Defence spending must serve Canada first

The Conservative Party of Canada, the United States government, and several NATO allies argue that the Liberal administration under Prime Minister Carney is not spending enough to meet Canada’s defence commitments to its allies.

Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has called for defence spending to double, while U.S. officials (including the American ambassador) have repeatedly urged Canada to meet alliance expectations on military funding. The question, then, is straightforward: Should Canada significantly increase its defence spending, perhaps even doubling it?

My answer is yes, but not for the reasons you might expect.

The Official Opposition and many of our allies’ frame increased defence spending as a commitment to humanitarian missions, weapons procurement, staffing, and new naval and aircraft purchases, largely sourced from allied manufacturers. What is often left unsaid is that much of this equipment is surplus to allied needs. That does not make it useless, but it does raise questions about whose strategic priorities are truly being served.

The Conservatives, for their part, stand to gain political capital. Defence spending signals seriousness on the world stage and reliably earns praise from NATO partners. That kind of imagery has undeniable political value.

So, why increase defence spending to levels Canada has not seen in decades?

Canada’s core vulnerabilities are not being honestly addressed.

• Canada’s Arctic remains largely undefended and is heavily reliant on U.S. military capacity.
• Russia and China have expanded naval and air activity across the Arctic region.
• Canada’s sovereignty claims over large portions of the Arctic are contested by multiple nations, including some allies.
• Canada’s future economic security (through minerals, energy, and shipping) lies increasingly in Arctic waters and lands.
• A nation unwilling, or unable to defend its borders risks strategic irrelevance.

Canada’s national defence must be exactly that: the defence of Canadian territory, people, and long-term interests.

It is not Canada’s responsibility that the United States historically assumed the role of global enforcer, a role that has placed immense financial strain on its own system. Canada’s obligation is narrower, but no less serious: to protect its population wherever they may be, and to secure its borders and resources at home.

That kind of defence does not primarily rely on battleships, fighter jets, or missile stockpiles. It depends on highly trained, multi-capable forces designed for the realities Canada actually faces, including:

• Fighting forest fires and responding to climate-driven disasters
• Managing floods, security operations, and large-scale rescues
• Protecting borders by disrupting weapons trafficking, drug smuggling, and human exploitation
• Defending waterways, fishing rights, and the Arctic environment

The final, and most neglected priority is the North itself.

Canada must establish fortified, permanent Arctic communities built for resilience and self-sufficiency. These communities would anchor our sovereignty, protect future natural resources and energy development, and ensure that Canada (not foreign powers) defines the rules of engagement in the North.

What Canada needs is not a symbolic military designed to impress allies, but a national defence force composed of highly skilled, adaptable personnel capable of responding to any domestic challenge.

That is what defending Canada means; here and now.