Canadian Security Objectives
When President Trump stated that Canada should become the 51st State[1], the Canadian leadership was taken aback by this unexpected statement from a long-standing strategic ally and interpreted it as a direct threat to Canadian sovereignty and national security. The subsequent imposition of trade tariffs on Canada and the change in leadership during the Canadian elections are steps pushing an entire nation to reflect on its national priorities. Presently, the immediate action that Canada must take is to strengthen its national security priorities to minimize the risks to its sovereignty, infrastructure, and citizens. This article explores how events since President Trump’s election might affect Canadian security and what steps could help improve it.
Since the 1980s, Canada’s various political parties have not sufficiently supported the Canadian Forces (CAF). This influenced a perception that the Canadian Government was not prioritizing their own defence and was providing inadequate support to collective defence initiatives with the international community and strategic allies. Thus, the limited and fluctuating budget has negatively impacted the procurement process of acquiring, maintaining, and modernizing the CAF’s military arsenal of equipment and weaponry. Furthermore, a manpower shortage for national defence needs in the full-time and reservist Forces further limits Canada’s engagement in international strategic missions and operations, including United Nations peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions or military exercises with strategic allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Meanwhile, Canada’s defence budget is still under the 2% GDP requirement of most NATO allies, and the last time Canada complied with this GDP standard was in 1987[2].
Moreover, even if Canada reaches the 2% GDP mark, it needs to determine what aspects of defence would be prioritized, whether a higher budget is sustainable, and what challenges are being mitigated through this increased budget. Therefore, these are among the key objectives for the upcoming Canadian Government elections in April 2025.
The 2% GDP is a critical opportunity to address the lower rates of recruitment. Since January 2025, Canada is nearly 14,000 recruits short of its national defence manpower requirement[3]. However, there has been a recent increase in the CAF’s recruitments, spurred by the comments from the US administration and the easing of applications from Canadian permanent residents. The new bolster in recruitment estimates that by 2029, Canada will be at their required military strength of 71,500 active and 30,000 reservists until a revision of Canada’s defence policy for recruitment. While the current Canadian-US military alliance remains strong[4], an increase in salary and benefits for servicemen and women, including increasing the allocated budget for overall national security purposes, will not only ensure Canada is well-defended but also provide an opportunity to establish strong partnerships with strategic allies.
Simultaneously, Canada’s military inventory is also deteriorating. However, this issue can be tackled by increasing investment in its defence capabilities and enhancing procurement. The following three graphs represent the land, air and naval capabilities according to the Global Firepower Index with select NATO members[5]. Comparatively, Canada is behind their average number, with only 74 to 358 main battle tanks and 0 to 44 attack helicopters, however, they are ahead in patrol vessels with 12 to 24 in their arsenal. The data, however, does not reflect whether the number of military equipment listed has been modernized, is operational or depreciating, or may be disassembled. If the American arsenal is excluded, Canada would be even more behind the average, with 214 main battle tanks and 13 attack helicopters. Meanwhile, Canada is in the process of developing their aircraft capabilities with new airborne early warning and control systems (AEW&CS)[6]. Notably, not all NATO member states can be compared equally, as factors such as geography, population, economic capabilities, and proximity to ongoing conflict have affected the military capacity data. However, such factors may be less important in the era of rising geopolitical crises and insecurity.
Among his first actions as the newly appointed Prime Minister, Mark Carney visited key allies, including France and the United Kingdom[7]. One of his underlying goals was to strengthen the strategic defence partnerships, specifically addressing Arctic security and military capabilities. With a progressively increasing national GDP dedicated to defence, the Canadian Government can allocate more defence contracts to ally countries and defence firms. For instance, aluminum – a vital raw material for building lightweight equipment and materials, including aircraft, missiles, and hardware systems[8] is an industry significantly affected by the trade tariffs with the USA, which severely impacts the defence partnerships by limiting production, weaponization and procurement contracts with the USA. Therefore, leading defence companies within the USA, such as General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Gruman, will face increased costs for importing and assembling aluminum raw materials from Canada.
