Tillis argued that Canada should compensate the U.S. for two decades of NATO spending shortfalls, claiming Ottawa failed to meet its responsibilities. “Can we do a makeup payment … for the 20 years of shortfalls as well?” he asked during a security panel.
He warned that even though Canada now plans to reach NATO’s 2% GDP target, it cannot simply ignore what he calls an accumulated deficit.
Canada’s Defense Response
Canada’s Defence Minister David McGuinty responded by highlighting the country’s renewed commitment to defense. He said Canada is hiring 15,000 soldiers, rebuilding 33 bases, ordering hundreds of aircraft, and constructing new destroyers.
McGuinty admitted there was “complacency” in the past when governments prioritized social programs over defense spending.
Context: Canada’s Changing Defense Posture
Under Prime Minister Mark Carney, Canada has pledged to finally meet NATO’s 2% GDP target, reaching it five years earlier than previously planned. Carney has also set a long-term goal of hitting 5% of GDP by 2035, a dramatic shift after decades of underinvestment.
Political Fallout and Transatlantic Tensions
Tillis’s comments raised concern among other U.S. lawmakers. Independent Senator Angus King warned that such rhetoric risks damaging relations between the two countries.
The U.S. ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, also acknowledged tensions but said Washington will not dictate how much Canada must spend.
Doubts and Criticism
Critics argue that the $300 billion figure is unrealistic and not grounded in NATO rules, since member states never agreed to repay past shortfalls as a literal debt. Analysts warn the demand could fuel domestic resentment in Canada, where many already question rapid increases in military spending.
