Ontario’s Ford warns US power could be cut as he trades insults with Trump

In the latest salvo of the U.S.-Canada trade war, Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford is wielding the province’s electricity exports as a bargaining chip. His blunt warning—“everything is on the table”—signals a hardening stance after another round of negotiations went nowhere. From Ford’s perspective, this is a necessary pushback against unfair tariffs and a defense of Canadian workers and industries. Energy is one of Ontario’s most potent leverage points, and threatening to cut it off sends a clear message that Canada will not be pushed around. Yet the move carries significant risks. The U.S. is Ontario’s largest electricity customer, and cutting exports could disrupt power grids in border states like New York and Michigan, leading to price spikes and reliability issues. It could also escalate the dispute further, prompting U.S. retaliation that hurts Canadian exporters. Critics argue that using energy as a political weapon undermines the long-standing, mutually beneficial relationship between the two countries, and that such brinkmanship could damage trust far beyond the current tariff fight. The broader theme here is the fragility of cross-border economic integration. For decades, the U.S. and Canada have operated under the assumption that trade and energy flows are stable and predictable. This dispute, however, has turned those assumptions on their head. Both sides are now signaling that they are willing to sacrifice short-term stability for political leverage, and the consequences could ripple through industries, households, and diplomatic relations. As Ford himself noted, this is a public and repeated threat—a sign that the relationship has entered a new, more confrontational phase. Ultimately, the onus is on both governments to find a resolution before the rhetoric becomes reality. Cutting power might win a battle, but it could lose the war for economic goodwill. The citizens on both sides of the border are watching, and they expect their leaders to prioritize pragmatism over brinkmanship. Only time will tell if this is a negotiating tactic or a preview of a more fractured North American partnership.