During an election debate organized by the Quebec Movement for Peace, Green Party of Quebec leader Alex Tyrrell presented a vision firmly opposed to the arms race, public subsidies for the military industry, and Canada’s growing integration into U.S. military policies. Throughout the debate, Alex Tyrrell argued that Quebec can have a real voice on the international stage, even though several foreign-policy powers fall under federal jurisdiction. He noted that, for the first time, the Green Party of Quebec’s 2026 platform includes a section dedicated to foreign policy and “Quebec’s voice in the world.” For the Green Party leader, that voice should be based on peace, international solidarity, cooperation between peoples, and a common fight against climate change. He notably called for the closure of Quebec’s office in Tel Aviv, criticized positions supportive of wars and militarization, and called on Quebec to use more of its international influence in favour of peace.

No Public Funding for Arms Companies

When asked directly whether Quebec should finance or support companies connected to the military industry, Alex Tyrrell gave an unequivocal answer: “The answer is no. There should be no public money put into that.”

He also denounced the objective of devoting the equivalent of 5% of GDP to defence-related spending, which he described as a “completely radical agenda.” According to him, diverting such large sums toward the arms race necessarily means fewer resources available to meet social and environmental needs. Tyrrell particularly challenged the argument that a massive increase in military spending would allow Canada to protect itself against a potential U.S. attack. He pointed to the enormous difference in population and military power between the two countries and argued that even an extremely significant economic mobilization over many years would not allow Canada to match U.S. military power. For him, the response to tensions with the United States should therefore not be a new arms race, but greater political, economic, and diplomatic independence.

Tyrrell Responds to the PQ: Peace Does Not Come Through Preparing for War

One of the most notable exchanges of the debate occurred when the Parti Québécois candidate repeatedly invoked the saying “If you want peace, prepare for war” to defend maintaining military capacity and investments in defence. He argued in particular that sufficient military capabilities were needed to avoid being left defenceless against the United States.

Alex Tyrrell directly challenged that logic.

He clarified that his argument was not that populations should never defend themselves, but rather that the Canadian military does not represent a realistic response to a threat coming from the United States. “What I was saying is that it’s not the Canadian military that is going to prevent an American invasion,” he replied.

He then contrasted his vision with the one expressed by the PQ candidate: rather than strengthening military ties with the United States at the very moment Washington is putting pressure on Canada, Tyrrell argued that this dependency should instead be reduced.

“The solution is not to strengthen military ties with a country that is talking about invading and annexing us. I think we should be doing exactly the opposite,” he explained.

For Tyrrell, presenting military preparation as a prerequisite for peace risks fuelling a new, costly, and dangerous arms race. Instead, he advocated de-escalation, political autonomy, and a foreign policy more focused on negotiation.

Break Military Ties With the United States and Leave NATO

Alex Tyrrell also defended one of the Green Party of Quebec’s clearest foreign-policy commitments: Canada’s withdrawal from NATO. According to him, Canada has aligned itself too closely with U.S. foreign policy over the decades. He denounced joint military exercises, Canadian military personnel deployed or trained at U.S. bases, and growing military cooperation between the two countries. He argued that a Canadian government that truly wanted to demonstrate its independence from Washington could begin by reducing those ties and bringing home Canadian military personnel involved in certain forms of cooperation with the United States.

Tyrrell also described NATO as an alliance he considers “extremely aggressive and dangerous to world peace.” He argued that Canada’s membership in the Alliance contributes to drawing the country into international conflicts and creates constant pressure for ever-increasing military spending. According to him, those hundreds of billions of dollars would be far better used for social programs, the environment, and the ecological transition. Later in the debate, he returned to the issue by criticizing efforts to bring a NATO-linked financial institution to Montreal.

“Montreal has no interest in becoming a hub for NATO,” Tyrrell said, arguing that there are many other ways to develop Montreal’s economy than orienting it toward the arms race.

A Critique of the PQ’s Military Vision of Independence

Although the Green Party of Quebec is federalist, Alex Tyrrell said that Canada’s militarization is precisely one of the aspects of Canadian federalism that he criticizes most strongly. He nevertheless criticized the Parti Québécois for proposing, based on the positions presented during the debate, an independent Quebec that would remain a member of NATO and continue to participate in military research and investment. For Tyrrell, changing Quebec’s constitutional status while maintaining the same military orientation would not represent a sufficient break with the status quo.

“Let’s build a social project that isn’t based on imperialism, that isn’t based on military confrontation,” he said.

Transform Weapons Factories Rather Than Sacrifice Workers

Alex Tyrrell also insisted that reducing the military industry should not come at the expense of the workers who currently make their living in it. The Green Party instead proposes converting industrial capacity currently devoted to weapons production toward the ecological transition while offering an employment guarantee to affected workers.

Tyrrell criticized the presentation of military-industry expansion as an economic project for Quebec’s future. According to him, the industrial, scientific, and technical expertise currently devoted to producing weapons could instead be mobilized to meet enormous needs in public transit, infrastructure, and the energy transition.

Peace Is Also an Affordability Issue

For Alex Tyrrell, foreign policy is not disconnected from the cost of living. He explained that wars and international tensions can contribute to higher energy and transportation prices and, ultimately, higher food prices. He therefore presented de-escalation and the pursuit of negotiated solutions as part of an economic policy aimed at protecting people from the consequences of international conflicts.

He then presented the Green Party’s three major measures aimed directly at the largest expenses faced by Quebec households: housing, food, and transportation. On housing, the Green Party proposes reducing rents by 5% per year for four years, for a total reduction of 20%, accompanied by measures aimed at fighting real-estate speculation.

On food, the party proposes creating a network of 250 publicly owned grocery stores supported by an entirely public distribution chain. Tyrrell said such a model could substantially reduce the cost of groceries.

Finally, the Green Party proposes free public transit along with a major expansion of the metro system and other public transportation services.

Tyrrell argued that many people currently have to go into debt to buy a car simply to get to work, before even having to pay for gasoline. For him, investing in public transit and reducing households’ essential expenses represents a far more constructive use of public resources than escalating military spending.

Quebec’s Critical Minerals Must Not Fuel the Arms Race

The debate also gave Alex Tyrrell an opportunity to connect peace issues with environmental and mining concerns. He recalled that the Green Party platform includes a commitment stating that Quebec’s critical minerals should not be used to fuel the arms race.

Tyrrell cited the La Loutre mining project in the Outaouais, which he had recently visited. He described the major changes to the territory that the project would cause and raised concerns about the potential consequences for lakes, the watershed, and water quality. He also referred to U.S. involvement in the project’s development.

The Green Party leader clarified that his party is not opposed to all mining development, but believes that certain projects have environmental consequences that are too significant to justify moving forward.

Referring to the strong opposition expressed in a local referendum on the project, Tyrrell concluded that Quebec should not accept sacrificing mountains, lakes, and watersheds in order to “fuel the American war machine.”

A Different Vision for Quebec’s Role in the World

Across his various interventions, Alex Tyrrell presented a consistent position: moving away from the idea that more weapons and more military spending are necessarily the answer to international insecurity.

In response to the Parti Québécois candidate’s argument that “if you want peace, prepare for war,” Tyrrell defended a different approach: reducing tensions, decreasing military dependence on the United States, leaving NATO, ending public support for the arms industry, and devoting more resources to people’s needs and the ecological transition.

For the Green Party of Quebec, peace is therefore not an abstract issue disconnected from people’s daily concerns. It directly affects budget choices, the cost of living, the environment, the use of natural resources, and the kind of economy Quebec wants to build.