(Preview) Canada and the New World Order; Second Order Questions for the US and EU; More Big Names Purged from the PLA?

Summary

Sharp China with Bill Bishop — Episode Summary

(Preview) Canada and the New World Order; Second Order Questions for the US and EU; More Big Names Purged from the PLA?

Date: January 22, 2026
Hosts: Andrew Sharp and Bill Bishop

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the surprising thaw in China-Canada relations following a historic visit by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to Beijing. The hosts analyze the implications of Canada's decision to lower tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs), China's reciprocal canola deal, and what this warming means for US-Canada relations, global power dynamics, and the evolving “New World Order.” The discussion also touches on domestic pressures, trade strategy, and the symbolism of Carney’s rhetoric.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Canada’s Policy Shift on China

• Canada’s Tariff Reduction on Chinese EVs:

  • Canada to allow up to 49,000 Chinese EVs at a preferential 6.1% tariff (down from 100%).
  • Announcement came during Mark Carney's visit to Beijing, a significant thaw after years of tension ([02:23]).
  • China reciprocates by lowering tariffs on Canadian canola products.

• Symbolism and Timing:

  • Carney is the first Canadian Prime Minister to visit China in nearly a decade.
  • His remarks highlight a changing global landscape and the forging of a "New World Order" ([04:22]).

2. Loaded Language and International Messaging

• Carney’s Phrase “New World Order”:
  • Bishop sees use of the phrase in Beijing as “unfortunate,” noting it aligns with CCP messaging and is “very loaded” globally ([04:30]).
  • Suggests Carney’s language will be read favorably in China, but raises eyebrows in the West due to its strategic significance.

3. Domestic and Strategic Motivations

• Domestic Canadian Politics:
  • Carney balancing domestic interests: benefiting auto workers and farmers with trade boosts ([06:15]).
  • Policy is not just an anti-US maneuver, but also “taking care of your farmers,” echoing domestic priorities.
• China’s Perspective:
  • Gaining access to a Five Eyes and NATO country’s market is a strategic win, even if marginal ([06:38], [08:59]).
  • Possibility of further energy cooperation (Canadian crude oil potentially replacing Venezuela’s supply to China) ([07:26]).
  • China seeks diversification of trade partners as US relations remain tense.

4. Concerns About US-Canada Dynamics

• Potential Complications with the US:
  • This policy shift could strain US-Canada relations, especially with ongoing USMCA (US, Canada, Mexico trade agreement) negotiations ([05:08]).
  • Canada’s perceived pivot toward China threatens to empower Beijing and undercut Western unity.

5. Skepticism and Criticism of Carney’s Approach

• Sharp’s Take:
  • Sharp doubts Carney's apparent naivete, suggesting deep “insincerity” or calculated political theater ([10:18]).
  • Strong criticism: Carney is “breathtakingly irresponsible,” risking American leverage over Canada for international grandstanding ([10:42]).
  • Points out 75% of Canada’s exports go to the US—China cannot replace the US as a consumer market ([11:16]).
• Comparison to US Strategy:
  • Highlights how even hawkish US policymakers moderate actions on China due to real economic interdependence ([10:38]).
  • Carney, by contrast, is “ignoring an inconvenient reality.”

6. Memorable Quotes & Moments

• On the use of “New World Order”:

  “I think using that language was... a bit unfortunate just because it, you know, reality or not, I think maybe he could have used that outside of China, given that that sort of ties in a lot with the messaging from Beijing.”
  — Bill Bishop ([04:30])

• On Canada’s shift and Chinese leverage:

  “If Canada starts relying more on China for trade, then that just gives the Chinese side more leverage to effectively dictate terms.”
  — Bill Bishop ([06:38])

• On US-Canada trade debt:

  “Canada sends 75% of its exports to the US and has a 5200 mile border with the US and no matter how many speeches he gives at Davos, those realities won’t change.”
  — Andrew Sharp ([11:16])

• On the Western reaction:

  “He’s being widely celebrated for it throughout the Western world here, which is part of what makes me feel like I’m losing my mind over the last week.”
  — Andrew Sharp ([12:09])

7. Geopolitical Ramifications

• Divergence within Western Alliances:
  • Canada’s policy illustrates that “Five Eyes” and NATO members aren’t always entirely aligned, providing China with opportunities ([07:00]).
• Arctic Sovereignty as a Flashpoint:
  • Washington Post’s concerns about Ottawa’s approach to Arctic sovereignty and alignment with Beijing ([09:34]).

