Canada's exposure to risk from China is extraordinarily limited compared to the US: we're not culturally-similar neighbours with all the resultant fractally complex relationships and hazards. Does that mean we should be blind to both structural risks as far as trade (non)diversification or soft-through-medium power moves and games of silly buggers? Not at all. Wouldn't hurt to do a review of US influence activities, political support, and "branch office" arrangements with the same lens as would be used to review Chinese activities and counteract both as vigorously as possible.
As an example, if a Chinese police office on Canadian soil is objectionable, then anything equivalent in function, including partnerships we may have actively sought in the past, involving the US needs to end at the same time.
Given the current situation in the US, including both their vicious internal law enforcement approach and their threats to Canadian sovereignty, there's no baseline, on principle alone, reason for Canada to preserve the US, especially its government or military, from threats or harm. Anything, and I mean anything, that won't cause blowback for Canada just isn't our business.
Can't say I agree with you on a few things here...
Regardless of whether people like Trump or not, and regardless of what he says - the United States is still our next door neighbour. They are still our biggest trading partner. And they are still a critical defense partner, re NORAD
Trump will be gone in 3 years, but the United States will still be a superpower and they will still be our next door neighbour.
Maintaining the best relations possible is in both of our best interests, and I have no doubt our relations will improve dramatically when Trump's term ends
...
Maintaining information & intelligence sharing with American law enforcement is critical to the domestic security within North America.
With Canadians and Americans mostly able to cross the border without any issues, it's important that law enforcement be able to view someone's criminal history or relevant notes made from previous police encounters.
(Maybe someone doesn't have a criminal record, but has had multiple interactions with police due to a mental health condition, re schizophrenia, dementia. Maybe their listed associates matter. This is important for officers dealing with an individual to know, if possible.)
Again, there is no real benefit to having the two countries stop sharing criminal intelligence.
...
- Do I like the way ICE operates? No, I think it's beyond stupid & irresponsible.
There are too many videos of ICE officers escalating situations, approaching people hyper aggressively, using excessive force, and seemingly creating problems where there didn't necessarily have to be one.
I think their tactics cause a real fear in the communities they operate in, because they don't seem to give a shit about what local courts rule in regards to their conduct. Or local mayors.
ICE is going to do their thing, and they have the federal government behind them regardless of what local courts say...
(Police officers that ignore the rules or advice of the local courts on advice from their leadership is scary. Can you imagine a Court of King's Bench judge ruling against aggressive police action up here, and am entire agency saying "Meeeehhhhh, fuck it...we're gonna keep doing this anyway..." Not a good look, and again creates problems that don't need to exist)
Covering their faces while wearing body armour over civilian clothes & then swarming an individual has got to be terrifying for that person, and will lead to unnecessary violence going both ways.
How does someone know if it is ICE officers or a gang of some sort?? To be honest it's hard to visually tell the difference sometimes, same goes with their apparent conduct.
...
All of that being said, we need to remember that we are seeing this because that's what the media is showing us. They
want us to see this, and have this be our impression of current American law enforcement.
The truth is, there are tens of thousands of municipal police officers across the country that aren't participating in hyper-aggressive targeted policing.
Tens of thousands of Sheriff's deputies that are still serving their counties & regions very professionally and respectfully. Locally elected Sheriff's that are keeping their citizens safe the best they can.
Same applies to state law enforcement, and many other federal agencies.
The media shows us a small, small sliver of what's happening down south - usually with a negative narration. They'll even show the same 30 seconds of the same situation on repeat, while narrating that an isolated incident is reflective of a national trend that doesn't exist.
(We've seen the mainstream media pull the same garbage up here, re RCMP in Cold Lake, re dealing with a native man attempting to drive drunk.)
...
They come across Canadians somewhat regularly, and should have the same officer safety notes we do. And we come across Americans somewhat regularly also, and knowing any criminal intelligence/officer safety notes is handy for us also.
(Although as far as my agency goes, we don't have access to NCIC...don't think anybody else does either?)
The only result that would happen if we stopped sharing intelligence would be police officers on either side of the border may be injured or killed by something that may be preventable, and organized crime would be given a real advantage if cross border investigations stopped being a thing.
...
A few years ago, a young girl here in Edmonton was kidnapped outside of her school by a man who she had chatted with online, from the US
EPS was on it 24/7 and was actively collecting and feeding information in real time to the FBI, who was able to quickly identify the POI & his address.
FBI HRT rescued the girl within a day or two of them crossing the border & was able to get her back to her parents
alive
That would
not have been possible in the timeframe that it happened if we didn't have the information sharing mechanisms in place that we do