Canada has a very difficult road ahead navigating its national defence upgrades.
The country faces an aggressive Trump administration which is prompting anger in the public and an increasing sense that Canadians are under threat. But defence experts see hope that Canada is heading in the right direction, even though there are very difficult purchasing decisions ahead.
In part, the current situation is the result of years of Canadian governments neglecting national security. While former prime minister Stephen Harper, for example, talked about the importance of national defence and of protecting the north in particular, he didn’t follow that up with action.
“The problem is that Harper did that while cutting the defence budget,” said Stephen Saideman, Paterson Chair in International Affairs at Carleton University. “They were gestures, symbolic gestures.”
The government of Justin Trudeau too was inconsistent.
“The Trudeau government went up and down in terms of defence spending,” said Saideman.
He notes Harper and Trudeau did make some progress especially with defence procurements including the commitment to buy at least some Lockheed Martin F-35s and build a fleet of Arctic offshore patrol ships, River-class destroyers and over-the-horizon radar.
“Whatever bottom we were [at], we are no longer near the bottom,” said Saideman, with Canada’s defence spending set to rise to two per cent this year, hitting the current NATO target and ultimately to five per cent by 2035.
The Mark Carney government has also just announced an emphasis on building Canada’s domestic industry with a plan to award 70 per cent of federal defence contracts to Canadian firms within a decade. It also proposes to raise the servicability rates of Canadian military equipment to 75 per cent of the navy’s ships, 80 per cent of the army’s vehicles and 85 per cent of the air force’s planes.
The urgency of these actions is apparent in emerging international interest in the Canadian North in conjunction with NATO and the NORAD pact with the U.S.
Despite reports that Trump is privately complaining about Canada’s northern vulnerability to Russia and China, Arctic defence is maintained through cooperation with the U.S.
“We have NORAD and that has been the front line of defence,” said Prof. Andrea Charron, director of the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba.
Charron notes Canada has met its obligations to the nearly 70 year old binational military defence and warning system, but underscores areas of concern.
“The Arctic is by no means homogeneous,” said Charron. “There are different threats in different areas.”
But it starts with being there.
“Presence goes a long way to demonstrating sovereignty,” said Adam Chapnick, professor of Defence Studies at the Royal Military College of Canada. “One Canadian prime minister used to say that, when it comes to the Arctic, you use it or you lose it.”
That quote comes from former prime minister Stephen Harper, who took part in Operation Nanook, an annual Canadian Armed Forces-led sovereignty exercise in the North from 2007-2015.
Additionally, Canada has eight fully staffed military sites in the Arctic, including in Yellowknife, Whitehorse, Iqaluit, Inuvik and other communities.
Canada operates 47 radar sites in the North Warning System. In terms of boots on the ground, there are five Canadian Ranger patrol groups, totalling 5,000 troops.
“We have the Rangers in the Arctic … sort of the eyes and ears,” said Charron. “And we’re getting new maritime base sensors [and] satellite surveillance sensors.”
What’s missing in Northern Defence
While Canada’s military assets are valuable to NORAD, Charron thinks the government can do more to reinforce continental defence.
“We need to make sure that the NORAD modernization projects we have come out as quickly as possible,” says Charron.
In June 2022, then defence minister Anita Anand announced $38.6 billion to bolster five areas of NORAD defence over the course of two decades.
This included increasing abilities to detect threats earlier, investments in modern science and technology, modernizing air weapons systems, sustaining military presence across the country, and new infrastructure and support capabilities.
“We actually have a good plan with the NORAD modernization,” Charron says. “Stick to the plan.”
However, she thinks foreign adversaries are using other means to undermine our defence.
“What we are seeing is more gray zone activity,” said Charron. “[Like] cable-cutting, foreign interference with Indigenous populations.”
Charron explains the foreign interference targeting Indigenous populations in the North, including the Inuit, would not fall under military responsibilities, but needs to be addressed.
“It’s these activities that fall in between everybody’s jurisdictions and mandates, that’s the concern I have,” said Charron. “You cannot missile your way out of those kind of concerns.”
Picking new planes
Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government is pushing ahead with procurement. But it can’t come fast enough, particularly the replacement for Canada’s aging fleet of CF-18 fighters.
“They literally are going to start falling out of the sky from metal fatigue,” Charron says.
Canada’s fighter jet procurement has been an issue since former prime minister Stephen Harper’s government chose the Lockheed Martin F-35 to replace the fleet in 2010.
Justin Trudeau campaigned on not buying the American-made fighters in 2015, only to reverse course eight years later.
Canada is about to receive 16 of up to 88 fighter jets but the final purchase of the rest is under review following a request by Carney.
While polling suggests most Canadians oppose to buying military equipment from the U.S., the F-35 manufacturer believes its product is best suited to meet Canada’s Northern defence needs.
“The F-35’s advanced sensor fusion, stealth and networked capabilities offer unmatched advantages in NORAD operations and North American air defence,” said a Lockheed Martin spokesperson in a statement. “With the F-35, Canada strengthens its ability to monitor vast territories, respond to emerging threats and safeguard its skies through seamless integration with American and allied forces.”
A leaked Canadian Armed Forces 2021 scoring chart obtained by Radio-Canada comparing the F-35 to the Saab Gripen – the other frontrunner – showed the American fighter jet scored 57 out of a possible 60 points, while the Gripen was at 19.
Meanwhile, the Carney government is considering another major procurement to replace Canada’s aging submarines. The government has identified South Korea’s Hanwha Ocean and German-Norwegian TKMS as the contenders.
“This is a proven submarine,” said a Hanwha Ocean spokesperson, speaking about their KSS-III submarine. “It’s in the water. It’s in service with the ROK Navy.”
Hanwha Ocean recently signed agreements in principle with five Canadian companies, and a high-level delegation was in Ottawa in January to pitch the industrial benefits they say a deal could bring to Canadian workers.
The 212CD from TKMS has also signed deals to work with other Canadian-based companies should it land the bid.
“It is Arctic-capable and guarantees a long service life and deployment under ice,” said a spokesperson for TKMS in a statement.
TKMS believes the program could create industrial control support for Canada’s sovereignty.
“This includes the development of capabilities for lifetime support and overhaul in Canada, as well as Canada-led development and integration of selected systems,” said the spokesperson.
Better focus on priorities
In a changing defence landscape, Charron says the government needs to better articulate its goals. In general, she notes that the word ‘sovereignty’ shouldn’t be thrown around lightly.
“It has an ‘insert your particular concern’ without articulating it,” said Charron. “Which means we can never actually come up with a solution.”
She underscores that discussions about the Arctic must include those who are impacted most by it — the people and Nations who call it home.
“We have rights holders in the Arctic, and they have sovereignty,” said Charron. “And by calling everything sovereignty, we sort of forget their essential and central role in the decisions we make about how we defend the Arctic.”
