U.S. freezes joint defence board

The United States has frozen its participation in the U.S.-Canada Permanent Joint Board on Defense, a bilateral body created in 1940 to advise on continental defence, after publicly accusing Ottawa of falling short on military spending and delaying a decision on its F-35 fighter purchase. Pentagon officials said on May 21 that the pause reflected concern that Canada was not acting like a “credible” security partner and had yet to produce a funded plan to meet NATO’s new spending goals. Canadian reporting has described the move as a symbolic but pointed rebuke inside one of Washington’s oldest defence relationships. The dispute lands as the two countries are still working together on NORAD modernization, Arctic security and other shared defence files. ### Which body did Washington freeze, exactly? The Permanent Joint Board on Defense is the principal forum for U.S.-Canada bilateral defence cooperation, according to a 2023 U.S. Embassy readout of its 241st meeting. That readout said the board brings together senior civilian and military officials to discuss bilateral priorities including NORAD modernization, Arctic security and defence cooperation beyond North America. (streetinsider.com) The board’s most recent public Canadian readout was issued after its 242nd meeting in Ottawa on November 13, 2024. Canada’s Department of National Defence said the two sides discussed NORAD modernization implementation, Arctic security, critical minerals and broader bilateral defence priorities. (ca.usembassy.gov) ### What did the Pentagon say Canada failed to do? A Pentagon official told Reuters on May 21 that the U.S. decision to suspend planned biannual talks followed concern that Ottawa was not taking the steps needed to become a “credible” partner in continental defence. The official said Canada needed a plan, backed by resources, to raise core defence spending from 2% to 3.5% of gross domestic product by 2035. (canada.ca) CBC reported that senior U.S. officials also tied any resumption of cooperation under the board to a Canadian road map for NATO’s new benchmark, which they described as 3.5% of GDP for core defence plus 1.5% for defence infrastructure. Those officials, speaking on background, said Ottawa had not articulated a path to that target. ### Why is the F-35 purchase part of this dispute? (streetinsider.com) Pentagon officials said Canada’s unresolved review of its planned purchase of 88 Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jets had become another irritant. Reuters reported that the review had been expected to wrap up around September 2025 but remained unfinished, with discussion in Canada about whether to split the fleet and buy some Saab Gripen aircraft instead. (cbc.ca) CBC said senior U.S. officials cited the absence of a decision on whether Canada would proceed with the full F-35 purchase as part of the rationale for the freeze. The Pentagon official quoted by Reuters said the delays and lack of transparency around the review showed “the prioritization of politics” over shared defence responsibilities. (streetinsider.com) ### Has Canada actually raised defence spending? Canada’s 2026-27 Departmental Plan says Ottawa committed in June 2025 to spend 2% of GDP on defence by March 31, 2026. The same document says Canada also committed to invest 5% of GDP by 2035 across core defence capabilities and defence- and security-related dual-use investments. (streetinsider.com) CBC reported that Canada allocated C$9.3 billion more to the Department of National Defence last year to meet NATO’s older 2% benchmark and that the defence budget for the fiscal year ended March 31 was expected to top C$63 billion. U.S. officials, however, said the issue was no longer the old NATO threshold but a funded path to the new target. ### Does this change day-to-day NORAD cooperation? (canada.ca) The November 2024 board readout shows the forum has been used to discuss NORAD modernization, but neither the Pentagon nor Canadian officials said the pause ended NORAD’s operational work. The board is an advisory and consultation mechanism rather than the command structure itself. (cbc.ca) CBC quoted Imran Bayoumi, a former U.S. defence adviser now at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, calling the cancellation a “needless provocation” that sends the wrong message to Ottawa and other allies. That is an assessment from an outside analyst, not a formal U.S. government position, but it captures why the move has drawn attention beyond the board’s immediate practical role. (canada.ca) ### What happens next? May 21 is the clearest marker so far: that was the day Pentagon officials publicly said Canada would need a resourced NATO spending plan and progress on the F-35 file before the board’s work could resume. Ottawa’s next formal response is likely to come through defence budgeting, NATO-related commitments or a decision on whether to proceed with the full 88-jet Lockheed Martin purchase. (streetinsider.com) (cbc.ca)