• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

  • Policy Issues
    • Fact Sheets
    • Countries
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Non-Proliferation
    • Nuclear Security
    • Biological & Chemical Weapons
    • Defense Spending
    • Missile Defense
    • No First Use
  • Nukes of Hazard
    • Podcast
    • Blog
      • Next Up In Arms Control
    • Videos
  • Join Us
  • Press
  • About
    • Staff
    • Boards & Experts
    • Jobs & Internships
    • Financials and Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Search
You are here: Home / Press Room / Center in the News / Canada has no nuclear weapons. After Trump’s Greenland threats, should it?

February 4, 2026

Canada has no nuclear weapons. After Trump’s Greenland threats, should it?

Senior Policy Director spoke with Global News about the pros and cons of a Canadian nuclear arsenal.

“Nuclear weapons are not the way to deal with growing uncertainty and danger around the world,” said John Erath, senior policy director at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation in Washington, D.C.

“It’s not a good idea … and they contribute to the issue much more readily than they can resolve it.”

…

Erath noted the treaty has been successful overall, reducing the global nuclear stockpile from 70,000 at the end of the Cold War to around 12,000 today, a drop of over 80 per cent.

“The last 20 per cent are proving very difficult to get at,” he said — and now some countries are pushing to build more.

…

Erath pointed out that nuclear threats and deterrence “are only effective if you are prepared to carry them out,” which also helps explain why nuclear fears are rising globally.

“The thought of President Putin being ready to carry out some of the threats he’s made is one that is quite frightening,” he said.

However, Erath argued that’s precisely why Canada should continue to co-operate with the U.S. on both collective deterrence and eventual disarmament.

“It’s a wake-up call, and there should be some dialogue on this,” he said. “If Canada feels that its security is not adequately provided for, as an alliance partner, it has the obligation to make these concerns known” to both the U.S. and NATO.

“I’m personally an optimist, so I think we will get back to … considering really meaningful reduction in nuclear weapons. You don’t need a lot of nuclear weapons to deter a potential adversary. It only takes one.” Read more

 

Posted in: Center in the News, John Erath, Non-Proliferation, People, Press & In the News on Non-Proliferation, Press Room

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Iran’s Stockpile of Highly Enriched Uranium: Worth Bargaining For? March 16, 2026
  • Trump’s Claim About the Obama Nuclear Deal and Iran’s Nuclear Development March 12, 2026
  • More Than 100 School Children Were Killed in Iran. Evidence Points to a U.S. Missile Strike March 11, 2026
  • Something’s Missing March 10, 2026
  • The Threat of Nuclear Weapons March 3, 2026

Footer

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

820 1st Street NE, Suite LL-180
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: 202.546.0795

Issues

  • Fact Sheets
  • Countries
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Non-Proliferation
  • Nuclear Security
  • Defense Spending
  • Biological and Chemical Weapons
  • Missile Defense
  • No First Use

Countries

  • China
  • France
  • India and Pakistan
  • Iran
  • Israel
  • North Korea
  • Russia
  • United Kingdom

Explore

  • Nukes of Hazard blog
  • Nukes of Hazard podcast
  • Nukes of Hazard videos
  • Front and Center
  • Fact Sheets

About

  • About
  • Meet the Staff
  • Boards & Experts
  • Press
  • Jobs & Internships
  • Financials and Annual Reports
  • Contact Us
  • Council for a Livable World
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Facebook

© 2026 Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
Privacy Policy

Charity Navigator GuideStar Seal of Transparency