Meanwhile, French and British defence companies such as Thales Dassault Aviation, Naval Group, and BAE Systems have a lucrative, mutually beneficial opportunity to invest in defence capabilities as there are currently no increase in trade tariffs between these countries. Conversely, France and the UK can provide the Canadian Forces valuable insights on defence procurement due to Canada’s previous ill-advised procurements and the high costs of purchasing new military airplanes, submarines, and missile systems. For example, Canada purchased the Canadian Joint Support Ships, which supposedly included modern features to replace the current and depreciating service fleet and was designed to cover long distances and Arctic operations–a critical aspect of Canada’s current defence policy. However, due to design issues, procurement, assembling, selection of defence systems, delays, global economy, and other complications, Canada ended up spending on two ships originally valued at 2.6 billion CAD while the costs increased to approximately 4 billion CAD, which affected the delivery time and operational availability of the ships. In comparison, the UK Royal Navy purchased four new vessels from a Korean defence company, which included modern features and technology for maintaining British security interests at sea. Their contract was valued at approximately just under 4 billion CAD. The result was twice the number of ships with additional defence characteristics that the Canadian ships didn’t have, and at a lesser cost[9]. Furthermore, through strategic procurement processes, Canada can develop its own military-industrial complex by promoting the establishment of European defence industries in Canada, where they may develop, assemble, and modernize new military equipment. This provides job opportunities across Canada and hands-on expertise from leading defence firms. Hence, this would be a critical initiative for any new leadership in Canada.
Prime Minister Carney’s aim to strengthen security ties to close the gap in Canada’s defence capabilities, if a 2% GDP budget is maintained, ensures guaranteed sustainability for the long term, regardless of who is in office. Presently, there are opportunities to strengthen and develop new partnerships, gain valuable insights on procurement, and build Canada’s military inventory. Furthermore, Canada could provide the opportunity to establish new industries to assemble parts of military and defence equipment, including BAE Systems’ future Challenger tank and ground vehicles or the Thales new attack helicopter. Therefore, the Canadian leadership should ratify new defence partnerships with European allies. However, the emphasis on this will rely on an increased and maintained GDP allocated to national security purposes, which will enhance the CAF and overall defence capabilities.
Footnotes
[1] New York Times, How Trump’s 51 State Canada Talk come to be seen, 7 March 2025 https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/07/world/canada/trump-trudeau-canada-51st-state.html
[2] The World Bank Group, Military Expenditure % of GDP Canada, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?end=2023&locations=CA&start=1990
[3] CTV news, Military can’t say if uptick in applications since Trump’s return connected to his threats, amid push to bolster recruitment 19 February 2025, https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/military-cant-say-if-uptick-in-applications-since-trumps-return-connected-to-his-threats-amid-push-to-bolster-recruitment/
[4] CTV news, Military can’t say if uptick in applications since Trump’s return connected to his threats, amid push to bolster recruitment 19 February 2025, https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/military-cant-say-if-uptick-in-applications-since-trumps-return-connected-to-his-threats-amid-push-to-bolster-recruitment/
[5] Global Firepower Index, NATO Member States (2025), https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing-nato-members.php
[6] Skies Magazine, Chris Thatcher, Canadian Early Airborne Warning, December 2024, https://skiesmag.com/features/canadian-early-airborne-warning/
[7] Reuters, Canada’s PM Carney in Europe to work with reliable allies, Michel Rose, 17 March 2025 https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/canadas-pm-carney-europe-work-with-reliable-allies-2025-03-17/
[8] NATO, 12 Defence Critical Raw Materials, December 2024, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_231765.htm#:~:text=These%20materials%20are%20integral%20to,advanced%20defence%20systems%20and%20equipment.&text=Aluminium%2C%20for%20example%2C%20is%20pivotal,enhancing%20their%20agility%20and%20performance.
[9] Canadian Defence Strategy and Issues, Perun, December 2024, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27wWRszlZWU
