The Current - Boosting Canada’s military will take 'sustained and stable' preparation: Defence chief

Episode Date: June 25, 2025

Defending Canada will require new strategies, investments in new equipment, and more recruits, according to Gen. Jennie Carignan, chief of the defence staff of the Canadian Armed Forces. The country��s top soldier tells guest host Susan Ormiston about her priorities for the military, and what a new five per cent NATO defence spending target would mean for Canada.

Ten years ago, I asked my partner Kelsey if she would marry me. I did that, despite the fact that every living member of my family who had ever been married had also gotten divorced. Forever is a Long Time is a five-part series in which I talk to those relatives about why they got divorced and why they got married. You can listen to it now on CBC's Personally. This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and this is the current podcast. Only one of our four submarines is seaworthy. Less than half our maritime fleet and land vehicles are operational. More broadly, we're too reliant on the United States. And so for all those reasons, I'm announcing today that Canada will achieve NATO's 2 percent of GDP target this year,

half a decade ahead of schedule. Prime Minister Mark Carney has moved quickly on increasing Canada's defence budget but as Canada promises to hit 2% of GDP, the demand from NATO is going up now to 5%. This week Carney is in Europe for both the NATO summit and defence and security talks with European Union leaders. This comes as the conflicts in the Middle East continue to evolve and it's a moment where the ability of Canada's armed forces to meet all the demands they face are in sharp focus. General Jenny Carignan is Canada's chief of the defence staff.

I spoke with her yesterday in our Toronto studio. Here's our conversation. General Carignan, welcome. Hello, Susan. Thank you for having me. You're welcome. You are watching as the world is, the escalating tensions in the Middle East. We may have a fragile ceasefire. It may not last. Tell me from your perspective, how much further away are we now from stability in that region? perspective, how much further away are we now from stability in that region? I think generally speaking the global environment is very dynamic and complex and in constant evolution and Ukraine is not over as well so we need to watch this part of the world as well very carefully, as well as the Indo-Pacific and the actions of

China and the South China Sea and in that region as well. So it's a volatile situation within a global environment, but so we consistently have to be mindful of that. AMT. So speaking about the Middle East though, Tehran of course launched missiles at the US base in Qatar this week. You have armed forces members in the Middle East broadly, some with UN, some with NATO missions. Are you adding any security measures to protect Canadians there? So in terms of armed forces members, of course we are always monitoring where they are and ensuring that the appropriate force protection measures are in place, that they have shelters and that they have the necessary situational awareness to make the right decisions.

So this is in terms of Armed Forces members. But also, we are working very closely with Global Affairs Canada to monitor the situation in each one of these countries in case we need to evacuate Canadians from these countries. General, I want to talk about NATO. You've had a lot of experience with NATO missions in Iraq, I believe, in Afghanistan and others. Prime Minister Carney is at NATO this week with a huge emphasis on defense spending. We're going to get pressure all the countries to increase even further defense spending. Canada has just, some say belatedly, agreed to a 2% of GDP target. Now we expect to be pressured for a 3.5 or greater. How is Canada going to

meet that and should it? So I think this is the the conversations that are ongoing between allies within NATO and as we participate to NATO's collective defense it's important that allies again share the burden of that defense. So in terms of Canada for say, those additional investments are going to enable us to be at a higher state of readiness, making sure that we address the foundation of our armed forces so that we can build on the future capabilities that we will need. What we've asked the Canadian Armed Forces to do over the past 30 years plus is fundamentally different than what we are being asked to do now and in the future and requires different

equipment, different capabilities. So we need to build our foundation which is the number of our people, everything that we need to make sure that our equipment can be fixed, repaired, that we have the number of people that we need. So addressing that as we will be onboarding new modern equipment in the next few years. I want to ask you about how it is fundamentally different, but just getting back to the increased pressure to increase funding. I mean, you know it's taken a long time for this country to get to a 2% of GDP commitment. Now it's 3.5 or more. Is that possible? Can we meet it?

