Canada’s Victoria-Class Submarine Nightmare Has ‘Sailed Into Port’

We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Key Points and Summary: Canada’s plan to replace its aging Victoria-class submarines with up to 12 modern vessels is a crucial step to safeguard its Arctic, North Pacific, and North Atlantic waters. The Victoria-class, plagued by maintenance issues and outdated capabilities, underscores the need for a reliable fleet to address emerging challenges.

-However, Canada’s history of defense procurement inefficiencies threatens this vital project. Key decisions on propulsion systems, cost, and collaboration with allies like AUKUS nations will shape the program’s success.

-With rising geopolitical tensions and climate change affecting maritime security, the stakes are high for Canada to deliver a capable submarine fleet and secure its maritime sovereignty.

Victoria-Class Submarines Out, Modern Fleet In: Can Canada Deliver?

Canada’s plan to replace its aging Victoria-class submarines is both a crucial step toward safeguarding the nation’s maritime interests and a formidable test of its defense procurement capabilities. Announced with ambitions that match the strategic importance of the project, the plan to acquire up to 12 new submarines represents a recognition of the need to bolster Canada’s ability to defend its Arctic, North Pacific, and North Atlantic waters. However, given Canada’s troubled history with defense procurement, this ambitious effort is far from assured. The stakes are high, and success will depend on whether Ottawa can overcome its own systemic inefficiencies to deliver a modern, capable fleet.

The need for new submarines is clear. Canada’s four Victoria-class submarines, purchased secondhand from the United Kingdom in the 1990s, have been plagued by persistent maintenance issues and have struggled to achieve the operational readiness required for a country with vast maritime responsibilities.

These submarines were designed in the 1980s and, even when fully operational, are ill-suited to the challenges posed by emerging demands and the complexities of operating in Canada’s expansive maritime domains. Whether it is monitoring activity in the Arctic as climate change opens new sea lanes, ensuring a presence in the North Pacific, or contributing meaningfully to NATO’s collective defense in the North Atlantic, the need for a reliable and modern submarine capability is undeniable.

The Trudeau government’s submarine replacement plan acknowledges these realities, but the path from announcement to implementation is fraught with challenges. Canada’s defense procurement history is littered with delays, cost overruns, and missed opportunities.

From the decade-long saga of replacing the CF-18 fighter jets to the troubled Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ship program, Ottawa’s record inspires little confidence. Major defense projects in Canada are hampered by a Byzantine bureaucratic process, insufficient political will, and a lack of long-term strategic planning. The proposed submarine program, which could cost tens of billions of dollars, risks becoming another victim of these systemic issues unless the government acts decisively to reform the procurement process.

One of the key hurdles will be deciding on the type of submarine to acquire. Diesel-electric submarines are a practical choice given Canada’s history and budget constraints, but they lack the endurance and stealth of nuclear-powered submarines, which are increasingly favored by other Arctic nations. While Canada has long resisted the nuclear option, relying on diesel-electric submarines to operate effectively in Arctic waters presents challenges, particularly as maritime traffic and geopolitical interest in the region continue to grow.

The debate over propulsion technology is emblematic of the broader challenges the program faces: balancing cost, capability, and strategic necessity in a way that satisfies both domestic stakeholders and Canada’s allies.

This debate also raises an intriguing hypothetical: how might Canadian participation in AUKUS, the trilateral security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States, have influenced the trajectory of the submarine program? AUKUS, with its focus on cutting-edge military technology and particularly on nuclear-powered submarines, has provided Australia access to unprecedented capabilities.

If Canada had sought and gained inclusion in this pact, it might have had the opportunity to share in the development of advanced submarine technologies or even to collaborate directly on procurement. Such participation could have brought strategic clarity and technical support to Canada’s submarine program, possibly helping to overcome some of the inefficiencies that have historically plagued Ottawa’s defense projects. Instead, Canada finds itself charting this course largely alone, without the benefit of the AUKUS framework.

Despite these challenges, there are signs that Canada’s naval procurement record may be improving. The Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ship program, while not without its delays, has begun to deliver vessels that enhance Canada’s ability to operate in northern waters. The Canadian Surface Combatant program, though controversial for its cost, represents a serious commitment to modernizing the Royal Canadian Navy’s capabilities.

These developments suggest that Ottawa is beginning to grasp the importance of investing in a capable and well-equipped navy, even if progress remains slow and uneven.

The new submarines are not merely a military necessity; they are vital to Canada’s sovereignty and security in a world where maritime interests are increasingly contested. In the Arctic, where warming temperatures are making the region more accessible, Canada must ensure it can monitor and protect its waters, safeguard its natural resources, and assert its sovereignty in line with international law. In the North Pacific, Canada’s strategic environment is shaped by the realities of an evolving security landscape and the growing importance of Indo-Pacific trade routes. The North Atlantic, long considered NATO’s maritime backyard, remains a critical theater for transatlantic security and a region where Canada must demonstrate its commitment to the alliance.

A modern submarine fleet would enhance Canada’s ability to address these challenges, providing a deterrent against illicit activities, supporting intelligence-gathering efforts, and ensuring Canada’s voice is heard in multilateral defense forums. Submarines are uniquely suited to operate in contested and sensitive areas, offering capabilities that surface vessels and aircraft cannot match. Without a credible submarine force, Canada risks being sidelined in the very regions that define its maritime identity and security.

For Canada to succeed in this endeavor, it must approach the submarine replacement plan with a seriousness and urgency that have often been lacking in its defense policy. This requires not only sustained funding but also political leadership capable of navigating the inevitable controversies and trade-offs that will arise. It also demands greater collaboration with allies, particularly the United States, whose own submarine programs and Arctic policies intersect closely with Canada’s interests.

Canada Victoria-Class Submarine. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

The stakes could not be higher. Failing to replace the Victoria-class submarines would leave Canada vulnerable to gaps in its ability to monitor and protect its waters. Yet even as Ottawa embarks on this ambitious project, it must contend with the weight of its own history, a history that has often prioritized short-term political considerations over long-term strategic imperatives.

There is room for cautious optimism. Canada’s recent naval programs, though imperfect, have demonstrated that progress is possible. If Ottawa can build on these successes and apply the lessons learned, the submarine replacement program could mark a turning point for Canadian defense policy. But the clock is ticking. The Victoria-class submarines will not remain operational indefinitely, and every delay brings Canada closer to a dangerous capability gap.

Ultimately, the success or failure of Canada’s submarine replacement plan will serve as a litmus test for the nation’s ability to adapt to a changing security environment. More than that, it will determine whether Canada can live up to its responsibilities as a maritime power in the Arctic, the North Pacific, and the North Atlantic. The path ahead is difficult, but for the sake of Canada’s sovereignty and security, it is a path that must be followed with resolve.

Victoria-Class Submarine Canadian Navy. Image Credit: Government Photo.

About the Author: Andrew Latham 

Andrew Latham is a Professor of International Relations and Political Theory; and Special Advisor to the President of Macalester College, Saint Paul, MN. He is also a Non-Resident Fellow, Defense Priorities, Washington, DC; a Senior Washington Fellow with the Institute for Peace and Diplomacy also in Washington, DC; a 2023-25 Education Ambassador with the Council on Foreign Relations; an Opinion Contributor with The Hill in Washington, DC; and an Opinion Contributor with RealClearDefense.