Foreign Affairs Committee on Feb. 28th, 2022

[Sandra McCardell]

Given the shortness of time, I think Heidi has answered that very adequately.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Okay. Thank you very much.

You'll have a chance to follow up in—

[Marty Morantz, Conservative, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Mr. Chair, is it possible to get an answer to that question in writing, since my time is up? It would be specifically addressing Mr. Shamalov and Ms. Georgieva.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Yes, we can request that it be provided in writing. I think that's expedient. Thank you for that, Mr. Morantz.

We will now go to Dr. Fry, please, for five minutes.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Good morning, everybody. I'd like to thank you all for being here.

Welcome, Excellency, to our meeting.

I want to ask what might sound like a naive question. Ukraine wanted to join NATO. So does Finland. Of course, Finland is extremely at risk right now. Given where we all are, given that all the allies, including all the NATO allies, are on the page for moving forward with a defensive mechanism, why don't we let them join? Why doesn't everyone agree to have them join? Can that happen?

[Bob Rae]

The issue of NATO membership is determined by all the members. I think it's fair to say that there may not have been complete unanimity before about which countries should join or whether indeed there was a formal application to join. In order for things to happen, you need a formal application and process of discussion. Whether that happens now, I don't know.

I'm sure there will be discussions, not only about NATO membership but also about EU membership. I think President Zelensky made it very clear, in his public announcements the last few days, that he's looking to that, and many European countries have said they're eager to have Ukraine join the EU, which in many respects has historically been just as important to Ukraine as membership in NATO.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

Thank you. I thought that might allow NATO to suddenly defend Ukraine on its own territory because of this. That's why I asked the question.

I know about the diplomatic processes that we have to go through as we're doing talks, but Putin himself has shown that he's not to be trusted. You know the old saying, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” There was the 1991 Budapest assurance with regard to nuclear disarmament in Kazakhstan and Ukraine, which made them give up all their nuclear armaments in order to be assured that their territorial integrity would be protected. He reneged on that. He then came into Crimea. He's then sitting around at Minsk talks, and everything he says cannot be trusted.

Why are we trusting that this man will not be unstable enough to press that nuclear button? It doesn't seem to me that he's a stable human being. I think he's the kind of guy who, when he's backed into a corner, will do anything to fight back. Why are we trusting these talks that are being held today? Do we think they'll amount to anything? Are we concerned that he will demand certain things that might make him in fact keep his nuclear threat going? I am concerned about that piece.

[Bob Rae]

The talks that are taking place in northern Ukraine on the border with Belarus are taking place between the Government of Ukraine and the Government of Russia. They're not taking the place with NATO or anybody else.

It was President Zelensky who asked for a meeting, and then they debated about where it would be and the terms and conditions of the meeting. They are having talks without any conditions, following his insistence on that, and that means no ceasefire. That's the reason that we have this very dangerous situation still under way.

I don't think it's about trusting Mr. Putin. I don't trust him. For me, as an individual, if he says something.... Many things he says I know are not true, so there is no reason to trust him. I don't think it's about trust. It's about the fact that there will have to be some kind of compromise or something happen that will allow for a resolution of this crisis, or else it will be a fight to the bitter end, and that's not something anybody wants to see.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Vancouver Centre, BC]

I agree. However, we have watched him amassing his military might, including in the Arctic and around Ukraine, for a long time now. Why weren't we more prepared for this? Why wasn't NATO putting its forces in NATO countries and the Baltics, etc., to be ready for this moment, knowing that it could easily happen with this unstable man?

[Bob Rae]

I'm not sure I can answer that question easily, except to make a general point, and that is, I think it's true that many countries did not take the threat of a Russian invasion as seriously as we all should have. I'm not being critical of any one country or another, but I think there will be lots of historians who want the answer. However, right now we're in the middle of a battle, and it's a battle for the lives of the Ukrainian people. The moments for analysis or reanalysis or reconsideration will come later. Right now we're at the coal face, and it's a very tough place to be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

We'll have to leave it there, Dr. Fry.

