Hold on to your hats, because this international bridge drama just got a whole lot more complicated. Former President Donald Trump recently took to social media to threaten blocking the opening of the highly anticipated Gordie Howe International Bridge, a major new US-Canada connection over the Detroit River. But here’s where it gets controversial: his claims about the bridge are riddled with inaccuracies and omissions that demand closer scrutiny. Let’s break it down in a way that even beginners can follow, while diving into the details that most people miss.
Trump’s post not only included misleading statements but also ignored key facts—like his outlandish claim that Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney could strike a deal with China that would somehow end ice hockey in Canada and eliminate the Stanley Cup. Yes, you read that right. But beyond the absurdity, there’s a deeper story here about trade, infrastructure, and international relations.
And this is the part most people miss: Some of Trump’s arguments eerily echo those made by the family that owns the nearly century-old Ambassador Bridge, a toll bridge over the same river. This family has fought for years to stop the new bridge, even running ads on Fox News in 2018—a show Trump was known to watch. Coincidence? Perhaps. But it’s worth noting.
Trump criticized the Gordie Howe Bridge, which was slated to open early this year, claiming Canada is trying to ‘take advantage of America.’ But here’s the kicker: he himself endorsed the project in 2017. In a joint statement with then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Trump praised the bridge as a ‘vital economic link’ and pledged to expedite its completion. So, what changed? Jeff Watson, a former Canadian MP, summed it up perfectly: ‘The absurdity is Trump 1.0 takes no issue with the arrangement, wants the construction expedited, while Trump 2.0 now wants to use it as leverage in a trade war he started.’
Now, let’s talk ownership. Trump demanded the US should own ‘at least one half of this asset.’ But here’s the truth: the bridge is already jointly owned by Michigan and Canada, a fact confirmed by government documents, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens, and even former Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. Snyder bluntly stated in The Detroit News, ‘We do already! Canada and the state of Michigan are 50/50 owners of the new bridge.’
Trump also demanded ‘full compensation’ for what the US has given Canada, though he didn’t specify what that entails. Here’s the reality: Canada footed the entire multi-billion-dollar construction bill after Michigan lawmakers refused to contribute. Canada plans to recoup its costs through toll revenue, with future profits split between the two partners. So, where’s the unfairness?
But here’s where it gets controversial again: Trump claimed Canada built the bridge ‘with virtually no U.S. content,’ blaming President Obama for waiving the Buy American Act. However, Canadian officials and Snyder insist U.S. steel was used—specifically for the Michigan side of the bridge and the U.S. Port of Entry. Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens noted, ‘Thousands of U.S. workers helped construct the bridge, where lots of U.S. steel was used.’ Ontario Premier Doug Ford added that while 75% of the materials were Canadian (since Canada paid for it), 25% were American. So, is Trump’s claim fiction or fact? You decide.
The Obama administration’s 2012 waiver allowed Canadian materials but ensured American steel could compete fairly—a compromise given Canada’s full financial responsibility for the project. Yet, Trump’s narrative paints a different picture, one that raises questions about his motives and the accuracy of his statements.
Here’s the bigger question: Is this threat about fairness, or is it a strategic move in a trade war? And should international infrastructure projects be held hostage to political agendas? Let us know your thoughts in the comments—this debate is far from over.
