Last week, the United States’ Under Secretary of War Elbridge Colby announced the demise of the 86-year-old Permanent Joint Board on Defence. Originally established by then-American president Franklin D. Roosevelt and then-prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King to manage the defence of North America, it played a direct role in creating many of the military institutions and installations we now take for granted today. NORAD is a prime example, the St. Lawrence Seaway is another.

Unsurprisingly, the announcement caught a number of commentators off guard, primarily because the Permanent Joint Board on Defence (PJBD) was unknown to them. Equally unsurprising, ignorance seemed to be no barrier to commentary.

One could be forgiven for not being aware of the board because, by design, its meetings were held in secure locations primarily Ottawa or Washington, D.C., among participants with very high-security clearances. No agenda or reports were made public. Reporting lines were directly to the prime minister and the president. One is less forgiving of those who were never “in the room,” yet still feel free to be dismissive.

As a former board co-chair for seven years, I considered it a privilege to listen to and interact with some of the finest military and diplomatic minds of our respective nations. The meetings typically began with a global threat analysis, usually focusing on two or three areas of particular concern. Generally, there was a great deal of consensus, though on more than one occasion there were sharp divergences of viewpoint. Regardless, the briefings were consistently rich in depth and insight. I often lamented that my parliamentary colleagues were not permitted to attend.

One Canadian presentation was so impressive that I attempted to bring the presenter before the House Defence Committee. Unfortunately, permission was denied.

The second part of each meeting consisted of what I referred to as the “to-do list,” an evergreen agenda of ongoing projects, with each nation holding the other accountable for progress. The over-the-horizon radar occupied considerable attention in the latter years of my involvement.

At the conclusion of each meeting, the chairs would summarize the discussions and, where appropriate, issue instructions. I would invariably end with the observation that if our respective publics could have witnessed the intelligence, professionalism, and thoughtfulness of the dialogue, they would have been reassured that the defence of North America was in capable hands.

In the evenings, after the formal proceedings, we would dine together. At our last dinner, I invited the late Tim Cook, the Canadian military historian, to address the group on his book, The Good Allies. It remains an excellent antidote to the current state of ignorance surrounding Canada-U.S. military relations.

Needless to say, I was disappointed, though not surprised, by Colby’s announcement. Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Davos speech has irritated U.S. President Donald Trump and his acolytes to no end. Why anyone in the Trump orbit should be surprised that Canada and other nations are attempting to reduce their dependence on an increasingly unreliable and erratic America is difficult to comprehend.

When a longstanding ally unilaterally dismantles joint military institutions such as the PJBD, the message is unmistakable: America first, America alone, America always.

The prime minister is correct to say that “it has a long heritage, but I would not overplay the importance of this” in discussing the demise of the PJBD. Like many of Carney’s statements, it can be interpreted on several levels. In my view, the loss of an historic and at times critical forum for secure and frank exchanges should not be understated.

It is increasingly clear that the Trump administration seeks to push hegemonic boundaries. The stalemate with Iran has weakened Trump in the eyes of the world. Seeing Trump appear almost supplicant before Chinese President Xi Jinping is not an attractive sight. NATO members closed ranks against Trump’s ill-advised foray into the Middle East, while Denmark mounted a vigorous defence against his ambitions regarding Greenland.

It would be naive to believe that a forum such as the PJBD could have derailed any of these developments. Nevertheless, had these meetings continued, I am confident that Canadian views would have been expressed clearly, firmly, and articulately.

The collateral damage resulting from the cancellation of a forum for dialogue and the disappearance of its ongoing “to-do list” will unfold over time. Militaries will find “work arounds” for the simple reason that the geographic fact of North America will require a defence posture. Alliances will shift, trade negotiations will stall, NORAD will evolve in new directions, and military procurement decisions will be reconsidered all because one party is no longer interested in hearing the views of the other.

This is a recipe for growing divergence, wasted resources, and increasing hostility.

Many will shrug and say this is simply the state of the world today. Even so, it is worth pausing to lament the PJBD’s demise and to recognize that it along with other institutions like it helped keep North America relatively safe and secure for the better part of 86 years.

John McKay is the former Liberal Member of Parliament for Scarborough–Guildwood, Ont., and was the Canadian co-chair of the Canada-U.S. Inter-Parliamentary Group. He co-chaired the Permanent Joint Board on Defence for seven years. He was an MP for 27 years, from 1997 to 2025.

The Hill Times