A Canadian shipbuilding company finds itself in a complex situation after providing blueprints to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during heightened military activities in the Arctic region.
North-Vancouver Seaspan has designed six versatile ice-capable ships that will be added to the U.S. Coast Guard’s Arctic fleet over the next ten years. The White House has emphasized that this initiative aims to safeguard “American sovereignty” and protect national interests.
The agreement was finalized on Dec. 29, 2025, predating recent statements from U.S. President Trump regarding an enhanced American presence in the North. Prime Minister Mark Carney, speaking at the World Economic Forum on Jan. 20, reiterated Canada’s commitment to assisting Greenland in asserting its self-determination and working with NATO to bolster the alliance’s northern and western boundaries. Carney also highlighted Canada’s shift towards reducing reliance on major trading partners.
Seaspan has disclosed that the ship designs were initially created for Canadian Coast Guard usage before being repurposed and sold to the U.S. market. Despite this, company spokesperson David Hargreaves asserts that Canada still gains from the arrangement by enhancing both Canadian and U.S. Arctic security.
However, Samuel Roscoe, a business education expert at UBC Sauder School of Business, questions the mutual benefits of the deal, suggesting that it primarily favors the U.S. Coast Guard. He believes that recent geopolitical developments, including Trump’s statements, indicate a shift towards prioritizing U.S. interests in the Arctic.
Hargreaves remains optimistic about the economic prospects for Canada, anticipating substantial involvement of Canadian suppliers in the U.S. government’s icebreaker program. While acknowledging the potential job creation and profits for Canadian companies, Roscoe raises concerns about the complete assembly of the vessels not taking place in Canada.
Roscoe predicts public skepticism towards the contract as it aligns with U.S. military objectives amidst Trump’s territorial remarks. The U.S. Coast Guard’s intentions to utilize the ships for defense, securing shipping routes, and countering adversaries in the Arctic further fuel apprehensions about the deal’s implications for Canadian involvement.
Roscoe suggests that the agreement contradicts Carney’s vision of reduced dependency on the U.S. for security, calling for greater scrutiny of the decision-making process. He emphasizes the importance of preserving the Canadian supply chain and military investments to uphold national interests.
Amidst uncertainties, the U.S. Coast Guard aims to unveil its inaugural domestically constructed vessel in 2029.