Canada’s surface fleet is in crisis.
For a country that spans three strategic oceans—the North Pacific, the Arctic, and the North Atlantic—Ottawa’s approach to naval power is scandalously inadequate. Years of political neglect, chronic underinvestment, and endless procurement missteps have left Canada with a navy incapable of fulfilling its most basic national security obligations.
Canada’s Navy Is a Giant Problem for Ottawa
This is not a minor issue of mismanagement; it is an outright failure of strategic vision that leaves the country dangerously exposed in an increasingly hostile world.
This decline is particularly shameful given Canada’s proud naval history. During the Second World War, the Royal Canadian Navy played a pivotal role in the Battle of the Atlantic, escorting convoys and protecting supply lines from the German U-boat threat. By the war’s end, Canada possessed the third-largest navy in the world, a fleet that was respected and feared. In the Cold War, Canada was a frontline maritime power within NATO, operating state-of-the-art destroyers and anti-submarine warfare assets to counter the Soviet Union’s growing submarine fleet in the North Atlantic. These decades of commitment built a legacy of professionalism and strategic importance—one that Canada has squandered through neglect and misplaced priorities.
At present, Canada’s surface fleet consists of a dwindling number of aging warships, most notably the Halifax-class frigates, which, despite recent modernization efforts, are approaching obsolescence. The Canadian Surface Combatant (CSC) program, meant to replace these frigates, has become a procurement disaster. Once envisioned as a $26 billion project, costs have spiraled out of control to an estimated $84 billion, with no viable replacements expected for at least another decade. This prolonged delay leaves the Royal Canadian Navy in an untenable position, reliant on outdated ships ill-suited to the demands of modern naval warfare.
The mismanagement of this program is emblematic of Canada’s broader failure to maintain a capable and credible navy, and the consequences extend well beyond budgetary concerns. With every delay, Canada cedes more strategic ground in the Atlantic and Pacific to nations willing to invest in serious maritime capabilities.
Canada’s Navy Has An Arctic Problem
Nowhere is this failure more pronounced than in the Arctic. As climate change reshapes the region, opening new shipping routes and intensifying geopolitical competition, Canada remains woefully unprepared to assert its sovereignty. While Russia rapidly expands its Arctic fleet with heavily armed icebreakers and modern warships, Canada has responded with token measures such as the Harry DeWolf-class Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships. These vessels, while useful for basic patrols, lack the armament and capabilities needed to deter hostile actors or project meaningful power in the Arctic. The notion that unarmed patrol ships can safeguard Canada’s Arctic sovereignty against nations investing in heavily armed icebreakers is wishful thinking.
The Arctic is no longer a benign security environment, and Canada’s neglect of naval power in the region is an invitation for encroachment.
The United States, for its part, has recognized the Arctic as a strategic domain, increasing military patrols and reinforcing its icebreaking fleet. Russia, with its formidable fleet of nuclear-powered icebreakers and heavily armed surface vessels, is positioning itself as the dominant power in Arctic waters.
China, too, has declared itself a “near-Arctic state,” deploying research vessels and working toward a long-term strategic presence in the region. Canada’s response has been lethargic at best, lacking both a coherent Arctic defense strategy and the means to back up its territorial claims with real force projection.
Without serious investment in Arctic-capable warships, Canada risks losing its voice in one of the world’s most geopolitically contested regions.
Canada’s diminished role extends beyond the Arctic, particularly in the North Atlantic and North Pacific. Once a key NATO player in anti-submarine warfare, Canada has all but abandoned this role as its fleet ages and its capability gaps widen. Russia’s modernized submarine force poses an increasing threat to transatlantic security, yet Canada lacks the vessels and infrastructure necessary to contribute meaningfully to NATO’s maritime defense.
NATO allies such as the United Kingdom and the United States continue to bolster their naval deterrence in the North Atlantic, recognizing the growing threat posed by Russian undersea forces. Canada, by contrast, has allowed its ability to track and neutralize submarines to deteriorate, reducing its relevance in joint maritime operations. The failure to maintain a robust North Atlantic presence undermines not just Canadian security but also the strength of the NATO alliance itself.
Challenges in the Pacific and Beyond
In the Pacific, the challenge is equally stark. China’s naval expansion has transformed the North Pacific into a critical theater of competition, yet Canada has little more than a token presence. The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has dramatically increased both the size and sophistication of its fleet, with a growing focus on power projection and control of key sea lanes. For a country with direct access to the Pacific and extensive trade ties to the region, Canada’s absence from Pacific security discussions is inexcusable.
Australia and Japan have both ramped up naval investments to counterbalance China’s ambitions, but Canada continues to see itself as a marginal Pacific player. This outdated mindset must change if Canada is to protect its maritime interests in an era of strategic competition.
This crisis demands decisive action. The government must urgently acquire interim warships to fill the capability gap, ensuring that the navy is not left with an outdated fleet until the CSC program finally delivers. The idea of waiting another decade for new warships while relying on aging frigates is not a serious strategy—it is an abdication of responsibility.
Rather than over-relying on costly and delayed domestic shipbuilding programs, Canada should look to allied nations for off-the-shelf solutions that can be acquired and deployed rapidly. Other NATO members have successfully procured proven designs from allied shipyards without suffering from Canada’s dysfunctional procurement bottlenecks.
It is imperative that Canada abandons the illusion that lightly armed patrol vessels are sufficient in the Arctic and instead invests in ice-capable warships designed for combat operations. A serious Arctic strategy requires more than symbolic patrols; it demands ships capable of withstanding hostile encounters and reinforcing Canadian sovereignty with credible deterrence.
3 Three Words: A State of Crisis
The country must also embark on a fundamental overhaul of its broken procurement system, which has repeatedly proven incapable of delivering modern military capabilities in a timely and cost-effective manner. The bureaucratic inertia and political interference that plague Canadian defense procurement must be addressed before any real progress can be made in modernizing the navy.
Above all, Canada needs a renewed commitment to naval power as a core component of its national security. A serious maritime strategy cannot be built on symbolic gestures and incremental fixes but requires sustained investment and strategic vision. This means recognizing that a strong navy is not a luxury—it is a necessity in a world where maritime security threats are growing, not diminishing. The notion that Canada can continue to rely on the United States to guarantee its security in perpetuity is both naive and dangerous.
Canada Victoria-Class Submarine. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
The failure to modernize Canada’s navy is not a distant or abstract concern. Without a credible surface fleet, Canada is gambling with its sovereignty and security at a time when the world is becoming increasingly dangerous. Geography and alliances alone cannot protect the country indefinitely. If Canada wants to be more than a paper tiger in maritime affairs, it must abandon its complacency and act with the urgency that the situation demands.
A strong and capable navy is not just a matter of national pride—it is the foundation of Canada’s ability to defend its interests, uphold its commitments to allies, and secure its place in the evolving global order.
About the Author: Dr. Andrew Latham
Andrew Latham is a non-resident fellow at Defense Priorities and a professor of international relations and political theory at Macalester College in Saint Paul, MN. Andrew is now a Contributing Editor to 19FortyFive. You can follow him on X: @aakatham.