---

Notable Segments & Timestamps

• [02:23] – Andrew reads the New York Times report on Canada’s tariff reversal.
• [04:22] – Carney’s “New World Order” announcement in Beijing.
• [04:30] – Bill analyzes the political and symbolic consequences of Carney’s language.
• [06:38] – Discussion on the risks of increased Canadian dependence on Chinese trade.
• [08:59] – Bishop states it’s a “clear win” for China, even if marginal.
• [10:13] – Washington Post editorial and the Arctic sovereignty debate.
• [10:18] – Sharp’s direct critique of Carney’s insincerity.
• [11:16] – Analysis of US leverage over Canada; the limitations of pivoting to China.

---

Tone and Style

• Conversational, candid, and a touch irreverent, with elements of frustration (especially from Sharp) regarding Western media and policy takes.
• Informed but skeptical about the real-world impact of new strategic partnerships and rhetorical flourishes on the global stage.

---

This episode offers a thought-provoking breakdown of Canada’s delicate balancing act between US and Chinese interests, the limits of symbolic diplomacy, and the complex realities under the surface of shifting global alliances.

Transcript

[A]

Foreign. Welcome to Sharp, China. I'm Andrew Sharp and you are listening to a free preview of today's episode.

[B]

Hello and welcome back to another episode of Sharp China. I'm Andrew Sharp and on the other line, Bill Bishop. Bill, how you doing?

[C]

I'm doing well. Hey, everybody. I must say, I joked a couple weeks ago that has Davos ever been less relevant and sure, was I wrong? What a crazy week.

[B]

It's starting to feel more relevant these days. Yes, indeed. A lot of takes circulating around Davos. One question before we start though. We're supposed to get a blizzard in Washington D.C. this weekend. Does Tashi have his snow gear ready for the Blizzard of 2026?

[C]

Well, that's a great question. So actually Tashi is, you know, he had a little surgery last week. His sutures should be out. I'm hopeful he can run around in the park I got him last year. I haven't tried it yet, but this, this sort of kind of ointment that sled dogs use to keep the ice balls out of their paws called mushers. So we're looking forward to experimenting with that. We'll see if we'll.

[B]

There you go.

[C]

We'll see if the blizzard happens. We've been in dc, been here before, lots of expectations with big snow and then it turns into, you know, like three flakes.

[B]

The hype rarely materializes.

[C]

This one could be a big one though. But it shouldn't keep us from the newsletter or from the podcast right next week.

[B]

It won't keep us from the podcast.

[C]

Unless there's no power.

[B]

A full report on the ointment next week. On next week' episode, I'm supposed to travel to Madison, Wisconsin later this week where it's supposed to be negative 7 degrees, 7 degrees below zero in Madison on Friday when I'll be there meeting with Ben. And the low is 19 degrees below zero. So I am going to be in sub zero temperatures coming back to a blizzard.

[C]

Since Ben is originally from Wisconsin, do you think he'll be wearing a jacket or he'll just be in like long sleeve shirt for that?

[B]

Yeah, short sleeve T shirt out there trying to impress me. Me, it's great. I living in dc, I don't own a jacket for anything worse than like 40 degrees, so I might not survive. We may not actually be able to fulfill the promise of a podcast next week. Who can say? But speaking of cold weather, you mentioned Davos. The first topic here is going to be Canada, although relations are warming.

[C]

Bill.

