In this episode, Canadian Ranger Allen Pogotak talks of his life in the Canadian Arctic, and questions why there aren’t more efforts to defend or explore it. Then, former Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy explores Canada’s role within NATO, from our reason for joining and our most memorable contributions in the past, to how we should evolve in the future. Are we doing enough to keep up with the shifting global landscape, or are other nations stepping up where we’re falling short?
Listen to the episode:
[CLIP] Harry S. Truman: Men with courage and vision can still determine their own destiny. They can choose slavery or freedom, war or peace. I have no doubt which they will choose. The treaty we are signing here today is evidence of the path they will follow. If there is anything certain today, if there is anything inevitable in the future, it is the will of the people of the world for freedom and for peace.
Angela Misri – Welcome to Season Three of Canadian Time Machine, the podcast that dives into the key moments that have shaped our country. This podcast receives funding from the Government of Canada and is produced by the Walrus Lab. I’m Angela Misri. This episode commemorates the 75th anniversary of the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty—a milestone we marked in 2024. It was a pivotal moment on April 4, 1949, a spring day in Washington, D.C. when foreign ministers from 12 countries gathered to sign.
And guess who was there? Ready to sign on to a new vision for global security? Yep. Canada alongside some of the world’s biggest players. We committed to something bigger than ourselves. Peace, stability and freedom. In a world still reeling from the devastation of World War II.
Now picture it. Europe’s in shambles. The Cold War is looming and the Soviet Union is making moves. The world needed something to keep the peace. And NATO was the answer. Think of it like an international buddy system. If one member gets into trouble, the rest of the crew jumps in to help. It was about keeping the balance so we didn’t repeat the chaos of the last few decades. Canada, ever the good neighbour, figured it was time to pitch in.
Since then, Canada’s involvement in NATO has been fundamental, from leading peacekeeping missions to ensuring our sovereignty in the Arctic. While the world has changed, Canada’s commitment to NATO has stayed grounded in those core values of peace and freedom. But as we’ll hear soon, some key issues, especially when it comes to defending the Arctic, still raise important questions about how far we’ve truly gone to live up to our promises.
So today, we’re exploring how Canada’s role in NATO has shaped both our global standing and our defence priorities then and now. And that brings us to the Arctic. A vast expanse of rugged beauty and untapped potential, but also a region facing increasing challenges, from climate change to shifting geopolitics. It makes up 40% of our land and over 70% of our coastline. But are we doing enough to defend and nurture it? That’s a question Canadian ranger Allen Pogotak has spent his life exploring.
Allen Pogotak – I’d like to see more sovereignty up on the northern islands, which we haven’t done enough of. Northwest passage now is open so it’d be nice to get up there and see if there’s any changes on any of the islands, or if there’s any inhabitants or anything up there.
Angela Misri – Allen has lived in the Northwest Territories for his whole life, and he’s been working as a Ranger since 1997. The Canadian Rangers are a vital unit of the Canadian Armed Forces’ Army Reserve, with over 5,000 members who are stationed in remote communities. They provide military support through surveillance, search and rescue, and help during domestic operations like floods and wildfires.
Allen Pogotak – The challenges up here are the cold, it’s the wind and the rain. The weather is the most challenging part up here in the north, and not much daylight in the winter.
Angela Misri – Allen is also an Arctic survival instructor who has been learning to navigate the land since he was young. He’s spent years training military personnel in Arctic survival—teaching them how to build igloos, pitch camps, and adapt to the extreme cold.
Allen Pogotak – It’s a lot of fun to travel up here, if you know the land and use your landmarks. As you grow up, you get to know the land, ocean and land. For me, it’s not too bad, not too hard for me to navigate up here because I’ve grown up here and taken a lot of guys out hunting and guided them out.
Angela Misri – For Allen, knowing the land isn’t just a skill, it’s a way of life. And it’s this expertise that makes him an invaluable asset to Canada’s sovereignty efforts. But for Allen, these efforts fall short.
Allen Pogotak – I think we still need more. It’s pretty hard to keep track of everything that’s going around up north. Would be nice to see more Rangers. Actually I would like to do more sovereignty on islands because it’s our land, and we’d like to keep control of it, because nobody lives up there.
Angela Misri – And even though Allen has been a Canadian Ranger for almost 30 years, he’s not sure why there isn’t a stronger effort from Canada to defend the North.
Allen Pogotak – I’m not sure. Maybe it’s because of funding or other stuff going on. Maybe the wars somewhere have something to do with what’s going on with those Rangers or the military, so I’m not very, I can’t really answer that…
Angela Misri – Allen’s uncertainty speaks to a larger issue: despite his decades of service and intimate knowledge of the land, the disconnect between those on the ground and Canada’s broader Arctic defense strategy is striking.
