Article content continued

Canada should do more to see to its own defence

That’s a common theme for this president, who has long made his skepticism about the alliance clear. And it’s not an unjustified gripe. The U.S. has indeed carried the heavy burden of Western security for many decades, and NATO members—including Canada—should do more to see to their own defence. The president’s comments are particularly noteworthy to Canada because Ottawa recently turned down a request by the U.S. to provide 150 troops to assist in training Afghan security forces. If the president chooses to be cross about this, it could well become a point of contention between our allied, trade-dependent nations.

We’re a sovereign country, of course, but Canadians must be realists: maintaining harmonious relations with Washington is not just a luxury, it’s a necessity. If we’re not willing to send troops to Afghanistan, it would be sensible for Canada to offer something else, to show we’re a reliable defence partner.

Luckily, we have just such a card we can play. In 2005, then-prime minister Paul Martin surprised many, including then-president George W. Bush, by announcing that Canada would not join in the American ballistic missile defence (BMD) system, which is designed to shoot down a small number of incoming nuclear weapons before they can strike targets in North America.

In 2005, Paul Martin announced Canada would not join the U.S. ballistic missile defence system

The controversial program certainly wasn’t perfect then. It antagonized China and Russia, who feared that their nuclear deterrents would be partially negated. It had suffered from a series of high-profile technical failures. And while there was concern even then about future threats from North Korea or Iran, none seemed imminent. A case could be made that Canada ought to have joined anyway—a case we agreed with—because of the close ties between the U.S. and Canadian air defence systems, and as a way for Canada to meaningfully contribute to continental defence. But one can at least understand why, in 2005, Canada’s decision to stay out was at least open to debate.