Canada’s Submarine Project and the Arctic

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As the geopolitical situation in the world grows worse, Canada will be forced, sooner or later, to upgrade its armed forces for the defence of the country. Canada’s Arctic is extremely vulnerable, as several successive governments since WWII have neglected it, hoping that the United States will defend it for us. With the development of new weapons and new foes on the horizon, the situation has changed dramatically. Climate change has opened up the waters of the Canadian Arctic, increasing the region’s strategic importance and presenting new security challenges from powers such as China and Russia. Canada’s vast and vulnerable Arctic territory, waters and coastline necessitate a rethinking of our armed forces deployment and submarine fleet. We need a fleet capable of prolonged and stealthy under-ice operations to deter potential adversaries. When I served on the House of Commons Defence Committee, I raised the need for defence of the Arctic several times, particularly the need for capable submarines. These are formidable weapons we may need in future conflagrations. At that time, my warnings were generally ignored. Currently, I see that interest in the defence of the Artic is once again becoming a recognized item to be dealt with. A little too late, but better than nothing. It has become clear that addressing threats that originate in the Canadian Arctic, transit through the region, or directly involve the Arctic, such as potential incursions by foreign land and naval forces or unauthorized resource exploitation, can no longer be ignored. A prime focus should be the building of a strong fleet of submarines. Here again, we see the failure of our public service in purchasing used Victoria-class submarines, from the U.K. government in the 1990s, which have proven inadequate for Arctic operations, frequently spending more time in dry dock than on missions. The cold depths of the Arctic Ocean have long been a stage for geopolitical manoeuvring, where submarines play a crucial role in national defence strategies, including intelligence gathering, deterrence, and protecting maritime territory. For Canada, modernizing the fleet is essential for addressing both current and future defence challenges and maintaining a strategic edge in these increasingly contested waters. In early 2024, the Liberal Government finally unveiled “Our North, Strong and Free,” a comprehensive defense policy update (DPU) that emphasizes modernizing the Royal Canadian Navy’s underwater capabilities as part of a broader strategy to strengthen national security and address evolving challenges. As part of the DPU, Canada announced plans to invest C$60 billion to replace its aging submarines with up to 12 advanced, conventionally powered vessels designed for Arctic conditions, with the first replacement submarine to be delivered no later than 2035, more than 10 years from now. This is not a good sign. Spending taxpayers’ money on conventional rather than nuclear submarines means we are not getting the most advanced ones. Even though conversations about the potential acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines have resurfaced, these discussions, unfortunately, remain in the exploratory phase, with no formal commitment thus far from either the government or the military. Historically, Canada’s interest in nuclear submarines dates back to 1987 — and in fact even as far back as the late 1950s — when Canada announced plans to transition from German-style diesel submarines to a fleet of 10-12 nuclear submarines, surprising non-proliferation advocates. That announcement nearly led to supply contracts with the U.K. and France. However, under pressure from the United States, which feared the market-driven expansion of nuclear technology, Canada subserviently abandoned these plans. (shades of Avro Arrow, anyone?) We really face a continued lack of leadership in securing our country’s defence. Today, opinions within Canada on acquiring nuclear submarines remain sharply divided. Proponents highlight the strategic advantages of nuclear powered submarines, such as their long-range capabilities and ability to engage in extended Arctic operations. These attributes would enhance Canada’s role within NATO and strengthen its defense posture alongside key allies like the United States. Critics, argue against nuclear submarines citing high costs, logistical challenges, complex maintenance, potential safety and environmental risks, and the challenge of training crews to operate them. We seem to have learned nothing from the fiasco of acquiring F 35’s ten years later at a higher cost to taxpayers. Let us hope the F-35 story will not be repeated with the submarines and Canada will decide to acquire nuclear submarines rather than conventionally powered ones. I retain this hope despite the short-sightedness focus of defence officials and the public service on the potential acquisition of conventional submarines . Canada’s immediate focus on conventional submarines reflects last century warfare mentality. The immediate goal should look to the future and build the advanced skills and capabilities needed to adopt more sophisticated submarine technologies, including the nuclear-powered submarines. This approach would better position Canada to address evolving security challenges in the Arctic and beyond. Strengthening security co-operation with like-minded countries and jointly pursuing advanced submarine technologies, including nuclear options, should be considered a primary goal. Furthermore, our current politicians should take a page from the playbook of WWII Prime Minister W.L.M. King and Minister C.D. Howe in skillful negotiating with the United States in much difficult times. They might find it easier today to navigate diplomatic challenges in lifting the United States. opposition to Canada’s procurement of nuclear submarines. Are our leaders up to it? In short, the procurement process should aim to achieve the objective of acquiring the most advanced nuclear submarines. The adoption of advanced submarines also should be pursued alongside the accumulation of comprehensive operational capabilities, technological proficiency, and diplomatic leverage so that the opportunity can be seized immediately when it arises. What do you think?