This year, 18 of NATO’s 31 member countries are expected to hit the military alliance’s spending target. Shamefully, Canada is not one of them.
The group of countries meeting the target is double the number in 2023, and up from just three countries in 2014. That was the year NATO members first committed to spending two per cent of GDP as a means of ensuring continued military readiness.
In 2023, Canada spent just 1.38 per cent of GDP on defence, according to NATO. That put it ahead only of Slovenia, Turkey, Spain, Belgium and Luxembourg.
We should not expect much to change this year. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told NATO officials privately that Canada would never meet the NATO spending target, according to a leaked Pentagon assessment reported on by The Washington Post last year.
At Canadian Affairs, we are focused on covering topics pertinent to Canadians’ daily lives. While military conflicts such as the ones in Ukraine and Israel-Gaza may seem distant, they are highly relevant to us — even if we like to pretend otherwise.
Canadians are only able to enjoy security and stability — and all the economic and social offshoots of that — because NATO, and the US in particular, keep a fragile global peace. If that peace disintegrates, through the actions of aggressors like Russia or regional conflagrations spiraling into something larger, Canadians will face a rude awakening. Members of our military may be sent abroad, costs of basic goods will climb, our economy and social services will likely be disrupted.
In today’s world, most countries would be hard pressed to ensure their security on their own. There are too many threats to guard against and too many potential points of entry. Coordinated international action is both effective and necessary.
The case for global action on defence is thus very similar to the case for global action on climate change. It’s most effective where all countries contribute in proportion to the sizes of their economies.
Ironically, the Liberal government seems to recognize the moral imperative of Canada doing its part on climate change, even though Canada’s own emissions reductions will not ultimately determine whether the world meets its climate goals. Puzzlingly, though, it does not seem to recognize the moral imperative of doing its part on defence.
To meet the NATO target, Canada would need to increase spending by 0.7 per cent of GDP, or $20 billion per year. The implicit position of the government is that meeting this target is too costly. But consider this: the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates the carbon tax will cost the Canadian economy 1.3 per cent of GDP per year by 2030. This sacrifice is somehow not too costly.
Of course, the problem of inadequate defence spending did not start with the current Liberal government. Successive governments have failed to take defence spending seriously, as one expert told Canadian Affairs in October. But Canada’s failure to meet the two per cent target agreed to by NATO members in 2014 does largely rest at the Trudeau Liberals’ feet: they have been in power since November 2015.
It was thus disappointing to see the Conservatives signal this week little intention to act differently on this file. Pierre Poilievre’s assertion that a Conservative government would “move towards” NATO’s spending target sounds little different than the Liberals’ own milquetoast claims.
There is little daylight between the Conservatives and Liberals on most issues. Taking a clear, principled stance on defence spending would be an opportunity for the party to differentiate itself and present Canadians with a clear choice about their values and priorities.
Peace is a precondition to enjoying Canada’s many social programs. Committing to our international alliances today will signal our seriousness to allies and ensure the continuation of the safe, stable and secure environment we enjoy at home.
