‘Oceans 11’: The Case for Canada Joining the Joint Expeditionary Force

On 28 March 2025, Mark Carney – a strong candidate to become the next Canadian Prime Minister today – declared that Canada's old relationship with the US, ‘based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperation, is over’. Just three months into his second term, President Trump has made unprecedented and repeated demands that Canada becomes America’s 51st state, even refusing to rule out the use of force to achieve this. Similar threats to acquire Greenland from the Kingdom of Denmark have shattered NATO harmony. His ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs have directly challenged the North Atlantic Treaty’s Article 2 (Economic collaboration). For Canada, NATO’s protections are now less certain, and the country should look to Europe for alternative security and trade arrangements. Joining the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) would be a valuable start.

Why Now?

In 2013, Canada was among the first group of countries invited to join the JEF. The UK and Canada are closely linked, with a shared history, monarch, values and political system. Canadian soldiers fought alongside the UK, Denmark, Estonia and the Netherlands in NATO’s Regional Command South in Afghanistan – the hard fought experience which became the genesis of the JEF. However, Canada declined the offer of membership at the 2014 NATO Wales Summit and thought the door closed during Britain’s post-Brexit positioning and Danish concerns around traditional rivalries over Hans Island and Arctic cooperation. These issues have since eased and Trumpian pressure has reopened the door.

Canadian, European and UK defence policy is increasingly aligning north to shore up the Arctic and High North to Russian challenge. Canada is a major actor in the JEF core regions of the Northern Atlantic, High North and Baltic Sea Region. It is also the lead NATO framework nation in JEF member Latvia, alongside JEF members Iceland and Sweden as contributing nations and thus is committed to defending the Baltic States through NATO’s new hardened defence posture. Therefore, Canada joining the JEF would enhance political and military cooperation in the north and make the JEF a true Euro-Atlantic framework, thereby increasing its presence, operational effectiveness and deterrence credibility. Moreover, the offer of Canadian membership can regain the lost momentum on JEF since the new UK government came to power and give the framework a new impetus in a deteriorating security environment. The situation is so extraordinary that some have even suggested that Canada join the EU. Joining the JEF could be a valuable stepping stone to closer European integration, just like Finland and Sweden joining the JEF in 2017 eventually helped them into NATO in 2023 and 2024 respectively and setting Canada on a different path.

Strategic Shocks

The Trump administration’s hostility towards Europe and rapprochement with Russia has galvanised NATO and EU countries to increase defence spending, revise economic strategies, and consider organic alternatives to US leadership. Fundamental shifts in Euro-Atlantic security are expected which will push Europe and Canada closer together.

First, NATO faces multiple challenges from US reprioritisation away from the Europe. There are reports that the US may choose to leave elements of the NATO command structure. Moreover, Trump, and multiple US Cabinet members, have suggested a new Alliance spending target of 5% of GDP. Creating stronger linkages between Canada and Europe will help bind NATO together as a Euro-Atlantic framework as US policy towards Europe evolves.

Second, climate change in the North is rapidly enabling geopolitical change, with melting sea ice opening up more reliable – and valuable – trade and security routes between the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific. These emerging sea lines of communication could have significant geoeconomic benefits for Europe, Japan, South Korea and other Indo-Pacific partners. These changes will affect – and potentially benefit Canada and the JEF countries most. Canadian security and viability of the Northwest Passage would be a valuable alternative for European shipping to risk relying on Russia for safe piloting and navigation of the Northern Sea Route to Asia.

These shorter trade arteries will need to be secured. With limited benefit to US wealth generation and growing demands for increased burden sharing from Washington, DC, these new sea lanes will likely have to be protected by Canada, European Allies and Indo-Pacific partners without US support.

Putin has acknowledged that Trump was serious about Greenland and that the Arctic was, ‘a springboard for possible conflicts.’ As Russia seeks new resourcing opportunities, whilst opening new bases across the Arctic, the US rhetoric towards long-term allies threatens traditional patterns of generating consensus through NATO, the Arctic Council and international maritime law. More concerning, the US and Russia might collude to create a duopoly in the Arctic as a way of stabilising the region and coming to a grander bargain on Euro-Atlantic security, than just peace in Ukraine.

Third, uncertainty – and shock – over US leadership has pushed Europe and Canada to consider novel options to finance rearmament and defence resilience. Rebuilding Europe’s defence industrial base is seen by some in Brussels as a prerequisite to ween the continent off US security, while cooler heads point out that the US is still critical for the defence of Europe.

Even with significant increases in defence spending, it will take 15-20 years to replace the US nuclear and conventional deterrent in Europe. Therefore, Europe and Canada’s own liberation day from US leadership is a long way off. However, alternative groupings of likeminded nations are needed to step up in the meantime to bolster assurance and burden sharing. Complementary groups such as the JEF are therefore becoming more important for regional cooperation.

Strength in Numbers

Canada is not the only NATO ally that has attracted Trump’s ire. Denmark – a founding member of NATO, the Arctic Council and the JEF – finds itself in a similar position.

