You have one minute.
Evidence of meeting #33 for National Defence in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was arctic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #33 for National Defence in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was arctic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
NDP
François Lapointe NDP Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
You are very nice.
The report also states that Canada and the U.S cooperate quite well and effectively in the Arctic through NORAD, and do so despite disagreements over certain waterways.
My colleagues and I talked about that and Ms. Charron also pointed to the importance of not having just a military presence. There are a number of related aspects. Clearly, there is military defence, search and rescue, and potential pollution problems in the event of a spill. In light of all those potential tragedies in the Arctic, how do your studies see NORAD's contribution? Is NORAD a priority in all those cases?
4:30 p.m.
Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
NORAD, when it comes to the Arctic, is going to be more concerned with the classic foreign defence aspects of this, because the military of course doesn't have the mandate to be fining ships for vessel pollution and things like that. That's done by Transport Canada and other agencies.
That said, because we're talking about the Arctic and the austere conditions, one of the issues is that something like a search and rescue event that may or may not involve the military could easily turn into a bigger situation just because of those austere conditions. For the most part, though, the military operating in the Arctic has the function of aiding civilian powers. We are keen to call on the military because they have that unlimited liability, and there is always a possibility of dying when you go to the Arctic.
Really, in Canada especially, there's always been a whole-of-government approach. There are many other agencies, before the military, that have primary mandate for making sure that the Northwest Passage is navigable, that we have the aid, that we have them charted, etc.
What I'm saying is that the more we do of that, the less NORAD has to be tracking everything going on.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to both of our experts for being here this afternoon and for informing our study on the defence of North America.
My question is with regard to cybersecurity. Not being a regular member of this committee, before I ask my question about it, I'd like you to indulge me and give me an example of what that might look like. Have we experienced any of that in Canada or in North America? Where are the threats coming from, and where have they come from if we've had them?
4:35 p.m.
Professor, Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
I'm not a cyber expert. I've seen enough reports come out, mostly emanating from the United States, that there have been cyber-attacks. Whether they are designed to acquire intelligence—i.e., there are spying missions that have been identified, and the finger has been pointed at the Chinese, who deny it—or whether they are an attempt to imbed some form of undetectable virus such that if some conflict did emerge, it could then be triggered, again, it's beyond me.
The classic example everyone points to, for those who aren't really involved in the cyberworld, like me, is the embedding of the Stuxnet virus in the Iranian centrifuges, which destroyed them. That's sort of the image of what could happen here.
4:35 p.m.
Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
If there has been an attack on military assets, we're not going to know about it, because that's going to be classified, but for instance, now that NORAD has maritime warning, we are talking about other than military assets feeding in pictures, for instance, a recognized maritime picture that is fed from Canada into USNORTHCOM and into NORAD.
So there's going to be increased attention on who is injecting these feeds, and if there is due diligence on what information is being sent and what's the unclassified, what's the classified, and protecting the assets, because now we have a lot more eyes and a lot more conduits going into the military and into other organizations. That's generally what they're going to be concerned about.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Dr. Charron, do you see the need for a more coordinated effort by Canada together with the United States? Or with your knowledge of this, of how they have been dealt with so far, do you think the current system of the countries dealing separately with these incoming threats is sufficient and is working well enough?
4:35 p.m.
Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
We do treat them separately and we don't treat them separately. Certainly, for Canada, we are very cognizant of the fact that, for the U.S., cybersecurity is a major, major concern, so the U.S. is always going to be looking to us to make sure that, as per the 1930 agreement with Franklin Delano Roosevelt, we can't be a weak link to impact U.S. security. Because they are interested in cybersecurity, they are always going to look to make sure that we have the best processes and agencies involved.
That said, like Jim, I am not a cyber expert, and this is where we have Ellie Malone, who is one of our researchers, an American, who really I would point to about cybersecurity.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
We did have one witness who spoke earlier to the committee about the electrical grid and its vulnerability in North America. The committee was told that a cyber-attack on the grid is a real threat and could do serious damage to our continent. Have you found this in your studies? Do you think NORAD should be taking on a bigger role in the protection of these types of assets?
4:40 p.m.
Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
Right now, NORAD would be involved if, for example, they used a jet to crash into one of the major electrical nodes. That's when NORAD would get involved. NORAD right now doesn't have that sort of land mission warning, and I'm guessing that's probably how an attack on an electrical grid would take place—or via computer. So for right now, no.
