U.S. President Donald Trump used a major address at the World Economic Forum in Davos to call out Prime Minister Mark Carney, saying Canada should be grateful to the United States and warning, "Remember that, Mark," after Carney spoke at the same forum the day before.
Speaking for more than an hour, Trump said his proposed "Golden Dome" defence system would protect Canada, accused Ottawa of getting "a lot of freebies" from the United States, and reiterated an unusual public focus on Greenland and territorial access.
Carney's Davos address
Carney delivered a 17-minute keynote at the World Economic Forum that framed a path for Canada and allied middle powers in a changing international order. He argued the postwar rules-based order is not returning and warned that economic integration has begun to be used as a weapon.
More recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons. Tariffs as leverage. Financial infrastructure as coercion. Supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
Prime Minister Mark Carney
Carney did not mention the United States or President Trump by name. He stressed Canada would "stand firmly" with Greenland and said Canada "strongly opposes tariffs over Greenland," framing economic coercion and trade measures as strategic tools that undercut global stability.
Trump's response and Greenland comments
In Davos on Wednesday, Trump directly referenced Carney's speech while defending his own foreign-policy posture. He told the audience the United States provides substantial defence and other benefits to Canada, and said Ottawa should show appreciation.
Canada gets a lot of freebies from us, by the way, they should be grateful also, but theyre not. I watched your prime minister yesterday, he wasnt so grateful. Canada lives because of the United States. Remember that, Mark, the next time you make your statements.
Donald Trump
Trump spent a portion of his speech on Greenland, a Danish autonomous territory that he has repeatedly said the United States "needs" for strategic reasons. He said he would not use force to obtain the territory, but used stark language about the option of "excessive strength and force."
We probably wont get anything, unless I decide to use excessive strength and force. We would be, frankly, unstoppable. But, wont do that. Now, everyones saying, Oh, good. Its probably the biggest statement I made, because people thought I would use force. I dont have to use force. I dont want to use force. I wont use force. All the United States is asking for is a place called Greenland.
Donald Trump
Reactions and context
Carneys speech drew attention for its focus on economic coercion and supply-chain vulnerabilities. It was his first address at the World Economic Forum since becoming prime minister, and commentators praised its emphasis on collective action by like-minded countries.
The Prime Ministers Office told CTV News it had no plans to comment on Trumps remarks. Carney was asked about the presidents speech by reporters in Davos and did not respond.
- Carney framed the rules-based international order as unlikely to return and highlighted economic coercion as a rising threat.
- Trump used his Davos address to emphasise U.S. defence ties with Canada and to press his long-standing interest in Greenland.
- Ottawa has not publicly replied to Trumps comments, and observers noted the unusual bilateral tone on the Davos stage.
The Greenland dispute has drawn international criticism over the past week, elevating what is ordinarily a diplomatic nuance into a high-profile talking point. At Davos both leaders positioned their views on global power, trade and security in ways that underline growing strains between established allies.
What to watch next
Expect follow-up statements from government officials in Ottawa and Copenhagen, and continued scrutiny of how economic tools such as tariffs and financial infrastructure are used in statecraft. Carneys call for middle powers to coordinate suggests Canada may seek partnerships to counter coercive economic measures.
For now, the exchange at Davos underscored both countries differing public approaches to security and trade, and left unanswered whether the rhetoric will translate into concrete policy shifts.
