In early June, Prime Minister Carney met with the nation’s Premiers and discussed “needed investments in dual-use infrastructure in Northern and Arctic communities that will address Canada’s Arctic sovereignty and security goals, meet local community needs, advance national energy independence, and unlock the North’s economic potential.”1
The idea of dual-use infrastructure in Canada’s Arctic and North is clearly top of mind for many decision makers, and following this trend, the Arctic Security Working Group (ASWG) met in Whitehorse on the 28th and 29th of May to discuss this topic. ASWG is co-chaired by the Commander Joint Task Force North (JTFN) and a rotation of the three territorial governments. The purpose of ASWG is to “enhance the safety and security of Canada’s North through information-sharing and cooperation among federal and territorial government department and agencies,” as well as facilitating planning with other partners such as Indigenous governments, academia, and the private sector.2
Dual-use infrastructure was discussed extensively over the course of the two days, with some central themes emerging. First, there is a need to better define what constitutes dual-use infrastructure. Second, dual-use infrastructure should be used to achieve both national security and community resilience in the North and Arctic. Third, dual-use infrastructure can be cost-effective and scalable if it upgrades and retrofits existing infrastructure. From these three themes, one can extract three interrelated questions that can help to demystify the concept of dual-use infrastructure in Canada’s North and Arctic: What is dual-use infrastructure? What purpose does dual-use infrastructure serve? Why is dual-use infrastructure important?
What is dual-use infrastructure?
To date, Canada has not created a strict definition of "dual-use infrastructure," or an objective list of criteria to evaluate a project. Some may allude to the idea that dual-use infrastructure is infrastructure used for military activities on the weekdays and civilian activities on the weekends. Take for instance the Mary Lake Cadet Barracks outside Whitehorse, where in 2014 I stayed overnight for my grade 8 band camp and in 2021 was used to house Canadian Armed Forces members during their response to the Southern Lakes flooding. The gulf between these types of use underscores the need for actors in the Arctic security landscape to demystify and deromanticize the notion of dual-use infrastructure in the North.
Dual-use infrastructure should be thought of as conventional infrastructure that benefits everyday civilian and commercial needs while also contributing to strategic military considerations.3 Examples include upgraded all season roads, highways, bridges, airports, and aerodromes; energy transmission lines with increased redundancies; and more connected broadband and telecommunication networks; among other things.4
Of course, these are all examples of infrastructure that civilian Northerners would greatly benefit from. These are also examples of infrastructure that are essential for a sustainable military presence in the North that can be integrated into a nationwide Arctic security and defence strategy.3 Dual-use infrastructure should not only be thought of as a physical building used by both military and civilians, rather, it should be thought of as the everyday infrastructure Northerners rely on that can simultaneously contribute to effective military operations.
What purpose does dual-use infrastructure serve?
Another area that requires demystification is the purpose of dual-use infrastructure. Media coverage surrounding Canada’s Arctic sovereignty has been increasingly studied, with many researchers concluding that the media’s reactions to Arctic security are oftentimes “alarmist”5 and exposing Canadians to “myths about our Arctic sovereignty being much more precarious than it is.”6 In that sense, it is important to clarify the role that an increased military presence and dual-use infrastructure in the North would play.
The vast majority of Arctic security scholars agree that despite rising geopolitical tensions around the world, the risk of an armed conflict in the Arctic is low. As a result, military investments in the North and Arctic are not so much intended for power projection as they are for increased domain awareness.3 The investments into the dual-use infrastructure described above should not be interpreted as the Canadian military gearing up for an impending armed conflict in the North and Arctic. Instead, investments in dual-use infrastructure should be viewed as a means to enhance the military’s ability to monitor the land, maritime, air and space, and cyber domains; engage in search-and-rescue operations; and respond to natural or human-made disasters (like the 2021 Southern Lakes flooding or the 2023 evacuation of Yellowknife due to wildfires).7
While the above examples should be the primary purpose of dual-use infrastructure in the North, in the unlikely event of a major global conflagration in the Arctic or an unexpected event like the 2023 Yukon balloon incident, dual-use infrastructure will also be helpful to better coordinate and execute Canadian or allied military operations in the North.
Why is dual-use infrastructure important?
