Thank you very much for having me. I really appreciate the opportunity to testify on these two studies, which are of vital importance for the national security of our country.
My personal area of research is understanding the nexus between strategy, procurement and politics, not just in Canada but also internationally, and that will be reflected in my remarks. In my view, one of the major issues facing Canada is that we are far too beholden to our own context and we fail to look beyond our borders to see threats or to learn from the experience of our allies.
This past decade has underlined the importance of air power and modern warfare, including in the Azerbaijan-Armenian conflict, as well as the ongoing war in Ukraine. They underline the need for the air force's likely acquisition of the F-35 and the army's ground-based air defence program, or GBAD.
The latter is essential to protect our soldiers from air threats on the battlefield, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, which have proven so deadly in modern conflicts such as the one in Ukraine. However, it will likely take eight years or more for Canada to field a response. By comparison, the United States developed and fielded several systems to address this threat, including one in under three years' time.
GBAD is part of our country's underwhelming track record for responding to major threats in a timely manner.
Canada's approach to defence procurement has tended to be very platform-centric, which seems to supersede other considerations, including changes to the strategic or technological environment. This is particularly problematic, given the challenges facing program delivery. This means that Canada will often prepare systems that will have limited utility for newer challenges that may emerge.
In addition, many of the public debates around defence do not correspond to a military reality. Much of the public and political discourse over the CF-18 replacement revolved around issues that are more than decades old. Most modern western militaries have long since settled such debates and are addressing much more relevant and current challenges.
The platform-centric approach also means that Canada is highly focused on single capabilities to deal with multi-faceted challenges. That approach may have worked in the past, but is less effective in the new technological and threat environment that emphasizes multiple systems operating synergistically.
Defining features of military platforms today are their sensors, data processing and connectivity, which reflect the changes to how our society now organizes itself. Our military procurement approaches need to better address this reality. For something like the army's GBAD program, how we address the air threat should start to focus on foundational enablers, such as networking and data links, before addressing sensors and missiles.
I'll cut off my comments here. I look forward to your questions, and I'm willing to go into any specific area in much more detail.
Thank you.