Posted originally on CTH on February 17, 2026 | Sundance 

There is an awful lot to unpack in this seemingly obscure article talking about Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and a new trade approach he is pitching to Pacific/Asia and Atlantic/European nations. [Story Here]

Before getting to the substance of the outline, something important needs to be shared for context.

Do you remember the 2014, 2015 and 2016 top story conversations and debates over the Transpacific Partnership trade deal known as TPP?

You might also remember the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership trade deal known as TTIP.

The TPP (Pacific) and TTIP (Atlantic) were two major multinational trade deals negotiated between 2013 and 2016. While both sparked plenty of debate, most of the spotlight was on the TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Hillary Clinton was in favor of TPP as were most of the traditional republican field of candidates in ’15/’16.  However, Donald Trump was strongly against TPP and pledged to exit out of any negotiations and scrap the U.S. participation if he was to win the 2016 election.  Some of you may begin to remember this.

Donald Trump agreed with our position, that TPP was being falsely sold as a beneficial 12-nation massive trade agreement between the USA and pacific rim countries including Australia and Southeast Asia nations.

With the history of NAFTA behind us, we could see two major issues with TPP:  #1: It was structured with a back door to let China into the deal. And #2) it was created to ensure the USA remained a “service driven economy.”

Supporters of TPP and TTIP claimed this multinational trade deals would create smooth supply chains and align on ‘rules of origin.’ They believed TPP would benefit companies and lead to cheaper products. Critics, however, argued that the agreements were designed to exploit the U.S. consumer market and prevent the country from ever regaining a strong manufacturing base.

I share those reminders to set up the big 800-lb gorilla question.

If the TPP was such a great trade deal for all parties involved, why didn’t the group finalize it after the USA withdrew? It’s been a decade, so why haven’t the TPP nations completed their trade agreement?

The honest answer reveals the undiscussed lie.

Both TPP and TTIP were constructed and designed to keep exploiting the U.S. consumer market. That’s it. That was the entire purpose of TPP (Asia) and TTIP (Europe). Corporations and lobbyists like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote the TPP language to maximize corporate profits. That was the purpose of it.

Take the U.S.A. out of the TPP trade agreement and the purpose/benefit no longer exists.  Without the host, there is no need for a feeding agreement between parasites.  That’s why a decade has passed and TPP/TTIP went nowhere.

All of that said, suddenly with President Trump positioning to eliminate the USMCA trade agreement, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney wants to go back to the TPP/TTIP “Rules of Origin” trade framework in order to create an insurance policy against the end of the trilateral USMCA trade agreement.

Now, here is where it gets really interesting.  There is no way for Canada to remain in the USMCA and simultaneously commit to a trade agreement with different rules of origin.   This means that for Carney to accomplish what he’s reportedly aiming for, the dissolution of the UMCA would already need to be in the works.

USMCA Article 32.10 – Non-Market Country FTA (key provisions):

“A Party intending to negotiate a free trade agreement with a non-market country shall inform the other Parties at least three months prior to commencing negotiations and, upon request, provide information regarding the objectives of those negotiations.

A Party that enters into a free trade agreement with a non-market country shall provide the other Parties with the full text of the agreement prior to signing.

If a Party enters into a free trade agreement with a non-market country, the other Parties may terminate this Agreement on six months’ notice and replace it with a bilateral agreement.” [SOURCE]

The Canadian proposal violates the central tenet of the USMCA. Carney’s proposal can only move forward if the Canadian government has already accepted that the USMCA trade agreement will come to an end.

WASHINGTON – The European Union and a 12-nation Indo-Pacific bloc are opening talks to explore proposals to form one of the largest global economic alliances, multiple people with knowledge of the talks told POLITICO.

Canada is spearheading the discussions after Prime Minister Mark Carney called on middle powers to buck trade war coercion last month, days after Trump threatened to raise tariffs on Denmark’s European allies if it didn’t cede Greenland.

Ottawa is “championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership [CPTPP] and the European Union, which would create a new trading bloc of 1.5 billion people,” Carney told world leaders and the global business elite in Davos.

The middle powers are taking action. The EU and CPTPP are starting talks this year to strike an agreement to intertwine the supply chains of members like Canada, Singapore, Mexico, Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia and Australia with Europe.

It would bring nearly 40 nations on opposite sides of the globe closer together with the aim of reaching a deal on so-called rules of origin.

These rules determine the economic nationality of a product. A deal would allow manufacturers throughout the two blocs to trade goods and their parts more seamlessly in a low-tariff process known as cumulation. (read more)

In practice, a multilateral trade agreement with “Rules of Origin” involving many countries doesn’t really matter to the USA since our trade deals are bilateral. Other parties can set whatever terms they like, but if they want access to the U.S. market, that’s where we lay out our own specific terms on a one-to-one basis.

The same thing cannot be said for Canada, who is intentionally planning to remain a deindustrialized economy.  Canada will import component goods for assembly in Canada, but they will not fabricate much.

Prime Minister Mark Carney is strategically planning to keep Canada dependent on cheap foreign imports.