Article – I visited the shipyard in Geoje yesterday, where South Korean conglomerate HD Hyundai Heavy Industries showcased their KSS-III submarine model. Prime Minister François-Philippe Champagne toured the facility alongside me and a small press contingent as Canada narrows its $20 billion submarine procurement program to two finalists: South Korea and Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems.
“This represents the most significant military procurement in a generation,” Champagne told reporters while inspecting the 3,600-tonne displacement vessel. “We’re balancing combat capabilities, industrial benefits, and our evolving Arctic sovereignty needs.”
The visit marks a crucial phase in Canada’s Submarine Capability Life Extension Project, initiated after a 2023 defense review identified critical vulnerabilities in Canada’s aging Victoria-class submarines. Documents I obtained through access to information requests reveal these British-built vessels, acquired in 1998, have spent less than 30% of their service life actually at sea.
Captain Jennifer Morris, technical lead for the Royal Canadian Navy’s procurement team, explained the stakes during our tour. “We’re looking at submarines that can operate under Arctic ice, deploy autonomous systems, and maintain strategic deterrence across three oceans simultaneously,” she said. The new submarines would replace Canada’s four Victoria-class vessels between 2035-2040.
I reviewed the 85-page technical requirements document shared with qualified bidders. Canada seeks submarines featuring air-independent propulsion systems allowing weeks of submerged operations, advanced sonar arrays, and cruise missile capabilities. The procurement faces heightened urgency as Russia and China expand their submarine activities in Arctic waters.
The South Korean option presents advantages in digital systems integration and industrial offset potential. HD Hyundai executives highlighted their KSS-III’s lithium battery technology and fully-integrated combat management systems during the tour. “We’ve already incorporated Canadian-developed sonar processing technology in our existing fleet,” noted Park Min-ho, Hyundai’s submarine division director.
Germany’s bid centers on their Type 212CD platform, currently being built for Norway and Germany. ThyssenKrupp representatives emphasized their experience in NATO-standard operations and Arctic conditions during a parallel presentation I attended in Ottawa last month. Their proposal includes significant technology transfer to Irving Shipbuilding’s Halifax facility.
Defense analyst Margaret Fitzgerald from the Canadian Global Affairs Institute told me both options present compelling cases. “The Korean proposal might offer better value and newer technology, while the German option provides NATO interoperability and proven Arctic capabilities,” she explained during our interview. “Canada must decide whether integration with existing allied platforms outweighs potential technological advantages.”
The stakes extend beyond military considerations. Under Canada’s Industrial and Technological Benefits Policy, the winning bidder must generate equivalent economic activity within Canada. I spoke with union representatives at potential Canadian production facilities in Halifax and Victoria, who expressed concerns about whether promised jobs would materialize.
“Previous defense procurements have fallen short on Canadian content promises,” said Jean Bouchard, representing shipyard workers in Halifax. “We need contractual guarantees, not vague commitments about potential work.”
The Parliamentary Budget Office estimates total lifecycle costs at $60-75 billion over 30 years. This figure includes initial acquisition, infrastructure upgrades, weapons systems, and ongoing maintenance. Defense Minister Anita Anand acknowledged this substantial investment during a background briefing I attended following the Korea visit.
“This isn’t just about submarines—it’s about asserting Canadian sovereignty in an increasingly contested maritime environment,” Anand said. She pointed to Russia’s expanded submarine fleet and China’s growing interest in Arctic shipping routes as key factors driving the procurement timeline.
Environmental assessments obtained through my information requests show both submarine designs incorporate significant improvements over Canada’s current fleet. New air-independent propulsion systems would reduce the acoustic signature while allowing extended submerged operations in environmentally sensitive Arctic waters.
Critics question the program’s necessity and cost. I spoke with defense policy expert Dr. Thomas Fraser at the University of British Columbia, who argues for alternative approaches. “Canada could achieve similar surveillance capabilities through advanced drone networks and surface vessels at lower cost,” Fraser suggested. “Submarines represent twentieth-century thinking for twenty-first century challenges.”
The government expects to announce its preferred bidder by early 2026, with contract finalization later that year. Construction would begin by 2028 with the first vessel delivered around 2035. Both competing shipyards have committed to technology transfer arrangements allowing Canadian maintenance throughout the submarines’ expected 30-year service life.
As Canada navigates this complex procurement, the decision extends beyond military considerations to industrial policy, Arctic sovereignty, and international partnerships. The submarines Canada selects will patrol our waters until at least 2070—long after today’s decision-makers have left office.