And while Allen focuses on the day-to-day realities of life in the Arctic, the region is also at the center of rising global interest. Countries like Russia and China are eyeing the North, prompting serious questions about Canada’s ability to navigate shifting geopolitics. But for Allen, the most pressing changes are much closer to home.
Allen Pogotak – There has been a lot of changes, like the weather, like climate change. It’s been pretty warm, and late freezing up here in these past couple of years, and now we still have open water, so I think climate change is a big thing up here.
Angela Misri – The Arctic is warming faster than any other region on Earth, and for Allen, that reality is undeniable. He speaks of open waters where there once was ice, unpredictable winds, and changes to the landscape that he’s had memorized for his whole life. And as things continue to melt, we might be more and more exposed to outer threats, not just from climate change, but from others looking to stake their claim in this increasingly accessible region. The melting ice is opening up shipping routes, revealing untapped natural resources, and sparking a geopolitical race for influence in the Arctic.
For Canada, the question isn’t just about how to adapt to these changes, but how to assert its sovereignty and protect its northern borders in a rapidly shifting landscape. And yet, voices like Allen’s remind us that the Arctic isn’t just a battleground for global interests—it’s a home, a way of life, and a region that deserves both respect and protection.
As Canada grapples with its role in the North, the choices we make now will shape the future of this vital region—for its people, its environment, and its place on the world stage.
For decades, Canada has been known for its commitment to peacekeeping, collaborative security, and humanitarian values. But in a changing world—with shifting defense priorities, the resurgence of great power competition, and increased demands for NATO contributions—where does the Arctic fit in our national defense strategy?
To answer these questions, I’m honoured to welcome a truly distinguished guest to Canadian Time Machine, Lloyd Axworthy. As Canada’s former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Axworthy played a pivotal role in shaping the country’s global presence, including its involvement in NATO and international peacekeeping efforts. Over his remarkable career, he’s been a champion of humanitarian values, leading initiatives like the landmine ban treaty and the UN policy on the Responsibility to Protect.
In addition to his time in politics, Mr. Axworthy has made significant contributions to academia and human rights advocacy. He served as president of the University of Winnipeg and is currently the Chair of the World Refugee & Migration Council. Few Canadians have had a greater impact on the global stage. Mr. Axworthy, thank you for joining us.
Lloyd Axworthy – My pleasure to be here. Good to be here. Thank you.
Angela Misri – So Canada was a founding member of NATO and has been part of nearly every operation since its creation. From your perspective, what were the most significant motivations behind Canada’s early involvement in NATO?
Lloyd Axworthy – Well, I think going back to the post-war period, the -45, -46 period, it was pretty clear to the Canadian governments and policymakers that the best security for Canada was to be in collaborative relationships. In a world that was dominated by very big powers coming out of the Second World War and recognition that you had to be united, you had to work together, and that that’s where Mike Pearson and others really forged a sense of how we should be internationalist, what was called liberal internationalist at the time.
And I think that certainly set a precedent or the model for things to follow. And I think NATO there was a clear expression of the concern about the Soviet’s aggressive stances and positions they were taking. But I think Canada also tried to introduce into NATO certain sections that suddenly should be considered about peaceful issues, about economic and social inequity, things of that kind. D idn’t go very far, but it was there. But we certainly bought into the idea that we should be part of a collaborative cooperative, a security arrangement.
Angela Misri – So you talked about -45, -46 and then you accelerated to the Cold War. What took so long? Like, why did it take so long for this to come about?
Lloyd Axworthy – I think the Cold War issues were already emerging. I think what really kind of changed dramatically the scene was the emergence of nuclear weapons, the discovery of Americans of the atomic bomb. Immediately the Soviet followed.
What is a little known part of that early development on the nuclear issue is that Canada had the capacity to become a nuclear power. We have been part of the Manhattan Project. We had the uranium, we had the scientific know-how. A number of Canadians were involved in actually making the atomic bomb. Right now, when you think that one of the issues that people like to flex their muscles is, well, we’ve got nuclear weapons. Well Canada unilaterally decided not to become a nuclear weapon power, we said we will really emphasize the peaceful use of nuclear weapons. And that, to me, really set in motion a particular pathway for Canada to—a legacy, if you like. But we followed up until recently of trying to mitigate, reduce control of the threat and risk of nuclear weapons in the world. And I think that was very, very much reflected in positions we took in NATO.
Angela Misri – So how do you think being a founding member, and that founding vision has shaped Canada’s role in the alliance today.
Lloyd Axworthy – Well, I think we’re still a very prominent member. We do our part, but we’re under attack from the American military and others, and we don’t put enough into our NATO defenses.
I mean, I think this 2% argument is one of those things that takes on a kind of a legendary role. What is 2%? And the issue is, how do you spend it? What do you invest in?
