China Doesn’t Need To Invade America. It Has Canada.

Thucydides teaches that Athens was lost in Sicily. The Sicilian expedition was far from Athens and looked like a side matter, a chance to gain something at little risk. The city’s rulers assured themselves the real contest lay elsewhere, and while they said that, the city’s strength drained away on a distant island. Great powers rarely fall at the center first. They fall around the edges, in the places they stop watching because they assume those places are safe.

For America, that edge is Canada. The border between the two nations is the world’s longest undefended frontier, and people speak of it with pride. Beneath the pride is a structure of trust with few parallels in history. The two nations share the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, and supply chains so intimately linked that car parts can cross the border several times before they are assembled into a car. American security depends on Canadian integrity. Thus, when Ottawa is compromised, Washington is exposed. Whoever holds the side door has little need to break down the front.

So the question before Canada is larger than a trade dispute. President Abraham Lincoln understood that some questions can never be split down the middle. In 1858 he told the people of Illinois that “a house divided against itself cannot stand,” and that the Union would “become all one thing, or all the other.” Lincoln’s greatness lay in seeing that some questions allow no middle because the two answers rest on opposing accounts of the nature of man. One regime holds that man is born free and equal in natural rights and thus must necessarily govern themselves. The other holds that man is little more than a slave or beast and must be ruled by the will of a single man. A nation cannot simultaneously belong to both liberty and tyranny.

The Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference, led by Justice Marie-Josée Hogue, found that China interfered in the 2019 and 2021 Canadian federal elections. The inquiry may have concluded that interference did not change which party ultimately formed government, and some have taken this as consolation. It should comfort no one. A burglar who fails to empty the safe has still been inside the house. He has learned where the valuables are kept, which locks are weak, and who in the household was willing to leave the door unlatched.

The last point matters most. In 2024, Parliament’s own intelligence oversight committee reported that some parliamentarians had been “semi-witting or witting” participants in foreign interference. Put plainly: some people elected to serve Canada’s sovereignty knew in some capacity that they were aiding and abetting an enemy of the West. Every free government must answer what happens when the guardians themselves have been compromised.

The pattern continues. At the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Canada’s highest-security biological facility, the Public Health Agency of Canada removed two scientists and later fired them after investigators found they had passed information to Chinese entities. At Hydro-Québec, an employee was charged with espionage for allegedly working on behalf of China. In Toronto, Montreal, and elsewhere, undeclared Chinese police stations were reported to be watching and pressuring members of its diaspora, people who had come to Canada to flee precisely this. Each case may be explained away one at a time. Taken together, however, they show a sustained campaign against free peoples.

Now the ordinary disputes over tariffs, fentanyl precursors, transshipment, and Chinese electric vehicles look different. Treated as economics alone, they invite the endless balancing that commerce enjoys. Treated honestly, they are tests. Fentanyl precursors come from Chinese suppliers and pass through networks that have used Canadian territory, and they have killed tens of thousands of North Americans. Transshipment lets Chinese goods take on a Canadian identity and slip past American defenses. Heavily subsidized Chinese electric vehicles, full of sensors and software answerable to a foreign despot, are a bid to put the enemy’s machinery on the West’s roads and into its data.

This is why the conduct of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney deserves moral judgment as well as policy analysis. A prime minister who treats Beijing as one more trading partner, to be pleased or managed as the quarterly figures require, has made a choice, despite calling it pragmatism. To hedge between liberty and tyranny is to bet that liberty won’t win. Every conciliatory gesture toward the CCP, every softened tariff, every inquiry finding that is acknowledged and then shelved, places a wager against the civilization that produced Canada’s Parliament, common law, and liberties.

The founders of free government knew that such regimes rarely die by conquest. In his Lyceum Address of 1838, the young Lincoln warned that no foreign army could ever “take a drink from the Ohio” by force. “If destruction be our lot,” he warned, “we must ourselves be its author and finisher.” Canada’s danger fits that warning perfectly. Beijing won’t march on Ottawa. It need not. It needs only for Canadians, and the prime minister who rules them, to decide that the difference between liberty and tyranny is a matter of degree, a subject for negotiation, one way of life among many.

Canada has chosen well before. It sent its sons to Vimy Ridge and Juno Beach, and it stood beside its friends through the long twilight of the Cold War. Those were choices made by a people who knew what they were. The question now is whether they remember. The nation faces no invasion. It faces a quiet abdication, carried out by men who have mistaken relativism for tolerance and appeasement for prudence. Canadians should demand that Mark Carney answer one question plainly: on which side of this century’s great divide does he intend to place Canada?

***

Dimpee Brar is the Fellow for Religious Freedom at The Democracy Fund. She is a writer and commentator whose work may be found in the Daily Wire, The Federalist, American Spectator, Washington Examiner, and Western Standard. She is a regular guest on various radio shows and podcasts. You can follow her on X: @isthisdimpeeb

Takdeer Brar is a consultant with Earnscliffe Strategies. He has served on multiple election campaigns in both Canada and the United States. He is most proud of his role as GOTV Chair for MP Jamil Jivani’s campaigns.