Putting the PJBD on hiatus

When 'old relationships' end, their institutions crumble

The Permanent Joint Board on Defense (PJBD) has apparently been suspended by the United States. Elbridge Colby, the American Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, announced the decision on X. Created in 1940, the PJBD was the first institution of continental defence cooperation set up by the United States and Canada. Since then, the PJBD has become far less important, but it remains a respected body. Although suspending the PJBD doesn’t matter operationally, it’s symptomatic of a frayed Canada-United States relationship.

Should Canadians be angry about the suspension? Sure. Is it counterproductive? Yep. Should we be surprised? No.

Colby linked the suspension of the PJBD to Canada’s weak defence spending and to Prime Minister Carney’s Davos speech. Canada’s spending isn’t the real issue. It’s the equivalent of the fentanyl excuse for tariffs. Yes, we can retort that Canada is now spending 2% of GDP on defence and aiming to reach 3.5% by 2032. The Trump administration knows that already and it’s not going to sway them. It’s akin to when we argued that Canada only accounts for a small percentage of the fentanyl entering the United States. We have to say it, but it won’t solve the problem.

The Davos speech is closer to the issue at hand. In it, Prime Minister Carney spoke of “a rupture in the world order, the end of a pleasant fiction, and the beginning of a harsh reality where geopolitics – where the large, main power – is submitted to no limits, no constraints.” President Trump didn’t take too kindly to that, and from what I’ve been told, it encouraged an even harder stance on Canada within the White House.

In other speeches, Carney has told us that “The old relationship we had with the United States, based on deepening integration of our economies and tight security and military cooperation, is over.” The PJBD was, in many respects, the start of that old relationship of tight security and military cooperation. If that old relationship is over, it’s not too shocking that its symbols are being covered up.

The Carney government has been reviewing Canada’s purchase of 88 F-35s for over a year now. He’s also declared that Canada will no longer be spending 75% of its military procurement budget on American kit. I won’t weigh in on those decisions or their merits as part of this discussion; I’ve already commented on them here and here. The point is that through his words, actions, and policies Carney has signalled a Canadian intent to distance itself (somewhat) from the United States in military matters.

With that in mind, did we think the United States was simply going to shrug as we ponder a pivot away from them militarily? The U.S. Ambassador already hinted that a reduction of Canada’s F-35 order would have an impact on NORAD. If anything, a suspension of the PJBD is a relatively minor riposte considering what else the United States could do on the security and defence front, such as terminating NORAD itself and cutting off Canada from vital intelligence. Those might be coming, but it’s notable that they haven’t yet.

Let me put it differently: did you believe Carney when he said the old security and military relationship with the United States was over? If you didn’t —if you thought the fundamentals of the Canada-United States defence relationship remain sound and steady— then the suspension of the PJBD may indeed be jarring. If you believed the Prime Minister, however, this kind of move should have been expected. Things don’t stay the same when they end.

If that’s the case, why should Canadians still be upset? Because we’ll still have to defend the continent with the United States, no matter how bad the relationship gets. And if the relationship gets really ugly, there’s going to be an even greater need for places where Americans and Canadians can talk about the defence of North America. Symbolic though it may be, the PJBD is one of those places.