For example, I’ve been making the argument that if you really want to upgrade our security, we need to do it in the Arctic. And the Arctic is part of the NATO environment, and that already we’re seeing quite significant new military activities by the Russians and the Chinese and others. And so we should be basically saying back to the complainants, we need to ensure that our own backyard in the Arctic is one that we take special interest in and run the coalition now that you’ve got Sweden and Finland, Norway, Greenland, Iceland. So we actually do have a pretty significant coalition, a NATO coalition in the North.
Angela Misri – Can you talk a little bit more about the 2%? You just mentioned it in passing, the 2% that people complain about, but can you tell us a little bit more about that?
Lloyd Axworthy – It was part of the Trump sort of demand, that NATO pay its fair share.
The point is, you do what you do best. And where I think we have fallen, sadly, in the last decade—going back to the Harper government, but continuing with the present government— is that we’ve abandoned peacekeeping, for a period of time. And one of the contributions we made, to use examples, in the Balkans, where the NATO took a very strong intervention to protect people against what was going on by the Serbs and the Milosevic, well, we don’t do that anymore. I think, of the 60 000 peacekeepers in the world, I think Canada has 28. The strategy of our Defense Department under when we went into Afghanistan was to be a warrior nation, not a peacemaking nation. And I think that has altered our situation quite dramatically.
Angela Misri – So that’s part of the criticism about Canada’s defence spending and its commitment to NATO. What do you think are the main challenges Canada faces in meeting NATO’s expectations, and how might they be addressed?
Lloyd Axworthy – Well, I’ll just address one. I think the Arctic is certainly a key strategic area, and I think the government is working on the Arctic strategy. I don’t know what’s in it, but hopefully it would be something that’s a little bit more robust than what we have today. But after all, we did pioneer with the establishment of the Arctic Council, which was the first time that we incorporated the involvement of Indigenous people in making Arctic policy. And in the book I’ve just finished up, I do strongly argue that one of the things we should be doing is an Arctic strategy that is very much involving the Inuit people of the North, as those not only who are responsible for security and given positions of responsibility, because we’re also facing not just military threats, but also environmental threats. But I think we still have a long way to go in fully tapping into the knowledge and the experience of indigenous people in terms of our foreign policy.
Angela Misri – One hundred percent. So you talked a little bit about peacekeeping. What do you see as Canada’s most impactful contributions to NATO over the decades?
Lloyd Axworthy – Mike Pearson’s 1956 effort on Suez and peacekeeping, I think we added to that because when we were on the Security Council in 1999-2000. So much of what the conflicts were about were all kinds of warlords and militias and so on, attacking, basically attacking people. Ninety percent of the casualties were innocent civilians. So we had established that as a model. And in 1999-2000, what we did is, when we were on the Security Council, we initiated a major resolution that would give UN peacekeepers the right to use force when necessary to protect people. Up to that time, they could only use it to protect themselves. So we took a very significant new rationale for peacekeeping, which again was applied, for example, in Kosovo, when we stopped the expulsions and exterminations in Kosovo. Well, that’s the one element, I think the other element is that we have been pretty consistent up until the last decade of providing one of the voices in NATO arguing for a change in our nuclear policy in NATO.
NATO still has, on the books as part of its strategic sort of protocol, the idea of a first use, which is very provocative. I mean, we’re all very upset about Vladimir Putin, you know, kind of rattling the nuclear weapons about Ukraine. Well, the NATO still has, clearly on its protocol, the nuclear weapons could be first used against conventional issues. So, we made a singular effort in the 90s, and when I was a foreign minister, I asked the External Affairs Standing Committee of Parliament to do a major review of NATO’s nuclear policy. And, Bill Graham, who, the chair of the committee, he did a terrific job in crossing the country and letting Canadians—we had hundreds of representations of Canadians. It was a policy that was really grounded in the form of participation. It wasn’t something that was generated in the corridors of power. It was done in a good parliamentary inclusion. And what they came out with was to say that Canada should take a stand to change the NATO strategy, taking away first use.
We tried. There was the big NATO summit in ‘99 where we made the case for change. We had some support. The Germans were there, the Dutch were there. But, the big nuclear powers, particularly the United States, would have nothing to do with changing their nuclear policy or NATO’s nuclear policy. What we were able to go with, the Prime Minister and I were able to introduce into the declaration of that major summit, was the idea that there would be a review of NATO’s strategy, including its nuclear position.
Well, that I’d have to be, you know, blunt and candid. The fact is that the Americans just really totally blackballed any effort on that. But it was part of, I think, of a good history of Canada speaking for the non-nuclear countries. And we could speak with legitimacy because we were the first country to decide not to be a nuclear power when we could have been. We could have been sitting on nuclear weapons that we wanted. But the Canadian government didn’t.
