Boomerang effect: separatism sweeps across Canada Alberta challenges Ottawa

In the province of Alberta, political tensions have flared up once again, with renewed talk of secession from Canada and independence.

Just recently, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced that a referendum is to be held to answer the question: “Should Alberta remain a province of Canada or should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?” At the same time, she stressed that she herself supports the province remaining within the Maple Leaf country, a position shared by her government and caucus.

To begin with, it is worth recalling that serious discussions about Alberta’s separation first emerged back in the early 1970s. At that time, the main impetus behind the idea was the stance of the federal government. Later, in 1974, in response to federal energy and constitutional policy under Canada’s 15th Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, a group of oil workers in Calgary created the “Association of an Independent Alberta.”

Subsequently, discussions about the province’s separation from Canada intensified in the 1980s, following the adoption of the National Energy Program, which led to the formation of the Western Canada Concept party, advocating independence for western provinces. A new wave of escalation began in 2015 after Justin Trudeau became Prime Minister and amid a downturn in the oil industry. Today, in the province of just over 4 million people, more than 300,000 signatures have already been collected in favour of Alberta leaving Canada, and more than 400,000 in favour of remaining within the country.

In this context, it should be noted that there are several factors contributing to the separatist winds of change in the Maple Leaf country, one of which is purely economic in nature: Alberta is Canada’s main oil and gas hub and its key economic engine. The issue, however, is that local residents believe their province contributes significantly more to the federal budget than it receives in return in the form of public investment and subsidies. That is the first point.

The second aspect is political in nature: Alberta’s residents are convinced that Ottawa ignores the interests of western provinces in the country’s political life. In their view, due to the high population density of Ontario and Quebec, these provinces play a decisive role in elections, thereby reducing Alberta’s political influence at the national level.

However, secession remains difficult, as Canada’s constitutional process requires not only a referendum but also the consent of the federal government and other provinces. Federal authorities, of course, oppose any secessionist initiatives: in particular, Prime Minister Mark Carney described such provincial proposals as a “very dangerous bluff” threatening the country’s economy and unity, and even drew a parallel with Brexit, the consequences of which, he said, the United Kingdom continues to feel to this day.

“People say it's the start of a negotiation process, but for some people it's the start of real separation,” he said, noting that referendum logic often creates the illusion of controlled political bargaining, while in practice it can trigger irreversible processes.

Recalling that before the Brexit vote Britons were promised a “soft” scenario and subsequent negotiations, yet years later the country is still dealing with the consequences of that decision, Mark Carney also referred to his personal ties with the province: “As someone who was raised in Alberta, I'm a proud Albertan. My view is very much that the best place for Alberta is in Canada.”

Meanwhile, a careful reading of the current prime minister’s statements makes it entirely clear that the Canadian government is seriously concerned about Alberta’s potential secession, and this concern is directly linked to socio-economic factors. As noted above, being the country’s energy engine, the province holds vast oil reserves, generating a significant share of Canada’s GDP and the bulk of its exports. At the same time, it finances social programmes and infrastructure in less affluent Canadian regions.

As can be seen, the loss of Alberta for the federal authorities would be tantamount to self-destruction.

On the other hand, such a scenario could set a precedent for other provinces, triggering a rise in separatist movements, primarily in francophone Québec, where in the 1980s and 1990s attempts were already made to achieve independence, and several referendums on the issue were held.

Based on the above, it can be argued that the Canadian government will fiercely resist any attempts at secession, while completely ignoring the fact that Ottawa has, at the official level, previously supported separatist narratives in other states.

There is no need to look far for an illustration of this position by the Canadian authorities. Throughout nearly 30 years of Armenia’s occupation of Azerbaijani territories, Canada never once condemned Yerevan for its aggressive policy and for violating the rights of more than one million Azerbaijanis, did not issue any statement capable of influencing the negotiation process or supporting the implementation of relevant UN Security Council resolutions, and did not express a single word of support for Azerbaijan, which faced aggression and separatism on its own territory.

Canada, under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, took an openly pro-Armenian stance. The Trudeau government banned the supply of components for Turkish UAVs in October 2020, and then Foreign Minister François-Philippe Champagne explained that the country took such measures to “stop violence and protect civilians,” meaning Armenians. At the same time, the fate of Azerbaijanis who were subjected to Armenian shelling was not taken into account by the Canadian government, which in essence reflected a policy of double standards by official Canada toward Azerbaijan.

In addition, Canada became the first non-EU country whose representative joined the EU monitoring mission in Armenia, deployed there despite Azerbaijan’s objections. In August 2024, then Canadian Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly stated that “Canada will continue to put pressure on Azerbaijan to force it to release arbitrarily detained Armenians.” She also claimed that Armenians were allegedly forced to leave the Karabakh region.

Canada’s biased position against the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan has not gone unnoticed in Baku. In July 2024, the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, while receiving the credentials of the newly appointed Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Canada to the country, Kevin Hamilton, recalled that during the period of occupation of Azerbaijani territories, ethnic cleansing and genocide had been committed there, and that the territories had been subjected to large-scale destruction.

In response to the ambassador’s remarks on the right of return, the President of Azerbaijan emphasised that this right must be ensured on a reciprocal basis, including for members of the Western Azerbaijan Community.

And today, Canadian authorities are, with a high degree of probability, experiencing first-hand the consequences of separatist sentiments that may engulf the country’s domestic political arena. As the saying goes, the boomerang effect never fails to return.