Questions about nuclear proliferation and deterrence have increased following US President Donald Trump’s threats against Greenland and NATO, as well as the impending expiration this week of the last remaining US-Russia nuclear arms control treaty.
Retired Gen. Wayne Eyre, the former chief of the defense staff, told an event in Ottawa on Monday that Canada should not completely rule out purchasing its own nuclear weapons, according to reports from the Globe and Mail and La Presse.
Asked about these comments as he headed into a cabinet meeting on Tuesday, Defense Minister David McGuinty said Canada has “absolutely no intention” of doing so.
“Canada has signed international treaties that, first of all, exclude us, and Canada has long been a non-nuclear proliferation state,” McGuinty told reporters.
“We’re going to continue to build conventional weapons. We’re going to continue to rearm. We’re going to continue to reinvest. We’re going to continue to rebuild our Canadian Armed Forces and we are doing just that.”
He said the work, with a particular focus on Arctic security, will “absolutely” ensure the Canadian military can operate independently of 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 he added that this is not something the country should pursue at this time.
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, does not appear to have been publicly broadcast.
Other experts warn that nuclear proliferation in general, and the idea of a Canadian nuclear arsenal in particular, should not be pursued further.
“Nuclear weapons are not the way to deal with the growing uncertainty and danger around the world,” said John Erath, senior policy director at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington, DC.
“It’s not a good idea… and they’re contributing to the problem much more easily than they can solve it.”
Alexander Lanoszka, an associate professor of political science at the University of Waterloo who studies international security, said the question is not whether Canada has the scientific or resource capacity to develop a nuclear weapon, but rather, “What are the strategic objectives and what would be the strategic costs associated with that?”
“Frankly, even though there is a lot of concern about Russian adventurism, Chinese assertiveness and what the United States is doing today, the Canadian government has very little incentive to undertake such a costly undertaking as nuclear proliferation itself,” he said.
European countries have long relied heavily on the United States, including its large nuclear arsenal, for defense and to deter potential land grabs from Russia.
Canada is no different, with the added benefit of being a geographical neighbor the second largest stockpile of nuclear warheads in the world, just behind Russia.
Receive national news daily
Get the day’s top news, political, economic and current headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.
However, Trump has demanded that NATO allies increase their military spending and shoulder a greater share of the collective defense burden – even threatening not to help those who do not spend enough.
Trump’s recent attempt to take over Greenland from Denmark, which he has since withdrawn from, has only further thrown the NATO alliance into turmoil.
France and Britain, the only two European countries with nuclear weapons, signed a declaration for closer nuclear cooperation last summer.
That came just a few months later French President Emmanuel Macron said he was opening a “strategic debate.” on creating a shared European nuclear umbrella to reduce dependence on US nuclear assets on the continent.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said this last week that those talks had started 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 of the International Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The agreement prohibits signatories that do not have nuclear weapons from acquiring or producing them.
The treaty, commonly known as the NPT, serves as the basis for the global disarmament movement. Canada has strongly supported the treaty since it came into effect in 1970.
However, the treaty does not explicitly ban the five nuclear signatories – the US, Russia, China, France and Germany – from acquiring any more weapons. It only encourages them to negotiate eventual global disarmament, without a set timetable for doing so.
Erath noted that overall the treaty has been successful, reducing the global nuclear stockpile 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 is proving very difficult to reach,” he said – and now some countries are pushing to build more.
According to US intelligence, China is rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal and is on track to surpass 1,000 by 2030.
Trump, while the announcement that the US would test its nuclear weapons for the first time in decades, said in October 2025 that China’s nuclear program will “match” America’s within five years.
Russia has also taken steps to increase and modernize its supplies and repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, as well as against Kiev’s Western allies.
The New START Treaty, a key anti-proliferation treaty between the US and Russia, expires on Thursday, raising fears of a looming global arms race.
Trump indicated last month in an interview with the New York Times that the treaty would expire. He has not formally responded to a Russian proposal to observe the treaty’s missile and warhead limits for another year to allow time to figure out what to do after the pact expires.
Non-signatories to the NPT, such as India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran and Israel, They are also believed to be expanding their various nuclear capabilities.
Why acquiring nuclear weapons would not be easy
Experts like Lanoszka and Erath said it would be politically and diplomatically unwise for Canada to try to leave the NPT and pursue a nuclear weapons program.
“I think such a statement will be met with dismay” by Canadians and the world at large, Lanoszka said.
He also added: “The United States would be very reluctant to support any independent initiative to acquire nuclear weapons” because of its desire to “control escalation risks” – especially in its own hemisphere.
That would make it extremely difficult for Canada to purchase the equipment needed to deliver a nuclear weapon, which would likely have to come from U.S. defense suppliers, he said.
Erath pointed out that nuclear threats and deterrence “are only effective if you are willing to carry them out,” which also helps explain why nuclear fear is increasing worldwide.
“The thought that President Putin is willing to carry out some of the threats he has made is quite frightening,” he said.
However, Erath argued that this is precisely why Canada must continue to work with the US on both collective deterrence and eventual disarmament.
“It’s a wake-up call and there should be a dialogue about this,” he said. “If Canada believes its security is not adequately guaranteed, it has a duty as an alliance partner to raise these concerns” to both the US and NATO.
“I’m personally an optimist, so I think we’ll get back to… considering a really meaningful reduction in nuclear weapons. You don’t need many nuclear weapons to deter a potential adversary. It only takes one.”
– with files from The Canadian Press, The Associated Press and Reuters
#Canada #nuclear #weapons #case #Trumps #threats #Greenland #National #Globalnews.ca