Should Canada have its own missile defence system? Trudeau’s defence minister won’t rule it out

Careful to prevent speculation that the commitment would rekindle the years-old debate about Canada participating in American ballistic missile defence, officials who unveiled the defence update last week said the government has not changed its long-standing policy to refrain from hosting launch pads that can shoot down incoming projectiles as part of that U.S. system. 

But in an interview with the Star, Blair said the new strategy will indeed consider ballistic missile defence in general, alongside a range of emerging threats that includes potential drone attacks and hypersonic missiles.   

“It includes ballistic missile defence, but it’s broader,” Blair said of the government’s plan. “What we’re seeing is the emergence of new technologies and new missile threats.”

Asked whether Canada could acquire the capacity to shoot down ballistic missiles, which it has long refused to do, Blair said: “What we need to do is defend our country from any threat.”

A spokesperson for Blair later stressed that Canada’s policy on ballistic missile defence remains the same, but did not rule out the possibility that it could change as the government considers how to best improve the country’s defences against airborne attacks. 

As it stands, Canada can detect and release warnings about ballistic missile attacks on North America, but has left it to the U.S. to defend North America against such threats through its ground-based defence system that can shoot down these missiles, explained Andrea Charron, director of the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba. 

To Charron, it makes sense to revisit such questions at a time when rapidly advancing technology is pushing allies like the U.S. and NATO countries to look at how to make sure their air defence systems are able to protect people and their militaries against modern threats. 

Such an attack was on dramatic display over the weekend, when Israel’s air defence systems shot down an onslaught of drones and missiles launched by Iran.  

“We are under a massive rethink of how to defend North America. And it’s really complicated and has all sorts of moving parts — and, of course, it has to be co-ordinated with the U.S.,” Charron said.

“Maybe now is the time to reopen the ballistic missile defence (discussion).”

The debate over whether Canada should acquire the capacity to shoot down ballistic missiles as part of the U.S. system provoked warnings that it could undermine arms control efforts by encouraging the further development of missiles to evade defence systems or lead to the weaponization of space.

For Charron, the discussion doesn’t necessarily mean Canada will change its policy and acquire the capacity to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles. There are other threats, such as new hypersonic missiles that can change direction and “skip along the atmosphere,” which might require different capabilities, she said. It also might make sense for Canada to focus on improving its ability to detect incoming missiles through improved radar and monitoring technology, and to keep leaving it to the Americans to shoot down ballistic missiles that are launched at Canada or the U.S., she said. 

Under its 20-year, $38.6-billion Norad modernization plan, released in 2022, the government pledged to install “over-the-horizon” radar capabilities in the Arctic as part of a $6.9-billion plan to improve systems to detect incoming threats. The recent defence policy update also pledges $1.4 billion to install sensors on boats, $222 million to create a new satellite ground station in the Arctic, and $307 million on early warning aircraft to detect long-range missiles. 

The policy update also promised almost $2.7 billion over 20 years to provide the army with unspecified types of long-range missiles. Writing by email, military spokesperson Andrée-Anne Poulin said this is meant to help “our forces deter threats to Canada from an appropriate distance and reach targets at greater ranges than our adversaries in combat.” The government also proposed exploring whether to install ground-based air defences for unspecified critical infrastructure, which Poulin said would defend against “a diverse array of incoming airborne attacks, including drones, missiles and artillery.”

Ernie Regehr, a University of Waterloo professor and senior fellow in Arctic security and defence at the Simons Foundation, said he is watching for how any improved air defences might include capabilities to strike at adversaries’ launching sites before they fire an attack — something which is emerging in defence policy circles as a possible response to the creation of projectiles that are more difficult to shoot down once they’re airborne. 

The problem with this, said Regehr, is that it could be interpreted as a “pre-emptive attack” rather than a measure of defence. And once such technology is more widely available, its very existence could create a new incentive to strike first. 

When asked about this, Blair told the Star he is not aware of such technological specifics, but that it will be essential for the next generation of missile defence to be integrated so that Canada and its allies can quickly share information and work together to stop any threats.