|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
While Canada has long enjoyed a close and stable relationship with its American neighbour, threats to stifle the Canadian economy in order to force it to join the United States, to stop protecting Canada, to redraw the borders, or to exclude Canada from the Five Eyes alliance mean that we have to consider the possibility that President Trump will exert pressure that could undermine Canada’s sovereignty and security. We can certainly hope that President Trump will not carry out his threats, but it would be irresponsible not to prepare for the worst. Especially as the threats of annexation are aimed not only at Canada but also at another transatlantic ally, Denmark, and as President Trump persists in his appetite for 19th century imperialism.
While the idea of the US turning against its northern ally may seem far-fetched to some, we need to be aware of the potential risks. A clear-sighted approach to national security requires us to anticipate and prepare for scenarios where the US would use its considerable leverage to achieve its imperialist objectives. In this analysis, I examine four possible scenarios and propose a way forward to increase Canada’s resilience and mitigate the risks posed by Donald Trump’s brutal policies.
Four scenarios for American coercion
For decades, Canada has relied on US protection through the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and broader military cooperation. However, a more transactional and selfish US administration might decide that military protection of Canada is no longer in its interest, either because it costs too much, as Trump supports, or because Washington wants to pressure Canada into accepting annexation to the US. Canada would then find itself highly vulnerable to external threats, including potential aggression from rival states such as China and Russia. The principle that the United States will guarantee Canada’s security no longer holds because the bond of trust has been broken. Canada could be dropped by its main ally with a simple message on social networks. Canada must therefore prepare for the possibility of strategic abandonment, whether in the face of a cyberattack or the violation of its airspace or sea lanes.
US economic and strategic interests could also lead to more aggressive unilateral action on Canadian territory. This could manifest itself in territorial disputes such as the Northwest Passage, which the Americans consider to be international waters and not Canadian, or in the Great Lakes, which Trump openly covets. Similar concerns could apply to the Arctic territory for its natural resources, or to airspace to make a show of force and make Canada bend. This, of course, would test the country’s ability to control its own territory.
The Canadian Armed Forces are heavily dependent on American technology and equipment. If Washington decided to restrict access to critical military resources, such as spare parts, software updates or intelligence sharing, it could significantly weaken Canada’s military operational readiness. Systems such as the F-35 fighter jet, the sensors and combat system on Canada’s future warships and the North Warning System, which is undergoing a major upgrade, all depend on continued support from the United States. If access to this equipment were blocked, Canada’s ability to defend itself and contribute to allied operations would be seriously compromised.
Finally, another potential risk lies in the possibility that the US government – or private entities operating with tacit approval – might support actors within Canada seeking to destabilise the country. This could involve massive disinformation campaigns aimed at influencing Canadian elections, economic coercion targeting strategic industries, or even support for annexationist movements. Such tactics have been used in other countries to influence and create divisions, and Canada must be vigilant against these threats.
The Canadian response: autonomy, resilience and risk mitigation
In the face of these threats of coercion, Canada must take decisive steps to strengthen its sovereignty, diversify its security partnerships and increase societal resilience. The era of the unwavering and unchallenged alliance with the United States may be coming to an end. Canada must therefore rethink the fundamentals of its defence policy.
The first step is to develop a long-term defence industrial and technological base as a matter of urgency. Canada must develop its own capabilities in key areas such as UAVs, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) technologies, strategic lift and communications systems. By fostering a strong domestic industrial base, Canada can reduce its dependence on US military technology and ensure that its operational readiness is maintained, regardless of external pressures. This first step must be taken as a matter of urgency, but cannot be achieved in the short term.
Consequently, Canada must also broaden and deepen its strategic defence partnerships beyond the United States. While bilateral relations with Washington remain important, excessive dependence on a single country is an unacceptable vulnerability. Strengthening defence ties with countries that have a military industry that is relatively autonomous from the US but interoperable with US forces should be a priority, such as France, Sweden and South Korea. These countries could provide Canada with other sources of advanced military technology, including long-range precision fire, submarines, air defence systems and intelligence sharing. These countries share Canada’s commitment to democratic values and global stability, making them natural partners for strengthening national security.
