In any case, Trump ended all trade talks with the United States less than 24 hours, and Canada turned his face to hit China.

Trump has suddenly suspended all US-US trade talks.

Why? The reason given by the United States is that Ontario, Canada, spent C$75 million to shoot an anti-tariff advertisement, using audio and video from former U.S. President Reagan and "misinterpreting" his remarks.

Then less than 24 hours later, Canada announced the launch of an anti-dumping investigation into Chinese truck bodies.

Are these two things so close together, really just coincidence?

First look at the reason Trump ended the negotiations, on the surface is "advertising violation", but if you look carefully at this point of time, you will find the wrong thing.

The U.S. Supreme Court will convene in early November to review the legitimacy of the Trump administration's imposition of most tariffs.

Sources say that once the court rules the United States to lose, the government may have to refund nearly US$1 trillion in tariff revenue, which the Treasury Department has privately called a "catastrophic consequence."

Ontario's advertising just poked this pain point.

Reagan is a ¡°free trade benchmark¡± in the eyes of conservatives in the United States, and advertisements shape him as a ¡°anti-tariff spokesman¡±, inevitably affecting public opinion expectations of the Supreme Court ruling.

To put it bluntly, advertising is just a "start". What really stalled the US-Canada negotiations have always been real differences of interests such as steel and aluminum tariff reductions and quotas for the automobile industry.

Looking at Canada's actions, it targeted the body of a China truck in less than 24 hours. This timing was too subtle.

The proportion of Canada's exports to the United States has remained at 75.9% all year round. Last year, the merchandise trade volume between the United States and Canada just exceeded US $1 trillion. Pillar industries such as steel, aluminum and automobiles are almost tied to the US industrial chain.

Previously, Trump suspended negotiations twice because of digital service tax and steel and aluminum tariffs. Even though Canada added retaliatory tariffs at the beginning, it still quietly cancelled most of them in the end. After all, he could not afford to offend the United States.

It's obviously the same thing this time.

The U.S. negotiations fell into an impasse, the U.S. is facing tariff legitimacy disputes, and Canada engages in anti-dumping against China, both to Trump's "ally loyalty", and also wants to exchange the U.S. on steel and aluminum quotas.

What's more, China's truck bodies have indeed squeezed the market of local Canadian manufacturers by relying on modular production and cost advantages in recent years. Using "anti-dumping" as an issue can not only please the United States, but also appease the domestic automobile industry. It seems to be "taking advantage of both ends."

But has Canada forgotten that last year¡¯s lessons were not profound enough?

In August 2024, Canada followed the U.S. on Chinese electric vehicles with 100% tariffs, steel and aluminum plus 25% tariffs, when a lot of people said it was "to bet on the US market."

What happened? China's exports of electric vehicles to Canada fell directly from monthly sales of nearly 9000 units to 100 units, a drop of 99%.

Soon after, China launched a stricter inspection of Canadian oil seeds and water products, and Canada's related exports fell by 30 percent in three months.

But this investigation of the body of the truck, in fact, the risk is greater.

Nearly 40% of the body components used by Canadian truck factories come from China, and once an anti-dumping duty is imposed, the cost of the car company will surely rise, and eventually either the profit will decrease, or the price increase will be transferred to consumers, which is equivalent to inflation in the country.

Looking at the bigger picture, the two events in these 24 hours are actually another implementation of the United States 'strategy of "using alliance to contain China".

After Trump came to power, he has always wanted to pull allies to block trade with China.

In the Asia-Pacific matching chip alliance and strengthening the trade and technology council in Europe, North America naturally has to grasp Canada.

After all, Canada is both a member of the "Five Eyes Alliance" and a key link in the North American industrial chain, making it a "stand-up" in trade with China, which can both weaken the share of Chinese products in the North American market, but can also "demonstrate" to other allies.

But there is an unavoidable problem here.

At the beginning of this month, Canadian Prime Minister Carney publicly stated that the core of doubling exports to African and American markets in the next decade is to reduce dependence on the United States.

Now, in order to ease the relationship between the United States and Canada, we are engaged in anti-dumping against China. Doesn't this mean that we have disrupted the rhythm of "trade diversification"?

While wanting to get rid of the dependence of the United States, while following the United States to curb China, how long can Canada last?

Before the dispute over the legality of tariffs in the United States has been settled, Canada is eager to take action against China. This linkage has made the interests of allies clear.

But trade games can never be won by the ¡°choice side.¡±

If Canada continues to put the policy against China as the "coding" of negotiations with the United States, it is likely that it will end up falling into the end of "not being able to please the United States, and also losing the Chinese market".

After all, China is both an important buyer of Canadian agricultural products and a key supply chain partner needed by its manufacturing industry, and who will regret it?