As Canada and the United States dig deeper into a damaging tariff standoff, Alberta’s diplomacy-first trade approach is producing results that other provinces have not managed to replicate, according to the province’s top representative in the US.
Nathan Cooper, who serves as Alberta’s US representative, told CBC‘s West of Centre podcast that Premier Danielle Smith’s decision to pursue engagement with Washington rather than escalation has paid off in concrete terms. ‘I think the premier’s diplomacy-first approach has really not only been helpful for me, but certainly helpful for the province,’ Cooper said.
Cooper pointed to the trade war’s differential impact as evidence. ‘If we look at the impact of US tariffs on the Alberta economy, we have a disproportionately low impact,’ he said, adding that US officials have been ‘significantly more responsive’ to Alberta than to some other provinces.
Why Alberta’s diplomacy-first trade approach carries weight in Washington
The province’s leverage is rooted in energy. Alberta supplies approximately 25 per cent of America’s energy needs, according to the Economic Times, a dependency that gives the province an outsized role in any discussion of North American energy security. That reality helps explain why Washington listens when Alberta speaks, even amid a broader breakdown in US-Canada trade relations.
Energy’s structural position in the relationship also gives Alberta a degree of insulation that other provinces simply do not have. Energy is exempt from Trump’s latest 50% tariffs on Canadian goods, and Canada remains by far the largest source of US crude imports. Smith has rejected proposals to use Alberta’s oil as leverage against Washington, including calls to tax or restrict exports, and Cooper’s comments suggest that restraint has been noticed.
Alberta is also the only remaining province that has imposed neither a ban nor a retaliatory levy on US alcohol imports. Cooper said American officials have shown ‘a real appreciation’ for that stance. ‘I believe that that’s actually translated into results for the province of Alberta as well,’ he said.
A contrasting approach from the rest of Canada
The picture elsewhere in Canada looks quite different. Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe has also argued that oil and potash should remain outside the trade fight, but his province nonetheless put a 50% levy on American alcohol into effect on Tuesday. Moe’s position illustrates the tension within Canada’s response: a desire to protect key commodity exports sits alongside pressure from other parts of the economy to be seen retaliating.
At the federal level, Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government has struggled to reach a trade deal with Trump after months of negotiations. Canada’s latest counter-tariffs, including 25% on US cheese and 50% on honey and aluminium foil, took effect Tuesday, in response to levies Trump imposed last month on approximately $20 billion of Canadian goods.
The broader dispute has spilled beyond goods and tariffs. Trump issued an executive order last month directing the US government to rename Lake Ontario ‘Lake America.’ Apple Maps and Google Maps subsequently adopted that name for US users, while Canada continues to recognise the lake under its original name.
Alberta’s softer posture carries a political risk: other Canadians have at times framed the province’s reluctance to join retaliatory measures as breaking ranks with a national response. Cooper’s comments push back against that reading, framing the province’s approach as a deliberate and productive strategy rather than a failure of solidarity. Whether the broader Canadian government moves toward a similar model of selective engagement will depend in part on how Washington responds to the counter-tariffs that took effect this week.