Foreign Affairs Committee on June 13th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Welcome to meeting number 71 of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. Members are attending in person in the room as well as remotely using the Zoom application.

I'd like to make a few comments for the benefit of the members and the witnesses as well. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike, and please do mute your mike when you are not speaking.

Interpretation for those on Zoom is at the bottom of your screen. You have the choice of floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use the earpiece and select the desired channel.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, February 7, 2023, the committee is commencing its study of the destabilizing impacts of the Wagner Group.

It is my great pleasure to welcome before us four witnesses from the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development. We have Ms. Heidi Hulan, the assistant deputy minister and political director of international security issues. We also have Mr. Marcel Lebleu, the director general of the West and Central Africa bureau. We have Ms. Rebecca Netley, the executive director of the accountability, human rights and United Nations law division; as well as Mr. Andrew Turner, director of the Eastern Europe and Eurasia division.

You will be provided with a maximum of eight minutes for your opening remarks, after which we will go to the members for questions.

Ms. Hulan, the floor is yours.

[Heidi Hulan, Assistant Deputy Minister and Political Director, International Security, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I really appreciate the invitation to brief the committee as part of your study on the destabilizing impacts of the Wagner Group.

The Wagner Group is variously described as a private military company, or PMC, a network of mercenaries or a de facto private army of Vladimir Putin. It is part of Yevgeny Prigozhin's vast and overlapping network of businesses and private military activities, a network that has been active for decades and enjoys the implicit support of the Russian state.

As a private military entity, the Wagner Group first emerged in 2014 during Russia's annexation of Crimea. Since then, it has expanded into the Middle East and Africa fighting on the side of forces aligned with the Russian government. Beyond its combat role, there are persistent reports of Wagner meddling in and destabilizing countries, committing widespread human rights abuses and extorting natural resources.

Yevgeny Prigozhin, a Russian businessman, restaurateur and former convict, has long been known to control the Wagner Group but has historically sought to conceal this fact. Only after the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 did he publicly acknowledge his lead role within the organization. Although he does not hold any official government position, Prigozhin is understood to have a close personal relationship with Putin. He is described as a confidant, including in matters of state.

Recently, Prigozhin has robustly criticized defence minister Shoigu and his military chief for, quote, incompetence, and a lack of support for Wagner soldiers fighting in Bakhmut, Ukraine. This public criticism marks a shift, and there has been speculation that this indicates his relationship with President Putin is strained.

However, we're cautious about speculation of this nature, as President Putin is known to tolerate rivalries within his inner circle. We are also tracking the Russian ministry of defence statement this past weekend, which I'm sure members of the committee will have seen, regarding the requirement for volunteer formations in Ukraine to sign contracts with the Russian military. This appears to be an attempt to bring all so-called volunteer corps, including Wagner, under the Russian command and control structure. Prigozhin has publicly rejected this idea for Wagner.

Nothing about Wagner is straightforward. It is a private military company operating openly in St. Petersburg and Moscow despite the fact that private military companies are illegal in Russia. It is a corporate enterprise, yet it is deeply enmeshed in Russian defence affairs and advances the Russian state's strategic objectives around the world. It is not part of the Russian military, yet it has been reported to train on a military base with Russian special forces. It has a founder who has denied his relationship with the company until he didn't.

What role does this group play? Generally, Russia uses the Wagner Group to advance its strategic interests where official Russian government intervention is perceived to be too costly or the risk of battlefield losses too great. His proxy forces serve as force multipliers. They help to expand the influence and financial gain of the Russian government and oligarchs in fragile and conflict-affected states, while obfuscating Russia's role in those conflicts and circumventing attribution through disinformation, deception and propaganda.

Here are some examples of the group's activities.

The Wagner Group has been active in Syria since 2014 and supports Russia's efforts to prop up Bashar al-Assad's regime.

In 2018, the Wagner Group entered the Central African Republic, and since 2021, it has played a significant role in military operations against rebel groups there. It's now an integral part of the country's security and business environment, and even acts as an adviser to the president.

In 2021, the military junta in Mali hired the Wagner Group to support military operations against salafist extremists and jihadists. The group deployed between 1,000 and 1,500 people to Mali.

The United Kingdom and the United States have estimated that approximately 50,000 soldiers taking part in the conflict in Ukraine are members of the Wagner Group. It has played an increasingly visible role in that country as the war has evolved. The actions of the Wagner Group in Ukraine, notably in Bakhmut, were particularly bloody and controversial.

