Canada to meet NATO spending threshold before schedule, Carney says
Canada will meet NATO's defence spending threshold of 2 percent this year as it shifts spending away from the United States and strengthens its relationship with the European Union, according to Prime Minister Mark Carney.
Carney made the announcement on Monday, warning that in a 'darker' world, Canada must reduce its security dependence on the US. In a speech at the University of Toronto, he said the country would hit the target five years earlier than anticipated.
Canada has been realigning its defence partnerships to better align with the EU, which marks a significant break from Ottawa's longstanding reliance on the US. The country plans to buy more defence equipment, including fighter planes, from Europe.
His government is also reviewing the planned purchases of F-35 jets from the US to assess alternative options.
'Our military infrastructure and equipment have aged, hindering our military preparedness,' Carney said.
'Only one of our four submarines is seaworthy. Less than half of our maritime fleet and land vehicles are operational. More broadly, we are too reliant on the United States.'
'The threats that Canada faces are multiplying,' he added.
Carney's pledge follows similar commitments by other NATO members and comes after sustained pressure from US President Donald Trump for allies to increase defence spending. Increasingly, hostile language, including Trump's jabs at turning Canada into the 51st US state, has increased tensions with Ottawa.
Canada spent 1.33 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence in 2023, according to NATO data.
Since taking office in mid-March, Carney has issued a series of stark warnings about what he describes as a shift in US global leadership under 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, criticising Trump's trade policies.
'We should no longer send three-quarters of our defence capital spending to America,' the prime minister added.
He also warned that Canada has 'been jolted awake by new threats to our security and sovereignty,' citing Russia and China as key concerns.
Carney framed the increase in defence spending as a strategic necessity 'to protect Canadians, not to satisfy NATO accountants'.
In April, NATO announced that 22 of its 32 members had reached the 2 percent spending target. European countries, in particular, have ramped up military budgets in the wake of Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and NATO now considers the 2 percent threshold a minimum requirement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
10 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Canada to meet NATO spending threshold before schedule, Carney says
Canada will meet NATO's defence spending threshold of 2 percent this year as it shifts spending away from the United States and strengthens its relationship with the European Union, according to Prime Minister Mark Carney. Carney made the announcement on Monday, warning that in a 'darker' world, Canada must reduce its security dependence on the US. In a speech at the University of Toronto, he said the country would hit the target five years earlier than anticipated. Canada has been realigning its defence partnerships to better align with the EU, which marks a significant break from Ottawa's longstanding reliance on the US. The country plans to buy more defence equipment, including fighter planes, from Europe. His government is also reviewing the planned purchases of F-35 jets from the US to assess alternative options. 'Our military infrastructure and equipment have aged, hindering our military preparedness,' Carney said. 'Only one of our four submarines is seaworthy. Less than half of our maritime fleet and land vehicles are operational. More broadly, we are too reliant on the United States.' 'The threats that Canada faces are multiplying,' he added. Carney's pledge follows similar commitments by other NATO members and comes after sustained pressure from US President Donald Trump for allies to increase defence spending. Increasingly, hostile language, including Trump's jabs at turning Canada into the 51st US state, has increased tensions with Ottawa. Canada spent 1.33 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence in 2023, according to NATO data. Since taking office in mid-March, Carney has issued a series of stark warnings about what he describes as a shift in US global leadership under 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, criticising Trump's trade policies. 'We should no longer send three-quarters of our defence capital spending to America,' the prime minister added. He also warned that Canada has 'been jolted awake by new threats to our security and sovereignty,' citing Russia and China as key concerns. Carney framed the increase in defence spending as a strategic necessity 'to protect Canadians, not to satisfy NATO accountants'. In April, NATO announced that 22 of its 32 members had reached the 2 percent spending target. European countries, in particular, have ramped up military budgets in the wake of Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and NATO now considers the 2 percent threshold a minimum requirement.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
What are the threats facing Europe?
