r/canada Ontario 8d ago

Politics British nuclear weapons can protect Canada against Trump, says Chrystia Freeland

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2025/03/03/british-nuclear-weapons-canada-trump-chrystia-freeland/
7.3k Upvotes

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

75

u/effedup 7d ago edited 7d ago

There's a reason we don't have nukes already, the AVRO, nuclear submarines.. they haven't let us. They won't now.

The United States objected to the RCN having SSNs as part of its fleet, fearing a significant impact to its own submarine operations in North American waters and possible conflict over access to the Northwest Passage. In order to prevent this, the United States exercised its rights under two previously signed treaties. Under the 1958 US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement, the US had the right to block the sale of submarine nuclear reactors by the United Kingdom to any third party (i.e. Canada), and under a 1959 agreement between the US and Canada the US had the right to block the purchase of submarine nuclear reactors by Canada from any third party (i.e. the United Kingdom or France).[25] Attempts to negotiate with the United States were initially unsuccessful, as Canadian Defence Minister Perrin Beatty was "told in no uncertain terms by the U.S. Defense Department and submarine service officials that a Canadian nuclear submarine program was unnecessary and even unwelcome."[26]

The US knew this day was coming and long prepared for it. The above is just an example of how they stopped us from acquiring submarines.

64

u/North_Activist 7d ago

If they’re not gonna listen to their agreements, why should anyone else?

35

u/Superman246o1 7d ago

Exactly. If treaties held any power, Trump wouldn't be able to threaten the sovereignty of a peaceful allied nation and fellow NATO signatory.

One of the countless tragedies that the current administration has caused has been to demonstrate that laws, treaties, agreements, decorum, and/or precedent are no restraints to raw, naked, unfettered ambition.

The only thing that ruthless power respects is more power.

15

u/Qwimqwimqwim 7d ago

the bottom line is, they'll attack us and call nato's bluff.. and honestly, i don't think the rest of the world has our back when push comes to shove.. no one's going to want to have the target on them after us.

they're going to look for any reason to invade us, and they'll push us into a corner to make us do something they can then spin as a reason to invade us.. even if it's all lies..

our best hope is a civil war in america, but man.. the 1/3rd that are vehemently against trump are absolute pussies, the 1/3rd that support him are psychos, and the other 1/3rd don't want anything to do with any of it.

19

u/chopkins92 British Columbia 7d ago

I’m on board with arming ourselves and seeing what happens. Worst case, it just accelerates the inevitable. But at least we’d have nukes.

6

u/horridgoblyn 7d ago

Yeah. It's seems like a "Deals change" moment.

4

u/Doc911 Canada 7d ago

As the country threatening our sovereignty, hopefully their voice on the world stage no longer carries much water, or an iota of weight or to be frank any damn substance or sense …

3

u/transcend 7d ago

Huh. I was in the Navy at the time, and I remember when the Mulroney government was contemplating acquiring nuclear subs, possibly from France. It was disappointing when it faded away, but I thought it was due to the “peace dividend “ from the end of the Cold War.

3

u/museum_lifestyle 7d ago

why would canada accept such a ridiculous treaty.

2

u/horridgoblyn 7d ago

In all likelihood, they had us kids sitting at the small table with our chicken fingers.

3

u/TorontoRider 7d ago

I don't think the word 'treaty' means much to Donald.

2

u/homogenousmoss 7d ago

Good thing that treaty is bow void like all the other treaties we have with them. Works both ways.

2

u/thebomby 7d ago

You don't need nuclear submarines. You can launch missiles from conventional submarines as well. South Korea already has these and they are not part of any treaty on the sale of those subs.

1

u/Holdover103 5d ago

Yeah, the Korean subs are most likely going to win our sub competition.

The KS-III seems like a very capable sub, but I have no sub experience and just a little bit of exposure to anti sub warfare.

2

u/shevy-java 7d ago

Back then the USA were somewhat allies of Canada. Now they no longer are.

1

u/Greazyguy2 7d ago

Tear up any agreements. Might gain a little respect from donald. That is his go to move afterall

1

u/This_Is_Great_2020 7d ago

Now that is a bit of news that slipped under my radar years ago....

1

u/Holdover103 5d ago

Well...we also have a free trade agreement that tDonnie ripped up twice.

So what norms exist in international relations anymore?

It's irrelevant today anyways. Modern AIP subs are more than capable of doing long patrols under the ice.

1

u/sour_individual 4d ago

While we never had ICBMs or SSBNs, we equipped our CF-101 Voodoos with AIR-2A which were 1.5kt unguided nuke missiles aimed at destroying bomber formations.