Evidence of meeting #3 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was russia.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Deputy Director General, International Security Policy, Department of National Defence
I'm sorry, but could I just add to that?
Regardless of whether these incidents are claimed, I think there's a clear understanding that there are escalatory activities happening here, hence why these deterrent responses are being augmented.
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I would also add this, if I may. Certainly, the Danish and Norwegian authorities and allies, after these things happen, will do the investigation, follow through and, eventually, come to a more solid conclusion as to what happened.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
You said in the very beginning that there were a number of European countries that responded. I can't remember which incursion that was. You mentioned the Netherlands and Italy.
How is that coordinated, and how quickly can these nations come together and respond in real time?
Deputy Director General, International Security Policy, Department of National Defence
As part of a NATO response, we also have what's called air-policing missions. They're our allies. Canada has contributed in the past. In the case of Poland, I believe that they were Italian fighter jets that participated as well as some from the Netherlands, who were conducting air-policing missions. That's part of our overall response.
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I was going to say the exact same thing about Baltic air policing, but NATO also conducts air policing in other areas along the eastern flank, the Adriatic, western Balkans, Iceland and Benelux, where allies take a two- or four-month tour or so and deploy to different bases. They are then responsible for airspace coverage in those countries.
Liberal
Anita Vandenbeld Liberal Ottawa West—Nepean, ON
You said that Canada participates in this. Had it been Canadians who were policing that particular area, would it be conceivable that it would have been Canadians who would have intercepted?
Deputy Director General, International Security Policy, Department of National Defence
We have previously participated in air-policing missions in Romania, Latvia and Iceland. We weren't participating at this particular moment, but, yes, had it been us we could have been responsible.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ahmed Hussen
Thank you.
Next we have MP Lemire for two and a half minutes, please.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Curran, I would like to hear your thoughts on drone capabilities. Have we designed drones that can fly for long periods in northern conditions, such as the conditions in the Arctic and Canada's Far North?
Deputy Director General, International Security Policy, Department of National Defence
Drones can certainly do this. Some Canadian industries produce this type of long‑range drone, which can help with logistics and so on. For example, the RQ‑8 drone can do this quite well.
Perhaps my colleague would like to chime in.
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I just want to point out that the Canadian Armed Forces are in the process of acquiring long‑range RQ‑8 drones. I believe that they have already signed a contract. These are American drones, but they're specifically designed to help with surveillance in the Arctic.
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
That I don't know.
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
In 2022, the Royal Canadian Air Force discussed potential issues for drones given the ice, temperature and satellite coverage limitations in these areas. Have we improved our satellite infrastructure, for example, and the ability of these drones to survive in winter conditions? Battery charging time is an issue.
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Unless my colleague has anything to add, I'm not aware of the issue concerning satellite coverage. I do know that, in addition to the RQ‑8 drones indeed adapted for winter use, the Canadian Armed Forces are also acquiring P‑8 Poseidon long‑range and long‑endurance maritime patrol aircraft to conduct surveillance in the Arctic.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
You said that the drones would be American. Has there been any effort to see whether Canadian technology could be used and whether these drones could be produced by Canada? Obviously, given the somewhat tense, shall we say, diplomatic situation with the Americans, could possessing this data pose a problem in the medium or long term?
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I can't tell you whether any Canadian companies have been approached.
Liberal
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to go back to talk about the NATO response in our deterrence. In recent weeks, the sheer volume of Russian threats has been head spinning. It's hard to keep track. We've had the drones over Polish and Romanian airspace. We've had Russian MiG fighter jets violate Estonian airspace. We've had a Russian aircraft buzzing a German naval vessel in the Baltic Sea. We've had, reportedly, Russian drones over airports in Oslo and Copenhagen. Just recently, in recent hours, they were reported over other airports in the region as well.
That comes on the heels, as Mr. Oliphant has mentioned, of the severing of communication cables in the Baltic Sea for the Baltic states and Finland. Norway recently said that Russian hackers broke into the controls for a Norwegian dam, opening up the sluices for fours hours before the Norwegians could get control of it. The Russians are messing around with foreign interference here in North America and in European states.
When I look at NATO's response, frankly, it seems less than coherent and comprehensive. I don't understand what our deterrence posture is with these repeated incursions into NATO airspace, and I'm not alone. I just looked at some of the headlines today. CBC's headline is “Putin is poking NATO with drones and jets. The military alliance is still sorting out its response”. CNN's headline today is “NATO divided on how to respond to repeated Russian incursions”.
We are a senior and founding member of the NATO alliance. What are we doing to sort out our position on these incursions and re-establish a posture of deterrence?
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
As we highlighted previously, again, these incursions, I agree, are egregious and reckless, and that is how the 32 allies have qualified them publicly. They've signalled that through two article 4 consultations and a North Atlantic Council statement, and are in the process of establishing a number of new measures called Eastern Sentry.
As I mentioned earlier, we've seen, in the past, a number of incidents involving critical underwater infrastructure. The alliance did set up a Baltic Sentry, and we've seen a drop from that.
We're still in the early days in the response. The SACEUR has already said that he has the tools and authorities he needs. He just needs some more assets, and allies are providing those. The challenge is that NATO, as an organization, is frankly very much heavy on the conventional side. It does do work on cyber and it does do work on hybrid, but some of the response options in some of those domains are not within NATO's remit.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON
Off the top of my head, from my recollection, about a decade ago, a NATO member did shoot down a Russian fighter jet that violated NATO airspace, and the Russians accepted that. They were upset, obviously, but they tacitly acknowledged that they had violated that NATO member's airspace.
Again, there doesn't seem to be a consistent response across the alliance to these violations of our airspace. It's hard to establish deterrence when the posture is not clear.
Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
I'm fully aware of the Turkish shoot down of a Russian aircraft in the past. The context is different at the moment. There's a hot war going on in Ukraine. The commanders and the alliance will determine in due course what it needs to do if and when it needs to do it.
Having the Estonian airspace violation, for example, occur simply a few days after an initial article 4 consultation could probably have been seen as very escalatory. The authorities decided not to shoot it down. I don't know. I'm speculating. I shouldn't be speculating, but I'm speculating. However, looking forward, the allies have since come out very strongly in reaffirming collective defence and reaffirming their desire to ensure allied defence and territorial defence.