Skip to main content

Canada must brace for pressure on defense from Trump

By Andrew Latham 
Real Clear Wire

As President Donald Trump returns to the White House, Canada’s government faces a new set of challenges on defense and security. Unlike his first term, when Trump’s focus was largely on NATO’s European members, this time around Canada is likely to find itself squarely in his crosshairs. 

Trump has made no secret of his disdain for allies that fail to meet defense spending targets, and he will no doubt demand quick action from Ottawa to meet NATO’s 2% defense spending threshold – far faster than the Trudeau administration has ever committed to. Furthermore, the strategic importance of Arctic security and the tightly interwoven U.S.-Canada defense industrial base mean that Canada will need to adjust its defense posture to keep pace with U.S. expectations. Ottawa has a choice: take meaningful action on defense or risk a rupture in a long-standing partnership.

NATO Spending: More than Just a Target

For years, Canadian defense spending has fallen short of NATO’s 2% GDP target, a benchmark Trump aggressively pursued in his first administration. While Ottawa promised to increase its defense spending incrementally, the results have been underwhelming. As of now, Canada spends approximately 1.4% of GDP on defense, putting it among the lowest contributors in NATO. Trump’s return to power all but guarantees renewed pressure to bridge this gap, and quickly. Unlike Trudeau’s vague promises, Trump will demand a concrete plan backed by firm commitments and transparent timelines. Failure to respond could jeopardize Canada’s credibility within NATO and its broader defense relationship with the U.S.

Canada’s recent acquisition of F-35 fighter jets and a commitment to expand its submarine fleet signal a move in the right direction, but these initiatives are no substitute for a comprehensive boost in defense investment. Trump’s administration will be watching to see if these investments translate into actual capabilities that benefit the alliance. A reluctance to step up spending could lead Trump to question Canada’s commitment to collective security, souring a relationship that has long been the foundation of North American defense. Ottawa needs to prioritize new spending in areas that matter most, including military readiness and operational support in regions where both countries have overlapping interests.

Arctic Security: A Critical, Shared Priority

The Arctic is emerging as one of the most strategically sensitive areas of North America, and for Canada, it is a region where action is sorely needed. Both Canada and the U.S. have mutual security concerns in the Arctic, where the thawing polar ice cap is opening new shipping routes and potentially exposing natural resources that have already attracted attention from Russia and China. Canada’s recent diplomatic and defense approach to the Arctic has been cautious, but Trump’s administration will likely expect Canada to be more proactive.

This expectation is not entirely unreasonable. Canada’s own policy statement, “Our North, Strong and Free,” lays out a framework for protecting Canada’s Arctic sovereignty and increasing its security presence in the region. However, the Trudeau government has yet to fully implement this policy, leaving much of Canada’s Arctic vulnerable. A more timely and meaningful commitment to the principles outlined in "Our North, Strong and Free" would send a clear signal to the Trump administration that Canada is serious about defending its northern interests and willing to take on shared responsibilities in Arctic security.

Canada’s Arctic presence remains limited, with few military assets positioned in the region. In contrast, Russia has ramped up its Arctic presence with new bases and icebreaker fleets, while China has declared itself a “near-Arctic” state with plans to increase its activities in the region. Trump’s team could interpret Canada’s reticence to invest in Arctic infrastructure as a sign of reluctance to defend its own territory, creating friction in a relationship where Canada’s Arctic credibility is crucial.

Implementing “Our North, Strong and Free” would mean committing to joint exercises with the U.S. and rapidly deploying military assets, including surveillance systems, icebreakers, and training facilities, to strengthen its Arctic defenses. Additionally, supporting NORAD’s modernization could be a critical step, demonstrating Canada’s willingness to shoulder its share of Arctic security responsibilities. The recent NORAD renewal pact offers Canada an opportunity to invest alongside the U.S. in critical early-warning systems and infrastructure needed for Arctic defense.

The U.S.-Canada Defense Industrial Base: Deepening Ties or Drifting Apart?

The defense relationship between the U.S. and Canada is more than just a security arrangement; it’s also a tightly integrated industrial partnership. Canadian firms are part of the U.S. defense supply chain, contributing critical technologies and components to American defense projects. However, Trump’s focus on securing and expanding the U.S. defense industrial base could bring this collaboration under renewed scrutiny, especially as he emphasizes a “Buy American” agenda. If Ottawa does not take proactive steps to demonstrate that Canadian industry is a reliable and indispensable partner, the U.S. might seek alternatives elsewhere.

One potential avenue for strengthening the defense industrial base is to enhance joint procurement projects and streamline cross-border supply chains. By reducing barriers to collaborative defense projects, Canada can prove that its industry is indispensable to North American defense. Moreover, Canada could leverage its own advanced technology sectors in AI, cybersecurity, and communications to meet U.S. needs, signaling its value as a partner in high-tech defense initiatives.

For instance, Canada’s role in the F-35 program is an asset that could be expanded. Canadian defense firms have provided components for the F-35’s global supply chain, making Canada a key contributor to this vital project. Expanding such collaborations would not only secure Canada’s place in the U.S. defense ecosystem but also bring economic benefits domestically. However, this will require Canada to address potential gaps in its own technology security protocols to align with U.S. expectations on cybersecurity and prevent foreign interference. Given Trump’s likely vigilance in protecting U.S. intellectual property, this could be a point of contention if Canada fails to take adequate safeguards.

A Way Forward: Canada’s Path to Maintaining a Vital Alliance

While Trump’s second administration will almost certainly test Canada’s defense commitments, there is still a path forward for Ottawa. Canada can take several key steps to meet Trump’s expectations without abandoning its own defense priorities. A concrete spending plan that aligns with NATO’s 2% target, a timely implementation of “Our North, Strong and Free,” and renewed efforts in joint defense production could reassure the Trump administration that Canada is serious about meeting its obligations.

Ultimately, Canada’s response to these pressures will define the future of the U.S.-Canada defense relationship. Ottawa has an opportunity to secure its place as a valued ally and partner, but only if it takes proactive steps to show its commitment. Trump’s demands are unlikely to be lenient, and a failure to act could erode Canada’s role as a credible member of NATO and a reliable partner in North American defense.

The onus is now on Ottawa. Serious, sustained investments in defense are no longer optional—they are essential if Canada is to avoid friction with an administration that values allies who pull their weight. The Trudeau government’s past approach to defense spending and Arctic policy will not suffice in this new geopolitical landscape. By fully implementing “Our North, Strong and Free” and aligning with NATO and U.S. defense priorities, Canada can secure its standing in the years to come.

Andrew Latham, Ph.D., a tenured professor at Macalester College in Saint Paul, Minnesota. He is also a Senior Washington Fellow with the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy in Ottawa and a non-resident fellow with DefensePriorities, a think tank in Washington, D.C.

Add new comment

This is not for publication.
This is not for publication.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.
Article comments are not posted immediately to the Web site. Each submission must be approved by the Web site editor, who may edit content for appropriateness. There may be a delay of 24-48 hours for any submission while the web site editor reviews and approves it. Note: All information on this form is required. Your telephone number and email address is for our use only, and will not be attached to your comment.