I think again it's decision space for our government to make that decision and for Canadians as well. So I think what we see as we engage with Canadians at the moment is a realization that our geography does not protect us as well as it used to be. The advancement of technologies, mostly in the missile domain, can reach, we know it can reach our continent and our big urban areas at the moment. And so it is clear that the environment has changed and again our geography is not as you know protective as it used to be. A senior lieutenant general in Latvia recently told our defence correspondent in at CBC that the army we have now is not the army we need for the future.

That's a pretty bold statement and even the Prime Minister has talked about, you know, you need more recruits, you need to keep them, you have one in four seaworthy submarines, you're looking at F-35s that are delayed and expensive. It sounds as if we are not capable currently of fulfilling our NATO obligations. So there is more work to do, that is for sure, and all of our allies are in similar positions. So historically, again, over the past 30 years plus, NATO allies, members, including Canada, we've been involved in operations that are more limited, specific in focus and in in theaters of operation and it's usually expeditionary. Whereas now well again with the behavior of Russia, with the behavior again of adversaries across the world, it

is clear that we need different capabilities and go back to collective defense and then national defense within our own borders as well. So that requires different capabilities and I'm just going to take one as a very good example. It's air defense capabilities. In a scenario like Afghanistan, you don't need air defense because you have air supremacy. So we divested those systems to get other capabilities that were required for that specific type of theater of operation. But the type of conflict that we see happening right now, Russia, again, China, it's large-scale conventional conflicts and requires fundamentally different equipment structures.

And not only that, but rebuilding our defense industrial base that requires to be able to sustain the requirements of defence as well. But how far behind are we? I mean, we left Afghanistan 15 years ago and we've had wars ever since. We don't have operational drones. We won't have until perhaps the early to mid-1930s. What is a priority for the defence spending that has been promised by the government for the Armed Forces? So we have many initiatives at work currently. So we are acquiring air defence system as we speak, for example, so short, medium, long range. So we're in the process of doing that. Long range precision fires is another one.

Air defence system is another one. So, like, all allies are looking for the same type of capability. So what we are doing is basically putting all of this together to leverage each other's strength in those various capabilities. So this is why we are assigned the share of those capabilities to ensure that it's complementary to each other. Is drinking raw milk safe like RFK Junior suggests? Can you reduce a glucose spike if you eat your food in quote-unquote

the right order? I'm registered dietitian, Abbey Sharp. I host a nutrition myth-busting podcast called Bite Back with Abbey Sharp, and those are just some of the questions I tackle with qualified experts on my show. On Bite Back, my goal is to help listeners create a pleasurable relationship with food, their body and themselves, which in my opinion is the fundamental secret to good health. Listen to Bite Back wherever you get your podcasts. It appears that the new Prime Minister Carney has decided to look elsewhere for alliances, not depend as fully on the United States for all the reasons that our listers know a lot about with the U.S. He's just signed a new agreement deepening defense and security with European partners. Is that a signal in your view that we are going to move away from so much dependent

on the U.S. and lean in towards European defense partnerships and strategy and procurement? So my understanding is we need to have a menu of options available to us and having more diversity in our approach to procurement equipment allows also for better interoperability with our European partners, for example. But we share the continent with the Americans, better interoperability with our European partners, for example. But we share the continent with the Americans, so we need to be interoperable as well with our American partners in terms of NORAD and defence of the continent. You mentioned air defence systems as something we need to invest in soon. I presume you think there's an urgency around that. What else are we missing in

in the event of the, you know, the scale of threats that Canada is facing right now, both in the Arctic and our allegiances and operations overseas? Dr. Catherine Lange So, one of our main area of focus is Canada and the Arctic, the defence of Canada and the Arctic. We have a lot of investments coming in to enable that through NORAD modernisation, for example. So extending airfields in the Arctic region to make sure that our fighter jets can land, acquiring and acquiring infrastructure or Norden operational support hubs. So establishing infrastructure in the Arctic where we can project power to make sure that again we can assume our sovereignty.

But what is the scale of the geopolitical threat in your view? From a military perspective, it's mostly ballistic missile, cruise missile, and hypersonic missile as well that are very, very difficult to defeat. You've only got sometimes a few minutes to react. Coming from the West, it is more about those new technologies along with the way they can be delivered via ships, submarines, space or other means. You've talked about this. I'm curious how long you think we need as a country to be ready, to be military prepared in the Arctic to face those threats.

