Why Should Canada Join the EU? A Legal Analysis

Introduction

Mark Carney, newly appointed Canada’s prime minister, recently delivered a very powerful speech on the future of his country. With that, he set a brave shift in the Canadian historical relationship with the United States. From then on, various rumors about the future of the country’s international relations have arisen. Among other things, Carney recently spoke with Mexico’s prime minister, Claudia Sheinbaum, and found a commonality of interests in strengthening their reciprocal trade exchanges. It is not strange if we consider that the backlash of Trump’s policies brought around a table countries like Japan, China and South Korea - not exactly best friends. If such different countries, like the above mentioned, were able to put aside centuries-old frosty relationships, why should not EU and Canada make a step forward in their already enhanced collaboration to face an unforeseen challenge?

A Provocation. With Real Roots.

The debate started with an ironic tone and found grounds in reality following the publication of Abacus’ survey on the matter. 46% of the Canadians interviewed declared that they would like to join the EU, while another 25% stated that they are undecided towards this chance. If almost three quarters of Canada’s population is not prejudicially adverse to this option, a discussion can be brought to the table. Results of the poll have to be taken cautiously, naturally. But those results have to be read in a broader context. The Trump administration talked about Canada as the wannabe 51st state of the US. Indeed, this is clearly not compatible with Canadian history, interests and even sentiments. To the point that this overreach of the Americans leads to a bipartisan patriotic rediscovery of Canadian politics. This was hugely costly for Pierre Polievre, Canadian leader of the opposition, who was on the edge of becoming the next President before Trump’s appointment. In fact, the Liberal party was facing a deep crisis after former PM Justin Trudeau resigned. However, Polievre suffered major struggles due to his previous MAGA support, positions that made him fall in the polls. It is in this situation that Mark Carney - taking advantage of the restored unanimity on the issue - arrived and suggested expanding the perspective to new horizons. Europe, for example. 

Legal Implications

To prevent distortion of facts, it is fair to say that Carney never mentioned the idea of joining the EU. It is just a suggestion fueled by the previously mentioned survey, but it remains a suggestion. It is no coincidence that the European Commission reacted to the results of that survey expressing their being flattered, at the same time underlining that such a path is hardly achievable. In conjunction, Euronews published a fact-checking on the legal basis of an admission of Canada in the EU. They underlined that Art. 49 TEU explicitly limits the accession to the Union to European states, which the Commission pointed out too. Another major limit that the Article poses is that another non-European country, Morocco, tried to enter the Union in the past and was rejected. But what if the idea of “European state” is not necessarily geographic? 

In 1992, the Commission published a document entitled “Europe and the challenge of enlargement”. In that text, it is assessed that a clear-cut interpretation of the term “European” does not exist. Although, various mentions to the geographical dimension are made, at a certain point it is written that "the shared experience of proximity, ideas, values, and historical interaction cannot be condensed into a simple formula, and is subject to review each succeeding generation,” as Euronews reports - though reaching a different conclusion. What if the current “succeeding generation” decides to put the ideas and values requirements at the top of the priorities to accede to the EU, regardless of all the rest? Canada is actually a member of NATO, an observer member of the Council of Europe, a bulwark of the West and a strong supporter of the rule of law. It could not be said that its values are  significantly distant from ours. Furthermore, it cannot be ignored that Canada has concrete historical connections with Europe, even if of colonial nature - it was called New France. Of utmost importance is the presence of a vast French-speaking minority on Canadian soil, not just limited to Quebec.

A Realistic Approach

The problem of a European solid identity arises either if Canada joins the EU or not. Probably the fact that this transatlantic enlargement would generate much - more - confusion in this sense is sufficient to set it aside, at least temporarily. This is without prejudice to other intermediate solutions of immediate application. In 2016, Canada and the EU signed a historic trade agreement named CETA, strengthening their relationship in terms of reciprocal access to market, uniforming standards and pushing investments. The deal was hotly debated especially in the agri-food sector - like any other free trade agreement which brings in competition, it could be said. What would be ideal is going further in this direction of major cooperation between the two. A rational proposal could be that of granting Canada full access to the European common market. An already existing solution is the Agreement on the European Economic Area, granted to Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, members of the EFTA (a similar setting was asked by the UK after Brexit). Of course, the problems similar - and even bigger - to those concerning the CETA remain. Yet, somewhere, they have to start.