While it's true that the US is backsliding in some agreements, this is mostly due to the current administration and unclear if this will continue.

Historically, the US has mostly been a free market to both Europe and Canada, and hasn't enacted protectionist measures overall. The US allows European car companies to sell here despite having domestic production. Nestle, HSBC, Astra-Zeneca, Siemens, SAP, Ericsson...these are all companies that are titans in their respective industries and also have a large mostly dominant US presence.

The level of US protectionism pales in comparison to what China engages in and it's hardly fair to compare the two. Obviously there are well sourced grievances but to compare China's protectionism to US protectionism isn't correct.

In Telecom, Ericsson and T-Mobile (Deutsche Telekom) are both VERY heavy players. Ericsson doesn't sell many phones, but tons of tower equipment. In IT, SAP is probably the largest competitor to Oracle for many companies Middleware.

Fights over trade tarrifs on those raw material and others existed long before Canada was a country.

To say the US is banning Canadian giants like shopify because they reached critical mass is very wrong and not based on reality. Using it to compare to China's relationship with western countries at best confused two different things.

> Right now, it doesn't. But I don't think it is because they are OK with European companies dominating US market. It is rather because there are no European companies at the moment capable of dominating US market. The moment a company in Europe starts to gain significant market share from American companies in the US, the government would (most probably) step in and stop them.

Airbus is a great example of this, the US repeatedly cockblocks Airbus from making major US military sales, puts tariffs on them, etc.