-
Canada wants to build a larger submarine fleet than the UK.
-
But buying twelve new boats can be a challenge while the company struggles to operate four boats.
-
Canada has the longest coastline in the world and submarines could be vital to its defense.
If Canada has trouble operating four submarines, how easy will it be to operate twelve more?
That’s one of the questions hanging over Canada’s ambitious new plan to become a dozen new subs that would strengthen the desperately undermanned Royal Canadian Navy and give Canada a larger submarine fleet than BritainGermany and most other NATO countries.
The plan also faces numerous obstacles that could make it a pipe dream. At the very least, it would require a revitalization of Canada’s neglected submarine force, which consists of just four aging and troubled submarines. Victoria class diesel-electric attack submarines, of which only one is fully operational at any given time.
“Everything is done on a shoestring budget and the results are clearly visible,” Paul Mitchell, a professor of defence studies at the Canadian Forces College, told Business Insider.
For now, details about the submarine purchase are scarce. The boats will be “conventionally powered, under-ice capable,” with a Request for Information for potential bidders set to be issued this fall, the Canadian government said. When asked by Canadian media, a government official “could not confirm how much the plan will cost, how many boats will be purchased, or when they will arrive.”
But the ability of these submarines to operate under ice underscores the program’s motivation: protecting Canadian interests in the North Polewhere melting ice has created a race among nations — including the U.S., Russia and China — to secure new shipping routes and mineral resources. “Competitors are seeking access, transportation routes, natural resources, critical minerals and energy sources through more frequent and regular presence and activity,” Canada’s Department of National Defence warned. “They are exploring Arctic waters and the seabed, probing our infrastructure and gathering intelligence.”
Canada has the the world’s largest coastlinestretching 150,000 miles across three oceans — the Atlantic, the Pacific and the Arctic. With so much territory to protect — plus commitments to NATO, the Royal Canadian Navy is already overstretched. Canada had the world’s third largest navy immediately after World War II: today the fleet consists of only twelve frigates and four submarines, plus several small patrol vessels.
Submarines could be very useful for defending Canadian territory, or for establishing a presence in contested Arctic waters. “SSKs (diesel-electric attack submarines) would be excellent for patrolling the areas where ships might approach the entry points into the Canadian Arctic: the Davis Strait to the east and the Beaufort Sea to the west,” Mitchell said. Unlike nuclear-powered submarines, diesel-electric boats must surface to recharge their batteries, but air-independent propulsion technology allows them to stay submerged for much longer periods.
Equipping new submarines with cruise missiles would also give Canada a powerful land-attack capability. Canada’s frigates already carry Harpoon anti-ship missiles, but the submarines could also be armed with Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles, like those carried by U.S. submarines. Harpoon and Tomahawk would be “the only strategic strike capability that the Canadian Forces has now or in the future,” Mitchell said.
Submarines would also allow Canada to support NATO and even Pacific operations, such as providing warships to a US-led coalition to Defending Taiwan of the Chinese invasion. The Victoria-class boats have been deployed as far away as Japan and Korea, the Barents Sea and the eastern Mediterranean.
But tripling Canada’s submarine fleet requires more than just buying new boats. For one thing, land-based infrastructure, such as maintenance and training facilities, is lacking and is spread across the east and west coasts. To continue submarine operations in the Arctic, a new base in the region is needed, Mitchell said, noting that Canada’s Pacific Naval Base in British Columbia is nearly 4,000 miles from the western entrance to the North West Passage.
Like the U.S. and other militaries, the Canadian Forces are facing a recruitment crisis. And even if there were enough men available to man 12 submarines, there would be a shortage of experienced officers. “There are currently only five qualified submarine captains in the RCN,” Mitchell said. “One is a rear admiral and two are captains. Submarines are generally commanded by lieutenant commanders, who are two ranks below captain.”
Although Canada is first submarine in 1914, the recent experience with submarines has not been exactly cheerful. In 1998, the Royal Canadian Navy purchased four used British Upholder-class diesel-electric submarines that were made redundant when Britain switched to an all-nuclear submarine fleet. The boats, renamed the Victoria class, quickly developed a reputation for unreliability. “The Victoria class has historically been underfunded in terms of maintenance and durability,” Mitchell said. Refits were hampered by bureaucracy and late work by defense contractors. Shortages of spare parts were exacerbated by the need to keep supplies 3,000 miles apart.
“Because of this scarcity, there was often a case of something that was needed on the West Coast that was only available in reserve on the East Coast,” Mitchell said.
In addition, Canadian shipyards cannot build submarines. Several foreign shipbuilders have expressed interest in selling submarines to Canada, including South Korea. Hanwha Ocean and that of Sweden Saab.
But importing foreign submarines instead of supporting local manufacturers raises another question: Is the Canadian public willing to pay foreign companies the $500 million or more that conventional submarines cost? Canada spent just 1.38% of its GDP on defense in 2023, well below NATO’s 2% target for alliance members.
A massive submarine procurement program would also face competing priorities. National Shipbuilding Strategy will cost more than $100 billion, including 15 new destroyers to replace aging frigates by 2050, as well as Arctic patrol vessels and icebreakers. In addition, the Royal Canadian Air Force is buying 88 F-35 fighters that will cost nearly $75 billion in acquisition and maintenance by 2070.
National defence has rarely been a major issue in Canadian politics. “Our approach historically has been one of minimal effort,” Mitchell said.
“If Canada continues its historic practice of underfunding defence, the proposed 12 boats could prove to be the biggest disappointment in defence history.”
Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter And LinkedIn.
Read the original article at Business insider