What issue in Canadian foreign and defence policy saw the least improvement during the last year, and where should the Government of Canada focus its efforts for the next?
Policy Forum Politique is a new publication format that aims to stimulate debate by presenting a wide range of expert opinion on a topic of national security significance to Canada. For this fourth edition, we ask three experts for their perspectives on Canada’s performance during the last year, and where it should focus its efforts next.
Louise Blais | Laval University
The issue that has seen the least progress this year is the defence and security relationship with the United States, a pillar that we continue to address in a fragmented manner. Despite additional investments, particularly to modernise NORAD, Canada has still not articulated a proactive strategy that addresses all of the continent’s security challenges.
This shortcoming becomes even more concerning when considering developments in Mexico. Washington is now openly discussing possible targeted military operations against cartels on Mexican soil. Such a decision would create a major strategic dilemma for Canada: are we prepared to define our position if our main ally chooses to act in this context? Have we assessed the impacts on trilateral cooperation, on the USMCA, and on the security of our own borders? There is no indication that such a scenario has been seriously anticipated.
More broadly, our lack of a continental strategy sometimes leads us to compensate by moving closer to Europe. While important, this pivot cannot replace our defence relationship with the United States, without which neither the protection of our territory nor the stability of our supply chains can be guaranteed. Distancing ourselves from Washington, whether voluntarily or by omission, would undermine our own security.
For the coming year, the priority must be clear: to build a North American security strategy that is embraced at the highest level, linking our investments, our commitment to NORAD, and sincere preparedness for emerging dilemmas, including those related to Mexico and US military decisions.
Louise Blais is a diplomat in residence and associate member of ESEI. She served as Canada’s Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations from 2017 to 2021, responsible for the 2030 Agenda and the campaign for the Security Council.
Alexander Lanoszka | University of Waterloo
In a decade from now, members of the Canadian defence community might reflect on 2025 in at least one of two ways. They could come to regard 2025 as the year of overdue catalytic change that helped to bring much needed vitality to the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). After decades of neglect, Canadian leaders finally were able to make an enduring financial and political commitment to rebuild the CAF, restoring Canada’s reputation as a militarily reliable ally while giving the country much-needed agency in a world increasingly beset by violent conflict.
Yet there is a risk that 2025 could be a blip. New financial commitments might prove temporary, not unlike what happened during and before the Harper years. Despite all the right things said by political leaders at the time, old habits proved hard to break. Rather than consider procurement in terms of military needs and functions, politicians still saw it as a means for regional economic development and job creation, to say nothing of scoring easy political points. Military capability and defence capacity suffered as a result.
The ongoing F-35 review is indicative of how the path forward remains uncertain. Initially prompted by corrosive statements made by U.S. President Donald Trump, the review continues to drag amid highly questionable claims made by Saab about the job benefits of producing Gripen aircrafts in Canada. Thus, if there is one area for improvement for Canadian civilian leaders, it is that they need to take seriously what the CAF really needs to perform what is asked of it, and to align better their investments and plans accordingly.
Alexander Lanoszka is an Associate Professor of International Relations at the University of Waterloo as well as the Director of the Master of Public Service program. He is a Co-Director of the Network for Strategic Analysis and his research focuses on alliance politics, theories of war, and European politics.
Sarah Sharma | University of Ottawa
Renewable energy is key to Canada’s a secure and sovereign future.
This past year, the Carney-led Liberal government undertook the most significant claw back of Canadian climate policy in the last decade. Perhaps most significant, the federal government and province of Alberta announced a MOU to build a new pipeline in the interests of “nation-building.” In reality, we cannot afford public investment in energy infrastructure projects that have no economic business case, threaten relationships with many First Nations and cause inter-provincial strife that could jeopardize other major infrastructure projects. Canadian energy sovereignty cannot sit on the shoulders on the oil and gas industry.
A group of retired senior military officials recently affirmed that the climate crisis and energy insecurity represent legitimate threats to Canadian national security. Renewable energy is the most viable path forward to net zero and can provide win-wins for both sustainability and security. We must invest in renewable energy across Canada, particularly in remote and Arctic communities that are increasingly sites of geopolitical concern.
Arctic communities must see investment in geothermal engineering to protect permafrost, renewable energy to replace diesel and forms of ecological conservation to protect lives, livelihoods and ecological systems. Beyond the Arctic, implementing infrastructure that can withstand extreme heat, including through clean energy sources, will be vital for Canadians facing health risks from increasingly warm summer months. Renewable energy is not a “nice to have” that is added onto the policy agenda when the going is good; it is a “need to have” for a strong secure economic future.
Sarah E. Sharma is an Assistant Professor in the School of Political Studies at the University of Ottawa. Her research examines how power, politics and economics shapes environmental policy and its outcomes at transnational, national and subnational scales.
Comments are closed.