Note: The following text was originally posted on my 𝕏/Twitter account. The original post may be expanded upon and edited for grammar and style in this post. Link
Originally posted on 20 January 2026
All things considered, the mental/conceptual models of the approaches to “total defence” undertaken by the likes of Finland, Sweden, Singapore, and Ukraine, etc., do not apply to Canada. The interplay of Canada’s human and physical geography with America’s immense military capabilities does not afford Canada such options. If the proverbial hammer falls, most of the surface area of even the ~densely populated areas of Canada will likely be militarily irrelevant. The same applies to the more populated segments ot the Canada-U.S. border—unless we are talking about a de facto scorched earth strategy in which Canada makes concerted efforts to independently demolish transportation infrastructure and the like, such as the seven major bridge and tunnel crossings in the Detroit-Windsor and Niagara Falls sectors (which is much easier said than done).
All things considered, the following three sectors are likely to be the most important in a(n unlikely) worst-case scenario:
(A) The intertwined Kingston and Ottawa Valley sector(s).
(B) The Windsor/Niagara Falls sector, including the approaches to the densely populated Greater Toronto Area sector.
(C) Remote/non-urban oil facilities in Alberta—one of the bigger "prizes," as it were—which can also be subject to a scorched earth strategy.
There is no viable so-called Fabian military strategy for Canada against the United States. Canada is not in Ukraine’s position vis-a-vis Russia. The United States will be able to overrun most of Canada's populated areas and, more importantly, leave no opportunity for international shipments of armaments to Canada, should anyone even be so bold as to extend military support and face America's wrath in the unlikely event that the proverbial hammer falls.
While there are several viable approaches through which Canada can make itself "difficult and/or costly to swallow"—none of which are suitable subjects for serious discussion in public fora, the fact remains that Canadian Forces are far too small and spread out far too thin to be decisively used in irregular warfare vis-a-vis the United States, and their garrisons and armouries will likely be subject to intense bombardment in the unlikely event that the worst-case scenario comes to pass. There is scope for an armed insurgency, particularly in Canada's largest population centers, should the United States occupy Canada, but that is another matter entirely.
Whatever approach(es) Ottawa comes to pursue, Canada will have to undertake military preparations that cannot be hidden, certainly not from the United States. Ottawa will, in all likelihood, also have to turn to a series of "unconventional" armament supplies—bullets are bullets, explosives are explosives, and needs must—if the country is to prepare itself for such an eventuality. Ottawa and Canadians more generally will need to have an extremely serious and sober discussion of what it will mean to go down with a fight vis-a-vis the United States, and continue an insurgency afterward (possibly without our current cohort of elected leaders alive, or in power—the continuity of Canada's constitutional order cannot be taken for granted). There is no whitewashing this: we are talking about nothing other than a very major bloodletting in an extreme worst-case scenario.
The government's proposal to establish a supplementary military reserve of 300,000 in late 2025 did not receive enough attention for reasons that I still do not understand. All things considered, there is only one realistic scenario for which Canada will need a military of such size. If Canada's duly elected leaders truly believe that the threat of American military action is not only non-zero but perhaps even quite high, then concerted military preparations will be required, including the training and possible arming of the civilian population.