Thank you, Ambassador Rae.

[Bob Rae]

I'm afraid I have to go, Mr. Chair. I apologize to the members of the committee.

However, my very able colleagues will be able to answer, perhaps less provocatively than me. I can see them looking at me rather uneasily as I answer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Ambassador Rae, on our collective behalf, thank you for your time this morning. Thank you for your service and your expertise. We wish you well. We are following your work very closely.

[Bob Rae]

Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you.

Honourable members, we now go to Mr. Bergeron for two and a half minutes.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

I can't tell you how disappointed I am, Mr. Chair, that Ambassador Rae has just left us. I was going to ask him about a comment he made during an interview with RDI on Saturday. He said that the time had come for Russia's political, military and business elite to speak directly with their leaders and tell them that the situation had gone too far.

I'm not sure whether any of you is able to answer the question I had for Mr. Rae. Is there any reason to think that the members of Russia's military, political and business elite are mobilizing in the wake of the sanctions?

[Sandra McCardell]

Since Ambassador Rae isn't here, I will answer that, Mr. Chair.

What we are seeing is an extraordinary unified response on the part of our partners and allies. It is commonly being said that Russia has given the west and NATO a new purpose. As we are seeing, the sanctions are having a significant impact. Already today, we are seeing the effects on Russia's economy, its currency. That creates pressure within Russia. That's exactly what we wanted, not just to affect the elite Mr. Bergeron described, but also to weaken Russia's capacity to mount operations like the one happening now.

Unfortunately, we can't see inside the Russian regime. What we do know, though, is that the effects of the unified response of Canada and its partners—the sanctions, political pressure and so forth—are really being felt on the ground in Russia. It goes [Technical difficulty—Editor] the sanctions can have a greater impact.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Montarville, QC]

Thank you so much. Sorry [Technical difficulty—Editor].

Along the same lines, I want to follow up on a question Mr. Morantz asked a little while ago.

When Alexeï Navalny's chief of staff, Léonid Volkov, appeared before the committee, he gave us a list of oligarchs who should be the first ones targeted by western sanctions. According to the information we have, there are people on that list who have still not been targeted by sanctions, including Canadian sanctions.

I imagine the answer is yes, but is Canada still planning to impose sanctions on those oligarchs who surround Mr. Putin and support what he's doing?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Please keep your answer brief.

[Sandra McCardell]

We have that very list put together by Mr. Navalny.

As Ambassador Rae mentioned, we are still working with our allies and partners on potential targets that could help bring significant pressure to bear on the Russian regime. We have not exhausted all of our measures, but I would point out that it's important to see what the impact of the sanctions we have already imposed will be. The political impact of sanctions may be immediate, but the economic impact takes longer to be felt.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sven Spengemann]

Thank you, Ms. McCardell and Mr. Bergeron.

I will now give the floor to Don Davies for two and a half minutes.

Go ahead, sir.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you.

I'd like to come back briefly to the nuclear ban treaty. Ambassador Rae went to great pains to tie NATO into this. I know the first members' meeting of state parties to the treaty is coming up. Other NATO countries are, I am informed, sending observer delegations to that treaty.

Are there any plans for Canada to do so as well?

[Heidi Hulan]

We follow developments on the treaty with great care and interest, and we are constantly collaborating with colleagues on all sides of this debate. I have to tell you that I'm not at this instant in possession of an answer to your question, but we would be happy to follow up with the committee.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you.

In answer to my question about visa-free travel for Ukrainians, I think the very end of the statement said that it's not under review. Could I get that clarified? What exactly does that mean?

[Jean-Marc Gionet]

I think it's important to give a bit more context, as I was pressed for time in the response.

To give an overview of the measures we currently have in place to facilitate the travel of Ukrainians—