Foreign Affairs Committee on June 13th, 2023

[Marcel Lebleu]

Canada is committed to these countries. We have long-standing relations with these countries, especially Mali, where we have been involved for 60 years.

To be honest, we have reviewed some of our development programs. For example, when there was a coup, we suspended all direct budget support. We're adapting to this new reality, but we will keep supporting the people most in need of humanitarian assistance. Humanitarian assistance will continue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Mr. Lebleu. We have to go to the next member.

Ms. Larouche, you have two minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair

Mr. Lebleu, I want to talk a little more about Canada's policy on Africa. Canada stated on several occasions that it wanted to expand its presence on the continent of Africa—as it did with the Indo-Pacific region—but we know that the government is behind on that file. Canada's actions in Africa are unclear, and as you've clearly told the committee since the meeting started, there has been a parallel increase in influence by China and Russia on the continent. By examining the growing geographic reach of the Wagner Group in Africa, particularly in Libya, the Central African Republic, Mali and Sudan, we see that the group's objectives often intersect with the foreign policy objectives of the Russian state, which is gaining influence throughout the region with the help of that group.

Why are we waiting to take a more serious interest in Africa and in the influence of countries like Russia on the economic development and stability in countries on that continent? Has Canada assessed its international aid programs in countries where the Wagner Group has a presence, such as Mali, so as to take that reality into consideration? We fear that our aid in those countries will fall into the hands of the Wagner Group. Have you made changes, and if not, why not?

[Marcel Lebleu]

Not matter whether it's in countries in Africa or on any other continent, it's standard practice for the government to suspend direct aid as soon as the first coup d'état occurs. No monies are paid directly to the government.

I can assure you that, for 100% of our current development programs, the funds are distributed through Canadian civil society or recognized international humanitarian aid partners, namely the World Food Programme and UNICEF. No monies are paid directly to the Malian government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lebleu.

We go to Madam McPherson.

You have two minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This has been very interesting. Thank you for all of the information you're sharing with us.

Very quickly on the sanctions and the Wagner Group, do you have any concerns that there are any Canadian assets associated with the Wagner Group in Canada still that have not been sanctioned?

[Heidi Hulan]

I am not aware of any Canadian assets or Canadians with assets tied up in Wagner.

I would ask if my colleague, Andrew, would like to add to that answer.

[Andrew Turner]

I'm not aware either, but I would note that we are working with all of the various investigative agencies and the RCMP to thoroughly look into any possibilities. As noted, because of the sanctions we have imposed, any such assets or financial dealings with Wagner or Wagner-related entities would be subject to criminal sanction.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Of course, the challenge we have is I'm not confident that our sanctions are being enforced as well as they could be. Obviously, we have limited resources compared to what other countries have associated with their sanctions.

I do want to go back, Ms. Hulan, to some of the things you were saying about them not being ideological. Obviously, the profit motive, from your perspective, is their key motivator, but the Wagner Group does have extremist right-wing views from my understanding and that does colour their work to some degree.

Could you tell us a little bit about the framework in which those right-wing views are being shown and expressed and how it could in fact influence some of their decision-making as a military?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Answer very briefly, please. You have 15 seconds.

[Heidi Hulan]

Very briefly, yes.

Wagner is known to have a number of actors within it who have links to extremists and far right ideologies. There's no question about the personal inclinations of some of the members, including its military commander, Utkin, who's a former Russian military officer. He is now retired and runs the military operations of Wagner. In fact, his nom de guerre was “Wagner”, because Wagner was Hitler's favourite composer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you, Ms. Hulan.

We're going to have to move on. My apologies for that.

We'll now go to Mr. Genuis.

Mr. Genuis, you have three minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to clarify my earlier questions.

The legal frameworks among different countries are not identical when it comes to terrorist designations or anti-terrorism laws. I'm aware of the U.S. situation. A number of countries in Europe have, in effect, designated Wagner as a terrorist organization through parliamentary measures, but that does not have the same legal effect as the designation does in Canada. The U.K. is being widely reported as developing a legal case and being on the verge of making a terrorist designation, which, in the U.K., from what I understand, would be relatively similar in its legal effects to the Canadian experience.

My question, though, was mainly about our engagement with those other players and whether we're having conversations with our allies about the fact that they view Wagner as a terrorist organization, and how our approach should line up with theirs.

Could you update the committee on any discussions happening with the U.K., the U.S. or other allies on how we might take a coordinated approach to recognizing, as terrorist or otherwise, the nature of the violence the Wagner Group is responsible for?