Under the slogan 'welfare not warfare', protesters have come out in force in London, objecting to the British government's plans to increase military spending while cutting back on social support. Like its European allies in NATO, the United Kingdom is under pressure from the United States to take responsibility for its own security in light of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But the European public – most of whom are facing a cost-of-living crisis – may well object as much as the British. So can NATO allies build a defence force strong enough to counter any threats from Russia without US support? And how will European leaders address possible public discontent? Presenter: Elizabeth Puranam Guests: Paul Beaver – defence analyst Aaron Gasch Burnett – senior fellow at the Democratic Strategy Initiative, a political think tank Jeremy Corbyn – independent member of the UK Parliament
Al Jazeera
2 days ago
- Al Jazeera
Democrats wooing Musk after the Trump breakup is US plutocracy at its best
It's official: United States President Donald Trump and the world's richest person, Elon Musk, have broken up. At the end of last month, Musk departed from his post as the head of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), where he oversaw the mass firing of federal employees and dismantling of various government agencies – all the while benefitting from his own companies' lucrative contracts with the government. Anyway, US 'democracy' has never met a conflict of interest it didn't like. Musk's service at the White House initially appeared to end on an amicable note as Trump praised him for the 'colossal change' he had achieved 'in the old ways of doing business in Washington'. The former head of DOGE in turn thanked the president for the opportunity. But soon after his departure, Musk publicly criticised the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act', a tax and spending bill that Trump is currently obsessed with passing, slamming it as a 'disgusting abomination'. There ensued predictably dramatic social media exchanges between the two right-wing billionaires with Trump pronouncing Musk 'so depressed and so heartbroken' after leaving the White House and offering the additional coherent analysis: ' It's sort of Trump derangement syndrome. We have it with others, too. They leave, and they wake up in the morning, and the glamour's gone. The whole world is different, and they become hostile.' Musk has repeatedly taken credit for Trump's 2024 election victory on account of the gobs of money he donated to the president's campaign and those of other Republican candidates. Now that the relationship is over, Trump has wasted no time in warning Musk that he'll face 'very serious consequences' if he chooses to fund Democratic campaigns in the future. But some Democratic ears, at least, have perked up at the possibility of getting the planet's richest person back on their side – which he abandoned in favour of Trump after having extended support to Democratic former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. The political switcheroo was hardly extreme. At the end of the day, ideology matters little when you're just in the business of buying power. California Congressman Ro Khanna, for example, recently opined that Democrats should 'be in a dialogue' with Musk in light of their shared opposition to Trump's big beautiful bill. As per Khanna's view, 'we should ultimately be trying to convince [Musk] that the Democratic Party has more of the values that he agrees with.' He went on to list a few of these alleged values: 'A commitment to science funding, a commitment to clean technology, a commitment to seeing international students like him.' Never mind that Musk's main 'value' is a commitment to controlling as much of the earth – not to mention the whole solar system – as he possibly can for the benefit of himself and himself alone. Beyond his mass firing activities while head of DOGE, a brief review of Musk's entrepreneurial track record reveals a total lack of the 'values' that Democrats purport to espouse. Over recent years, reports have abounded of sexual harassment and acute racism at Musk's Tesla car factories. In October 2021, a federal jury in San Francisco ordered Tesla to pay $137m to a Black former employee who claimed he was told to 'go back to Africa' among other abuses suffered at his workplace. Along with violating federal labour laws, Musk as chief executive of Tesla threatened workers over the prospect of unionisation. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020, he violated local regulations to keep his factories up and running, underscoring a general contempt for human life that, again, should not be a 'value' that anyone aspires to. To be sure, not all Democrats are on board with the proposal to woo Musk back into the Democratic camp – but he may be getting a growing cheering squad. In addition to Khanna's advocacy on his behalf, New York Democratic Congressman Ritchie Torres seems prepared to give Musk his vote as well: 'I'm a believer in redemption, and he is telling the truth about the [big beautiful] legislation.' Anthony Scaramucci, Trump's former White House director of communications, has, meanwhile, suggested that Democrats could 'bring Elon Musk back into the fold as a prodigal son' by foregoing more left-wing policies – as if there's anything truly left-wing about the Democratic Party in the first place. Newsweek's write-up of Scaramucci's comments observed that 'It would be a coup for Democrats if they could court the influence of the world's richest man once more.' It would not, obviously, be a coup for democracy, which is supposed to be rule by the people and not by money. And yet a longstanding bipartisan commitment to plutocracy means the US has never been in danger of true democracy. Instead, billions upon billions of dollars are spent to sustain an electoral charade and ensure that capital remains concentrated in the hands of the few – while Americans continue to literally die of poverty. Now it remains to be seen whether the Trump-Musk breakup will drive Democrats into Musk's arms. But either way, the country's plutocratic values remain rock solid – and that is nothing less than a 'disgusting abomination'. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
