Steve Levitsky, has just written a paper that was published in the Journal of Democracy.

And it’s called "Competitive Authoritarianism in America."

And there are kind of theories that there’s actually a continuum between being a democracy and being an authoritarian regime.

And that since 2025, America has slid towards authoritarianism, comparable to Orban’s Hungary or to Turkey.

But let me play devil’s advocate here.

You, as a minister, have negotiated with, but on the front lines, diplomatically, with traditional adversaries.

Russia, China, wherever else.

As a journalist, you know, you lived in Russia.

I mean, you know what a true authoritarian regime is.

That’s not the United States, right?

Freeland: Totally not.

And that’s why I would agree with Luke and Steve who say this is competitive authoritarianism.

And what’s hopeful about naming it that way is competitive authoritarian regimes can still flip back through an election, without a revolution.

That’s what we saw happening in Orban’s Hungary.

Schifrin: And that’s what you hope to see in the U.S, right?

I personally, yes, very, very much so.

And I think it’s not too late.

You know, that to me is like... I think what’s important right now is to, on one hand, really acknowledge the seriousness of what’s happening.

But on the other hand, have hope that things can get better.

The metaphor of the title of the book, the metaphor you have throughout the book is as a little less policy, if you will, it’s called "Unreliable Boyfriend."

And here is your explanation for that title.

[Reading] Why the boyfriend metaphor?

I wanted to write a book that someone who doesn’t read political science journals, and someone who is not a trade negotiator would have fun reading.

Because it really seems to me right now that foreign policy, trade policy, they are too important to be left to the experts.

And something that Donald Trump has done, actually very effectively, is communicate his actually very serious, very disruptive policy ideas in language and images that a regular person can understand.

And from his perspective, he has wanted to disrupt, he has owned the disruption, and he was elected as a disruptor saying it needed to be disrupted because his voters didn’t feel like the government was listening to them.

100%, and he has communicated it in ways that even if you disagree with him can be a little bit funny.

You know, I caught you chuckling when he did that, when he put that like America song beside Lake Ontario.

So I think people who are on the side of democracy like me, you know, we tend to be like very earnest, very values driven.

I plead guilty to those things, but I think we have to learn how to smile.

And how to, you know, be a little bit amusing.

Schifrin: Let’s talk about the actual response in Canada to some of the President’s rhetoric and also pressure.

Of course, we’ve seen food, American whiskey, you see their bottles being taken off the shelves.

I’ve talked to multiple Canadians who now refuse to travel the United States, refuse to go to vacation homes in Florida.

There’s lots of other examples in a Bloomberg-Nanos Poll earlier this year that you actually sat in the book.

55% of Canadians ranked the U.S.

as Canada’s leading risk to security.

And only 15% said China was the greatest threat.

Is that an anti-Americanism or an anti-Trumpism?

Well, that is exactly the right question.

And it’s going to depend on what America decides in the coming weeks and days.

- I mean, I would say... Schifrin: Weeks and days.

Literally, you’re talking about the midterm elections.

Yeah.

I think they will have a big impact on how the world sees America.

You know, from the Canadian perspective, and I think this is true of our European allies of our Asian allies, it was one thing for Donald Trump to be elected once.

For him to be elected the second time, makes you start to think maybe this is... it’s clearly not a fluke.

And what I think also really has had an impact and contributed to the distrust is so many people, so many institutions, so many Republican leaders, capitulating to what the president is doing.

I remain hopeful.

I look at things like the amazing people of Minneapolis.

And I believe.

America can straighten itself out, but when you see President Trump cozy, not cozying up to embracing Vladimir Putin, you have to realize something very serious has gone wrong.

So, there’s arguments against the president on the conversations and relationships with China and Russia.

Of course, his talk when it comes to Canada, specifically, 51st state, Governor Trudeau and then Governor Carney, that has sparked this response in Canadians, but take on some of the president’s arguments.

You know, Canada’s defense spending has not been high enough.

The trade imbalances, there’s long been complaints in the U.S.

of Canadian exports and milk, etc.

There are arguments beyond the rhetoric, substantively, that the United States has been making even before Donald Trump, right?

Only to a tiny, tiny degree.

And I think something that is a challenge for U.S.

journalists is the desire to have "on the one hand, on the other hand."

I think Christiane Amanpour said, as she sort of said, she’s stepping down, that the job is to reveal the truth, not to give equal time to both sides.

And what I would say about the Trump administration’s attack on Canada, start with trade, and start with the fact that the trade relationship is governed by a trade agreement negotiated by Donald Trump, right?

That he supported, that Nancy Pelosi supported, that Sherrod Brown supported.

So that is a pretty important baseline.

The terrorist that have been imposed on Canada are a violation of that agreement.

And the agreement actually includes dispute resolution provisions.

So if you don’t like something, you can take it to a NAFTA tribunal.

