“Vive le Québec libre!” French President Charles de Gaulle famously declared from the balcony of Montreal’s City Hall in 1967. This provocative remark emboldened simmering sovereigntist leanings of the Québécois and triggered a severe diplomatic crisis between Ottawa and Paris. For the next three years, members of the Front de Libération du Québec (FLQ) waged a terrorist insurgency that culminated in the October Crisis of 1970, when Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau invoked the War Measures Act, suspended habeas corpus, and deployed the army throughout the province. Over 60 years later, Canada’s sovereignty was again challenged by a foreign power when Donald Trump repeatedly suggested that America’s northern neighbour should become its 51st state. Domestically, more fuel was added to the fire of public outrage when members of the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) met with representatives of Trump’s administration—a move that the Premier of British Columbia characterised as “the definition of treason”. However, while historic and contemporary instances of separatism in Canada can conveniently be linked to agitation by foreign actors, such framing obscures a nascent and uncomfortable reality. Foreign influence rarely creates separatist movements from scratch, typically leveraging existing divisions. While secessionist sentiment in Quebec is at its 30–year low, Ottawa’s tensions with Washington reveal the issue of “Western Alienation”: Canada’s little-known domestic political dynamic.

Western Alienation refers to a longstanding and persistent regional political sentiment in Canada’s western provinces, particularly Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, that sees the country’s federal system to disproportionately privilege the interests of central Canada while marginalising political and economic concerns of the West. Scholars of Canadian federalism note that regional tensions have long been deeply ingrained within the institutional framework of the country. At the inception of the Confederation in 1867, the overwhelming majority of Canada’s population, industry and political power was concentrated in central Canada. The dominant narrative of Canadian identity that emerged from this period reflected priorities and historical experiences of Ontario and Quebec, often leaving Western perspectives underrepresented at the federal level. As western provinces saw rapid demographic and economic growth throughout the twentieth century, the imbalance increasingly produced a sense of political and cultural estrangement from the federal centre in Ottawa. This sense of alienation historically intensified during periods of federal intervention in the energy sector by liberal governments led by Pierre and Justin Trudeau.

During the premiership of Pierre Trudeau in the early 1980s the National Energy Program (NEP) was introduced as a response to global oil shocks and concerns about Canadian energy security. The NEP sought to increase federal control over oil revenues, regulate energy prices, and redistribute resource wealth across the country. While the policy was framed in Ottawa as a national economic strategy, it was widely perceived in Alberta as a direct assault on its provincial autonomy and economic prosperity. Many Albertans viewed the program as an attempt by the federal government to appropriate wealth generated by western natural resources for the benefit of central Canada. The resulting backlash entrenched a powerful narrative of federal overreach and economic exploitation that continues to shape western Canada’s political identity to this day.

Similar tensions resurfaced decades later during the ten-year tenure of Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister. While the political and economic context differed significantly from the energy crises of the 1980s, federal policy once again placed Ottawa at odds with Alberta’s resource-based economy. Introduction of a nationwide carbon pricing framework and stricter environmental assessment regulations for infrastructure projects sought to address climate change and help transition Canada toward a greener economy. In Alberta, however, these policies were widely interpreted as disproportionately targeting the province’s oil and gas sector—the backbone of its economy. Amid escalating legal and political disputes, Alberta’s United Conservative government under Premier Danielle Smith introduced the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act, which received royal assent in December 2022. The legislation established a framework allowing the provincial legislature to identify federal laws or policies deemed harmful or unconstitutional and to direct provincial entities not to enforce them. A similar rebellious spirit was reflected in neighbouring Saskatchewan when it passed the Saskatchewan First Act in 2023.

The official positions of the governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan do not explicitly support leaving the Confederation, although Premier Smith confirmed she would allow a citizen-led referendum on separation and respect Albertan’s judgment on the matter. It is the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) that leverages provisions of Alberta’s Citizen Initiative Act to actively campaign for a referendum on Alberta’s future within Canada and actively promotes independence. Despite the fringe status of the APP, almost 30% of Albertans lean towards supporting the idea with 15% fully committed to it even after considering potential costs. The aim to offset the costs of separation may very well have been behind APP’s motivation to ask members of Trump’s administration for a $500 billion line of credit to support Alberta’s sovereignty in case of a successful referendum. Even though Alberta courts ordered a temporary pause on the petition process, the issue is far from resolved, all while debates on constitutional legal autonomy of Canadian provinces continue to rage on at the Supreme Court in Ottawa.

Provincial governments in western Canada establishing legal frameworks for resisting Ottawa’s policies and asserting their autonomy combine with increasingly organised separatist sentiments to create a major challenge to Canada’s integrity. Readiness of the Trump administration to flirt with these expressions of Western Alienation and potentially capitalise on Canada’s internal divides should set off alarm bells in the federal centre, prompting a meaningful review of how it approaches its relationships with provincial governments. If Ottawa hopes to safeguard Canada’s sovereignty in an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment, it must address the underlying federal-provincial tensions that continue to fuel Western Alienation. Without meaningful efforts to reconcile regional grievances, Canada risks allowing domestic political fractures to evolve into vectors of destructive foreign influence. Mark Carney’s speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos made it clear that he understands the demise of the old rule-based order and the pressure it puts on middle powers like Canada. This recognition is only the first step—Canada must now strengthen its internal cohesion to withstand the pressures of a more competitive and unpredictable international system. The resilience of the Canadian Confederation in a new era will depend on how well it maintains national unity and federal legitimacy across its diverse regional political centres.

Written by Vladimir Petchkovsky, Edited by Georg Müller

Photo Credit: “Parliament House” by Mario Mendez (uploaded 2020, October 29) on Unsplash.