It felt like the right way to end one of the most enjoyable parts of my political life.

After nearly a decade of co-chairing the Midwest U.S.–Canada relations committee (part of the Midwest Legislative Conference comprised of 11 states and four provinces), my last meeting before stepping down from the position was in Detroit in 2023. There I joined my Michigan co-chair and dozens of state senators and congressmen to celebrate both the progress on the new Ambassador Bridge and the strength of our trading relationship.

The meeting was like all the others I had co-chaired before it. Presentations about how our countries didn’t just trade, but built things together, elicited nods of approval. We toasted our two nations and vowed it would always be so.

Less than four years later and we are months into a trade war. And I’m left wondering, how did I not see this coming?

The easiest answer, and the one we rely on, is that Donald Trump became president again. And to be sure, his re-election and love of tariffs was the spark to the trade war we find ourselves in. But if Trump lit the fire, surely all of those elected representatives, Republican and Democrat, with whom I meet annually and exchanged mutual affection, could have dosed that fire. But they didn’t.

Is it from a lack of political courage? Not wanting to be challenged in a primary? Likely that is a part of the answer.

But what I’ve come to appreciate now, and what I didn’t want to see before, is that Americans genuinely like Canadians, just not enough to matter when it matters most. They mostly don’t buy the anti-Canadian rhetoric Trump is trying to sell them, but they aren’t motivated enough to push back against it either. And for Canadians, we need them to. Eventually.

And because we are Canadian, perhaps we should be charitable. At any given time, America is consumed by either an international conflict, a domestic crisis, debates over border security, a government shutdown, a confirmation battle, or all of them at once. They may like us, but really, we are hardly their top concern.

Pollsters refer to this as a lack of intensity. It’s fine if a policy position has 90% support of the public, but if it lacks the intensity to make people vote or act, it doesn’t have much political value.

In the United States, the relationship with Canada has strong support, but it lacks the intensity to get people to act.

Of course, there were signs. In conversations with my American counterparts, they would often express frustration over our lack of military investment or border security. These matters were always near the top of their minds and for much of that time, near the bottom of the minds of federal lawmakers in Canada. Those issues had intensity for Americans.

So, what does this mean going forward and the current strategy of Prime Minister Mark Carney?

Mr. Carney was right to commit to meeting the NATO targets for military spending. Mostly because we have an obligation to our partners but also, it has been a long-standing thorn in the side of multiple U.S. administrations.

As well, it is necessary to invest time and energy in diversifying our trade relationships, as is happening. This has been a goal of past federal government’s but today there is motivation to fuel that intention.

But the reality is that America will, in all our lifetimes, remain our major trading partner even if significantly reduced. Our current anger will not change geography.

So, a primary goal will have to be to get Americans and their lawmakers to care about and value their relationship with Canada enough to cause them to actually push to change policy, not simply to express its importance. We have to push into the consciousness of lawmakers. And then we will have to work to stay there.

The strategy to ban American liquor, which came about more from emotion than planning, got attention down south. As did provincial procurement policies that favour Canadian businesses over American ones.

But will these measures, combined with targeted retaliatory tariffs and other irritants, actually do enough to move us up the ladder of priorities facing American lawmakers? There is some evidence that it is. Slowly, almost glacier in speed, Republican lawmakers are beginning to peel away from the tariff policies of President Trump as seen by Michigan’s Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate Mike Rogers. And a poor showing in the upcoming midterms might move us even further up the priority latter.

But none of this is likely to change the tariff policy of the current U.S. president. And while Democratic presidential hopefuls promise a better relationship with Canada, none have talked about reverting to the tariff levels of only a few years ago.

So, like any relationship, sometimes you are left with few options. Playing the long game isn’t what Canadian officials hoped for, but few choices remain, even if some short-term tariff reprieve is gained in an upcoming deal.

Prime Minister Carney has said that the relationship is fundamentally changed forever. After a decade of celebrating that relationship with my American counterparts, I’m struggling to go that far.

But what is over are the days where Canadian and U.S. lawmakers would gather together and wax on about how both value the relationship equally. And then go back to their respective Legislatures secure that the union is strong.

The truth of the matter is that by and large Americans do like and value Canada and Canadians. Just not enough to do the things needed when it is needed most. It’s just not enough of a priority for enough of them.

What has truly changed is we can never take the relationship for granted again and, more importantly, we cannot allow America to take it for granted. While we will never be the top concern of our neighbors, there are enough pressure points we can push that serve to remind them the relationship matters, and it is worth actively working to keep it healthy.

The long-term gains for this strategy will be slow and will need different decision makers in Washington. But the days of toasting our strong relationship, and feeling it cannot be shaken, shouldn’t return either. Because while we can be glad for the fact Americans truly do like their Canadian neighbors, until those feelings have the intensity needed to result in action, they are cold comfort. As cold as a Manitoba winter.

Kelvin Goertzen is a former Manitoba premier, deputy premier, minister of health, minister of education and minister of justice and attorney general. He served 10 years as the co-chair of the Midwest U.S.- Canada relations committee of the Midwest Legislative Conference.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.