Canada’s decision to join the U.S.-led critical minerals trading bloc won’t be made in isolation—it’s tethered to the fate of the USMCA, the free-trade agreement that underpins North America’s economic relationship. But here’s where it gets controversial: Is Canada risking its bargaining power by even considering a single-sector deal on critical minerals before the broader USMCA review? Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand thinks so. In a recent interview, she emphasized that Ottawa is wary of signing sector-specific agreements, especially when the USMCA—also known as CUSMA—is up for a mandatory review this year. “We’re only signing deals that are favorable to Canada,” Anand stated, adding that piecemeal agreements could weaken Canada’s position in the larger negotiations. And this is the part most people miss: Canada is a major producer of critical minerals—essential for everything from fighter jets to smartphones—giving it significant leverage in these talks.
The U.S., meanwhile, is pushing hard for this bloc, convening over 50 countries to create a trade zone that would use tariffs to stabilize prices and reduce reliance on China. The Trump administration, led by Vice-President JD Vance, has framed this as a matter of national security, citing China’s dominance in the critical minerals market. But Anand argues that Canada needs to fully understand the proposal, including the inclusion of a “right of first refusal” clause, which could give the U.S. preferential access to Canadian supplies. “It’s important for Canada to understand the full ambit of the proposal,” she said, emphasizing that any deal must align with Canada’s economic and security interests.
Here’s the kicker: While the U.S. has announced critical mineral action plans with Mexico, the EU, and Japan, Canada has been notably absent from these discussions. Why? The Office of the United States Trade Representative hasn’t said. But Canada did sign a Joint Action Plan on Critical Minerals Collaboration with the U.S. in 2020, though it lacks the price floor provisions now being proposed.
This raises a thought-provoking question: Is Canada playing its cards too close to its chest, or is it strategically positioning itself for the USMCA review? Anand’s visit to the Washington summit was aimed at gaining clarity on the U.S. proposal, which she described as a “preferential trade zone with adjusted price floors and coordinated tariffs.” Meanwhile, Vance argued that the U.S.-China trade war exposed the West’s vulnerability to Beijing’s dominance in critical minerals, making collective action urgent.
Canada isn’t sitting idle, though. At the 2025 G7 Leaders meeting, it established the Critical Minerals Production Alliance, a buyers’ club aimed at stabilizing extraction projects without restricting access. But as the U.S. pushes for a more exclusive bloc, Canada must decide: Is it better to lead from within or hold out for a stronger position in the USMCA review?
What do you think? Is Canada right to prioritize the USMCA review over a critical minerals deal, or should it join the bloc to secure its place in this strategic sector? Let us know in the comments!