[B]

I'll read from the New York Times On Friday, the headline was Canada breaks with us to slash tariffs on some Chinese Electric Vehicles. And they write, canada will lower tariffs on some Chinese electric vehicles and China will do the same for Canadian canola products. A major shift in policy that was announced on Friday during a landmark state visit by Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada to Beijing. Mr. Carney announced that Canada will allow up to 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles and into the Canadian market under a preferential tariff rate of 6.1%. That is much lower than the current rate of 100% that Canada imposed in 2024 at the behest of the United States. Mr. Carney made his announcement after meeting with President Xi Jinping of China in Beijing on Friday, where the two leaders hailed a new strategic partnership between the countries. As the previously frosty relationship showed signs of a thaw, the Chinese government summaries of the talks were broader, with no specific mention of changes to the tariffs on either canola or Chinese electric vehicles. And then I'll read what Mark Carney said in Beijing last week memorializing this new partnership. He said, mine is the first visit of a Canadian prime minister in nearly a decade. The world has changed much since that last visit, and I believe the progress that we have made and the partnership sets us up well for the New World Order. And he delivered those remarks with precisely that halting cadence, adding to the drama. So that was my Mark Carney impersonation. Bill, what do you think of all this? The Canada news has spawned a week's worth of hot takes from all corners. I have some thoughts. There are questions about what it means for China, what it means for Canada, what it means for the United States. But I mean, one specific question to start. What did you think of Carney's phrasing there, the New World Order talk in Beijing last week.

[C]

So I think, I think using that language was. She was a bit unfortunate just because it, you know, reality or not, I think maybe he could have used that outside of China, given that that is a sort of ties in a lot with the messaging from, from Beijing and the, and the Chinese government. So. But it's a very loaded. But he's, I mean, he's obviously, you know, very smart, very sophisticated. It wasn't a slip of the tongue. The whole visit, I think, was viewed quite positively from the Chinese side. You know, they gave up, was it? They've already made their first purchase of canola products. And, you know, that's just like buying soybeans. I mean, they'll happily buy that. And in exchange they get started yet access again to the Canadian auto market. You know, I think Carney, Prime Minister Carney, I was talking about, you know, potentially Chinese investment to build plants there. It's going to complicate the USMCA, the, you know, the U.S. canada, Mexico, free Trade Agreement renegotiations this year. I think it's certainly, you know, you think about it, I think from China's perspective, you know, not only is Canada part of NATO, they're also part of five eyes. And now you have a five eyes country saying actually we're not so worried about, I mean they talk about, they said afterwards they'll make sure they'll try and mitigate the risks from the connected vehicles, which is really the stated reason the U.S. has 100% tariffs on the Chinese EVs. Right. But again, this is going from sort of being in lockstep with the US Government in shifting policies towards China, towards a harder line to really pulling back in a lot of ways and that there clearly are domestic political reasons that Carney did this in terms of, you know, you want to just like selling soybeans and from, you know, President Trump's perspective, you want to take care of your farmers. I mean there's, there's also the auto worker lobby that's probably not so, so, so it's, it's, he's got domestic reasons. It's not purely about, you know, let's just stick it to the U.S. i think the idea that China is going to be, the way that they diversify from the US is in terms of trade is risky. It will move the needle a little bit. But you look at what happened with Australia now, you know, if Canada starts relying more on China for trade, then that just gives the Chinese side more leverage to effectively dictate terms or just basically make sure the Canada behaves well as China defines good behavior. And so, but I think Prime Minister is in a difficult spot because obviously the relationship with the US is strained. You know, the President joking about making Canada the 51st state. I mean it's a sovereign country. It's absurd. Right. And then you know, his speech at Davos where he talks about a rupture in the world order. I mean it was, it was a very realistic speech. It was, you know, what that means substantively is unclear. But again, if you're sitting in Beijing and leaving aside the trade bits and the people, the people stuff that are, you know, they're going to revitalize people to people ties between Canada and in China is, and also on energy, I Mean one we had a, a listener wrote in last after our podcast last week who said actually don't. He thought we were under appreciating how much capacity Canada actually has to ship sort of the heavy oil, crude oil to China that could really replace China's Venezuela supply.

[B]

That's interesting.