And that happens routinely, sometimes the U.S.

wins, sometimes Canada wins.

On the actual specifics of trade, actually, it’s not the case that the trading relationship is imbalanced.

If you take goods and services, there is only a small Canadian surplus.

And that surplus turns into a deficit if you take out energy.

Schifrin: Right.

Now, I don’t really think the United States would like us to stop selling the U.S.

electricity and oil.

I really don’t.

So it can be hard because I think as human beings, we try so hard to rationalize things.

But actually, this is a fight without a cause.

The relationship between Canada and the United States is balanced and mutually beneficial.

And I think that’s actually why there’s a data point that has made me so... has helped to restore, renew my trust in Americans, which is Americans surveyed.

Give more support to Canada’s tariffs against the United States than the U.S.

tariff against Canada.

That says to me Americans are sensible.

You use the word fight there.

And you write in early 2025, "The threat was real, "at least rhetorically."

This is during some of the tariff talks between the U.S.

and Canada.

Not quite when it blew up more recently, but early 2025, commerce secretary Howard Lutnick, threatened to send U.S.

troops across the border by sunset, even if he’s not in the chain of command.

And separately, you write this.

[Reading] How much fear is there?

You know, I would say there is more determination and being resolute.

Canadians are really very, very clear that we are going to stand for our sovereignty full stop.

- And you know, right now... Schifrin: "I’ll buzz up."

Yeah, I’ll buzz up.

I’ll buzz up.

And it’s important to emphasize it is not a partisan view.

It is a patriotic view.

Stephen Harper, who was the last conservative Prime Minister of Canada, said in early 2025, before things got even worse, that Canada should be prepared to pay any economic price whatsoever to defend our sovereignty.

And I think that’s the view that most Canadians have.

And by the way, I think that if Americans were in our position, I think that’s the view you would take too.

Schifrin: Let me ask another question about your perception of how Washington works.

It’s the summer of 2025, you’re still in government, and a friend and senior Canadian businessman asks you, quote, [Reading] How vast and how blatant, in your opinion?

Extremely.

And you know, part of the perversity of what is happening right now of how America is treating the world is it is better to be a corrupt authoritarian regime in Washington than a democracy that is a traditional U.S.

ally.

Because the corrupt authoritarian regimes, for them, this is business as usual.

You know, they know, it’s very familiar.

It’s how they themselves operate.

And they have no problem having a private conversation like, "OK, that’s the firm I use, excellent."

And guess what?

A luxury jet is delivered.

An investment is made in a crypto firm.

Democracies can’t do that.

And I think that it is really... it erodes what has made America great.

I think ultimately it’s going to weaken America’s economy.

And it really phrase relationships with the countries that I think.

America has historically had and should continue to have the closest ties.

Schifrin: Canadians, Europeans, that historical, ideological... I would say the Asian allies also, Japan, South Korea.

I mean, I was on a train traveling to Ukraine with a group of outside Western experts.

And one of them was talking to me about all the things that need to be done to help Ukraine be a rule of law society, to be sure there isn’t corruption, et cetera.

And this person was an American.

And there was a Ukrainian there too.

And I just kind of looked at the person and the person didn’t work for the U.S.

government.

But I was like, "Do you really think now is the time "for Americans to be lecturing Ukrainians "or anybody else "on how to have a rule of law, non-corrupt government?"

And it’s so sad, and it gets so sad to say that, but it’s true.

So let’s move to Ukraine, because there’s a connection here.

So full disclosure, you are now an unpaid advisor to the government of Ukraine.

But to your point, just now, the corruption came up with Ukraine.

You write this in the book.

[Reading] Do you believe President Trump sees Putin as a partner in peace and business?

Yes.

Yes, I do.

Schifrin: What’s the impact of that?

Well, again, absolutely dreadful.

You know, and I hope.

Americans will take a deep breath and recognize that their country in sort of crucial matters of war and peace can be sold to the highest bidder.

That’s a terrible thing.

And, of course, the President would deny it.

Steve Witkoff would deny it.

The President and Vice President in fact had multiple events this week saying they’re fighting corruption, not allowing it, Freeland: Fighting corruption.

Schifrin: In the U.S., they had events in saying they’re exposing corruption in the U.S., and fighting it.

That’s what they say.

I think Americans should judge based on the facts.

And to cite just one, having a son of the President have a post wedding party paid for by... He’s not even someone who’s a big enough deal to be a Russian oligarch.

Paid for by a Putin lackey, outrageous.

In any previous government, that would be the only thing that America and the world was talking about.

Schifrin: Although Don Jr.

Did pay that back.

But anyway, just for the facts, for the record.

But let’s talk about Ukraine and the policy, right?

Recently, President Trump exempted Russia from energy sanctions.

There are questions about who might have throttled down the SpaceX.

Receivers that Ukraine uses to project power offensively, but also defend themselves.

