Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on May 3rd, 2022

[James Stewart]

I could add to what Chile has said about technology—though, unfortunately, I'm no expert on it.

One of the things that was developed that I recall—and I wish I could remember the name of the app—was an app that would allow first responders, people who were on the ground who saw the sorts of things you're talking about, Mr. Sarai, to film this on their smart phones and then send it immediately up into the cloud so that it was protected and preserved. There were markers attached to that would preserve the location, time and all the rest of it. That's an example of the kind of technology that's available today.

Certainly, I can tell you that social media is an extraordinarily rich source of evidence. We built one entire case on social media of prisoners of war who were being shot, and the people who were doing it were putting what they were doing on social media and boasting about it. Of course, you can't just rely on that. You then have to authenticate it and support it with other evidence, but what Chile is talking about in terms of modern technology is very much a feature of criminal investigations, particularly at the international level now.

One of the difficulties is the mass of it, so the use of artificial intelligence to try to sort through it becomes very important, as is simply the application of human resources and the need to have enough people to go through this sort of material patiently. When you come right down on the ground with these things, it is just hard, smart work that generates the cases you need to bring in order to hold people accountable.

I hope that helps.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Yes, thank you.

Mr. Stewart, similarly, when it comes to sexual violence, as we've heard from Mr. Czolij and others in the past about what has happened, particularly to many young women in Bucha and other places, there are people like the RCMP investigators who are sent there and others who are indigenous to Ukraine. Are they able to deal with the sensitivities of a person who's been through all of that and capture all of the necessary evidence?

From your past experience, is this knowledge and training being given to those who are investigating the current situation there, who are dealing with the ethnic cleansing happening in Bucha and other places?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michael Cooper]

Make it a brief answer, please.

[James Stewart]

I honestly can't comment on what's happening now, because I'm not in the office of the prosecutor and I'm not authorized to speak for Karim Khan, and I just don't know. I can certainly tell you on the basis of past experience that the office of the prosecutor developed an entire policy dealing with sexual and gender-based crimes and how to deal with the medical and psychological needs of people. There are people in the office of the prosecutor who are trained to deal with traumatized victims. There are people who are capable of examining victims medically.

Of course, in today's world, when you think about the notion of complementarity, which I mentioned earlier, it may be that local prosecutors' offices have the capacity to deal with individuals. These are very sensitive matters, so much of it really depends on culture. It took a long time, for example, for people to come forward—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michael Cooper]

I'm going to have to interrupt. Unfortunately, we're going to have to leave it there.

[James Stewart]

—to talk about sexual violence in Rwanda because of culture.

I'm sorry I went over. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michael Cooper]

If you want to wrap up, you can have 10 more seconds. I'm sorry to interject.

[James Stewart]

No, thank you very much.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michael Cooper]

Thank you.

We were a little over there, but I will turn it over to Mr. Viersen for five minutes.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses.

Mr. Robinson, you wanted to jump in when Ms. McPherson was speaking. I am wondering if you still had that comment at the ready.

[Prof. Paul Robinson]

With regard to intent and what Putin has said, I have studied his features and have peer-reviewed academic articles on them, so this is my field. You should distinguish between his attitude to Ukrainian statehood and his attitude to the Ukrainian people, because they are distinct.

Putin has threatened Ukrainian statehood. He said a while back that if Ukraine tried to recapture Donbass by force, it would be the end of Ukrainian statehood. In his speech recognizing the independence of the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic, he ran through how the communists had put Ukraine together from various bits, and then he said that if the Ukrainian authorities wanted decommunization, he could give them decommunization—which in effect meant unravelling what the communists had done and cutting Ukraine up. That is a definite threat against Ukrainian statehood.

However, his attitude to the Ukrainian people is very different. The Ukrainian people are continually referred to as a brotherly people, as one sharing the same language, the same culture, a common history; as one the Russian people are entirely friendly with, and there's no intent to destroy the Ukrainian people or Ukrainian culture as such. There is a keyword that's not been mentioned in the genocide convention list, the words “as such”. You have to be aiming to eliminate a group “as such”. No such intent has been stated in his speeches.

