Today marks the 176^th anniversary of the Webster-Ashburton Treaty, a defining yet often overlooked moment in Canada–U.S. relations. In 1842, after years of border disturbances and legal controversies, British and American statesmen renewed their commitment to peaceful intercourse. They understood the necessity of restraining passions on both sides of the border, as it was in the best interest of all parties to prevent a third Anglo-American war in as many generations. The following piece is written in that spirit.

~     ~     ~

Who says business is only about money? In everyday transactions, trust, past experience, branding, as well as the quality of the service and the dependability of the product matter more than we care to acknowledge.

On a much larger scale, such “intangibles” are not only important, they are essential to successful and satisfactory international trade.

This is evident in Canada–U.S. relations. The two countries derive tremendous benefits from their commercial ties. Far from standing on their own—as rational and measurable economic choices—these ties are embedded in a multifaceted relationship. As President John F. Kennedy famously declared in Ottawa, in May 1961, “Geography has made us neighbors. History has made us friends. Economics has made us partners. And necessity has made us allies.” That spirit hardly belongs to a distant past, as the social media use of #FriendsPartnersAllies by diplomats and trade representatives suggests.

There is no way of peeling back one layer of the Canada–U.S. relationship without damaging the others, including trade—which is another way of saying that the business of sustaining strong commercial ties is not merely about money. At this “macro” level, the intangibles include recognition of political, diplomatic, and military concerns; a desire to foster trust and work towards common ends; cultural sensitivity and understanding; and historical awareness. These expressions of good will cannot be quantified, but that does not undercut their value.

This is most obvious when the intangibles are uncivilly cast aside, as we saw in June with the U.S. president’s fundamental misapprehension of the War of 1812. Wilfully or not, he misidentified who burnt down the presidential mansion and parts of Washington, D.C., in 1814. (His readiness to raise the matter in the first place was, arguably, in itself indicative of a larger outlook.) While, in a heartening twist, he had to go back more than two centuries ago to find an event that would justify commercial barriers, the president’s words signalled to Canadians the type of bilateral relationship he envisioned.

Aware of the importance of optics and anxious about the loss of investment and tourist dollars, American business and community leaders responded as forcefully as Canadian ones. Indeed, they have joined Canadians in seeking to protect free trade—or at least its general principles. In July, these U.S. stakeholders pushed back against the White House by developing a historical counter-narrative.

Such responses came from as far as the Gulf Coast. In early July, Sandy Stimson, mayor of Mobile, Alabama, reached out directly to Quebeckers and promoted the partnership between Bombardier and Airbus in La Presse.

Tout d’abord, nous avons davantage de choses en commun que vous ne le pensez. La ville de Mobile a été fondée par l’explorateur français Jean-Baptiste Le Moyne, Sieur de Bienville, en 1702, près de 100 ans après la fondation de l’habitation de Champlain à Québec. Elle est demeurée une colonie française pendant un siècle avant de passer aux mains de l’Angleterre, de l’Espagne et, finalement, des États-Unis. La Louisiane est largement plus connue pour son héritage français, mais Mobile, en Alabama est tout aussi fière du sien.

A few days later, Garry Douglas of the North Country Chamber of Commerce, based in upstate New York, followed suit in The Montreal Gazette. Douglas opposed import tariffs, especially in light of the rationale offered by the president. “Plattsburgh and Quebec share more than 200 years of social and cultural connection, unlike any other region on the border,” he noted.

With more space, Stimson and Douglas might have referred to nineteenth-century efforts to build a secure but peaceful international boundary; military cooperation during the two world wars and the Cold War; extensive cross-border tourism; exchange programs like Fulbright, which encourage good will; and the thousands of Canadian and American professionals who enhance the relationship by sharing their experience in the other country every year.

The history of immigration from Quebec to New England has also helped policymakers make the case for continued friendship—another intangible. Here we are referring to hundreds of thousands of French Canadians who settled permanently in the United States, particularly between the Civil War and the Great Depression. These immigrants sought to meld the honest embrace of American political values and institutions with a commitment to their ancestral faith, language, and customs. Spurred by local cultural institutions and political figures, celebrations of French-Canadian culture in New England have recently experienced a revival.

Diplomatic representation at events like Francophonie Day, la Saint-Jean-Baptiste, and French Heritage Day cements ties between Quebec and state and local leaders in the Northeast. A common history emblematized by Franco-Americans offers assurance: it instantly injects a pattern of trust and cooperation, as well as a dedication to continuing it, in the political and economic conversation.[1]

Are these rituals superfluous? A distraction? Hardly: the cultural and historical dimensions are factors in job creation. Investors look for the right fit. When choosing an American location in which to expand his business’s operations, Quebecker Serge Jacques had four criteria in mind: “availability of labor, proximity to his existing operation and to customers, the Buy America Act and the number of French-Canadians in local cemeteries.” Ultimately, the auto parts supplier settled on Berlin, New Hampshire.

Both the state commissioner for economic development and Berlin’s mayor noted the ancestral ties between New Hampshire and Quebec when responding to the decision. Evidently, there is something to the “Bienvenue” on welcome signs posted on the side of highways around New Hampshire.

And at a time when Canadians, faced with tariffs and an apparently hostile U.S. administration (as well as the “extreme vetting” of extremely unwelcoming highway checkpoints), are lured by a stay-at-home, buy-Canadian campaign, the intangibles may matter a great deal. In recent years, half-a-million Canadians have visited New Hampshire annually. The continued flow of tourist dollars may depend on local leaders—in New England, but also across the northern United States and as far as Florida—and their ability to force a new narrative amid seemingly insurmountable barriers.

The U.S. president has not only disturbed shared economic interests with his declarations and policies, but the inertia of a long, trusting, and mutually beneficial relationship as well. The key to resolving the present imbroglio, then, lies to a great extent in the past. In this regard, historians can render valuable services—to diplomatic officials, state and local policymakers, and community stakeholders—by exposing that profound inertia and nourishing the intangibles at a time when they are most essential.

~     ~     ~

[1] Of course, like all political uses of history, this one is highly selective. It means forgetting that contemporary Quebec elites expressed contempt for the migrants; that Franco-Americans endured marginalization and discrimination in the U.S.; and that this mass migration did not substantially improve Canada–U.S. relations even as it was occurring. But, in the interest of the present relationship, those inconvenient facts are set aside—as is the War of 1812. On such occasions as Francophonie Day, it is the narrative of a shared, mutually beneficial history that ultimately triumphs. Symbolically, disagreements are set aside.