However—and again, Dr. Fergusson mentioned this a number of times—NORAD has this unique North American picture. We may not think a plane flying in a diverted air path is significant, but when you take that, look at the maritime picture, and have the luxury of being able to look at both together from a North American point of view, then maybe NORAD can help contribute to warning other agencies about a potential attack on an electrical grid. But right now, NORAD doesn't have that mission per se.
October 28th, 2014 / 4:40 p.m.
NDP
Tarik Brahmi NDP Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
My question is for Ms. Charron.
I would like to go back to something you mentioned.
The current tensions between Russia and some NATO members about the crisis in Ukraine, as well as increasing tensions in the Baltic countries do not necessarily have an impact on how Russia sees the Arctic. I find that very interesting.
You said that it is not necessarily to Russia's advantage to increase the tension in the Arctic. Could you tell us what the impact might be if tension grows in Europe about the relations between the U.S. and Canada in NORAD, not between Russia and the U.S. or Canada?
4:40 p.m.
Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
The Arctic is in many ways slightly insulated, and this is one of these rare regional organizations where cooperation has been key. In fact, it was the Russians who wanted some sort of arrangement like the Arctic Council to govern relations in the Arctic, in recognition of the fact that it's a very strategic area for them, not only geopolitically but also financially.
Despite there being events in Europe, I still don't see them affecting the Arctic, and I think about the agreement that Norway and Russia struck with respect to the Lomonosov Ridge. Years ago, we honestly thought that could come to nuclear blows, and it didn't. In fact, it looks as if Russia has conceded some territory, so—
4:40 p.m.
NDP
Tarik Brahmi NDP Saint-Jean, QC
Let me interrupt you.
I understand what you are saying since you explained it in response to the previous question. I understand that this might not necessarily affect the relations between Russia, Canada and the U.S., but could you tell me what the potential impact is on relations between the U.S. and Canada in NORAD?
Do you think those relations could be affected by the situation?
4:45 p.m.
Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
The way the binational agreement is struck is that Canada and the U.S. jointly defend North America, so if for some reason Russia did try to attack the Canadian Arctic, then absolutely the U.S. would be there to assist, because that's always been the pledge. But I don't see that happening either. We haven't seen Arctic Council meetings being cancelled. We still have the Treaty on Open Skies, which is an agreement between Russia, Canada, and the U.S. In fact, two weeks ago in Winnipeg, we had a Russian military plane here at 17 Wing Winnipeg.
We may have concerns about Russian actions in Europe, but that's certainly not stopping the other bilateral or trilateral agreements that are going on among those three states.
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Tarik Brahmi NDP Saint-Jean, QC
Is the current or potential difference of opinion about the waterways a factor likely to affect the relations between Canada and the United States? Is it also a factor that might change their relationship within NORAD?
4:45 p.m.
Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
No, that's a managed disagreement. It's been a long-standing disagreement. Canada and the U.S. tend not to punish each other for concerns in one area through another. For example, when the U.S. and Canada have disputes about softwood lumber, it doesn't mean that in NORAD the U.S. refuses to speak to us.
The U.S. is usually very satisfied with the level of commitment we have. There may be small jabs and disagreements, but overall, the defence of North America is the number one priority of both states, and nothing yet has changed that fact.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Charron and Mr. Fergusson, I very much enjoyed your presentations today. One disadvantage of being the last questioner is that a lot of the things you were going to ask have already been asked, but I would like to continue Mr. Brahmi's discussion and interest in the Arctic, something that I have a keen interest in myself, and to continue the theme of the presence or perceived threat of Russia.
One may view it as just a lot of thumping of the chest and that kind of thing, but is there anything that Canada should be doing specifically with regard to some of the comments that have come out of Russia's government? Also, are there some things to do with security in the Arctic that other countries are doing in their regions that we could be copying or mimicking?
I'll ask both of you to comment.
4:45 p.m.
Professor, Director, Political Studies, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
I'll be very brief because Andrea is the Arctic expert, but from my perspective—mostly from listening to Andrea about this—we need to engage the Russian military. The two militaries need to sit down and talk about it as—and if—the greater presence and activity continues to occur in the Arctic.
We need to talk about the response of Canada, and not just Canada but bilaterally, with Canada and Russia, given our common interests in the region. We both I think have similar interests. This is an area where we should consider engaging the Russian military—their foreign office to their military—in confidence-building discussions in the region.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
I'm glad you explained what you meant by “engaging” the military.
4:45 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!