Canada raises defence spending to hit Nato targets amid tariff row: Carney
'The long-held view that Canada's geographic location will protect us is becoming increasingly archaic,' Carney said in a major foreign policy speech in Toronto. 'We have been jolted awake by new threats to our security and sovereignty – including from emboldened Russia and an assertive China.'
Under President Donald Trump, 'the United States is beginning to monetise its hegemony, charging for access to its markets and reducing its relative contributions to our collective security,' Carney said.
'In parallel, the world's trade routes, allegiances, energy systems and even intelligence itself are being rewired. Rising great powers are now in strategic competition with America. A new imperialism threatens.'
In response, Canada must rapidly ramp up its military capabilities and become less reliant on the US, Carney said – which will mean shifting some of its defence spending to domestic companies and to other allies. 'We should no longer send three-quarters of our defence capital spending to America,' he said.
Canada is already reviewing its planned purchases of Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets, with Swedish-produced Saab AB Gripen aircraft as a possible replacement or addition to the US-made planes.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
In debt-bloated US, stablecoin a new financial weapon in the making
Imagine a 500lbs man. Eighty per cent body fat. His arteries are clogged, his heart is on the blink. A doctor tells him to do 100 burpees a day to save his life. It's not bad advice – burpees are great for losing weight – but let's be honest. The man can't even kneel, let alone jump. The method isn't wrong. It's just impossible. That man is the US economy. And the debt – all US$36.65 trillion of it – is the fat. Let's cut through the noise. Recent headlines have been about the supposed feud between Elon Musk and US President Donald Trump. Sure, the friction is real, and their political interests don't quite align any more. But the real story isn't personal. It's structural. It's about how the world's most powerful nation – obese with debt – is quietly looking for a cheat code. It's not going to be austerity. Trump, with his 'big, beautiful' spending plans , has no interest in cutting back. Even if government departments miraculously shaved off a trillion dollars annually, that would barely cover the interest on the debt. Fiscal discipline isn't on the menu. The patient has no intention of dieting – he just wants a miracle drug. And here's where things get interesting. The US government may be exploring a new financial weapon: the stablecoin
The Standard
5 hours ago
- The Standard
Hang Seng Index rises to fresh high since late 2021 on trade deals
Musk's xAI to raise up to US$12 billion in debt for AI expansion, WSJ reports
AllAfrica
10 hours ago
- AllAfrica
Australia, Japan reluctant to commit to US-led Asian NATO
The Financial Times reported that US Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby recently asked Australian and Japanese defense officials how their countries would respond to a war over Taiwan. He also asked them to boost defense spending after NATO just agreed to do so during its latest summit. Colby lent credence to this report by tweeting that he's 'focused on implementing the President's America First, common sense agenda of restoring deterrence and achieving peace through strength.' This sequence shows that Trump 2.0 is serious about 'Pivoting (back) to (East) Asia' in order to more robustly contain China. This requires freezing the Ukraine war and assembling a de facto Asian NATO – both of which, however, are uncertain. Regarding the first, Trump is being drawn into 'mission creep,' while the latter is challenged by Australia and Japan's reluctance to step up. To elaborate, they seemingly expected the US to do all the 'heavy lifting', just like NATO expected till recently as well. That would explain why they didn't have a clear answer to Colby's inquiry about how their countries would respond to a war over Taiwan. Simply put, they likely never planned to do anything at all, thus exposing the shallowness of the de facto Asian NATO that the US has sought to assemble in recent years via the AUKUS+ format. This refers to the AUKUS trilateral of Australia, the UK and the US alongside what can be described as the honorary members of Japan, the Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan. Australia and Japan are correspondingly envisaged as this informal bloc's Southeast and Northeast Asian anchors, yet they're evidently unwilling to fulfill the military roles that their US senior partner expects. What the US apparently had in mind was them, at the very least, playing supportive logistical roles in the scenario of a Sino-US war, but their representatives reportedly didn't suggest as much to Colby. This, in turn, reveals that they fear retaliation from China even if they don't participate in combat. Japan's population and resultant economic density make it extremely vulnerable to Chinese missile strikes while unconventional warfare could be waged against Australia through sabotage and the like. Moreover, China is both of their top trade partners, which opens up additional avenues for retaliation and coercion. At the same time, however, neither of them wants China to seize control of Taiwan's chip-making powerhouse TSMC (if it even survives a speculative conflict) and thus seize a monopoly over the global semiconductor industry. The US doesn't want that either, but the problem is that the two envisaged anchors of its de facto Asian NATO aren't willing to boost defense spending nor seemingly assist America in a war over Taiwan. That's unacceptable from Trump 2.0's perspective so tariff and other forms of pressure could be applied to coerce Australia and Japan into at least spending more on their armed forces. The endgame, however, is for them to agree to play some sort of role (whether logistical or ideally combative) in that scenario. Given that the US won't relent on its 'pivot (back) to (East) Asia', it will likely coerce concessions from Australia and Japan one way or another. The same applies to the other members of AUKUS+, namely South Korea, the Philippines and Taiwan, albeit with perhaps a slightly lower defense spending from the latter two. All in all, the US is rounding up allies ahead of a possible war with China but it's anyone's guess whether it actually plans to spark a major conflict. This article was first published on Andrew Korybko's Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become an Andrew Korybko Newsletter subscriber here.
