Historical annexationist movements inside Canada were usually inspired by dissatisfaction with British rule in Canada. Despite some unrest, opposition to British rule never reached the degree that led to the
American Revolutionary War in 1775. Notably, Canada's population growth in the late 18th and early 19th centuries was spurred largely by
United Empire Loyalists, who left the American colonies during the Revolution because of their loyalty to Great Britain. In the period from 1790 to 1837, imperial officials repeatedly denounced American-style republicanism and tried to suppress it.
1837 Groups of Irish immigrants took the route of
armed struggle, attempting to annex the peninsula between the
Detroit and
Niagara Rivers to the United States by force in the minor and short-lived
Patriot War in 1837–1838. Not all rebels desired union with the United States; some fought for an independent nation state or for
liberal social reforms.
1840s and 1850s Between 1848 and 1854, a significant and articulate minority of conservatives in
Upper Canada advocated constitutional changes modelled on the American federal-state system and the
US Constitution. They critiqued Canada's imitation of
British parliamentary government as simultaneously too democratic and too tyrannical. They believed it destroyed the independence of the appointed governor and
Legislative Council and further concentrated power in the Cabinet. This critique led many conservatives to argue that the American model of
checks and balances offered Canada a more balanced and conservative form of democracy than did the British parliamentary government. These "republican conservatives" debated a series of constitutional changes, including annexation to the United States, an elected governor, an elected Legislative Council, a federal union of
British North America, and imperial
federation, within this framework. These conservatives accepted "government by discussion" as the appropriate basis for political order. In midcentury Montreal, with little immigration and complaints that the repeal of the
Corn Laws had cut the region off from its British trade links, a small but organized group supported integrating the colonies into the United States. The leading organization advocating merger was the
Annexation Association, founded in 1849 by an alliance of French Canadian nationalists and Anglophone businessmen in
Montreal who had a common interest in the republic. Many of its members, including
Louis-Joseph Papineau, were participants in the 1837–38 rebellions. The
Montreal Annexation Manifesto was published in 1849. It was hoped a merger with the United States would give Canada markets for its goods, ensure national security, and provide the finances to develop the West. A half measure was the
Canadian–American Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 that linked the two countries economically. However, the movement died out in 1854. Annexation was never a very popular choice. Many Canadians were loyal to the Crown and Great Britain, especially the descendants of the
United Empire Loyalists. French Canadians worried about being an even smaller minority in a larger union, and were concerned about
American anti-Catholicism. Around 1850, there was a serious annexationist movement on the border region of Quebec's
Eastern Townships, where the American-descended majority felt that union with the United States would end their economic isolation and stagnation as well as remove them from the growing threat of
French Canadian political domination. Leading proponents of this bipartisan movement were careful not to appear disloyal to Britain, however, and they actively discouraged popular protest at the local level. Fearful of American-style democracy, the local elite also expressed revulsion toward
American slavery and militaristic expansionism. Consequently, the movement died as quickly in the Eastern Townships as it did in Montreal after Britain expressed its official disapproval and trade with the United States began to increase.
1860s William Seward, subsequently
Secretary of State under
Abraham Lincoln, predicted in 1860 that western
British North America, from Manitoba to British Columbia, would join the United States along with
Russian Alaska. Many in Britain, such as
Goldwin Smith and
The Times of London, were pessimistic about the future of British North America and agreed with Seward;
The Times said that Britain would only object if the United States attempted to take the territory by force. Most Canadians were strongly opposed to the prospect of American annexation. Reports of the
Annexation Bill of 1866 — a bill introduced in the
U.S. House of Representatives that, contrary to myth, never came to a vote — might have been one of the many factors behind
Canadian Confederation in 1867. Much more serious were the
Fenian raids made by
Irish Americans across the border in 1866, which spurred a wave of patriotic feeling that helped the cause of Confederation. The
American Civil War further convinced many Canadians that the American experiment was a failure.
