Who would defend Alberta, and what alliances or security arrangements would replace Canada’s?

Short answer

An independent Alberta would need either negotiated continuity with Canadian security systems or new institutions for defence, border enforcement, intelligence coordination, emergency management, and policing.

Alberta already has provincial policing and emergency-management roles, so not every security function would start from zero [5][8]. But independence would move the top-level burden from provincial public safety to national security.

What this means for Albertans

For ordinary Albertans, this question shows up as practical continuity: who responds to major disasters, who patrols borders and airports, who handles federal offences, who protects critical energy infrastructure, who coordinates with the United States, and who decides whether Alberta participates in Canadian, North American, or allied defence arrangements.

What each side gets right

The pro-independence side gets local priority-setting right. Alberta could argue that a smaller state could design policing, emergency response, infrastructure protection, and border priorities around Alberta’s geography, energy economy, rural communities, and U.S. border relationships.

What would have to be decided

• Defence: Would Alberta create its own military, negotiate shared defence with Canada, seek allied partnerships, or phase in capacity [3]?
• Federal policing: What replaces RCMP federal policing, contract policing, forensic services, and national coordination [6]?
• Borders and ports of entry: Who runs customs, immigration enforcement, and border-security operations [7]?
• Emergency management: Which disaster-response and recovery systems continue, and who pays during the handoff [4][8]?
• Critical infrastructure: Who protects pipelines, power systems, telecom links, airports, and cross-border infrastructure?
• Intelligence and classified information: What sharing agreements would Alberta need with Canada and allies?
• Budget and staffing: How much capacity is needed on day one, and what can be phased in safely?

What survives both arguments

Alberta could not leave security to vibes and a press conference. A credible independence plan would need a public continuity map for policing, borders, emergency management, defence, intelligence coordination, and critical infrastructure.

The realistic answer is conditional: Alberta could build or negotiate security arrangements, but day-one continuity would be one of the highest-risk state-capacity tests. The more Canada and Alberta negotiated continuity, the lower the risk. The more unilateral or rushed the transition, the higher the risk.