Half-joking comments about Canada joining the bloc have become common as Ottawa adapts to its fraying relationship with the United States.
France’s foreign minister Jean-Noël Barrot has floated the idea that Canada could one day join the European Union, using the transatlantic ally as a striking example of the bloc’s global appeal.
Speaking at the Europe 2026 conference in Berlin alongside his German counterpart Johann Wadephul, Barrot argued that the EU is increasingly attracting partners far beyond its borders as geopolitical tensions soar.
Barrot’s Canada remark was not presented as a concrete policy proposal, but rather as part of a broader argument that the EU is emerging as a “third superpower” capable of balancing the rivalry between the United States and China.
The way I see it EU requires (at least in theory) certain level of rule of law, independent justice system, anti-corruption measures and so on. Once country fulfills those requirements and joins the Union EU institutions have tools to make sure member countries keep adhering to those standards. I think Canadian institutions are at a level that would allow them to join EU and I don’t see how EU making sure that Canada stays a healthy democracy would be bad for them. I don’t see any conflict of interest here. Politically and economically Canada and EU have many common goals. I think both would benefit. Then again, I’m not that familiar with internal politics in Canada. Is there anything where Canada and EU would clash and being together in the common market would be a problem for either side?
It is not about that though. Joining the EU means joining in common political institutions, accepting that EU law is above national law, that decisions on EU law are made together in common political instiutitons. It also means that one can be outvoted by others and still be bound by the result. Most areas (major exceptions being defense and foreign policy) of policy making in the EU are nowadays majority decisions with individual member states having no veto power on their own. Joining the EU is not joining some free trade zone or even some defense alliance, it is half way to joining another country (with the key difference that one can indeed leave anytime again).
It is not so much that Canada and the EU would have that many conflict points it. It is again, the level of commitment. Just because you are best buddies, doesn’t mean that sharing the same bedroom is the next logical step. Unless you are serious about that of course.
I agree but still, nothing you mention is necessarily bad for Canada. EU is leading the world in pretty much any policy you can think of: consumer protections, privacy, environmental policies, energy, women rights, worker protection, anti-corruption, freedom of press… The list goes on. (there may be some Asian country that’s more progressive than EU but Canada will not join it to form a union. EU is the only real option). So the question is: are Canadians as progressive as EU or not? If they are than joining EU will protect them from their own government. Everything you said will simply serve to make sure that Canada’s government will not take away some rights people want. If Canadians are not as progressive as EU then yes, it would be a problem because EU would force them to adapt some policies they don’t wont. So the real question Canadians need to ask themselves is if they like what EU is doing or not.
I don’t see the level of commitment as an issue. It provides stability. If Canadians want to protect their rights from authoritarian take overs like in US joining EU and losing part of their sovereignty is actually a good thing.
It boils down to how independent Canadians want to be. Also, the EU is not a guarantee against populist autocrats. There is a rising wave of those in the EU and its member states as well, just like in basically any democracy nowadays. But in most member states they aren’t in power yet and also on EU level they still lack a majority.
EU is not a guarantee but creates some friction against autocratic takeovers. When countries like Poland or Hungary try to weaken the rule of law EU has some tools at its disposal to discourage it. It doesn’t always work but countries not in EU have even fewer protections. Also EU justice system is often the only thing protecting people from errors and abuses of national justice systems.
As long as Brussels has not fallen to the same forces, yes. But it is dangerous to believe that Brussels can lastingly secure democracy when a majority of local voters persistently push for dictatorship.
Maybe I’m an optimist but most European countries an EU itself still have healthy and independent justice system. Even when extremists take over power in individual countries and at EU level they still have to operate inside the legal system. Situation like in US where the top court was completely taken over by political actors and is actively undermining all institutions is way less likely here, if at all possible. EU of course has many different, serious issues and I’m not saying that for sure nothing bad will happen here but I think most countries are safer as part of EU than being independent. Basically what I’m saying is that Brussels will most likely fall last. Once it’s down we’re all fucked.
The EU does complicate Gleichschaltung of the kind we see in the US indeed. This could be observed in Poland and Hungary, that the EU is at least an obstacle to some extend. However, like I said. Even that can only take so and so much erosion of institutions, especially once the populist authoritarians, energised by Russian support take over a majority in the EP and the Council (with the help of voters of course).
No democratic entity can survive voters persistingly voting for the end of democracy. No matter how it is set up.