British Columbia In the late 1860s, residents of the
Colony of British Columbia, which was not yet a Canadian province, responded to the
United States' 1867 purchase of Alaska with fear of being surrounded by American territory. Some residents wanted the colony to be the next American purchase. Local opinion was divided, with the three
Vancouver Island newspapers supported annexation to the United States, while the three mainland newspapers rejected the idea. Even opponents of the annexation scheme admitted that Great Britain had neglected the region and that grievances were justified. Nonetheless, annexation sentiment largely disappeared within a few months, and prominent leaders moved toward confederation with Canada. Petitions circulated in favour of American annexation. The first, in 1867, was addressed to
Queen Victoria, demanding that the British government either assume the colony's debts and establish a steamer link or allow the colony to join the United States. In 1869, a second petition was addressed to President
Ulysses S. Grant, asking him to negotiate American annexation of the territory from Britain. It was delivered to Grant by
Vincent Colyer,
Indian Commissioner for Alaska, on December 29, 1869. The petitions were each signed by only a small fraction of the colony's population, and British Columbia was ultimately admitted as a Canadian province in 1871.
Nova Scotia Despite the general opposition, a substantial annexationist movement existed in Nova Scotia, and to a lesser degree in New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario, during the 1860s. Nova Scotia
anti-confederationists led by
Joseph Howe felt that pro-confederation premier
Charles Tupper had caused the province to agree to join Canada without popular support. Howe in London unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the government to free Nova Scotia from the pending British North America Act by threatening American annexation. A significant economic downturn occurred after the 1866 end of the
Reciprocity Treaty of 1854; the colony was heavily dependent on selling fish to Americans, causing many to believe that free trade with the United States was necessary for prosperity. Anti-confederationists won all but two seats in the
1867 provincial election; as in British Columbia, they did not necessarily support annexation. They again sent Howe to London to free Nova Scotia, but in 1868 the British government again refused, believing that New Brunswick would likely follow Nova Scotia out of the dominion and cause the new nation to collapse. Angry Nova Scotians began talking seriously about annexation. An alarmed Howe — who wished Nova Scotia to be free of Canada but still with Britain — warned his supporters against disloyalty, dividing anti-confederationists. The provincial government, dominated by extremists who now also opposed Howe, decided that if another appeal to London failed, it would seize federal offices and unilaterally declare annexation, believing that Britain would not use force to stop the province. Believing he had no choice, Howe left the anti-confederationists. Although he narrowly won reelection to his federal parliamentary seat in March 1869 as a confederationist, support for secession and annexation grew that year. The federal government promised changes to taxes and tariffs, the economy was revived, and the United States agreed to free trade for Canadian fish. By 1871, the movement had mostly disappeared.
1880s A Quebec-born homeopathic physician,
Prosper Bender, expressed disappointment with the Canadian experiment in the 1880s and 1890s. An author and the former host of a literary circle in Quebec City, Bender suddenly moved to Boston in 1882. After celebrating the promise of Confederation, he became a strong proponent of annexation to the United States and something of an intercultural broker; he helped interpret French-Canadian culture to American readers. Bender wrote in the
North American Review in 1883 that many Canadians believed that annexation by the United States would occur "within the present generation, if not sooner". He believed that
Irish Catholics — about one-quarter of Canada's population — would prefer annexation because of
British rule in Ireland. They would be joined by the majority of those under 40, who viewed the United States as a prosperous, fast-growing neighbour providing many opportunities. He attributed the absence of an active annexationist movement in part to many who would favour such an effort taking the "easiest and quietest method of securing the benefits of annexation, by themselves silently migrating to the Republic", as more than a million already had. Bender believed that Prime Minister
John A. Macdonald's promise of a
transcontinental railway linking eastern Canada to British Columbia to be overambitious and too expensive, and unfavourably compared the Canadian government's growing debt to the United States' rapid reduction of its
Civil War debt. He stated that Canadian businesses would benefit from duty-free access to the American market, while "wondrous American enterprise, supported by illimitable capital" would rapidly prosper Canada, especially its vast undeveloped interior. Bender concluded with pessimism about the likelihood of success of a nation divided into two parts by 1,200 miles of "forbidding, silent wilderness stretching from the head-waters of the
Ottawa to
Thunder Bay, and thence to
Manitoba".
1890s In 1891, Goldwin Smith posited in his book
Canada and the Canadian Question that Canada's eventual annexation by the United States was inevitable, and should be welcomed if Canadians genuinely believed in the ideal of
democracy. His view did not receive widespread support. In January 1893, concerned about Canada's possible annexation, a goal then being pursued by the Continental Union Association (a group of
Ontario and
Quebec Liberals), Prime Minister
Sir John Thompson delivered a speech on tolerance,
Canadian nationalism, and continued loyalty to Britain. Thompson eventually learned that the desire to make Canada part of the United States was confined to a small minority amongst the Liberals.
