The Financial Alliance reported on January 9 (Editor: Huang Junzhi) that Canadian Minister of Energy, Jonathan Wilkinson, stated on Wednesday that Donald Trump’s claim that the USA does not need anything from Canada is "completely wrong." Wilkinson is a potential candidate to succeed Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister of Canada.

Wilkinson said that it is difficult for the USA to find alternatives to Canadian Crude Oil Product, Uranium, potash, and other critical minerals. He also warned that nothing is impossible when it comes to potential Canadian trade retaliation, including export taxes. Wilkinson will travel to Washington next week and is arranging meetings with US lawmakers.

At a press conference on Tuesday, Trump reiterated his commitment to imposing "huge tariffs" on all Canadian imported products.

"We don’t need anything they have," Trump said when referring to Canada.

The specific interview content is as follows:

Trump claims that the USA does not need anything from Canada. What is Canada's response to this?

This is completely wrong. The USA derives significant economic value from Canada, and the resources provided by Canada are difficult for the USA to obtain from other countries. If you look at oil, we provide heavy crude oil. Most of the crude oil produced in the USA is light, low-sulfur crude oil. The Midwest refineries were built to process heavy crude oil, and they have no choice but to use Canadian resources—alternatively, even if they have other options, it is not economical. For some Gulf refineries, the other option for heavy crude oil is Venezuela. Are you really telling me that Americans are more interested in buying crude oil from Venezuela than from Canada?

The same goes for the large number of critical minerals we supply, and we have the opportunity to provide more. Their alternative is to purchase from China. In some cases, this is actually not an option, as China has already banned the export of certain critical minerals.

The same applies to Uranium. The same goes for potash, yes, they do have another option: Russia, which is also not the most stable or reliable source. Take hydropower as an example; there is a large amount of trade on the West Coast, with substantial electrical utilities being transported from Quebec to Boston and New York, with no other alternatives.

Have discussions been held with leaders in Canada's Oil & Gas industry? What is their current mindset?

Yes, I have talked not only with the CEOs of the Oil & Gas industry but also with people from the Energy Industry and Resources Industry, especially from the mineral sector. They are clearly concerned about the potential for tariffs. But like me, they believe there are ways to collaborate with Americans, to work with American companies, to ensure that not only Canadians are talking with Trump officials but also that Americans discuss the downsides of tariffs with Trump officials and the benefits of further cooperation in the future. So there's definitely concern, but no panic. We are quite strategic about this.

Can Canada allow Trump to impose broad tariffs but exempt Oil & Gas tariffs?

Clearly, we are working to dissuade him from canceling tariffs. For example, if he implements broad tariffs excluding Energy, Canada would still need to respond. Canada cannot stand by idly watching our Autos Industry or other sectors being devastated. We need to respond in a thoughtful manner, in a way that genuinely exerts maximum pressure on the president and on the states benefiting from trade with Canada. So I'm not sure if this would completely alter our strategy.

In this scenario, would the oil export tax come to the forefront?

I feel that nothing is impossible. But as I said, my starting point is to persuade the government that through cooperation, we can achieve more.

Look, if they impose tariffs on oil, it will lead to an increase in prices at gas stations in the USA. There is no way around it. If they impose tariffs on Electrical Utilities and hydropower, the electricity prices paid by Consumers will increase. If they impose tariffs on potash fertilizers, food producers in the USA will pay the price, and food prices in the USA will rise. In a relatively short period, they will see prices increase and inflation worsen. This is contrary to what Trump said he wants to achieve during his presidential campaign.

In this case, we can propose a series of projects to help them. For example, one of the key minerals that China prohibits from exporting to the USA is germanium. There is a mine in Alaska that produces concentrates containing germanium. It is processed at the Teck Resources plant located in Trail, British Columbia. In this way, there is an opportunity to significantly increase the germanium output. American mining, Canadian processing, mainly used for national defense in the USA—wouldn't this be a better way to think about how we leverage our relative strengths rather than imposing tariffs on each other?

How to get Trump and his circle to understand this message.

Clearly, we may need to explain the situation to some of the people he talks to frequently. This includes not only those he appoints in his own government but also some key senators like Lindsey Graham and Others. However, I have always believed that Americans speaking to Americans is more effective than Canadians speaking to Americans.

Therefore, we are seeking to collaborate with our Industry to engage all companies with ties to the USA that can effectively lobby. This certainly includes associations like the American Petroleum Institute, but also companies such as Exxon Mobil, the largest Oil & Gas company in the USA. It holds 70% of Imperial Oil, which is Canada's second-largest oil company. Many of its products are sent to the refineries owned by Exxon Mobil in the USA. Exxon Mobil can become our very effective advocate. This is a well-known fact.