I think if there is one thing about the military to be ready is that it needs to be a sustained and stable preparation because if we demobilize, it takes years before you can reacquire those capabilities and then get people ready and trained to use the systems appropriately. It's a bit like an insurance policy. If you haven't paid your insurance when you need it, it's not there to do its work. I want to ask you about one of the assets that you mentioned, the fighter jets. We have a decision to make about the F-35 program. Do you think that we should continue to invest in the US F-35s beyond the 16 that we've already

paid for to a maximum of 88? Is that something that you would recommend the government do? Dr. Bela Moula-Moula, Ph.D. So I think for the moment, we'll have to see what the results of the reviews are. We need to always be ready to review what we are doing, especially for projects that are extended over a long period of years. So it's very important that we keep reviewing to make sure that this is the right capability for our needs. And as we onboard as well more capabilities in the future, that they again, how do they complement and supplement each other because it's all about redundancy as well. So it's a very healthy exercise to keep reviewing what we are doing to make sure that we are

still on course. But you are the head of the armed forces. You must have an opinion, a trained opinion about whether or not we should stay with one type of F-35 that we've already expressed interest in or whether two different types of jet fighters would be doable. Well, I'm always ready to revisit what we've decided and I'm always ready to see what the analysis is going to give me and then, you know, then what we propose to the government and then it will be up to them to make the decision. And you haven't got to that proposal yet. You're not willing to say what you're telling the government we should do.

I want to see the analysis first. Because the cost is ballooning as the this is something we don't control. Change in currency, inflation, these always play in those projects that are very long-term. So again, this is a consideration as part of the decision-making process. I appreciate your time. There are two other things I want to ask you about, one foreign and one domestic. Ukraine. It's a difficult time for Ukraine. NATO, you know, may spend less time talking about Ukraine than it has in the past, in part, perhaps,

to placate the US president. What do you think is going to come out of the NATO meeting or what should come out of the NATO meeting in terms of defending Ukraine? So, like, what I can say is about, like, my interactions with my NATO colleagues is we have every meeting, we're all about discussing Ukraine, making sure we understand what their strategy is. So we interact with General Sersky, the Ukrainian Chief of Defense. So we stay constantly appraised of the strategy, where they're going next, and what is it that they need to support them. So what is clear is that support to Ukraine is

continuous and we are looking at various means of enabling their fight. So for example, as part of our investments in defense, there is a two billion dollars there that has been allocated for the support to Ukraine. So that support definitely continues. And although it is not necessarily out in the media, because there's a lot going on in the world, but that support definitely is ongoing. Obviously, we have an enhanced mission in Latvia with Canadian Armed Forces, but given the challenges that you've described, is Canada able to support Ukraine to the degree that we want or the degree that Ukraine wants given the challenges we have about machinery, about replacements, things like that?

So of course there is always more that we can do, but we have committed to supporting their training and supporting their capability building. We are supporting them via various means, whether it's basic training, cyber, engineer training, as well as medical training, which saves a lot of lives. So enabling them to do their work is what we are about, and we have focused our efforts mostly in capability building. General, not only are you the first female head of the Canadian Armed Forces, I think it's undoubtable that you are the first avid dancer at the head of the Armed Forces. Flamenco, I believe, and ballroom dancing. So my question is, does your fancy footwork experience help you get

around the enormous challenges you face? Well, for me it's a hobby, it's an opportunity to be with a group of wonderful people and have, you know, great social experience as well at the same time, but it's, it's, it's a, it's an activity that I have, I have always enjoyed since I was a child. So to me, it's an opportunity to meet people and do something I like. Danielle Pletka A little stress reliever, I imagine. Suzanne Galuet For sure. Yes. Danielle Pletka Thank you very much for your time. Suzanne Galuet Thank you very much, Susan.

Danielle Pletka General, Jenny Carignan is Canada's Chief of the Defense Staff. You've been listening to The Current Podcast. My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening. I'll talk to you soon.