National Defence committee  Could I make a brief comment on this issue? It's one that's gone on for so long. The issue of burden sharing for Canada is within North America. There is a big bill coming, which will be vitally important for Canada's strategic interests in relation to North American defence. The issue for the United States' burden sharing is about the Europeans.

National Defence committee  Okay, I'll be very brief. I read the report. I disagree with the recommendations. What exactly is NATO going to do except in the context of flight paths, which is something we have already dealt with? The key thing is the Arctic is a transit point. We're talking about transit of both air and sea, and increased transportation up there.

National Defence committee  As I mentioned earlier, the key thing for Canada is the north warning system and NORAD's relationship with it, and then from there the acquisition of intercept capabilities to ensure our capacity to deter, relative to the Russian strategic doctrine of the threat to escalate in order to de-escalate.

National Defence committee  How far away? Under the joint comprehensive plan of action, JCPOA, assuming that it meets its commitments as well as the other signatories to the agreement, you have a decade. The agreement enables Iran to keep their nuclear option open so that under changed circumstances, whatever these might be within the length of the agreement, or after it ends or if it's extended, it likely gives Iran the ability to go nuclear fairly quickly.

National Defence committee  I would just add very briefly that I think there's a lot more going on in terms of investments being made in the cyber world than we know of the public domain, and for logical reasons you don't want to talk about these things in the public domain. To get a real answer on that, I think you would need to get a classified briefing.

National Defence committee  There is an emergency alert. By and large, it's for natural disasters. In the world of ballistic missiles, the timelines are so short. For example, from Russia to North America is about a 30-minute flight, so what are you going to do? We don't have a civil defence capability. There are places you might want to go as deep as you can underground, in the basements of places, but otherwise it can cause more danger, which is ironic in a way, particularly if you're wrong, than it can help, because there will be great panic with nothing to do.

National Defence committee  I do understand that the Government of Canada and others are dusting off old bomb shelters, if you will, or looking back into this issue, at least to ensure the security of the government structure of the nation in a worst-case scenario.

National Defence committee  You may.

National Defence committee  In terms of military forces, I don't think there's any question that we're doing a great deal to protect those key cyber links, if you will. In many cases military forces and, of course, military communication systems, are isolated from the broad world. There are people who crack into more of the public links into them, but by and large on the military side, I don't think that's a major issue.

National Defence committee  Certainly in the case of the future combat vessel, it will have a missile defence capability if we acquire the standard missile system from the United States that enables us to intercept missiles. In terms of it providing coverage against an ICBM threat, which is what the Middle East threat would be, relative to where it would have to be deployed, it would require a new generation interceptor that can go much faster.

National Defence committee  In my view, the immediate priority is the requirement to invest in a modernized, renewed north warning system. That's where the major capability gap is right now. Along with that, due to the longer range air and sea launch cruise missile capabilities of Russia— and in the future, China and others—come issues surrounding our ability to detect, deter, and defend against this emerging threat.

National Defence committee  Given a lot of factors, not least of all capability issues on the part of the Canadian Forces and investments in defence, I think the most important thing Canada can do is to be a loyal ally, both in the context of NATO, meeting its NATO commitments, and in the context of our close defence and vital defence relationship and broader relationship with the United States, but also in the case of China and issues in east Asia, in which Canada is noticeable by its absence in the defence and security realm.

National Defence committee  Thank you. Before I begin commenting on Canada, NATO, the Arctic, and the missile defence programs, as I was instructed, I just want to put a plug in to the committee. On May 24, the centre is hosting the 60th anniversary of the NORAD conference. I believe that the clerk has distributed the basic information and agenda.

National Defence committee  Now, to turn to the Arctic, I want to raise three quick points about the Arctic before I turn briefly to missile defence. One needs to distinguish between rhetoric and reality, or what's written on paper in the North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washington in 1949, and what the actual practices of the alliance have been relative to North America.

National Defence committee  Why attack Hawaii? First of all, Hawaii is defended with its own batteries as well as forward-deployed naval systems, so it has a defence. If it is attacked, yes, we are bound by article 5 to come to the assistance of any NATO member. Exactly what we decide to do in terms of that assistance in a state of war—because we would be at war with North Korea— is an entirely different issue.