So we had a legacy, almost a moral responsibility. We’ve dropped that since then, I think, Angela, one of the strangest developments in Canadian foreign policy, going back to the Harper era, was a total lack of interest in nuclear arms control, nuclear disarmament, nuclear nonproliferation. We just stopped going to the meetings. We stopped participating. And when Mr. Trudeau’s government came in, he said, we’re going back. But we didn’t. We’re still virtually missing in action. And there’s, you know, there’s major discussions going on. There’s actually a treaty to talk about abandoning nuclear weapons. Well, we don’t even send people to the meetings to discuss it.
Angela Misri – Why do you think that is?
Lloyd Axworthy – Well, I think probably it’s, coming out of the Afghan war, as I said, I think our Defense Department really became sort of, what they consider to be a war fighting, warrior stance. So many of our own military people are trained in Fort Hood and other American establishments. But the weakness is that there was no political direction. I can’t recall, well, certainly in the case of the Harper government, they disdainfully just rejected any effort. In the Justin Trudeau government, it’s just that they have they’re not participate. They don’t see anything one way or the other. They just let the whole thing drop.
Angela Misri – It’s strange because NATO’s relevance has evolved and our role in NATO has evolved. Where do you think Canada fits in this changing dynamic? If we become more warrior and less peacekeeping, what is our role in NATO now?
Lloyd Axworthy – Well, I think that’s part of the problem is that, developments have superseded us. And I think what we’ve seen, particularly with the Russian aggression in Ukraine, that is now, without a question of a doubt, one of the major security issues that we have to face. Are we capable of doing well? I don’t think so.
There’s a catch up game going on. I think the Minister of Defence has announced some new procurement for ships that can patrol in Arctic waters. We’ve signed an agreement with Iceland and Korea about creating icebreakers. We’re talking about purchasing a new fighter plane, and we’re talking about the modernization of the NORAD system. Those are all very big ticket items, and I just don’t see right now any strong thrush. And I’m not saying that’ necessarily those are the best uses of them, I think the Arctic is. Maybe the modernization of NORAD. But to be honest, I don’t think Canada knows what its role is right now in NATO. After Afghanistan, I think our strategic thinking kind of went into a gray zone and there’s nothing really sharp coming out
Angela Misri – Now, are you talking about the leadership not knowing where we’re going because we had, like, anti-NATO protests in Montreal recently. So it seems like some of the citizens have opinions about what NATO is doing. Where do you think this disconnect is?
Lloyd Axworthy – One very obvious initiative would be for the government to re-initiate what we did in 1996, which is to have a parliamentary committee to examine our role. Let Canadians speak. I mean, I think we’ve lost the kind of concept that a foreign policy isn’t simply something that’s only done in high circles. I think it’s got to involve Canadians and we, in the meantime, we have to stop funding NGOs and others who are interested, who could participate. So there’s a real dearth of resources. And the think tanks that we have don’t seem to be engaged very much in that kind of strategic thinking.
So I think there is a vacuum. I think it’s a gray zone, as I called it. I don’t know if a new government comes in under Mr. Poillievre, we don’t know what he—he’s not indicated anything about what he’s going to do or say. So I mean, we’re kind of writing a blank check for him.
Angela Misri – Lloyd, you mentioned you have a new book coming out. Can you tell us a little bit more about it?
Lloyd Axworthy – Well, it’s called Lloyd Axworthy: My Life in Politics. And it really talks—I guess I was involved in public life for close to 45, 50 years in Canada. So it’s an attempt to describe the experience and the lessons I’ve learned. But to take those lessons and apply it to where we are today and the kind of necessities to re-energize our democracy, to deal with our security issues. And I think, to understand that one of the real threats we have is authoritarianism. And, I call sort of, seeing what is happening in the United States where the government is becoming a ship of fools. And I think we have to be very careful that we don’t fall into that trap. That’s what the book is about. It was published on October 15th, and I’ve been out doing the kind of the book tour stuff, woof. Anyway.
Angela Misri – Been there, done that. It’s a thing.
Lloyd Axworthy – Yeah, it’s a thing. Isn’t that right? Okay.
Angela Misri – Really appreciate it, thank you Lloyd.
Lloyd Axworthy – Okay. Thank you very much.
Angela Misri – Thank you for listening to Canadian Time Machine. This podcast receives funding from the Government of Canada and is created by the Walrus Lab. This episode was produced by Jasmine Rach and edited by Nathara Imenez. Amanda Cupido is the executive producer. For more stories about historic Canadian milestones and the English and French transcript of this episode. Visit thewalrus.ca/CanadianHeritage.
There’s also a French counterpart to this podcast called Voyages dans l’histoire canadienne. So if you’re bilingual and want to listen to more, you can find that wherever you get your podcasts.