[Heidi Hulan]

I'm in regular contact with the U.K. and the U.S. on a wide variety of issues, particularly pertaining to the conduct of the conflict in Ukraine. We are overwhelmingly preoccupied with responding to the effects of—

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

I'm sorry. I'm very tight for time. I have three minutes. It's on Wagner specifically.

[Heidi Hulan]

We have discussed Wagner. I can tell the committee that none of those colleagues have raised with me any intention to list Wagner as a terrorist entity.

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

Does that include the U.K.?

[Heidi Hulan]

That includes the U.K.

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

Okay. That's striking, because it's been widely reported that they are on the verge of that. That's interesting information. Thank you.

I'm also a bit perplexed about your saying, on the one hand, that we have all the tools we need in order to respond, but that, on the other hand, we haven't used the existing tool we have yet, or that the U.S. has a tool we don't have. Is the issue with responding to Wagner that the tool you think would be optimal doesn't exist? If the tool does exist, we should use it. If the tool doesn't exist, you should tell us that. As parliamentarians, we can propose the new tool.

Do we have the tools we need or do we not? If we have the tools we need, why is there a delay?

[Heidi Hulan]

Mr. Chair, I believe I've answered this question already.

The government has the tools it needs to make terrorist designations. Those terrorist designations result from internal and iterative deliberations.

I'll finish, Mr. Chair, in a second.

The government does not comment publicly on the nature of those ongoing discussions.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you.

For the final question, we'll go to Mr. Oliphant.

You have three minutes.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you.

I want to thank you for your work on this and also give you time to finish your thoughts on those questions.

I think what our committee is wrestling with is the effectiveness of sanctions, the importance of sanctions, the difference between sanctions and listings, and the different processes. One is a set of laws we have under sanctions, and another is a Criminal Code listing, designation as a terrorist organization.

I think we all agree at this point that Wagner is an organization whose means and goals are malicious. Canada is looking for ways to stop that.

I want to give you a chance, also, to talk about the difference between our regime and that of other countries, which are long-established. I want you to take the time to help us. I'm not trying to score points here. I'm trying to get answers.

[Heidi Hulan]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.

I know you're at the beginning of your deliberations on this issue. We will be happy, either in writing or in person, to continue to support the committee in its deliberations. This is a very important file.

With respect to terrorist designations and sanctions, we care about this in two particular respects. One is effect. What kind of effect can you have with sanctions and various designations? From an effect perspective, I would say our existing sanctions provide substantially the same effect as listings as a terrorist entity. It's in effect a dealings ban, which is a very important effect.

Second, from the perspective of accountability and justice, particularly for Ukraine in this context, there is a question about whether they're better served by a designation or by treating Wagner as part of the Russian state apparatus under international law. Here, I would just say that while we can list, one thing to consider is that a listing as a terrorist entity may make it more difficult to associate the actions and activities of Wagner on the ground in Ukraine with the Russian state. If we have difficulty associating the actions of Wagner with the Russian state, it will be more difficult to hold President Putin accountable for those atrocities.

That sounds like a leading statement. It does not indicate the state of any discussions within the Government of Canada, except it is a real consideration for the committee to make note of as you consider your own findings in this area.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Thank you very much, Ms. Hulan.

That concludes our first hour dedicated to a study of the Wagner Group.

We're very grateful to Ms. Netley, Mr. Lebleu, Ms. Hulan and Mr. Turner. We're grateful for your time and for your expertise. You have certainly provided us ample context to revisit this study in the coming months. We are very grateful, indeed.

We will now suspend for a few minutes to allow the witnesses to leave and our next witness to appear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ali Ehsassi]

Welcome back, everyone.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, January 31, 2022, our committee resumes its study of the situation at the Russia-Ukraine border and implications for peace and security.

For that purpose, we are very honoured to have with us a special witness today. From the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania, we are honoured to have with us the vice-minister, Mr. Meilūnas.

As members are fully aware, we have a very special relationship with Lithuania. Lithuania will also be hosting the next NATO summit, but it is a country with which we have had excellent relations, starting from the Soviet occupation of Lithuania. We were one of the few countries that never actually accepted the annexation of Lithuania and, over the past year, we have had ample opportunities to work very closely with each other.

Mr. Meilūnas, we're very grateful that you made the time to appear before the committee. For your opening remarks, you will be provided seven minutes, after which we will open this to questions from the members.

One last thing that I did want to tell you, Mr. Meilūnas, is that you have an extraordinary ambassador here in Ottawa, who is well known to most of the members here, so you will be happy to know that we are quite conversant on many of the issues that both of our countries are grappling with.

That having been said, again, thank you for being with us. You have seven minutes for your opening remarks.