An 'Iron Dome' for North America? Talk heats up about Canada joining U.S. missile defence
After decades of saying no, is Ottawa ready to say yes?
Cross-border tensions or not, there's growing talk in Washington that Canada and the U.S. could expand their military co-operation in a continental missile shield.
It came up last week at a U.S. Senate committee hearing, when the top-ranking Democrat reported he'd just gotten positive signals from Defence Minister Bill Blair that Canada could end decades of reluctance to join U.S. missile defence.
Rhode Island's Jack Reed was talking about U.S. plans for a multi-faceted upgrade to the system — the project is currently nicknamed Iron Dome, a reference to Israel's existing, albeit vastly different, system.
"I met recently with the defence minister from Canada," Reed said, referring to Blair's visit to Washington this month.
"They are very much interested in participating [in this initiative]. They have legal obstacles, but they assume they can jump over them."
This comes amid U.S. plans for rapid changes to its aerial-defence system, so that it might detect more sophisticated cruise and hypersonic missiles
President Donald Trump accelerated that project with an executive order demanding preliminary plans within 60 days. He called it his Iron Dome for America, although this would involve different technologies, to defend against different weapons, over a far larger territory than Israel.
The U.S. Missile Defense Agency is now soliciting ideas — and fast. It's asking the industry to submit 20-page papers, this month, about what it could achieve by 2026, 2028, 2030 and beyond.
At the hearing, Reed asked NORAD's commander, Gen. Gregory Guillot, what Canada could best contribute.
Guillot said the first step would be to ensure that Canada's next generation of sensors communicate with the U.S. system.
Then, in the future, he said, should Canada ever install "defeat mechanisms" on its soil — technology capable of taking down a missile — it could operate under the binational NORAD command, as fighter jets already do.
"I welcome their participation," Guillot said.
The Canadian government doesn't deny its interest in the project.
Officials in Ottawa say they're watching to learn more about U.S. plans, as Canada weighs its potential contribution.
Blair himself spoke positively about tightening missile-defence co-operation after his trip to Washington. He told reporters that U.S. military planners hope their Iron Dome covers the Arctic.
"An integrated missile defence system for all of North America is the thing that makes sense to everybody," he said.
Asked what legal obstacle Reed was referring to, one Canadian official said the issue was more political than legal: Canada's policy of non-participation.
Or, rather, of quasi-participation.
Canadian missile defence policy has been in a state of purgatory for two decades — half in, half out.
The U.S. and Canada jointly monitor the skies, through the North American Aerospace Defence Command. But Canada's role thereafter is limited. If NORAD were to detect an incoming object, Canadians would be excluded from decision-making about when, where and whether to respond.
That neither-fully-in-nor-out status was cemented in 2005, when Prime Minister Paul Martin, who had a fragile minority government, refused to join, under political pressure in Canada amid anger from George W. Bush's deeply unpopular Iraq war.
Canada became an oddity among U.S. allies, with other NATO, European and Asian allies participating in the program, says one Arctic security expert.
"Canada was the only one that said that it would not," said Rob Huebert, an associate professor in political science at the University of Calgary.
The status quo has persisted. But a series of events has pushed the issue back to the forefront of the political agenda.
One is Russia and China developing hypersonic missiles, whose trajectory and blinding speed make them capable of evading existing sensors.
Another is escalating Russian and Chinese involvement in the Arctic. And, finally, the existing detection infrastructure is rusting out.
In a damning 2022 report, Canada's auditor general said the country's existing satellites are expected to start degrading around spring 2026, and since it will take years to replace them, there's a serious risk of satellite earth-observation services being interrupted.
U.S. politicians have been pressing Canada for years to speed up plans to renew its Arctic-monitoring infrastructure.
Canada is planning new radar and sensor systems in different parts of the Arctic, and space-based surveillance, over the next decade as part of a $38.6 billion project.
So given that Canada already plans to install these sensors, what difference does it make if it goes the extra step and offers to join the so-called Iron Dome?
It makes a few differences, says James Fergusson, senior scholar at the Centre for Defence and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba.
For starters, he says, it would give Canada greater say in how to defend the continent — instead of letting the U.S. make decisions on its own.
It would also clarify that NORAD has jurisdiction over cruise and hypersonic missiles. And, finally, it would simply allow Canadians into the room for discussions about highly classified topics — like the strategy for shooting down weapons over North America.
Until then, "the Americans will make unilateral decisions which will affect our defence and security," Fergusson said. "So this is a big issue,"
"We are [currently] left somewhat in the dark."
But first, there's that Canadian "obstacle" Reed referred to — the politics. With Canada-U.S. relations currently so bleak that Canadians are lustily booing the Star-Spangled Banner at hockey games, and boycotting U.S. goods, there's no guarantee that politicians in Ottawa will take that step the prime ministers Martin, Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau avoided.
Trump isn't helping, Huebert said.
His insults and tariff threats against Canada are "wreaking havoc" with a defence relationship that's been in place since the Second World War, he says.
"He's actually paradoxically hurting North America and hence American security," Huebert said. "The weaker we become because of economic dislocation from the tariffs, the worse our ability — when we finally start getting serious about our defence… to do so."
He supports Canadian involvement in missile defence, as does Fergusson. And he, too, foresees political recoil in Canada.
With an election approaching in Ottawa, and Trump's threats to Canada's economy and sovereignty top of mind, he worries about a scenario where the NDP opposes it and the other parties dither.
"That's what's going to scare the politicians. Including the Conservatives," Fergusson said.
"At least with this administration [in Washington] — I don't think we can dither anymore."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
