The point about Nuuk offering the only viable year-round port in the region is the operational reality we can’t ignore. Testimony at the National Defence committee (NDDN) has repeatedly flagged that Canada has zero comparable deep-water capabilities in the eastern Arctic. It is hard to be an "active player" when the Public Accounts show we consistently lapse the budget meant to build our own northern infrastructure.
Unfortunately, the only option I see is seeing if we can get some space or joint agreement with the yet to be constructed Naval docks at Nuuk. Unless we built something in northernish labrador from scratch, all our installations would be iced in for 6-7 months out of the year.
Taking and up dating one of the unused coldwar bases in Greenland and inviting NATO to operate a joint task force there (with the purpose of strengthening Artic defense that states they would defend Greenland) may be the only way to take some of US direct threats and reasoning out of the equation. Canada should participate in this by assigning an AOPS, helicopter squadron, and say 100 to 200 equiped rotational troops in the name of Arctic defense while allowing them to train with Norways Arctic troops to get eventually thousands of Canadian troops trained properly there with those who already are. They could start by accepting the UK and France with Canada in a joint or several joint locations where a port and airstrip is available. This would also allow Canada to practice/test using possible future equipment they may be thinking of procuring in the future.
Canada does seem to have partnered with each of the Nordic countries on Arctic defence recently, though the details of practical steps and expected outcomes are not very clear.
That said. I HATE that we're working with Finland to build icebreakers for the USA - our enemy, basically. This will only enable them to deny Canadian sovereignty over the NW Passage more readily; why we would do this to ourselves is beyond me!
As for an Arctic port, I understand that work is going to proceed on expanding Port Churchill for starters. It will rely extensively on icebreakers to be feasible, as ports in Finland do. Likely another Arctic port would be desirable, but without substantial goods to ship, it would be an immense money-loser. Churchill gives access to grain, potash and mineral exports. Likely more products will come along there in the centre of the continent, so it's worth the cost. But Ungava? Baffin? For now, St John's and Labrador must serve in the East, I think.
The Venezuela raid kinda proved that this administration doesn't think through second and third order effects. They grabbed Maduro. What strategic outcome did they accomplish?
We can't discount the fact that an old man who doesn't understand Mercator projection can be manipulated to invade by a Nazi who hates NATO and the EU (Miller) and by tech bros think all their dreams of rare Earths and cheap data centres will magically happen when Greenland has the star spangled banner flying.
I think we need to plan for the day after. Starting with what replacesv NATO and NORAD. And what will be our relationship with such a hostile USA.
Behind Trump are a bunch of reasonably competent policy types and tech bros from Project 2025 who have their own agendas for Greenland ( and Venezuela). These guys have been planning for years and Trump has given them their chance.
I don’t for a minute believe that Trump and his minions are acting for the benefit of the USA, or Venezuela, or any other sovereign nation. These actions benefit a kleptocracy. It ultimately will be some asphalt king and/or perhaps a handful of oil companies who have wanted access to Venezuelan oil for years (and who spent years trying to get around the sanctions).Trump’s Executive Actions are written by people who are familiar with US law and have an agenda that benefits a very small group of people who do not value the rule of law or peace, not Americans in general.
While I agree with most of this assessment, I just have to say we all need to step a bit back here when we criticize this government too much. Realize that at this moment in time we could have Poilievre in office because it was damned close , and just imagine what the dialogue would be right now between him and Trump if he was.
Then understand that this government has done more in less than 12 months than most of our governments have managed to do in 5 years. They have managed to change the course of this behemoth called Canada, and yes, they haven’t accomplished everything we need done, but dammit they are working on it.
Just imagine those jugglers you saw as kids only realize it’s not 10 or 20 pins or balls in the air, it’s 1000, or 2000 with an Opposition party fighting them every step of the way.
This NATO integration and strengthening is precisely why I think the CPSP will go to GERNOR. Politically and defense wise you can claim it as an easy Arctic and north NATO defense win.
Defence Minister McGuinty as quoted December 30 in ipolitics:
“In my conversations with U.S. Secretary Pete Hegseth, particularly when I spent two hours face-to-face with him at the Pentagon and in subsequent communications, we are moving in lockstep. That doesn’t mean we’re not going to continue to have important negotiations on fiscal and financial matters, but we’re going to continue to manage this relationship well.
We have no choice. That’s what we’re going to do, and that’s what I’m trying to do on the defence side.”
Noah, thank you for taking the courage to talk about Canada’s biggest “elephant in the room” defence/political dilemma in decades. And an elephant not caused by us but our closest ally!
