The prospect of renewed nuclear weapon stockpiling and global instability are spurring some countries to look more closely at nuclear protections — but Canada shouldn’t be among those, the defence minister and multiple experts say.
Questions about nuclear proliferation and deterrence have increased amid U.S. President Donald Trump’s threats against Greenland and NATO, as well as the impending expiry this week of the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty between the U.S. and Russia.
Retired general Wayne Eyre, the former chief of the defence staff, told an event in Ottawa on Monday that Canada shouldn’t altogether rule out acquiring its own nuclear weapons, according to reports from the Globe and Mail and La Presse.
Asked about those comments while heading into a cabinet meeting Tuesday, Defence Minister David McGuinty said Canada has “absolutely no intention” of doing so.
“Canada is a signatory to international treaties which preclude us, number one, and Canada has been a non-nuclear-proliferation state for a long time,” McGuinty told reporters.
“We are going to continue to build conventional weapons. We’re going to continue to re-arm. We’re going to continue to reinvest. We’re going to continue to rebuild our Canadian Armed Forces and we’re doing that.”
He said that work, with a particular focus on Arctic security, will “absolutely” ensure Canada’s military can operate independently from the U.S. even without its own nuclear deterrent.
The reports quoted Eyre as saying that Canada may never have true strategic independence without nuclear weapons, but adding that’s not something the country should pursue at the moment.
The discussion at the Rideau Club in Ottawa where Eyre made the comments, which focused on Canadian sovereignty and the limits of the country’s military autonomy, appear not to have been publicly broadcast.
Other experts caution that nuclear proliferation generally, and the idea of a Canadian nuclear arsenal 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 Non-Proliferation in Washington, D.C.
“It’s not a good idea … and they contribute to the issue much more readily than they can resolve it.”
Alexander Lanoszka, an associate professor of political science at the University of Waterloo who studies international security, said the issue is not whether Canada has the scientific or resource capability to develop a nuclear weapon, but rather, “What are the strategic purposes, and what would be the strategic costs associated with doing so?”
“Frankly, even though 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, very little reason to go about such a costly endeavour as nuclear proliferation itself,” he said.
European nations have long relied heavily on the United States, including its large nuclear arsenal, for their defence and to deter possible land grabs from Russia.
Canada is no different, with the added value of being a geographic neighbour to the world’s second-largest nuclear warhead stockpile, just slightly behind Russia.
Get daily National news
Get the day’s top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.
However, Trump has demanded that NATO allies step up their military spending and take on more of the collective defence burden — even threatening to not come to the aid of those that don’t spend enough.
Trump’s recent push to acquire Greenland from Denmark, which he has since backed down from, has only further rattled the NATO alliance.
France and the United Kingdom, the only two European nations with nuclear weapons, signed a declaration last summer for closer nuclear co-operation.
That came just months after French President Emmanuel Macron said he was opening a “strategic debate” over creating a shared European nuclear umbrella in order to reduce reliance on U.S. nuclear assets within the continent.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said last week that those talks had begun and that Germany was involved. Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson made similar comments last month.
Like Sweden and Germany, Canada is a non-nuclear state and a signatory to the international treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons. The agreement bars signatories without nuclear arms from acquiring or producing them.
Commonly known as the NPT, the treaty serves as the foundation for the global disarmament movement. Canada has strongly supported the treaty since it came into force in 1970.
However, the treaty does not explicitly forbid the five nuclear power signatories — the U.S., Russia, China, France and Germany — from acquiring more weapons. It only urges them to negotiate an eventual global disarmament, with no set timeline to do so.
Erath noted the treaty has been successful overall, reducing the global nuclear stockpile from 70,000 at the end of the Cold War to around 12,000 today, a drop of over 80 per cent.
“The last 20 per cent are proving very difficult to get at,” he said — and now some countries are pushing to build more.
U.S. intelligence says China is rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal and is on track to surpass 1,000 by 2030.
Trump, while announcing the U.S. would start testing its nuclear weapons for the first time in decades, said in October 2025 that China’s nuclear program will be “even” with America’s within five years.
Russia has also moved to grow and modernize its supplies and repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, as well as against Kyiv’s western allies.
The New START treaty, a key anti-proliferation pact between the U.S. and Russia, is set to expire on Thursday, sparking fears of a looming global arms race.
Trump indicated in an interview with the New York Times last month that he will let the treaty expire. He has not formally responded to a Russian proposal to keep observing the treaty’s missile and warhead limits for one more year to allow time to work out what to do after the pact expires.
Non-signatories to the NPT, like India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran and Israel, are also believed to be expanding their various nuclear capabilities.
Experts like Lanoszka and Erath said it would be unwise politically and diplomatically for Canada to try to leave the NPT and start pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
“I think any such statement will be met with a bewildered response” by Canadians and the world at large, Lanoszka said.
Also, he added, “The United States would be very disinclined to support any sort of independent initiative to acquire nuclear weapons” due to its desire to “control escalation risks” — particularly in its own hemisphere.
That would make it extraordinarily difficult for Canada to procure the equipment necessary to deliver a nuclear weapon, which would likely have to come from U.S. defence suppliers, he said.
Erath pointed out that nuclear threats and deterrence “are only effective if you are prepared to carry them out,” which also helps explain why nuclear fears are rising globally.
“The thought of President Putin being ready to carry out some of the threats he’s made is one that is quite frightening,” he said.
However, Erath argued that’s precisely why Canada should continue to co-operate with the U.S. on both collective deterrence and eventual disarmament.
“It’s a wake-up call, and there should be some dialogue on this,” he said. “If Canada feels that its security is not adequately provided for, as an alliance partner, it has the obligation to make these concerns known” to both the U.S. and NATO.
“I’m personally an optimist, so I think we will get back to … considering really meaningful reduction in nuclear weapons. You don’t need a lot of nuclear weapons to deter a potential adversary. It only takes one.”
— with files from The Canadian Press, The Associated Press and Reuters