Despite criticism from the US Vice President, Denmark has already expanded its potential defence and economic investment into Greenland and its naval forces in the north. Denmark’s pragmatism has paid off already through EU support. Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, pushed the Danish government to hold a referendum on reversing the 30-year-old opt-out clause relating to defence initiatives under the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) – that hosts its own mutual defence clause (Article 42.7 of the Treaty of the European Union). Two-thirds of Danish voters backed the government to reverse the opt-out and fully cooperate on EU defence. But it needs more support.

Denmark bridges every defence club and has a well-established Joint Arctic Command 2-Star Headquarters in Nuuk, Greenland, which is available for national, JEF, CSDP, or NATO operations. JEF operations do not always need to be UK-led and the UK can plug into other JEF member command and control structures - something that would appeal to Canada too. Moreover, belonging to the JEF provides access to UK strategic enablers, extended nuclear deterrence, and the UK’s own pragmatism in trans-Atlantic diplomacy. The opportunity to embrace these pragmatic bridges to Europe and the US must be appealing to Canada, particular as the Danes assume the 6-month EU Council Presidency in July 2025. 

Stepping Up on Defence

Canada would need to significantly step up on defence to match the JEF members and be a net contributor. Canada currently spends just 1.37% on GDP defence - well below the current NATO target of 2% - placing the country 27th of 31 allies (Iceland are not included in NATO spending figures). In 2024 Canada’s spending profile represented a real terms increase of 57.75%. In the same timeframe, the JEF members have delivered an average real-terms increase of 150% and are continuing to rise rapidly. Membership would help Canada position its spending on capabilities which are optimised for the High North and would bring 10 NATO allies to its side when renegotiating NATO Planning targets.

To fund the required increases, Canada should follow Europe in exploring new financial mechanisms, such as the Defence Security and Resilience Bank (DSRB). This new institution is complements developing EU initiatives and can be accessed by all of Europe (including UK and Norway as non-EU nations) as well as democratic partners across the world, including Canada, Japan and South Korea. It expands access to Canada, not clearly covered the non-paper recently circulated by the UK, which looks like an attempt to help fund a purely UK-EU Defence Pact. The UK can help enable Canada’s economic and security bridging in to Europe by helping it join the JEF and by hosting the DSRB in the City of London, providing a win for the new Canadian leadership who are already noting the DSRB as one tool for financing Canadian rearmament. Countries that commit capital to join the DSRB can use this overall national balance sheet asset as part of their overall GDP contributions to defence spending and would be the quickest way to get Canada to 2% and higher as the target increases to match American expectations.

The concept is also attractive to JEF countries who would make ideal initial members of the DSRB that has – in part – it origins in the idea of establishing a ‘JEF Bank’. Therefore, JEF members - alongside Canada – ;are in prime position to present the concept for agreement at the JEF Leaders Meeting in Oslo in May 2025, a few weeks ahead of the June 2025 NATO Summit in The Hague, which would allow a third of NATO members to collectively position themselves ahead of facing expected additional demands from the US.

Oslo provides the first opportunity for Canada to join the JEF and embrace a highly innovative new way of funding defence for all European nations and Canada. Finally, Canada holds the Presidency of the G7, the DSRB could conceivably make it onto the agenda at the next G7 Finance Ministers meeting in Alberta on 22 May 2025, ahead of the G7 summit is mid-June. A suitable reciprocal act in May from a likeminded JEF ally.

Oceans 11

Canadian membership of the JEF makes geopolitical, geoeconomic, and defence regeneration logic.

The UK has a critical role to play, through encouraging Canada’s rearmament and re-emergence as a North American power who wants to lead and rapidly enhance Canada’s defence credibility in a more dangerous world. However, the UK must also step up. King Charles – as Canada’s Head of State – warmly received Carney as his first overseas visit since taking over leadership of the Liberal Party. However, Sir Keir Starmer and his government have been near silent on support for Canada and Denmark under Trump’s increasing pressure. French President Macron and outgoing German Chancellor Scholz have been far more vocal in their support for Denmark.

It will also vastly strengthen Arctic security – a key UK interest – making six of eight members of the Arctic Council part of the JEF, frustrating Russia who will face a vanguard of JEF and EU CSDP security beneath the steel of NATO deterrence, underpinned by US and UK nuclear capability – creating another valuable layer of assurance.

Canada is therefore set to become the most important ally the JEF never had. The JEF enables Canada’s move towards northern European cooperation and interoperability, and in turbulent economic times, puts Canada on point as a good ally towards likeminded nations. The time is right for Canada to join the JEF as a full member. It should be offered in May.

© RUSI, 2025.

The views expressed in this Commentary are the authors', and do not represent those of RUSI or any other institution.

For terms of use, see Website Terms and Conditions of Use.

Have an idea for a Commentary you'd like to write for us? Send a short pitch to commentaries@rusi.org and we'll get back to you if it fits into our research interests. View full guidelines for contributors.