1900s In 1901,
W. T. Stead, a newspaper editor in London, England, discussed in
The Americanization of the World possible annexations of Canada and
Newfoundland. He believed that because of its size and strength, Canada would likely be the last of Britain's possessions in the Americas to join the United States. Stead cited several reasons for why he believed annexation seemed "inevitable", including rapidly growing economic ties and migration between the two countries, the
French Shore, and disputes over
the Alaska boundary and fishing rights in the Atlantic. After the discovery of gold in the
Yukon, many Canadians proposed to annex parts of Alaska currently controlled by the United States, by calling for a revision in the original map of the boundary line between the
Russian Empire and the United States. The United States offered to lease the territory to Canada but not to give it back. London and Washington agreed on arbitration, with one member of the panel from Canada. In 1903, the Chief Justice of Britain sided with the Americans to resolve the map dispute in favour of the United States. Many Canadians felt a sense of betrayal on the part of the British government, whose national interest required close ties to the United States regardless of the interests of Canada.
1930s The 1932 establishment of the
International Peace Garden on the North Dakota–Manitoba border honoured the long-lasting friendship between the two countries rather than attempts at annexation.
Newfoundland in the late 1940s While the
Dominion of Newfoundland was still separate from Canada, before 1949, a party known as the
Economic Union Party (EUP) sought closer ties with the United States. However, Canada objected to the possibility, and the British government, which administered the Dominion of Newfoundland as a de facto colony under an appointed
Commission of Government, would not allow it to consider annexation with the United States in any referendum. Instead, the EUP sought to resume "
responsible government" and would then explore American annexation. A
referendum showed a plurality in support of independence, but not a majority; a runoff referendum resulted in Newfoundland instead confederating with Canada to become the
tenth province.
1980s The
Unionest Party was a provincial political party in
Saskatchewan in 1980 that promoted the union of the western provinces with the United States. It was the most politically successful annexationist group, but its success was both short-lived and extremely limited in scope. The party briefly had two members in the
Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan, both of whom
crossed the floor from another party, but dissolved within a few weeks after failing to qualify for
official party status. The original
Parti 51 was a short-lived political party in
Quebec in the 1980s that advocated Quebec's admission to the United States as the
51st state. The party won just 3,846 votes, or 0.11 percent of the popular vote in the province, in the
1989 election — fewer votes than the
Marxist–Leninists or the satirical
Lemon Party — and was dissolved the following year.
21st century Two modern provincial political parties have proposed that their province
secede from Canada and join the United States. Neither attracted significant support. A 2022 poll showed that fewer than one in four Albertans support separation from Canada. In 2016, Hans Mercier, a pro-American lawyer from
Saint-Georges, Quebec, revived Parti 51. Mercier told
La Presse that the times have changed since the party's previous era, as
Quebec sovereigntism has waned in popularity. Mercier argued that Americans would be welcoming of a new Quebec state, and pointed to a survey taken during the administration of
George W. Bush that suggested nearly 34 percent of Quebecers would support joining the United States. The revived party ran five candidates and received just 1,117 votes provincewide in the
2018 Quebec general election, representing 0.03 percent of the provincewide popular vote. The party ran again and received just 689 votes provincewide in the
2022 Quebec general election, representing 0.02 percent of the provincewide popular vote.
Albertan annexationism Alberta separatists have proposed several paths, one of which is joining the United States either as a
territory or state. However, few among Albertan secessionists support actual annexation. The most vocal group in Alberta advocating for annexation to the United States is the
Alberta 51 Project, founded in 2023. Among the group's stated goals are the elimination of
customs barriers, a stronger military presence, the protections of the
US Constitution, enhanced protection for land and resources, and economic stability through the U.S. dollar. During an event in
Calgary where American political commentator
Tucker Carlson spoke with Alberta Premier
Danielle Smith, members of the Alberta 51 Project staged a minor demonstration. Demonstrators displayed signs and a
Trump 2024 campaign flag in support of Alberta annexationism.
