For generations, Canada has enjoyed an extraordinary strategic luxury: security without having to think very much about it. Three oceans, vast geography, and the assured protection afforded to us by the United States built and reinforced this reassuring national assumption.

Canadians answered the call when required, with distinction, in two world wars and many missions since around the world. But defending our homeland itself has rarely occupied the public imagination.

Geography was our shield, and to a degree, we outsourced some of our hard security and preparedness to the U.S. That made sense for most of our history. It doesn't anymore. Not because our geography or our defence and security partnerships changed, but because the threats did, and what's required to defend and deter against them now demands a shift in how Canadians think about our own defence posture.

You see, modern conflict does not respect oceans or borders. Cyberattacks disrupt essential services without an adversary ever crossing Canadian territory. Foreign interference targets democratic institutions. Telecommunications, supply chains, and energy systems are targets that require daily defending. And long range weapons have shortened the distance geography once gave us.

Nowhere is this more visible than in the Arctic. China declared itself a "near-Arctic state" in a 2018 policy paper and has pursued Arctic research, governance, and resource interests. Russia has reinforced its military infrastructure across its own Arctic coast, and in 2024, Chinese and Russian bombers conducted a joint patrol near Alaska, the first of its kind. Canada's response has been real, but it's been slow. The over the horizon radar program, part of NORAD modernization, isn't expected to reach “initial operational capability” until the end of 2029. The Canadian Senate's own defence committee flagged a "gap period" — years in which the threats these upgrades are meant to detect will arrive before we have the capability to detect them. Canada still pays 40 percent of the cost of the aging North Warning System and is only now replacing it.

None of this means Canada is undefended. But the timeline to meet these challenges is tighter than the political rhetoric admits. Good faith efforts are underway to speed up procurement, but the deeper problem is structural: due diligence and lengthy procurement timelines weren't built for how fast technology moves now. Drone technology experts I've spoken with put it plainly: the technology changes within a month, and our procurement process doesn't currently account for that.

Importantly, preparedness is not only a question of military capability. It is a test of sovereignty, collective preparedness, and public resilience. And Canada's blissful ignorance means our mindset hasn't caught up.

I encourage you to test this yourself. Ask the people around you a few basic questions. Where would they go for reliable information if communication lines went down? What would they do through a prolonged power outage? How would they help a vulnerable neighbour if an emergency ran for days, weeks, months, not hours? Where would they go if home was no longer safe?

Most have never been expected to think about, never mind know, the answers. Thankfully, allies have models for Canada to consider.

For example, Finland offers an instructive contrast. Its "Comprehensive Security" model treats resilience as shared among government, business, and citizens. The system doesn't need to look identical, but the principle should hold: resilience is a shared responsibility embedded in a country’s culture. It is not something wholly delivered by government when the moment calls. Rather, it is built continually, consistently, and collaboratively.

The goal here isn't to militarize society. It's to make society hard to intimidate, destabilize, or paralyze.

Canada should build our own "Comprehensive Security" model. It starts with education and practical preparedness. Citizens should know how to handle a prolonged disruption, spot trustworthy information, keep basic supplies on hand, and show up for their community using the skills they have.

Businesses, especially those running critical infrastructure, should know their obligations and work in partnership with community, military, and government leaders in a consistent and collaborative manner. Federal and provincial governments should exercise emergency systems with the public, not just behind closed doors.

This shift will start with leadership, but it will not be successful or sustainable if it remains a top-down approach or is treated like a new, temporary government program. Resilience and our collective responsibility have to become part of Canada's culture.

For too long, Canadians have treated security as something foreign, something we assumed would be handed to us if it the moment ever came we needed it. But the world has changed. Our thinking has to change with it.

Canada: Ignorance is no longer bliss. Preparedness isn't panic, it's prudence. It is the bare minimum we owe the country we inherited and the ones who defended it before us.