Everywhere it operates, the Wagner Group is accused of human rights violations. Reports indicate that its troops regularly targeted civilians and attacked them opportunistically, including by committing sexual violence and pillaging. Marginalized groups are disproportionately targeted, fuelling suffering and increasing the risk of violent extremism and instability.

I have described the Wagner Group as a private military company. It is important to telescope out a little bit and situate this group within the broader context of private military and security companies, which are common and are contracted by a wide variety of actors for an equally wide variety of purposes, many of these very legitimate.

States, including Canada, as well as such international organizations as the UN contract private military and security companies to provide vital support along a continuum of security-related activities. This includes logistics, perimeter security and close protection, to name a few. The UN, for example, uses such companies to provide security for UN staff, facilities and convoys in conflict zones.

The bottom line is that private security companies are not all created equal. The Wagner Group stands out due to its dubious legal status, its close affiliation with the Russian state, its record of supporting state-sponsored violence, its commission of human rights abuses, its malign influence activities and the sheer number of countries in which it is present as a fighting force.

Canada and international partners have responded accordingly. The U.S., the U.K. and the European Council have all sanctioned the Wagner Group and Prigozhin personally. Canada has likewise sanctioned Wagner as well as Prigozhin personally in addition to 13 other individuals and nine entities with links to the company.

Mr. Chair, that brings me to the end of my statement. I welcome questions from the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Ms. Hulan. That was perfect timing. We just hit that eight-minute mark.

We will now open it to questions from the members, beginning with Mr. Genuis.

Mr. Genuis, you have six minutes.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, officials, for being here and for your important work.

On January 30, Parliament unanimously adopted a motion calling on the government to designate the Wagner Group as a terrorist organization. Does the Government of Canada support that motion or did they abstain on that motion?

[Heidi Hulan]

I'm very sorry. It was a unanimous motion, you said?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Well, it was unanimous insofar as nobody spoke against it. I'd like to know the government's position on that. Did they abstain or did they support it?

[Heidi Hulan]

On the substance of the question, that is, should this entity be listed as a transnational terrorist entity, I would just note that those questions of listings under the Criminal Code fall under the Minister of Public Safety's responsibility. If you have further questions on the substance of that, I'll be happy to pass those along.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Substantively, my question was about what the Government of Canada's position is on whether the Wagner Group should be listed. Presumably, your department advised the government in the preparation of that motion. It shouldn't be that complicated a question. What was the government's position on that motion? Did they support it or did they abstain from it?

[Heidi Hulan]

Mr. Chair, the government is involved in an iterative and ongoing process related to the question of which entities to add to this list. It does not disclose the specifics of those iterative discussions publicly.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'm a little familiar with this process. The House passed a motion calling on the government to list the IRGC as a terrorist organization five years ago, and we had a similar response, that there's a process of ongoing consideration. At some point, after five years, it becomes obvious that the government has decided not to list and simply didn't want to admit as much.

There have been cases where the government has moved very quickly on the listing of terrorist organizations. I can think of, for instance, the Proud Boys, following a parliamentary motion. It was a month or two after that that the government proceeded with listing, so we know the process doesn't take that long.

What should we read into the delay in the government listing? The Wagner Group had been active, of course, long before January 30; but there was the January 30 motion in the House and there was the February 14 recommendation from this committee. What should we read into the government's delay in listing the Wagner Group as a terrorist organization?

[Heidi Hulan]

Mr. Chairman, it's not for me to advise Parliament on what to read into the government's actions, but generally speaking, determining whether to designate an entity as a terrorist organization is the result of a very rigorous and continual process based on evidence, intelligence and legal analysis. It must meet a specific legal threshold, as laid out in subsection 83.05(1) of the Criminal Code, where there are reasonable grounds to—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'm sorry, Madam, but I understand the process. What I'm trying to get an understanding of is simply what the government's position is on listing Wagner and why they've delayed. I know there is a process required, but I also know that process has unfolded very quickly in certain cases past, and there's been a ragging of the puck in other cases past.

I'm not asking you to comment on the merits one way or the other of listing; I'm just asking what the government's position is. From what you're saying, it sounds as if the government doesn't have a position on it. They haven't listed. You're not prepared to say whether or not the government supported the motion. Is it fair to conclude that the government simply does not have a position on listing the Wagner Group one way or the other?

[Heidi Hulan]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.

The government does not comment publicly on ongoing investigations and consideration of whether to list an entity. For the government's position, the honourable member would need to ask a member of the government.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Okay. I would love to have a minister testify as part of this study, but in the absence of a minister, I would think that our officials.... If there's a government position, you'd be able to tell us, and if there's not a government position, you're obviously in a difficult spot.