Alberta during Trump's annexation proposals |227x227px|left Initially, Premier
Danielle Smith believed that Trump's comments about annexing Canada were made in jest. However, amid escalating trade tensions between Canada and the United States following Trump's annexation proposal, Smith refused to endorse a retaliatory response to U.S. tariffs imposed by Trump. Instead, Smith advocated for increasing U.S. purchases of
Alberta oil and rejected measures such as curtailing, suspending, or taxing energy exports. This stance placed Smith at odds with the
federal government and other
premiers across Canada. On January 12, 2025, Smith set up an impromptu meeting with Trump at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida, as a guest of Canadian businessman and television personality
Kevin O'Leary, discussing U.S.-Canadian energy relations. After she met with Trump, Smith warned that blocking energy exports to the U.S. in response to Trump's tariff threats could lead to a "national unity crisis" in Canada, as the provinces primarily own oil and gas resources, and that such a move by the federal government would not be tolerated in Alberta. She also remarked that if the federal government proceeded with an export ban, she could not "predict what Albertans would do". Smith expressed to other premiers that she was committed to safeguarding the livelihoods of Albertans from "destructive federal policies". Smith remained noncommittal, refraining from taking a definitive stance on the issue of annexation. Amidst no change in American attitudes in March, Smith criticized the President's tariffs as a betrayal and warned of economic challenges ahead. Smith still opposed an Alberta oil export tax as a countermeasure, however, arguing it would harm Canada's reliability as a supplier. Alberta
NDP Leader
Naheed Nenshi criticized her stance, arguing it weakened Canada's bargaining power. Following statements by Trump expressing interest in annexing Canada, Alberta was the province least resistant to such a proposal. A January 2025 poll by the
Angus Reid Institute indicated that approximately 18% of respondents in Alberta favoured Trump's annexation proposal, the highest of any province in Canada, but still showing a vast majority of Albertans opposed such a move. In 2025, the
Republican Party of Alberta was formed, and modelled after the US
Republican Party.
Analysis on Alberta In his 2014 book
The Accidental Superpower, American geopolitical analyst
Peter Zeihan suggested that both Alberta and the United States could benefit if Alberta became the 51st U.S. state. Zeihan argued that Alberta's economic contributions significantly support the Canadian national budget, noting that it consistently contributes more than it receives. He projected that, by 2020, Alberta's net financial contribution would exceed $20,000 per person, or $40,000 per taxpayer, which he characterized as one of the largest per capita wealth transfers in the Western world. Zeihan also highlighted the economic disparity between Alberta and other parts of Canada, suggesting that Alberta might maintain its prosperity more effectively outside of Canada. Though Zeihan's assertion that Alberta would become the richest state in the Union remains speculative, it reflects ongoing debates about the province's economic future and political alignment. Economists have noted that Alberta's economy, often compared to that of Texas, has a strong reliance on oil, gas, and agricultural exports. Any shift in sovereignty would require complex negotiations, such as adopting new tax structures, renegotiating trade agreements, and determining how to manage Alberta's extensive
national parks and public lands. There are also concerns that Alberta's exit from Canada could disrupt established trade relationships under existing agreements like
NAFTA. describes Alberta's position as increasingly tenuous, caught between federal policies that he claims stifle the province's energy industry and a U.S. administration that perceives Canada as economically dependent. He suggests that Alberta might consider statehood if Canada fails to provide a compelling reason to remain part of the federation. He outlines potential economic advantages Alberta could gain by joining the United States, including lower taxes, improved market access, and enhanced infrastructure support. Peterson stops short of advocating for Alberta's secession, instead calling for a renewed national vision focused on economic growth, strengthening national identity, and self-reliance. He warns that without a significant policy shift, Canada risks economic stagnation while the U.S. continues to grow its influence and prosperity.
Edmonton Journal columnist David Staples argued that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's governance has
alienated Alberta through policies that undermine its oil and gas industry, recalling past comments by Trudeau that framed Alberta's influence as detrimental to Canada, reinforcing Western grievances about federal policies that restrict pipeline development and divert wealth from Alberta to the east. He argues that an Alberta free from Trudeau's policies could thrive economically, doubling oil production, reducing costs of living, and regaining regulatory autonomy. By contrast,
Calgary Herald political columnist Rob Breakenridge contended that Trump's proposal for Canadian statehood would be particularly harmful to Alberta. He argued that Alberta would lose its provincial autonomy, resources, and distinct identity. Assets such as the
Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund and
energy royalties would come under centralized control, diminishing Alberta's self-determination. Breakenridge dismissed statehood as impractical, instead calling for Canadians to address internal political divisions and instead emphasized the need for new Canadian leadership to address challenges from the
Trump administration while maintaining Canada's sovereignty and unity. ==American proposals to annex Canada==