There is a general consensus that the well-being of Northern communities and Indigenous people is a fundamental prerequisite for Canada’s Arctic security.8 So while dual-use infrastructure contributes to strategic military objectives, it can also improve communication and accessibility in Northern communities and Indigenous communities. In turn, this can help alleviate pressures on “soft infrastructure” such as health care, housing, education, emergency services, and employment.
For instance, improved telecommunications infrastructure and highways can facilitate the expansion of telehealth and enable greater integration of health and education service delivery between communities. Improved highways and airports can lower the cost of transportation, which can lower the cost of materials, construction, labour, and eventually, the cost of housing. Upgrading and building the infrastructure itself can create more employment opportunities while improved communication and accessibility can enable commuting or remote-work opportunities.9 Simply put, dual-use infrastructure not only helps military operations but can contribute to the well-being of Northern and Indigenous communities, ultimately strengthening Canada’s overall Arctic security.
With the Government of Canada and other NATO allies recently announcing their commitment to spending 5% of GDP on national defence by 2035, including 1.5% of GDP (around $45 billion) on “defence and security-related...infrastructure and resilience,”10 there is certainly a massive opportunity to leverage dual-use infrastructure as a means of simultaneously advancing national security, improving the everyday lives of Northerners, and bolstering Canada’s overall Arctic security.
--
Zach Zimmermann is a Coordinator with the Canadian Institute for Arctic Security, a Research Fellow with the North American and Arctic Defence and Security Network (NAASDN), and a Master's student doing research on military security in the High North. Born in Inuvik, NWT and raised in Whitehorse, Yukon, Zach is passionate about protecting his home, uplifting Northern youth voices, and eventually becoming an expert in Arctic Security.
1 - Prime Minister of Canada. “First Ministers' statement on building a strong Canadian economy and advancing major projects.” Prime Minister of Canada / Premier ministre du Canada, 2 June 2025, https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2025/06/02/first-ministers-statement-building-strong-canadian-economy-and-advancing-major-projects. Accessed 13 June 2025.
2 - Department of National Defence. “Department of National Defence and Canadian Armed Forces 2021-22 Departmental Results Report.” 2022, https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/reports-publications/departmental-results-report/2021-22-index.html.
3 - Lackenbauer, P. Whitney, and Katharina Koch. “NORTHERN AND ARCTIC SECURITY AND SOVEREIGNTY: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR A NORTHERN CORRIDOR.” The School of Public Policy Publications, vol. 14, no. 20, 2021, https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/EN_FR_NC25_Arctic-Security_Lackenbauer-Koch.pdf.
4 - Yukon Arctic Security Advisory Council. “Report of the Yukon Arctic Security Advisory Council.” Yukon Government, November 2024, https://yukon.ca/sites/default/files/eco/eco-arctic-security-advisory-council-report_0.pdf.
5 - Gayan, Praneel K. “Arctic Security and Sovereignty through a Media Lens: A Study by Mathieu Landriault.” NAASDN, 16 March 2021, https://www.naadsn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Gayan-policy-brief_Breaking-Through_Landriault-chapter.pdf
6 - Lackenbauer, P. Whitney. “Situating the Yukon in Canadian Arctic Defence and Security.” NAASDN, April 2024, https://www.naadsn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/2024apr-Lackenbauer-Yukon-defence-security.pdf.
7 - Østhagen, Andreas. 2018. “Geopolitics and Security in the Arctic.” The Routledge Handbook of Polar Regions, M. Nuttall, T. R. Christensen, and M. J. Siegert, eds. Oxon and New York: Routledge p.348
8 - Carleton University. “Securing Canada's Arctic: A Strategic Imperative for Multi-Use, Multi-User Infrastructure.” Carleton University, 5 March 2025, https://carleton.ca/cipser/2025/securing-canadas-arctic/. Accessed 13 June 2025.
9 - Christensen, Julia. “IMPLICATIONS OF A NORTHERN CORRIDOR ON SOFT INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE NORTH AND NEAR NORTH.” The School of Public Policy Publications, vol. 16, no. 25, 2023, https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/NC38-ImplicNC-on-Soft-InfrastructureNorth.Christensen-1.pdf.
10 - NATO. “NATO Defence Ministers agree new capability targets to strengthen the Alliance.” NATO, 5 June 2025, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_235900.htm.