I would say, in terms of the government commenting publicly or not, the government chose to allow the passage of the unanimous consent motion on January 30. We had a report of this committee, which included members of the government caucus and parliamentary secretaries, who supported a recommendation to list the Wagner Group.

I have one final question in the time I have. Various other allies—I'm thinking of France, the U.K. and Lithuania—have designated the Wagner Group as a terrorist entity. Have you been in discussions with those countries about their experience with listing the Wagner Group and the effect it's had in terms of their engagement.

[Heidi Hulan]

Thank you very much.

In fact, the Americans have listed Wagner as a transnational criminal organization.

On this question, we are not in a position.... We do not have the same mechanism in this country to list Wagner.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'm sorry. My question wasn't about the U.S. It was about France, the U.K. and Lithuania, though. I didn't mention the U.S. in my question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

We will now turn to Madam Bendayan.

You have six minutes.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

It seems there's some confusion on the part of my Conservative colleague. There was a unanimous consent motion in the House with the government members and certainly this government member in support of listing the Wagner Group as a terrorist organization.

To continue on the train of thought of my colleague—I believe you mentioned it, Ms. Hulan—the United States has listed the Wagner Group as a transnational criminal organization.

I was reading what some experts in the United States have been discussing about some of the issues they are facing with listing the Wagner Group as a terrorist entity. One expert noted that if they were to be listed as a terrorist group, that would mean many states, predominantly African states, that do engage with Wagner could be criminally liable.

Is that an issue you can help us unpack, Ms. Hulan?

[Heidi Hulan]

Terrorist activities fall outside of our normal treatment of government-sanctioned activities. Activities undertaken as part of a states military apparatus do not count as terrorist activities. If Wagner is operating in African countries and is designated as a terrorist entity, then in certain jurisdictions, I understand they could be held liable for Wagner's behaviour.

I would defer to my colleague from the legal branch on the finer points of that.

[Rebecca Netley, Executive Director, Accountability, Human Rights and United Nations Law Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development]

Thank you.

With respect to your specific question regarding whether African states could then be held responsible for Wagner's activities, if indeed they were listed as a terrorist entity, I do believe there would be challenges, because dealing with a terrorist entity engages criminal liability. In that case, yes, there would be the potential of criminal sanctions for those kinds of activities on the part of African states.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Thank you.

In your introduction you referenced the important role that Wagner Group had in Bakhmut. Their takeover of the town was significant in it being one of the only Russian so-called successes of their war effort.

I wonder if you can give us a sense if you expect the Wagner Group to continue operating in Ukraine as they have been or perhaps to refocus their operations elsewhere, such as in Africa.

I understand the Wagner Group is said to have left Bakhmut and been replaced by regular Russian forces. I'd like to hear you on what information you may have.

[Heidi Hulan]

I can't speak to the presence of Wagner and exactly who they may have been replaced by, although we are tracking all of those kinds of questions.

I would fully expect that Wagner would remain in Ukraine. They are a very important part of the Russian illegal operations in that country. This is despite the fact that Wagner has taken incredibly heavy losses. One estimate suggests that of the 50,000 troops it has deployed, it has lost 30,000. I can't verify those numbers, but they are really testament to the fact that Wagner is willing to be present in the most dangerous and active fighting zones of Ukraine. Of course, their motive is not ideological. It is profit-based. They are being paid for their activities in that country, which are substantial.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

In connection with that comment, I would point to the fact that Mr. Prigozhin explicitly called out Russian military leadership on various occasions. In your view, does that show some fragmentation in the Russian war effort? Do you feel this might present a challenge to Putin's leadership in Russia?

[Heidi Hulan]

I'm sure everyone has seen the profanity-laced comments that have been made on video by Prigozhin in which he has very harsh criticism of the defence minister, the chief of the Russian defence staff, etc. I think you can conclude from those comments that there is not unity within the Russian presence in Ukraine.

There is, at minimum, rivalry between some elements of the Russian military and Prigozhin and his private forces present in the country. Whether this has any impact on President Putin's stability and hold on power, it is very difficult to say. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, Putin does have a history of tolerating rivalries within his inner circle, for reasons I think we can speculate on, but perhaps it's best not to.

[Rachel Bendayan, Liberal, Outremont, QC]

Thank you.

I only have a few moments remaining. I wonder if you could provide us with some sense of how effective our sanctions have been in this regard. If you do not have time to provide a full answer, perhaps you could table with the committee some suggestions that we might pursue in order to strengthen our sanctions against Wagner Group individuals.