Canada does not have nuclear weapons. After Trump’s Greenland threats, right? – Nationally
The prospect of a nuclear stockpile and global instability are prompting some countries to take a closer look at nuclear defenses – but Canada should not be among them, the defense minister and many experts say.
Questions about nuclear proliferation and the arms embargo have risen amid US President Donald Trump’s threats against Greenland and NATO, and the expiration this week of the last nuclear arms control agreement between the US and Russia.
Retired general Wayne Eyre, a former chief of the defense staff, told an event in Ottawa on Monday that Canada should not completely abandon its nuclear arsenal, according to reports in the Globe and Mail and La Presse.
Asked about these comments on the way to a cabinet meeting on Tuesday, Defense Minister David McGuinty said Canada has “no intention at all” of doing so.
“Canada has signed international treaties that prohibit it, number one, and Canada has long been a nuclear-free country,” McGuinty told reporters.
“We will continue to build conventional weapons. We will continue to rearm. We will continue to invest. We will continue to rebuild our Canadian military and we are doing that.”
He said the mission, which focuses on security in the Arctic, will “ensure” that Canada’s military can operate independently of the US or without its nuclear deterrent.
The reports quoted Eyre as saying that Canada may never have true independence without nuclear weapons, but added that that is not something the country should be pursuing right now.
The interview at the Rideau Club in Ottawa in which Eyre made the comments, which focused on Canadian sovereignty and the limits of the country’s military independence, appears to have not been made public.
Some experts warn that nuclear proliferation in general, and the idea of Canadian nuclear weapons in particular, should not be pursued further.
“Nuclear weapons are not the way to deal with growing uncertainty and danger around the world,” said John Erath, senior policy director at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation in Washington, DC.
“It’s not a good idea … and they contribute to the issue faster than they can solve it.”
Alexander Lanoszka, an associate professor of political science at the University of Waterloo who studies global security, said the issue is not whether Canada has the science or the equipment to build a nuclear weapon, but rather, “What are the strategic goals, and what would be the strategic costs associated with doing so?”
“Frankly, while there is a lot of concern about Russian adventurism, Chinese assertiveness, and whatever the United States is doing these days, the Canadian government has very little reason to undertake such an expensive endeavor as nuclear proliferation,” he said.
European countries have long relied heavily on the United States, including its massive nuclear arsenal, to defend itself and prevent Russian land grabs.
Canada is no different, with the added value of being a local neighbor to the world’s second largest economy, just behind Russia.
Get daily world news
Get the day’s top news, politics, economics, and current affairs, delivered to your inbox once a day.
However, Trump has demanded that NATO allies increase their military spending and shoulder more of the defense burden – even threatening to bail out those who don’t spend enough.
Trump’s latest campaign to get Greenland from Denmark, which he had already withdrawn from, has further disrupted the NATO alliance.
France and the United Kingdom, the only two European nations with nuclear weapons, signed a declaration last summer on nuclear cooperation.
That came months after French President Emmanuel Macron said he was opening a “strategic debate” on creating a shared European nuclear umbrella to reduce reliance on US nuclear assets within the continent.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said last week that those talks have started and that Germany is involved. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson made similar comments last month.
Like Sweden and Germany, Canada is a non-nuclear-weapon state and a signatory to the international treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. The treaty prevents the signatories from acquiring or producing nuclear weapons.
Commonly known as the NPT, this treaty serves as the foundation for the global disarmament movement. Canada has strongly supported the treaty since its entry into force in 1970.
However, the agreement does not expressly prevent the five nuclear signatory countries – the US, Russia, China, France and Germany – from acquiring additional weapons. It only urges them to negotiate a global disarmament, with no set timeline for doing so.
Erath noted that the deal was an overall success, reducing the global stockpile of nuclear weapons from 70,000 at the end of the Cold War to about 12,000 today, a drop of more than 80 percent.
“The last 20 percent seems very difficult to find,” he said – and now other countries want to build more.
The U.S. intelligence community says China is rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal and is on track to exceed 1,000 by 2030.
Trump, while announcing that the US will begin testing its nuclear weapons for the first time in decades, said in October 2025 that China’s program would be “even” with America’s within five years.
Russia has also moved to expand and develop its assets and has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, as well as Kyiv’s western allies.
The New START agreement, a key anti-proliferation agreement between the US and Russia, is due to expire on Thursday, raising fears of a looming global arms race.
Trump indicated in an interview with the New York Times last month that he would allow the agreement to expire. He has not formally responded to Russia’s proposal to continue monitoring the treaty’s missile and warhead limits for one year to allow time to figure out what to do after the accord expires.
Non-signatories to the NPT, such as India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran and Israel, are also believed to be increasing their various nuclear capabilities.
Why getting nuclear weapons wouldn’t be easy
Experts such as Lanoszka and Erath say it would be politically and diplomatically unwise for Canada to try to leave the NPT and begin pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
“I think any such statement will be met with a confused response” by Canadians and the rest of the world, Lanoszka said.
And, he added, “The United States will strongly refuse to support any kind of independent initiative to acquire nuclear weapons” because of its desire to “control the growing risks” – especially in its own territory.
That would make it more difficult for Canada to buy the equipment needed to deliver a nuclear weapon, which would likely come from American defense suppliers, he said.
Erath pointed out that nuclear threats and deterrence “only work if you’re willing to carry them out,” which also helps explain why nuclear fears are on the rise around the world.
“The thought that President Putin is ready to carry out some of the threats he has made is very frightening,” he said.
However, Erath argued that this is why Canada should continue to work with the US on both joint deterrence and eventual disarmament.
“It’s a wake-up call, and there should be discussions about this,” he said. “If Canada feels that its security is not adequately provided for, as an alliance partner, it has an obligation to make these concerns known” to both the US and NATO.
“I’m an optimist myself, so I think we’re going to come back … considering a really reasonable reduction in nuclear weapons. You don’t need many nuclear weapons to deter a potential adversary. You only need one.”
— via files from The Canadian Press, The Associated Press and Reuters
