As much as I’d love it I don’t think this is an option in 2025. The process is long and fraught with Hungary vetoes. And if the threat of an armed conflict turns into actual conflict we’d be exactly as Ukraine is now, blocked from proceeding because nobody in the EU wants to volunteer to inherit a war.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: it’s technically impossible as Canada looks a lot like the US in many ways which goes against EU regulations. For instance, if Canada would join the EU, many cars won’t be allowed on the road anymore due to EU road safety laws. Same shit with food production. It doesn’t meet EU standards, which means most Canadian food production cannot be sold, so most farms would need to drastically change or go bankrupt. These are just 2 examples of many issues why Canada can’t just join the EU. Best possible outcome would be Schengen economic zone membership. Canada needs to change so drastically before EU membership can even be considered, it is almost, if not completely, impossible.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d love Canada to join us, I just don’t see how.
I’m 100% sure all the old Soviet vans in Romania aren’t up to current EU standards. Presumably things like that get grandfathered in.
Food regulations are different, but not “drastically”. I’m sure we could manage, although the farmers would act like farmers about it. Ditto for all the other regulations. It will take us a moment to move into compliance, though, so our politicians have their work cut out for them.
So that’s the EEA stuff out of the way. The Schengen zone for freedom of movement is actually bigger, because it makes problems at the US border, which is the longest border in the world and literally has buildings halfway across it. Still, if they keep acting like this, it can be overcome. The only thing left to do is to get Canadians other than me into watching Eurovision.
Ah, but old vehicles are listed as oldtimers and therefore rules apply only limited. But modern cars which aren’t up to standard to EU regulations are not allowed on the road. And because US standards are different, many American cars, even European cars made for export to the Americas, may not meet EU standards. Also, developing countries have a period to adjust to EU standards but Canada isn’t a developing country so it cannot enjoy those exemptions.
Food regulations are indeed drastically different. Crops used in the US and Canada are not up to EU standards. Switching is nearly impossible due to nasty Monsanto patents. When you used it once on your land, or a neighbor used it and pollen blew over to your crops, you’re forced to use Monsanto crops or face being sued into bankruptcy.
Maybe build a wall and make the US pay for it eh. Australia is already watching and joined eurovision, where the hell is Canada? At least Celine Dion already won once, that counts for something, right buddy?
Maybe build a wall and make the US pay for it eh. Australia is already watching and joined eurovision, where the hell is Canada? At least Celine Dion already won once, that counts for something, right buddy?
I hope this is intended in a friendly tone. The Canadianisms can slide into sounding mocking pretty easily.
Ah, but old vehicles are listed as oldtimers and therefore rules apply only limited. But modern cars which aren’t up to standard to EU regulations are not allowed on the road. And because US standards are different, many American cars, even European cars made for export to the Americas, may not meet EU standards.
North American companies export compliant cars to Europe, as well. Presumably, we could just start selling those versions here. Assuming we still have an industry, anyway - if the tariffs get high enough production just stops and we’re building a new single-country industry from scratch anyway.
Can you provide a source that this applies to already in-use cars? I can’t imagine the regulations are written to instantly require all old cars off the road in a new member, because that wouldn’t make sense. What I’ve found only applies to new cars, or only to ones that have to be scrapped.
Also, developing countries have a period to adjust to EU standards but Canada isn’t a developing country so it cannot enjoy those exemptions.
If that is indeed the case, we can always adjust and then apply after, if it would take too long otherwise. Australia is apparently in the process with their own vehicles.
Switching is nearly impossible due to nasty Monsanto patents. When you used it once on your land, or a neighbor used it and pollen blew over to your crops, you’re forced to use Monsanto crops or face being sued into bankruptcy.
As someone in a farming area, that’s a massive exaggeration. People can and do switch seeds all the time. You hear more complaints about John Deere tractors and their anti-competitive practices.
Forgot about the main reason; Canada is in North America, not Europe.
So? Ever heard of colonialism? Greenland and French Guiana are European too. So are the Dutch islands in the Caribbean. Many parts of the world were European once. French Guiana is a part of the European Union where it’s inhabitants get EU passports and pay with the euro. The Netherlands and France share a border, on the island of Saint Martin. Canada was European too when it was a part of the Commonwealth. Let them join again but this time independent.
And for said reasons I don’t want to join the EU. I’d way rather join similar to Iceland.
That would be amazing. Even if they don’t join the EU as an EU country, but simply be an ally, that would still make the world a better place!
but simply be an ally, that would still make the world a better place!
In what way? Neither Europe nor Canada are independently imperialist (they mostly just do whatever America tells them to do), but that’s always one election away from changing.