For example, the idea of ruling out the acquisition of the F-35 is spreading because of the lack of confidence in the United States. The Canadian Defence Minister has expressed his intention to re- examine the acquisition of 88 F-35s by 2034. The best strategy would be to adopt a mixed fleet, i.e. to maintain the purchase of 88 5th generation fighters from Lockheed Martin, but to add a fleet of Gripen or Rafale fighters in order to reduce Canada’s dependence on the United States. This would give us a fleet of fighter jets similar in size to the one Canada had during the Cold War. Similarly, this should be combined with the development of a 6th generation fighter aircraft with partners other than the United States, such as the project led by the United Kingdom, Japan and Italy.
Canada plays an important role in European security, whether through its military contingent in Latvia, whose mission is to defend that country against possible Russian aggression, or through the military support offered to Ukraine to resist Russian invasion. These contributions are essential to dissuade Russia from invading its neighbours, but they were made on the premise that the United States would guarantee the protection of Canadian territory in the event of war. This assumption no longer holds. Canada should therefore reassess its commitment to European security by making it conditional on European support for its own sovereignty and greater access to European military production lines in the process of modernising and empowering the Canadian Armed Forces. For example, Canada could negotiate the acquisition of French submarines, air defence systems or fighter aircraft in return for relocating production to Canada and Canadian investment in the production of other military equipment produced in France.
Joint military exercises with the Europeans, without the presence of the United States, would also make it possible to forge closer and more resilient relations between the Euro-Atlantic allies and guard against a possible American disengagement. This could be part of a wider process of deepening relations between Canada and the European Union, along the lines of the British, Norwegian and Swiss models. This could result in the formalisation of a mutual defence pact that would explicitly include Canada’s territorial integrity. Reciprocity must be a cardinal principle of Canada’s defence policy. We can only deplore the Europeans’ lack of eagerness to denounce Trump’s annexationist ambitions, especially as nearly 2,000 Canadians are currently deployed in Latvia to ensure the integrity of the borders of European allies, and Ottawa is not ruling out contributing to a deterrent force in Ukraine to ensure compliance with any ceasefire. In the face of President Trump’s questioning of the principle of Article 5 of NATO, an alliance within the alliance, comprising the most proactive allies, including the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Poland, is more necessary than ever. The idea is not new, as shown by the Franco-Hellenic strategic partnership and the one between London and Warsaw
Perhaps most importantly, Canada needs to make its public more aware of the changing geopolitical landscape. Many Canadians still believe that the United States will not threaten Canada’s integrity. This assumption is increasingly risky. Government transparency is key to maintaining trust in the authorities, and must therefore be substantially increased in order to preserve social unity. This includes a vast social media campaign to provide accurate information that is accessible to all, and to counter the lies spread by hostile actors, including Americans. Public awareness is an essential pillar of national resilience, ensuring that Canadian citizens support the necessary investments in security and self-sufficiency. Similarly, support for Canadian think tanks must be increased to encourage dialogue and inform public debate. Added to this is the absolute necessity of launching a consultation campaign in order to develop, within the current year, a new foreign and defence policy statement capable of offering a clear, strategic and coordinated vision to ensure Canada’s protection in the face of American coercion. Canada cannot afford to be blindsided again by the brutal pivot of the United States. While the current awareness is to be welcomed, it is now time to take action.
The United States remains Canada’s closest ally and most important trading partner. However, we cannot ignore the real risks posed by shifting U.S. priorities and the potential for Washington to pressure Canada in ways that undermine our sovereignty and security. A proactive approach is needed to prepare for scenarios in which the United States poses a threat to Canada’s national security.
Comments are closed.