[C]

Okay, so there's a lot of, a lot of deals, right? Energy, you know, the question, you know, Canada has lots of critical minerals. You know, it's not like there's this total break in the US China relationship or US Canada relationship. They're still working with the US on things around rare earths. I mean it's he, I think Prime Minister Carney is trying to hedge and diversify. The question will be, you know, is he going to do a sort of a more skillful job to protect Canada and not increase China's leverage over Canada than say some other countries have done. But again, from Beijing's perspective towards the.

[B]

Relationship with the United States and other.

[C]

And you know, the President Trump's first reaction was he's something like he's doing what he should be doing. You know, I think we talked about last podcast. You know, I don't think these EVs will be allowed to cross the Chinese EVs will be allowed to cross the border into the US even though at least the first grouping will most likely be the Teslas that are made in Shanghai. Yeah, but you know, ultimately, you know, from Beijing's perspective, again, this is again a five eyes member, a NATO member strains with the US they open up opportunities for China. The idea that it's a clear win.

[B]

For China, I mean it's a marginal win, but it's a clear win.

[C]

It's certainly directionally very positive. I think from the way China looks at how the world is being and how they're actively trying to reshape the world and what the US Is doing. I don't know what you call what we're doing.

[B]

It's anyone's guess. I mean, I will say for my part, I have been pretty baffled by some of the conversation around this. Like before we came on to record, I came across this note from the Washington Post editorial board. Frustrations with one American president need not give way to the agenda of dictators. I had discussions with President Xi about the situation in Greenland. Carney said about our sovereignty in the Arctic, about the sovereignty of the people of Greenland and the people of Denmark. And I found much alignment of views in that regard. What the Washington Post writes, there is universal agreement within NATO that the Arctic must be protected from China and Russia. Any suggestion that Ottawa and Beijing agree on geopolitical strategy concerning the Arctic is either deeply insincere or. Or worryingly naive. And yeah, deep insincerity or worrying naivete is how I read a lot of what is coming from Mark Carney.

[C]

He does not Canada right now. If you look at his history, there's no reason to think he's naive.

[B]

Right? So deep insincerity is what we'll go with here. And I mean, what fascinates me most is that I think this is just breathtakingly irresponsible leadership from Carney, not because China is morally bankrupt, although plenty of people have made that argument, former CCP hostage Michael Kovrig being one of them. And not even because every trade deal with China has ended badly for other developed countries around the world. But stepping back, the comparison that I would highlight is how the US has dealt with China on rare earths. Like, for all the hawkish instincts in D.C. over the past several years, and especially over the past year, we've seen the US government moderate on China in light of the very real leverage that China has over the US economy. And that's ultimately a reasonable, responsible decision for the American people, even if it's been frustrating to a lot of folks who want to ratchet up the pressure, take all kinds of offensive and defensive actions in all sorts of different areas. And all of it is paused because the leverage that China has is very, very real. And Carney, on the other hand, is just, it seems like he's completely ignoring an inconvenient reality that the US does have a ton of leverage to dictate terms to Canada, and Canada sends 75% of its exports to the US has a 5200 mile border with the US and no matter how many speeches he gives at Davos, those realities won't change. The US has leverage over and China can't replace the American consumer market for Canadian exporters. So I'm just, I'm not really sure where this will lead with Canada. And it feels to me like Carney is basically grandstanding on the international stage and like comparing the US to a repressive communist regime at Davos. All of it just reads really strange to me. And he's being widely celebrated for it throughout the Western world here, which is part of what makes me feel like I'm losing my mind over the last week.

[A]

All right, and that is the end of the free preview. If you'd like to hear the rest of today's conversation and get access to full episodes of Sharp China each week, you can go to your Show Notes and subscribe to either Bill's newsletter, Cynicism, or the Stratechri Bundle, which includes several other podcasts from me and daily writing from my friend Ben Thompson. I'm an incredibly biased news consumer, so I think both are indispensable resources. But either way, Bill and I are going to be here every week talking all things China, and we would love to have you on board. So check out your Show Notes, subscribe and we will talk to you soon.