Canada’s Strategic Betrayal: Decades of U.S. Protection, and Carney Turns to Europe and Beijing

 

Canada’s decades of military freeloading on the United States — and the slap-in-the-face pivot to Europe under Carney.

When an Ally Stops Acting Like One
Seven Decades of Taking the American Shield for Granted
The SAFE Pivot: Diversification or Disloyalty?
The China Question: Carney’s Blind Spot, or Carney’s Alignment?
What This Means for the United States

SAFE May Be the Most Dangerous Foreign Policy Decision Canada Has Made in 50 Years

December 2, 2025

When an Ally Stops Acting Like One

Allies don’t always fight on your soil. Sometimes they simply stand there while you carry the weight for both of you. For more than seventy years, the United States has protected Canada militarily, economically, and technologically through NORAD, NATO, missile defence, and intelligence sharing.

America built the radar shield over our Arctic. America provided the jets, the satellites, the command-and-control backbone. America put its own troops where Canada could not, or would not.

And what did Washington receive in return for seven decades of subsidized security?

A country that has consistently spent half of what it pledged on defence. A military eroded by political neglect. And now, under Mark Carney, the clearest signal yet that Canada is pivoting away from the United States in favour of Europe and, in the shadows, China.

SAFE the EU’s new €150-billion defence financing program is only the latest symbol of a deeper trend: a Canadian political class happy to accept U.S. protection, but unwilling to honour the responsibilities that come with the alliance.

This is not “multilateralism.” This is strategic freeloading, followed by strategic betrayal.

Seven Decades of Taking the American Shield for Granted

NORAD: 75% Paid by the United States

NORAD — the bi-national command guarding North American airspace is the single most important security structure Canada has.

The United States pays three-quarters of the operating and modernization costs. Canada pays the rest.

Yet Canada’s fighter jets are decades old, its northern radar chain is obsolete, and its Arctic sovereignty patrols barely register on a map.

NATO: Canada’s 1.3–1.4% Spending vs. the 2% Pledge

For twenty years, Canada has promised 2% of GDP in defence spending. It has delivered:

• 2004–2014: Averaged 1.2%
• 2014–2024: Averaged 1.36%
• 2025: Still well below 1.5%

Meanwhile, the U.S. spends 3.4% and covers 70% of NATO’s budget.

Procurement Reliance: 65–75% of Canada’s Military Hardware Comes from U.S. Firms

For decades, Canadian governments bought American equipment because:

• It was interoperable
• It was reliable
• And it came with U.S. operational support, Canada could not afford to replicate

Carney suddenly wants to cut that to less than 30% not by strengthening Canada, but by substituting U.S. suppliers for European ones.

The U.S. Has Subsidized Canada’s Security for Generations

Missile defence? Arctic surveillance? Nuclear umbrella? Intelligence pipelines? Shared cyber defence?

Canada enjoys them all without paying even close to proportional costs.

This is why U.S. leaders across parties, Trump, Biden, Austin, Blinken, and Congress have called Canada a “free rider.”

SAFE is the moment the U.S. may stop whispering and start acting.

The SAFE Pivot: Diversification or Disloyalty?

What Carney Signed Canada Up For

On December 1, 2025, PM Mark Carney announced that Canada would join the EU’s SAFE (Security Action for Europe) program — a €150-billion rearmament pool designed to rebuild Europe’s defence industries.

Canada becomes the first non-EU country in the program.

The move comes with:

• An undisclosed entry fee (likely $1–2 billion CAD)
• Commitments to buy European-made equipment
• Restrictions on U.S. defence suppliers
• Favourable loans that tie Canada to EU procurement chains

Why Americans See This as a Slap in the Face

Carney explicitly stated he wants over 70% of future Canadian procurement not to come from the United States.

The subtext is clear:

“We trusted the U.S. too much. We’re hedging. Europe is more reliable.”

That is not what allies say. That is what opportunists say.

SAFE Is Not Complementary, It’s Competitive

The F-35 program depends on U.S.-Canadian synergy. Canada is now exploring Swedish Gripens instead. NORAD depends on radar and missile systems built with U.S. standards. SAFE funding pushes Canada toward Franco-German systems incompatible with U.S. platforms. Canada’s submarine bid is now leaning towards German or South Korean, bypassing U.S. defence entirely.

This is not “diversification.” It is an economic and military pivot.

The China Question: Carney’s Blind Spot, or Carney’s Alignment?

This part, Peter, is where the gloves come off because much of the Canadian media soft-pedals this.

Carney’s Deep Ties to China Are Not Speculation, They Are Documented

As Bank of England Governor:

• Pushed for renminbi internationalization.
• Signed agreements opening London’s financial sector to Chinese state banks.
• Promoted UK participation in Belt and Road–linked financing streams.

As UN Climate Envoy:

• Worked closely with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) headed by Jin Liqun, a long-time CCP operative.
• Structured climate-financing vehicles that funnelled Western capital into Chinese renewable giants.

As Chair of Brookfield Asset Management, Brookfield expanded its China exposure under Carney:

• $2B Shanghai commercial real estate holdings
• A $276M refinancing deal with Bank of China in 2024, weeks after Carney met PBOC leadership
• $750M stake in China Xintiandi
• Several green-energy JVs with Chinese state-linked conglomerates

Investigators like Sam Cooper have laid out how these deals connect, indirectly, to CCP United Front networks.

The Ethical Nightmare

Carney now controls:

• Canadian defence procurement strategy
• Canada’s foreign policy posture
• Canada’s alliance architecture
• Canada’s economic diversification strategy

While having spent a decade building relationships with CCP financiers.

SAFE does not distance Canada from China. It distances Canada from the U.S. while keeping China channels quietly warm.

What This Means for the United States

The U.S. will not ignore a decades-long free rider now shopping in Europe and cozying up to Beijing.

Expect:

• Tariffs on Canadian autos and energy
• NORAD modernization cost-shifts
• Possible Five Eyes downgrades
• Reduced access to U.S. defence technology
• Reprioritization of Arctic strategies without assuming Canadian reliability

America does not punish allies for being poor. America loses patience with allies who exploit U.S. strength, then pivot away when politically convenient.

Conclusion: SAFE May Be the Most Dangerous Foreign Policy Decision Canada Has Made in 50 Years

Canada has every right to diversify, strengthen its military, and modernize its industry.

But turning your back on the nation that protected you for seven decades while entertaining ever-closer ties with Beijing is not a strategy.

It is short-sighted opportunism, executed by a Prime Minister whose global financial networks raise legitimate questions about whose interests he truly serves.

If Canada wants to be treated like an ally, it must start acting like one.

Otherwise, the United States will eventually respond, and when it does, the shock in Ottawa will be entirely self-inflicted.