Canada Wants to Increase Its Arms Exports: At What Cost?

A quantified sales goal: to increase sales by 50%

Mark Carney’s government is poised to make a major strategic shift. In a 68-page document titled “Defense Industrial Strategy,” Ottawa openly reveals its intention to transform Canada into an even more formidable military export powerhouse. The stated goal is clear and ambitious: to increase defense exports by 50% over the next decade. The sector, already vital for equipping the Canadian Armed Forces, is described as a key economic engine that must be running at full capacity.

Current figures already attest to the strength of this industry. According to the most recent government data, from 2022, local companies export nearly half of their production. In fact, 49% of military goods and services produced domestically are sold abroad, generating substantial revenue of 7 billion dollars. To achieve its new goals, the government plans to focus on its flagship products: ground combat vehicles, aircraft, radar and surveillance systems, and drones.

The geographic distribution of Canadian defense customers remains dominated by its southern neighbor. The United States alone accounts for 69% of exports. Far behind is the Middle East and Africa region (12%), followed by European Union countries (11%), Asia and Oceania (6%), and finally the United Kingdom (5%). The new strategy specifically aims to strengthen partnerships with the EU, the United Kingdom, and the Indo-Pacific region.

Administrative Simplification and Inspection Criteria

To achieve this increase in sales, the Carney administration plans to “simplify” the export process. Currently, a license is required to sell military goods and technologies abroad, a requirement that applies to all destinations except, in most cases, the United States. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has the authority to approve or deny licenses based, in part, on respect for human rights.

The new strategy calls for improved coordination among government departments to speed up these approvals, although no technical details have been provided on the exact method. Global Affairs Canada, contacted by Radio-Canada, declined to explain the mechanisms behind this streamlining, referring instead to the responses that government officials are set to provide to journalists this Tuesday morning. The current framework, however, is based on strict guidelines approved by the Cabinet in 1986.

Under this policy, Canada states that it rigorously controls exports to countries posing specific risks: those that threaten Canada and its allies, those engaged in or on the verge of a conflict, and those subject to UN Security Council sanctions. Furthermore, countries where the government commits serious and repeated human rights violations are theoretically excluded, unless it can be proven that there is no risk to the civilian population.

Persistent International Controversies

This push for expansion comes as Canada has weathered several diplomatic storms related to its arms sales. In the fall of 2018, following the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and the war in Yemen, the Liberal government was forced to suspend new export permits to Saudi Arabia. More recently, the situation in Israel has become a focal point of tensions. Since January 8, 2024, no new licenses have been issued for that destination, and some existing licenses have been suspended since October 7, 2023, in response to allegations of violations of international law in Gaza and the West Bank.

However, uncertainty persists. Last August, a coalition released a report based on Israeli customs data citing Canadian shipments of “bullets” and armored vehicles. Foreign Minister Anita Anand had to step in to defend herself, asserting that the items identified as bullets were actually paintball cartridges.

Prime Minister Mark Carney himself was questioned on this matter during his trip to the United Arab Emirates in November. This Gulf monarchy is accused of diverting weapons—sometimes Canadian ones—to Sudan, a country torn by a deadly civil war since April 2023. However, this contentious issue does not appear to have been addressed during this economically focused trip, during which the Emiratis pledged more than $70 billion in investments in Canada.

Bill C-233 and the U.S. Exception

Faced with the risk of arms being diverted to regimes that violate human rights, NDP MP Jenny Kwan introduced Bill C-233 in September. Its goal is clear: to eliminate the automatic exemption from scrutiny currently granted to the United States. Although Canada signed the Arms Trade Treaty in 2019, it exempted its southern neighbor from mandatory risk assessments.

In an interview with Radio-Canada, Ms. Kwan is unequivocal: “As a result, the vast majority of weapons, military parts and components, and technologies shipped to the United States escape any scrutiny […] and are subsequently re-exported to other countries accused of serious human rights violations.” She adds firmly: “We must put an end to this.” Canada can no longer be complicit in such violations.

The bill is scheduled for a vote on March 11, but optimism is in short supply. Bloc Québécois member Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay doubts its effectiveness given the integration of the two industries. Conservative MP Michael Chong fears that the United States may view this as a significant threat to its defense and security. There is similar reluctance among the Liberals: Robert Oliphant, Parliamentary Secretary, stated that the bill, in its current form, risks undermining international security, Canada’s security, the country’s defense industry, and its international partnerships at a critical juncture.

Expert Opinion: Balancing Profitability and Values

How can these commercial ambitions be reconciled with ethics? Justin Massie, a professor at UQAM, suggests that “streamlining” could involve increasing staff to process applications more quickly. “That doesn’t mean we’ll grant more licenses to more countries that violate human rights, but rather that we’ll optimize the bureaucracy,” he explains. He emphasizes, however, the economic reality: If we limit our customer base, it’s certain that [production] will cost Canadian taxpayers more—that much is obvious. He concludes that prioritizing values is a more costly choice, but one that is [at the same time] more respectful of our values.

For his part, Thomas Juneau of the University of Ottawa observes that the need to diversify the economy has pushed human rights to the back burner. In a broader context, the Carney government’s trade policy does not prioritize human rights, he argues, citing visits to Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and China. In his view, the reasoning is that diversification requires engaging with countries that do not have stellar human rights records.

Finally, Jessica West of the NGO Project Ploughshares emphasizes Canada’s legal obligations. She warns that a distinction must be made between administrative streamlining and lowering standards. However, Canada’s legal obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty and its export control regime require a rigorous assessment of risks to human rights and the protection of civilians, she tells Radio-Canada. She warns that the rise of dual-use technologies such as AI requires that these safeguards not only be preserved but also strengthened.

Source: ici.radio-canada.ca

Created by humans, assisted by AI.

Canada Wants to Increase Its Arms Exports: At What Cost?