In the atmosphere of political conflict created by United States President Donald Trump it is hard, even impossible, to understand what his administration’s objectives are. His confrontational style has unleashed a global wave of uncertainty and instability that is shaking nations and international institutions, from Ukraine to Europe and Asia. Nobody knows that experience better than Canadians who have been grappling with Trump’s consistent and demeaning claim to want to turn Canada into “the 51st state.”

Even the cross-border Four Nations hockey game became a presidential target as Trump continued to polarize Canadian-American relations. As I outlined in a column earlier this week, the 51st state has become a metaphor for an attempted U.S. invasion that has sent Canadian politicians stampeding into new forms of anti-American economic nationalism. But could it be that Trump’s aggressive negotiating style is destroying a sensible policy plan and undermining the potential for what some see as a promising concept.

In the view of U.S. historian Arthur Herman, the great potential is to forge an economic alliance between the United States and Canada. Herman, author of bestselling and award-winning histories (most famously, perhaps, is the 2001 bestseller “How the Scots Invented the Modern World”), explained the alliance prospect in an interview: “It would be interesting to explore more deeply how the Canadian and U.S. economies could become more integrated together and the enormous power and synergy that could flow from that.”

Herman, now a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington, said talking about “the 51st state” is not a good approach to producing greater unity of purpose. “But I think that what Trump has done — and he does this so often — is that by presenting one provocative position, he opens up a discussion on new ways of thinking and new ways of approaching problems that seem to be kind of insoluble.”

Herman’s observations and conclusions, along with the views of other policy thinkers in Washington, are said to be at the heart of the ultimate Trump agenda. As Herman describes that potential, continental economic unity would open up strategic and economic opportunities. ”Maybe the forming of an economic union or an economic bloc in energy production, in strategic materials, rare earths — a whole range of areas where the two economies could work together in ways that would be hugely and strategically important in shaping North America’s place in the world.”

And here Herman borrows a phrase created more than half a century ago by Herman Kahn, founder of the Hudson Institute. Through economic co-operation, Canada, the United States — and Mexico — would create a “North American Superstate.”

Herman is quick to acknowledge that the superstate’s structure is economic, not political. Promoting the 51st state is misleading, he said, since it implies political union and “overlooks all the heterogeneity and the very different political positions that Canada and the separate provinces represent.”

In the interview, Herman drew attention to a chapter in his book on the Scottish role in shaping the United States. The opening sentence notes that “Canada and the United States should be more alike than they are.” The two nations share a common language, geography and economic fates. Both are nations of immigrants. “Yet their histories run in very different directions.” With Scots playing key roles in both countries, they adopted different political structures. The development of Canada was largely a public enterprise, controlled and in many cases financed from the top down. Americans, on the other hand, built their world around the principles of Adam Smith and individual self interest.

The polarizing impact of the 51st state concept, while politically disruptive, may also be less severe in reality than it is in public discussion. Canada’s ambassador to the United States, Kirsten Hillman, struck confident and optimistic notes on CBC’s Power and Politics. She said Canada is “getting signals” that the border controls on fentanyl are being well received. She sees a need for “balance” and “reciprocity” as tariff deadlines loom. ”We need to be pragmatic and we need to be able to find a path that helps the president achieve the goals he’s trying to achieve in a manner that also benefits Canada.”

Further indications that Canada’s approach to Trump’s headline-grabbing style may require a little moderation can be found in a recent episode of CBC Radio’s The Current. Canada’s three northern premiers — the Yukon’s Ranj Pillai, the Northwest Territories’ R.J. Simpson, and Nunavut’s P.J. Akeeagok — talked about how Canada’s Arctic is exposed to Russian and Chinese proximity — and about the need for Canada to “wake up” and recognize that the Arctic — publicly coveted by Trump — is a storehouse of future economic growth.

Premier Akeeagok said he sees “an opportunity for us to really unlock the true potential that’s there before us (in the Arctic) … We have 23 of the 34 critical minerals that Canada has listed and there’s nation-building projects” to be pursued. The region needs roads and seaports “that could unlock so much potential in our blue economy.” Canada needs “to step up to start asserting our sovereignty over the Arctic.”

Can Canada do this alone? Or might it be worth looking into Arthur Herman’s North American Superstate concept as a partnership opportunity?

• Email: tcorcoran@postmedia.com

Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters financialpost.com.