Surely, some US politicians and military would object to this “imperialistic” threat by the Trump administration. Putting that aside, Canada is racing against time to fill massive gaps in Canadian Arctic defence needs not only for our (just us) defence but significant contribution to NATO’s northern flank. I agree with every recommendation you have made in this article.
No one has linked this threat to NATO to our NORAD agreement. If this military force threat by Trump occurs, then the Canadian NORAD Region (CANR) must:
- cease immediately all intelligence and surveillance information exchange with NORAD, EXCEPTING hostile threats across the Arctic from Russia or China;
- initiate a “no fly zone” for any US military aircraft incursion into Canadian airspace or the basing of military assets here; and
- use every diplomatic means possible to terminate this military action.
Failure of Canada to act decisively to protect a NATO ally will undoubtedly cause the other alliance countries and other nations as well to no longer regard Canada as an independent state but a proven vassal state to the US. And with just reason.
I am the asker of two questions for your next pending “Ask Noah” pertaining to necessary exchange with intelligence information exchange with the US through NORAD for continental defence. The other pertained to defence data systems firewalled and placed in a sovereign cloud.
I hope that defence planners here are considering every potential outcome should a Greenland action occur.
Canada will have 0 heavy icebreakers in the Arctic for most of the 2026 season as the Louis St Laurent, our only heavy icebreaker in the water is loaned to Sweden to do mapping with their Oden. The Terry Fox will be in dry dock for another year. And, with respect the mediums can’t cut it, and the AOPS are good for first year ice only. So we have nothing to establish sovereignty let alone enable the annual sealift or build major projects. We need more heavy icebreakers now and the deepwater port at Q port now.
We can station an AOP there for a bit and then relieve it with another one and crew. At the same time supply the port with extra food and fuel to compensate. Also fly some Ranger patrols over for Joint exercises.
The point about Nuuk offering the only viable year-round port in the region is the operational reality we can’t ignore. Testimony at the National Defence committee (NDDN) has repeatedly flagged that Canada has zero comparable deep-water capabilities in the eastern Arctic. It is hard to be an "active player" when the Public Accounts show we consistently lapse the budget meant to build our own northern infrastructure.
Seems like enough dockspace to support a AOP's and small shore station
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Nuuk,+Greenland/@64.1716933,-51.7121797,955m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x4ea20dce1ab32725:0x3de425fb4d692306!8m2!3d64.1743234!4d-51.7372787!16zL20vMGRfMW0?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDEwNy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
Unfortunately, the only option I see is seeing if we can get some space or joint agreement with the yet to be constructed Naval docks at Nuuk. Unless we built something in northernish labrador from scratch, all our installations would be iced in for 6-7 months out of the year.
Taking and up dating one of the unused coldwar bases in Greenland and inviting NATO to operate a joint task force there (with the purpose of strengthening Artic defense that states they would defend Greenland) may be the only way to take some of US direct threats and reasoning out of the equation. Canada should participate in this by assigning an AOPS, helicopter squadron, and say 100 to 200 equiped rotational troops in the name of Arctic defense while allowing them to train with Norways Arctic troops to get eventually thousands of Canadian troops trained properly there with those who already are. They could start by accepting the UK and France with Canada in a joint or several joint locations where a port and airstrip is available. This would also allow Canada to practice/test using possible future equipment they may be thinking of procuring in the future.
I think a coordinated NATO sea and air base at Nuuk is the best option.
At this juncture I wish my wish that the AOPS carried more weapons would come true.
Time for some full blown NATO training activities in Greenland now, and for the foreseeable future. https://x.com/nato/status/2010301448886829334?s=61&t=ndcduV32lJS_PasZXsqsdg
Canada does seem to have partnered with each of the Nordic countries on Arctic defence recently, though the details of practical steps and expected outcomes are not very clear.
That said. I HATE that we're working with Finland to build icebreakers for the USA - our enemy, basically. This will only enable them to deny Canadian sovereignty over the NW Passage more readily; why we would do this to ourselves is beyond me!
As for an Arctic port, I understand that work is going to proceed on expanding Port Churchill for starters. It will rely extensively on icebreakers to be feasible, as ports in Finland do. Likely another Arctic port would be desirable, but without substantial goods to ship, it would be an immense money-loser. Churchill gives access to grain, potash and mineral exports. Likely more products will come along there in the centre of the continent, so it's worth the cost. But Ungava? Baffin? For now, St John's and Labrador must serve in the East, I think.
The Venezuela raid kinda proved that this administration doesn't think through second and third order effects. They grabbed Maduro. What strategic outcome did they accomplish?