The European empires died decades ago, and the American thing was based on soft power and wasn’t an empire.
North Korea is a bad place, since we all know that’s where this is going.
The European empires died decades ago, and the American thing was based on soft power and wasn’t an empire.
You should look up the word “imperialism”. America maintains vassal/near vassal states and military presence all over the world, has intervened in and started wars in five of the six populated continents and has repeatedly deposed governments it doesn’t like. Look at Iraq, Vietnam or Yemen/Gaza and tell me the American thing “was” “about soft power”.
Ah yes, Iraq was very close to compromising the US’s global position. /s
They don’t have vassals, unless you include Puerto Rico or Guam. The rest of us did stuff for them because we liked them, and Israel is closer to vassalising the US if you just look at the exchange of favours. Occasionally, they attacked a small nation for fairly frivolous reasons. Your guys were staining the world with blood the whole time.
Ah yes, Iraq was very close to compromising the US’s global position. /s
I know this is sarcasm but I still have no idea what you’re trying to say. Who said anything about the US’s global position?
The rest of us did stuff for them because we liked them, and Israel is closer to vassalising the US if you just look at the exchange of favours.
Oh no I’m not talking about the West; those are for the most part “allies”. By vassals I meant US-installed or heavily controlled/supported governments all over the world, like in the Middle East, Africa and South America (though those seem to be more independent now).
There are so many reason why this is unlikely to happen. That said, the US forming an alliance with Russia seemed unlikely. Yet, here we are.
The so many reasons are?
For literally joining the EU: geography, Hungary and the optics of them leaving out places like Kosovo and Bosnia while we go ahead.
For getting every part of EU membership except the technical status, there’s much fewer. The only substantial thing I’ve heard is that they’re afraid of Russia and there’s a limit to how much we can help with that, while on the other side they’re tempted to just avoid confrontation with the US, or maybe even (wrongly) think they can keep the alliance going.
I don’t know what OP was thinking of, though.
It was someone in the EU that pointed out that the requirement to be European doesn’t have a strict definition. Cyprus is a member, but not in Europe because it was found to be ‘European in culture’. Turkey is in Asia and is currently negotiating entry. I believe there are others as well, not in Europe.
Geographically speaking, we share a close sea border with France and a land border with Denmark, the latter even if only technically.
Politically, while the UK is no longer a part of the EU, it gives us much closer ties to Europe. Our Monarch is European. We have close ties to the UK in our system of government. Culturally, we are very aligned with Europe in general.
The geography is a barrier, but not a dealbreaker, for all the reasons you pointed out. A common pair of languages, and the similarities in ideology and way of life are also arguments for “substantial Europeanness”. It’s just that they still might politically decide the European Union shouldn’t include countries in the Americas, or at least not one bigger than the whole rest of their (non-Greenland?) territory.
Sure, but the counter argument to that is Europe has lots of people, and Canada has lots of space. We could do something with all the empty space we have, and build industry. We would have a potential ready supply of workers to build the infrastructure we would need to settle some of the empty space and build industry, that could then export goods back to the EU.
We have lots of to offer the EU.
Yes we do. To be clear, I’d except us if I was them. On the other hand I’ve had discussions with people here who seem to be offended that I’d even suggest it because of the name.
Ask them if they are offended that Cyprus is in the EU, even though it’s in Asia. Or ask if it’s OK that Turkey may be joining.
Some people just like to argue, and if they are really butthurt “because the name”, then they probably aren’t worth debating the point. It’s a name that already encompasses countries that are not in Europe.
You’d have to get the entire union to agree. Including Hungary. Canada would have to change a bunch of stuff around when it comes to movement, currency, etc. The US would likely fight the move by putting its own NATO membership on the table. Assuming there haven’t been any Article 5 violations, then the EU would consider that a very bad deal. The list goes on.
Now, Canada and the EU increasing trade and allowing freedom of movement is not entirely impossible. I think new alliances are inevitable. I just don’t see Canada in the EU as a likely scenario.
I asked this question during Trump’s first presidency, and was met with scoffing and incredulity. Guess it’s starting to look a bit more reasonable now.
I started to hang around on r/Europe, even. If you knew the vibe and the system in America, knew history and didn’t just disbelieve that it could apply to you, it wasn’t hard to read ahead to this moment we’re in now. Unfortunately, that combination was rare, so you and me got to be Cassandras.
Yes. And we should.
Canada in the European Union would give us a major glow up.
For real
Well, it’s not Europe, but I wouldn’t personally opose it.
Neither are Malta nor Cyprus (and most of Turkie)
Why is there an arrow pointing from Africa?
