NORAD and USNORTHCOM revisited: or what I learned from Joel Sokolsky

Abstract

Joel Sokolsky's scholarship profoundly shaped how generations of students and scholars understood North American defence, particularly the evolving relationship between Canada, the United States, NORAD, and USNORTHCOM. Inspired by his insights, this paper revisits a question Sokolsky identified more than two decades ago: how can a binational command such as NORAD coexist alongside USNORTHCOM, a national US combatant command responsible for homeland defence? As NORAD approaches its seventieth anniversary and USNORTHCOM its twenty-fifth, it is timely to revisit the scholarship of Joel Sokolsky on these two commands. The paper reviews the origins of USNORTHCOM following 9/11, the expansion of Canada–US (CANUS) defence cooperation, and the decision to sign the NORAD Agreement in perpetuity. It then examines how both commands have adapted to renewed great-power competition, emerging aerospace threats, and evolving concepts of integrated air and missile defence. Particular attention is paid to two enduring issues: the uncertain relationship between NORAD's binational mission and USNORTHCOM's homeland defence responsibilities, and Canada's longstanding position on ballistic missile defence, now embedded within broader missile defence architectures. Drawing on Sokolsky's enduring concern for the political foundations of continental defence, the paper argues that NORAD's future cannot be taken for granted and that Canada gets the NORAD it wants.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 2026 · DOI ↗