Moreover, he is vehemently anti-ethnonationalist. He has repeatedly denounced what he calls “caveman nationalism”, which is ethnonationalism, and he has repeatedly stressed the need and the fact that Russia is a multinational, multiconfessional, multi-ethnic society, and that this is a good thing.

Therefore, yes, he's definitely expressed threats against Ukrainian statehood, but as for an intent to destroy Ukrainian people, Ukrainian culture—no.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you.

[Eugene Czolij]

Could I add one thing, because I am not reading the same thing that Mr. Robinson is reading?

In a very well-known and publicized article titled “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians”, on July 12, 2021, way before February 2022, Putin wrote:

...when I was asked about Russian-Ukrainian relations, I said that Russians and Ukrainians were one people—a single whole.

Then he disparaged Ukrainians by saying that, in his history books:

The name “Ukraine” was used more often in the meaning of the Old Russian word 'okraina' (periphery)...referring to various border territories. And the word “Ukrainian”...originally referred to frontier guards who protected the external borders.

That is how much Mr. Putin loves the Ukrainian people. He thinks that Ukrainians were border guards or frontier guards who were protecting the external borders of Russia, and he does not recognize the Ukrainian people as a people.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you.

One of the other areas I am wondering if you have any commentary on is the treatment of prisoners of war. That is one of the things I've noticed coming out of the conflict there. Do you have any comments on that?

[Eugene Czolij]

The horrific stories of the treatment of both civilians and the military who have been captured and are prisoners of war defies human logic. When I look at it, when I read about it, I did not think that a human being could go that low. The treatment inflicted on prisoners of war violates every single principle in international law on their treatment.

I don't want to shock this committee with examples of such violations, but I am just saying to you that, when one goes through the list, it clearly violates every single principle of international law regarding the treatment of prisoners of war.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Czolij.

[Prof. Paul Robinson]

May I follow up on this as well?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michael Cooper]

Yes. Mr. Robinson, I'll give you a little bit of leeway to jump in.

[Prof. Paul Robinson]

There is clearly mistreatment of prisoners of war going on in this war. That is clear. I think it is necessary to point out that it is happening on both sides.

A month ago, a video came to light showing Ukrainian soldiers murdering Russian prisoners of war. Even though, as we've had pointed out, a video only isn't proof per se, the BBC was able to verify this by geolocating where this happened, which was in Ukrainian-held territory. The Guardian newspaper reported that bodies were spotted in the area by satellites, so it does seem likely that in this case, the Ukrainian soldiers murdered Russian prisoners. There have actually been more than one such video. There have been a substantial number of videos not just of the murder of Russian prisoners, but also of the beating of Russian prisoners and the desecration of dead bodies, so there have been, I'm afraid to say, multiple violations of human rights on both sides in this war.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michael Cooper]

Thank you, Mr. Robinson and Mr. Viersen.

Mr. Trudel, you have five minutes.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will address Mr. Robinson first, but then I will come back to Mr. Czolij to ask him a question about Crimea.

Mr. Robinson, you are an expert on Russia. I think that at the moment everyone on the planet would like to stop this war. But we realize that we have to do it very carefully. The Americans are giving Ukraine weapons and Canada is giving it money to try to support it in this war. However, we cannot intervene directly. Yet we feel that many people around the world would like to.

We hear that, if we intervene, Putin would be crazy enough to unleash nuclear weapons and thus start a third world war. As someone who is an expert on Russia and is familiar with Mr. Putin's speeches, do you think this is really possible, or is it Russian propaganda being used to stop the world intervening in Ukraine?

[Prof. Paul Robinson]

The Russian state, even today, came out with of a new statement saying that they considered the use of nuclear weapons to be unacceptable. Now of course this is what is declared. As to what could happen in reality, I don't know, but I would consider it very unlikely unless NATO troops were advancing on Moscow or St. Petersburg, or something like that. I think it's very much an existence-of-the-state type of weapon, rather than something that should be used for tactical purposes in a war such as in Ukraine.

Does that answer the question?

Nuclear weapons can be used to save the state, if the existence of the state is in danger. However, I don't think they would be used to win the war in Ukraine.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

And yet the line is tenuous, isn't it?

[Prof. Paul Robinson]

I think it's pretty clear.