We can't discount the fact that an old man who doesn't understand Mercator projection can be manipulated to invade by a Nazi who hates NATO and the EU (Miller) and by tech bros think all their dreams of rare Earths and cheap data centres will magically happen when Greenland has the star spangled banner flying.
I think we need to plan for the day after. Starting with what replacesv NATO and NORAD. And what will be our relationship with such a hostile USA.
Behind Trump are a bunch of reasonably competent policy types and tech bros from Project 2025 who have their own agendas for Greenland ( and Venezuela). These guys have been planning for years and Trump has given them their chance.
You think Venezuela shows competency? What exactly has changed in Venezuela?
I think Venezuela shows that military competency can't make up for strategic incompetence.
I don’t for a minute believe that Trump and his minions are acting for the benefit of the USA, or Venezuela, or any other sovereign nation. These actions benefit a kleptocracy. It ultimately will be some asphalt king and/or perhaps a handful of oil companies who have wanted access to Venezuelan oil for years (and who spent years trying to get around the sanctions).Trump’s Executive Actions are written by people who are familiar with US law and have an agenda that benefits a very small group of people who do not value the rule of law or peace, not Americans in general.
Noah, my friend your rant is mild compared to what I suspect some of us have been thinking on this topic & others.
While I agree with most of this assessment, I just have to say we all need to step a bit back here when we criticize this government too much. Realize that at this moment in time we could have Poilievre in office because it was damned close , and just imagine what the dialogue would be right now between him and Trump if he was.
Then understand that this government has done more in less than 12 months than most of our governments have managed to do in 5 years. They have managed to change the course of this behemoth called Canada, and yes, they haven’t accomplished everything we need done, but dammit they are working on it.
Just imagine those jugglers you saw as kids only realize it’s not 10 or 20 pins or balls in the air, it’s 1000, or 2000 with an Opposition party fighting them every step of the way.
This NATO integration and strengthening is precisely why I think the CPSP will go to GERNOR. Politically and defense wise you can claim it as an easy Arctic and north NATO defense win.
Defence Minister McGuinty as quoted December 30 in ipolitics:
“In my conversations with U.S. Secretary Pete Hegseth, particularly when I spent two hours face-to-face with him at the Pentagon and in subsequent communications, we are moving in lockstep. That doesn’t mean we’re not going to continue to have important negotiations on fiscal and financial matters, but we’re going to continue to manage this relationship well.
We have no choice. That’s what we’re going to do, and that’s what I’m trying to do on the defence side.”
https://www.ipolitics.ca/2025/12/30/canada-has-no-choice-but-to-cooperate-with-white-house-on-defence-mcguinty/
Hopefully there is a Plan B to MOVING IN LOCKSTEP. But it doesn’t sound like it.
Noah, thank you for taking the courage to talk about Canada’s biggest “elephant in the room” defence/political dilemma in decades. And an elephant not caused by us but our closest ally!
Surely, some US politicians and military would object to this “imperialistic” threat by the Trump administration. Putting that aside, Canada is racing against time to fill massive gaps in Canadian Arctic defence needs not only for our (just us) defence but significant contribution to NATO’s northern flank. I agree with every recommendation you have made in this article.
No one has linked this threat to NATO to our NORAD agreement. If this military force threat by Trump occurs, then the Canadian NORAD Region (CANR) must:
- cease immediately all intelligence and surveillance information exchange with NORAD, EXCEPTING hostile threats across the Arctic from Russia or China;
- initiate a “no fly zone” for any US military aircraft incursion into Canadian airspace or the basing of military assets here; and
- use every diplomatic means possible to terminate this military action.
Failure of Canada to act decisively to protect a NATO ally will undoubtedly cause the other alliance countries and other nations as well to no longer regard Canada as an independent state but a proven vassal state to the US. And with just reason.
I am the asker of two questions for your next pending “Ask Noah” pertaining to necessary exchange with intelligence information exchange with the US through NORAD for continental defence. The other pertained to defence data systems firewalled and placed in a sovereign cloud.
I hope that defence planners here are considering every potential outcome should a Greenland action occur.
Canada will have 0 heavy icebreakers in the Arctic for most of the 2026 season as the Louis St Laurent, our only heavy icebreaker in the water is loaned to Sweden to do mapping with their Oden. The Terry Fox will be in dry dock for another year. And, with respect the mediums can’t cut it, and the AOPS are good for first year ice only. So we have nothing to establish sovereignty let alone enable the annual sealift or build major projects. We need more heavy icebreakers now and the deepwater port at Q port now.
We can station an AOP there for a bit and then relieve it with another one and crew. At the same time supply the port with extra food and fuel to compensate. Also fly some Ranger patrols over for Joint exercises.