NATO’s new strategy and the Canadian defence industry

“Without industry, there is no defence, no deterrence and no security … Our security relies on our technological edge and our defence industry.” So said NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in a recent speech. The alliance has undergone a major shift in its collective defence strategy since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. One key element has been a recognition, reflected in Stoltenberg’s remarks, that the defence industries of all NATO states—Canada included—are now vital to Ukraine’s victory, NATO’s mandate, and the security of its members in a way not experienced since the end of the Cold War. In practical terms, this means these defence industries—with the support of their governments—must produce munitions and defence technologies at a rate and in quantities not witnessed in a generation. The days of peacetime defence industrial planning, production, and purchasing are over as far as Brussels is concerned. A new defence industrial posture is required for three reasons: to supply Ukraine with what it needs to win; to replenish the depleted stocks of NATO members states, including Canada, which have donated (and continue to donate) munitions and defence equipment to Ukraine; and to beef up the arsenals of NATO members to provide the deterrence necessary to curb any future Russian aggression. This has resulted in the NATO Defence Production Action Plan (DPAP), agreed to by member states this past July. The DPAP aims to increase munitions and defence technology production across the defence industries of every alliance member, better co-ordinate that production, and aggregate demand. A new NATO body called the Defence Industrial Production Board has also been established with a mandate to provide advice on how to increase defence industrial capacity, surge potential, and improve planning, procurement, and supply chains. Nicolas Todd is vice-president of policy, communications, and government relations with the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries. Photograph courtesy of CADSI Canada needs to take this new NATO defence industrial agenda seriously, though there is little evidence this is the case. General Wayne Eyre, chief of the defence staff, recently told the House Standing Committee on National Defence that the Canadian Army has a couple days’ worth of ammunition. Shockingly, the government has not ordered a single additional 155 mm shell—used by the thousands daily on the battlefield in Ukraine—since war broke out 18 months ago. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C., has invested more than $1-billion in Canadian munitions production facilities to increase output for the United States military. Canada’s standing in NATO today must be near its lowest ebb since the alliance was formed 75 years ago. Ottawa—under both the Harper and Trudeau governments—steadfastly refused to meet the two per cent of GDP spending pledge both governments signed. At less than 14 per cent, Canada is also well below the 2014 Wales and 2023 Vilnius commitments to allocate at least 20 per cent of its military spending on equipment and research and development. Therefore, the least Canada could do to contribute to collective security is step up in a meaningful way and help the alliance meet its industrial production goals. If not, defence production will become another commitment on which Canada falls short. Canada cannot and should not rely on allied defence industries for all its needs given the key capabilities and capacity resident here. Anyone who thinks NATO is not that important for Canada and that our importance within the alliance has never mattered much is wrong. Without the collective defence NATO provides, countries like ours—which have grossly under-invested in their own national defence for generations—would be seriously exposed and vulnerable in today’s unpredictable international security environment. It is worth remembering our history. Canada was present at NATO’s creation, which was the product of ideas first incubated in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the U.S. Article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty, authored by Canadian diplomats Lester Pearson and Escott Reid, is euphemistically known as the “Canadian Article.” It states that NATO members “will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies and will encourage economic collaboration between any or all of them.” NATO’s new industrial agenda fits squarely into the philosophy of Article 2 and the Treaty that Canada’s best and brightest authored three-quarters of a century ago. Nicolas Todd is vice-president of policy, communications, and government relations with the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries. The association represents the interests of more than 700 defence, security, and cybersecurity companies across Canada. The Hill Times

NATO’s new strategy and the Canadian defence industry

The least Canada could do to contribute to collective security is step up in a meaningful way and help NATO meet its industrial production goals.

Canada’s aging crisis and a call for reform in eldercare

As COP29 wraps up, will Canada finally stop funding fossils this fall?

Addressing the threat of antimicrobial resistance

The wisdom of Homer Simpson and Aaron Sorkin

Climate finance should target resilient food systems

Trump’s ‘America First’ plans may undermine global trade

G7 faces legitimacy crisis as new players gain influence

Why two per cent makes perfect sense

NATO stands stronger together 20 years after its biggest expansion

How solid is the NATO alliance?

The role of small states and dual-use technologies in meeting NATO’s defence and security needs

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

NATO’s new strategy and the Canadian defence industry

The least Canada could do to contribute to collective security is step up in a meaningful way and help NATO meet its industrial production goals.

Get The Foreign Policy Newsletter