Month: January 2026

U.S. President Donald Trump’s Venezuelan adventure has generated a great deal of ink about the so-called Donroe doctrine. Commentators are eager to impose some form of coherence on a wide-ranging and often contradictory series of foreign-policy actions. But the subject resists.

The rhetoric of isolationism clashes with the covert action of a Delta Force raid to capture a foreign leader on foreign soil. The label of “president of peace” is not exactly consistent with gangster statecraft that threatens to acquire Greenland by any means necessary. Nor does it sit comfortably alongside the gutting of the State Department and foreign aid, the casual lobbing of tariffs, and what has become the habitual mistreatment of NATO allies.

Ideology is not, and never was, the way to understand the deeply transactional behaviour of Trump and the MAGA movement. The better lens is personality. And there is no personality more ascendant in MAGA politics today than Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Rubio was reportedly the most vocal proponent of the Maduro raid and now finds himself more front and centre in the MAGA media ecosystem than ever. Having the spotlight is always a dangerous thing with this president. But Rubio offsets that risk with a well-practiced grovelling to Trump’s “genius” at every conceivable opportunity — something that, as Dexter Filkins’s excellent profile in The New Yorker reveals, is entirely consistent with Rubio’s past behaviour. Filkins quotes a Miami political figure who puts it bluntly: “The one constant in Marco Rubio’s career is that he has betrayed every mentor and every principle he’s ever had in order to claim power for himself.”

An individual comfortable with logical contradiction, willing to go wherever the winds appear to be blowing, seems to be table stakes for membership in Trump’s cabinet. But it isn’t just Rubio’s flexibility on principle that has drawn attention. It is his ability to translate an unfocused and ever-changing foreign-policy posture, one driven largely by grievance, greed, and corruption, into something that sounds coherent and palatable to the American public.

Maddening as it may be, Canada needs to keep its eye on Rubio, on this court intrigue, and on where he is steering U.S. policy. It is never too early for a prediction of this magnitude: in my view, Rubio will be the Republican Party’s presidential nominee in 2028.

At this stage, the logic is simple. Rubio is not just, as Filkins notes, “at least in theory, the most powerful American diplomat since Henry Kissinger” (not a particularly flattering comparison), he is also head and shoulders the most effective communicator in the administration.

More importantly, his politics are a growth proposition. As Trump 2.0 approaches its one-year anniversary on Jan. 20, the reality is that Trump is a deeply unpopular second-term president. His favourability ratings are in the gutter, and his promise to “make America affordable again” does not, on the evidence, appear to be materializing, despite all the strong-arming of economists and nation-states alike.

Many assume Trump’s vice-president will be the natural successor. But the fact is JD Vance cannot grow the MAGA coalition or attract voters from the centre. He can only consolidate its most extreme elements.

Rubio, by contrast, may alienate some of the same far-right voters that Vance satisfies, but he can attract more centrist Americans, and he brings with him the added benefit of locking down Florida.

While he has played the loyal soldier and publicly stated that he would back Vance should the vice-president seek the nomination, a great deal can change between now and 2028. Momentum for Rubio’s candidacy will only accelerate if Republicans suffer a decisive defeat in the midterm elections this fall — a result that would intensify the party’s search for a figure who can expand the coalition.

Ultimately, Rubio’s rise is an indication of wag-the-dog foreign policy. It is a tried-and-tested political calculus, long a presidential playbook: when you are unpopular at home, you go abroad.

For Canada, that means more chaos ahead, more supply-chain disruptions, more conflicts, deeper NATO fractures, the works.

Marco Rubio will be the man tasked with stickhandling it all. And my bet is that he will also be the man Canada will be dealing with once his boss’s term draws to an end.

The year-in-review phase is over. It’s time to look ahead.

In Canadian politics, 2025 will be remembered as the year of Trump. In 2026, I regret to predict, very little will change. In my last column, I argued that the U.S. midterms — and President Donald Trump’s rhetoric in the lead-up — will turn Canada into an increasingly convenient political target, spelling trouble for our economy and particularly for the looming CUSMA renegotiations.

That is a seismic risk. But it is far from the only political story Canadians should be watching in the year ahead.

As 2026 dawns, here are two more consequential political fault lines to keep an eye on.

Quebec and the shadow of a referendum

Quebecers head to the polls in October, unless Premier François Legault pulls the plug earlier.

Despite Legault’s year-end insistence that Parti Québécois support is overstated and his laughable claim that his CAQ Party can recover, the writing is on the wall. Think Justin Trudeau in 2024-2025. Once a political narrative gets to this stage, it sets like concrete.

Perhaps even more beneficial for the PQ’s chances of forming a government, however, is the implosion of the Quebec Liberal party following Pablo Rodriguez’s resignation amid serious allegations of corruption.

Unless the Liberals rapidly find a credible, unifying leader, the path to a referendum becomes far more plausible as the PQ have promised a vote on sovereignty within its first term if elected.

History — Brexit in particular — teaches us these moments are not to be trifled with. Campaigns harden positions. Foreign actors interfere. Events spiral. And the consequences of Quebec breaking away from the federation would be economically and politically catastrophic.

Not to be outdone, in Alberta, a referendum looms with Elections Alberta approving a referendum question that now requires a petition with just 178,000 signatures to trigger a vote. In my view, the odds of a sovereign Alberta remain remote. But after a year marked by rare national unity, the renewed gravitational pull of separatist politics — in more than one province — is a reminder of how quickly the pendulum can swing. And how fragile our federation can feel when it does.

Party infighting: The real battles are internal

In 2026, the most consequential fights may not be between parties, but within them.

For the Conservatives, the risk is straightforward. Pierre Poilievre must prevent further floor crossings that could hand Mark Carney a majority government. If more MPs defect, Poilievre’s leadership will come under immediate threat, particularly ahead of a leadership review that would suddenly feel far less academic.

For the Liberals, unity may look deceptively strong following the additions of Michael Ma and Chris d’Entremont. But the Carney version of Liberalism has yet to be fully tested.

Stephen Guilbeault’s departure from cabinet may be the first of several moments of internal friction as Carney rolls out a more fiscally conservative governing agenda. Watch for more Trudeau-era ministers to decide to spend more time with their families.

But here’s the good news: infighting may be bad for parties, but it’s good for everyday Canadians.

Rigid partisanship serves ideologues and party elites, not voters. Most Canadians don’t care what jersey a politician wears. They care whether their lives are getting more affordable and their streets safer.

We’ve already seen the trend. In 2025, voters who once leaned Conservative moved toward Mark Carney. In the U.S., voters who supported Trump backed Zohran Mamdani. These are not anomalies, they are signals. The era of automatic party loyalty is eroding.

2026 will belong to politicians who can move with that reality, who are willing to shed tribal instincts, adapt their language, and focus relentlessly on results over ideology. That is the real political story of the year ahead.

Canada needs to keep its eye on Marco Rubio

Canadian politics in 2026: Two fault lines that could alter the landscape