The race to provide Canada with a new fleet of submarines has intensified, with TKMS, a German submarine manufacturer, making a case for its collaboration with Norway over a rival bid from South Korea’s Hanwha. Philipp Schön, a senior executive at TKMS, recently articulated his belief that the German-Norwegian proposal is better suited for Canada, arguing that it aligns more closely with Canadian cultural and operational frameworks.
A Multinational Choice
As Canada approaches a significant decision regarding its Canadian Patrol Submarine Project, the stakes are high. Both TKMS and Hanwha have submitted competitive bids to supply 12 submarines, with the contract estimated to be worth between $20 billion and $30 billion for the vessels alone, and an additional $40 billion to $50 billion for operations, maintenance, and upgrades.
Schön’s remarks, shared in a recent LinkedIn post, have sparked considerable discussion about the implications of choosing a supplier. He emphasised the importance of language in defence procurement, suggesting that Canada would benefit from selecting a submarine programme that uses English as its working language. This, he argues, would facilitate smoother collaboration and integration into an existing international framework rather than requiring Canada to adapt to a foreign linguistic environment.
Cultural Ecosystems in Defence
The concept of “cultural ecosystems” has taken centre stage in this debate. Schön posed a provocative question: “Which cultural ecosystem will Canada become part of for the next 40 years?” He contended that a partnership with TKMS would provide Canada with a robust framework for cooperation, pointing out that the 212CD submarine programme was designed from the outset for multinational collaboration.
“Defence cooperation works best when partners can engage directly, not through translation,” Schön noted, describing the need for engineers and sailors to communicate seamlessly. He stressed that language is not merely a matter of convenience but a fundamental aspect of defence programmes that affects every level, from technical documentation to operational concepts.
Responses from Rivals
Hanwha Defence Canada responded to Schön’s assertions by highlighting the multilingual capabilities of its team. CEO Glenn Copeland described the notion that language could be a barrier as “unfortunate,” emphasising that the Hanwha team includes members fluent in English, French, Japanese, and more, demonstrating that communication would not be an issue.
Vina Nadjibulla, vice-president of research and strategy at the Asia Pacific Foundation, cautioned against framing the submarine decision as a cultural dilemma. She pointed out that Canada and South Korea share a strong relationship built on extensive trade and defence cooperation. “Framing the submarine decision as a choice between different ‘cultural ecosystems’ is unnecessary,” she stated, urging that proposals should be evaluated based on capability and long-term value rather than perceived cultural compatibility.
Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers’ Association, echoed this sentiment, attesting to the effectiveness of South Korean companies in global markets. “They have no problem with English,” he remarked, suggesting that Schön’s comments may reflect a misunderstanding of the Canadian context.
Why it Matters
The outcome of this submarine procurement process could have far-reaching implications for Canada’s defence strategy and international relationships. It raises essential questions about how Canada perceives its role within the global defence community. A decision to partner with South Korea could signal a significant shift in Canada’s procurement strategy, while opting for the German-Norwegian collaboration might reinforce traditional Western alliances. Ultimately, the choice will not only define Canada’s naval capabilities for decades but also shape its geopolitical landscape and industrial partnerships in an increasingly multipolar world.