And here is what President Trump said about President Zelenskyy this week.

Russia, frankly, has been fine on Ukraine.

Zelenskyy is not helping matters much.

I think he doesn’t want to stop it.

I think it’s time for somebody else to negotiate on behalf of Ukraine.

We’ve given a lot to Ukraine.

They’ve given us nothing.

What’s your advice right now to the Ukrainian government?

Oh, I think that President Zelenskyy is doing something very hard and very important, which is to be clear on the position the United States is taking.

And I’m glad you played that clip.

For me, the crucial part is that for sentence.

Russia is being fine right now.

Although the National Security Council staff said that the President was trying to talk about Iran, but anyway, that’s what the President said.

That’s what he said.

And he went on to talk about Zelenskyy.

And, again, I say this with a little bit of hesitation because intellectually I see it happening, but emotionally I find it hard to really process.

The United States is siding right now with Vladimir Putin.

But again, let me just push back a little bit, because the U.S.

is still providing defensive intelligence that goes into Ukraine’s air alert system, right?

The CIA has helped in the last year and a half, Ukraine to target Russian energy facilities.

And the PURL Program, the program where the United States is selling weapons to Europe, right, is, according to European officials I talk to, going fine, there are some questions of delays on patron receptors, but those weapons are still happening, so all of that is still happening, right?

But like, be very clear, Nick, and I know that you know this.

Since Trump was reelected, the United States has stopped providing financial support to Ukraine, right?

And so it’s important.

Yeah, sure, the United States is selling Europeans weapons that they give to Ukraine.

Last time I checked the Americans were not against selling weapons.

And the military intelligence support, the Americans are providing is really very, very minimal.

I also think it’s important to recognize what the United States should be doing, what the vast majority of American voters believe in, what Lindsey O. Graham’s bill, called for.

Schifrin: The sanctions bill, yeah.

Yeah, it is actually not being even handed between Russia and Ukraine, but actually supporting Ukraine to win.

And the invitation to Putin to the G20 is shameful.

Schifrin: In Florida in November, in December.

Let me also play this, the President’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, visiting Vladimir Putin in Moscow this week in St.

Louis.

Witkoff: You talk so much about my President, President Trump, being humanitarian.

You are a humanitarian also, sir.

And I salute that and I commend you and I thank you again.

Putin is an indicted war criminal by The International Criminal Court.

What’s the impact of Witkoff’s words?

It is Orwellian, right?

This is newspeak.

For a representative of the President of the United States, to call Putin a humanitarian, is shameful.

And I think it’s important, it’s really important to say that, because not just a few weeks ago, we had Melania Trump be part of a much lauded event to support the return of the Ukrainian children, who have been kidnapped by Russia.

You can’t have it both ways.

You can’t pose as a defender of Ukraine’s children and send someone to the Kremlin to call Putin humanitarian.

And the thing I really want to say is, this goes against America’s interests.

Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, are aligned.

That leader, who was praised by a U.S.

envoy, is helping Iran, which is killing American servicemen.

Schifrin: We only have about a minute left.

So I’m remiss for saving this for the end, but coming back to your first point, you do want to see changes in the United States.

And you believe that changes are possible, but you also say that fundamentally, the world needs to do two things.

You need to push back on United States pressure and friendshoring, the idea that liberal democracies can come together again, only in about a minute we have, why are those the two solutions today?

Because I think there’s a bigger fight going on in the world right now.

There’s a huge fight between democracy and dictatorship.

We know for sure who the dictators are.

Russia, China, Iran, North Korea.

The rest of us, the democracies, we know who we are.

I know we would be much stronger if America would get back on side with us.

I think we need to build a system, the world’s democracies, to defend ourselves, and to become stronger.

I’d love to leave the door open for the United States.

Schifrin: And those democracies, this is what Prime Minister Carney is talking about, but middle powers uniting, is that... Yeah, I mean, I wouldn’t call the EU a middle power.

It could be a great power.

And, you know... Schifrin: There is an effort outside the United States that those democracies can come together.

100% 100%, and it’s really important.

And to me, what is important is that we build it in a way that the door is open to America.

Chrystia Freeland, former Deputy Prime Minister of Canada, thank you very much.

And that is all the time we have for now.

Thank you at home for joining us.

I’m Nick Schifrin.

We’ll see you here again next week on "Compass Points."

Announcer: Support for "Compass Points" has been provided by... the Judy and Peter Blum Kovler Foundation, Camilla and George Smith, the Dorney Koppel Foundation, the Gruber Family Foundation, and Cap and Margaret Anne Eschenroeder.

The Judy and Peter Blum Kovler Foundation.

Upholding freedom by strengthening democracies at home and abroad.

Additional support is provided by Friends of the News Hour.

♪ Announcer: This program was made possible by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you.

Thank you.

♪ You’re watching PBS.