The head of the U.S. delegation headed to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly says Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s “arrogance” on defense spending threatens the future of the alliance.
The Assembly is gathering in Montreal, and Rep. Mike Turner is certain to call out Canada.
“The Trudeau policies are the freeloading policies of a NATO of decay. If everyone had the policies of Trudeau, there would be no NATO,” said Turner, who also serves as vice chairman of the Defense and Security Committee of NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
Canada is expected to spend 1.37 percent of its gross domestic product on defense this year, well below the two percent target that heads of government agreed to in 2014. Members recently agreed that 2 percent should be a minimum, as concerns grow over Russia’s prolonged invasion of Ukraine.
Trudeau insisted this week that his government has a “concrete” track to hit the minimum target by 2032. “The world is getting more dangerous, more unstable, which is why we’ve committed to reaching the 2 percent, why we’ve almost doubled our investments in defense over the past years, and will continue to over the coming years,” he told reporters at the G20 in Brazil.
Canada is set to purchase submarines, upgrade its investments in NORAD and strengthen engagements around NATO, he said.
It’s still not quick enough for many Americans, especially under President-elect Donald Trump. Turner told POLITICO if countries like Canada don’t step up, then there will need to be consequences for those “who cheat.”
The Republican lawmaker spoke to POLITICO this week about the Assembly, Canada’s defense capabilities and his motivation for writing an op-ed that called Canada’s prime minister NATO’s greatest threat.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Why did you write the Newsweek op-ed?
The biggest threat to the future of NATO are those countries that are not performing.
How do you feel about Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s defense policies?
The Trudeau policies are the freeloading policies of a NATO of decay. If everyone had the policies of Trudeau, there would be no NATO. Think about the generations of lost capabilities, pilots, military capabilities, military strategists, that are not being handed down in the Canadian military because the military has so atrophied in its expenditures.
You also just don’t have the intellectual and physical capabilities of a generation of military leaders. Canada is a country of vast size and resources, but yet its military leadership has just starved.
The Trudeau leadership has been of incredible arrogance that it has believed it is above the need to understand that the threats to democracy is authoritarianism. And the only preservation we could have for democracy is having a strong defense. Trudeau’s policies have outsourced it. They have freeloaded on the backs of the American taxpayer. And the call from all the alliance — that Canada agreed to also — is that everybody pay their own fair share and get to above the 2 percent has been an obligation that the Trudeau administration just failed to achieve.
What’s your message in Montreal this week?
Every NATO parliamentary assembly meeting, the U.S. delegation continues to deliver the message of the need for countries to deliver on their 2 percent obligation. And it is not the United States’ imposed two percent obligation. It was a collective unified agreement of NATO countries to meet the 2 percent. Nations that have made that commitment and failed to achieve it are reneging on their own commitments.
When do you think Canada will face consequences?
The Trump administration has begun the process of saying … NATO has begun the process of saying, if you knowingly and willingly agree to a financial commitment to NATO that you walk away from, you ought not to be equal to everyone else because you’re being disingenuous. You’re being dishonest saying that you’re going to meet a commitment that you don’t. You are cheating everyone else and that has to be addressed to some extent by everyone else who’s not cheating.
Last year Donald Trump said he would encourage Russia to attack delinquent NATO nations. How should Canada interpret that message knowing he is going to become president come January?
I would disagree that he actually said that. Look, if we’re going to have collective defense and collective obligations, you need to meet those collective obligations.
If Canada does not meet those obligations, will there be repercussions?
There are going to have to begin to be consequences for countries who cheat.
Do you know what that would look like?
No, but I think the dialogue needs to happen because countries are sending other nations the bill. They’re also cheating their own countries because if you don’t invest in your own country, your own industry, in your own capabilities, in your own people, you are robbing your future.
Do you think Canada has control over its sovereignty if it doesn’t have a strong defense?
Well, it certainly doesn’t have the ability to defend itself and to live up to its obligation in the NATO alliance to defend the alliance.
What do you think of Trump’s secretary pick, and what do you think his relationship with the Trudeau government will be?
The United States has strong relationships with the Canadian people and certainly our military has strong relationships with the Canadian military. The issue becomes, is the Canadian government — past the Trudeau administration — going to value the Canadian military enough to make the requisite investment to honor it.
Should Trudeau not survive the next election, what’s your expectation of the next prime minister?
Really for the future of Canada, anyone who picks up any reports from NATO and looks at what has happened to Canada over the past 20 years — the direction in Canadian investment, specifically in the last 10 — would know that Canadian leadership has got to change its focus to improve military investment.
What do you make of Canada hosting the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in Montreal and the Halifax International Security Forum despite not meeting its spending targets?
Canada needs to stop being a bystander and the host and [start] being an initiator and a strong member at the table.
