Thank you very much for the question.
I agree with you about risk assessment, but my point is that the risks are going up in the Arctic in terms of a need for search and rescue. I would like to ask you how you think Canada would look if an Airbus 340 or a Boeing 777 crash-landed on Ellesmere Island and we couldn't get to them for two or three days. That's a serious challenge in terms of our reputation and our profile as an Arctic sovereign country.
In terms of the CF-18 intercepts of Russian bombers, that's a good thing. At a minimum, it's very good training for our pilots. It has been happening quite a bit, as it happened for decades during the Cold War. I understand you might have had some experience with this yourself.
In terms of the Russian plans for a military force for the Arctic, again, I am cautious with respect to the Russians. I think the Russian government is far from democratic, and we need to be vigilant, but we also need to be careful not to overinflate the threat. There are journalists who'd like to report on the potential for conflict while playing down actual cooperation.
From one perspective, what the Russians are doing is no different from what other Arctic countries are doing: increasing their northern presence to deal with, among other things, the non-state threats like terrorists, like smugglers. Take these reports with a grain of salt and, to the degree that it is possible, engage the Russians diplomatically, work with them, build confidence on matters like cooperation in search and rescue, so that we avoid the kind of arms race that could develop if this momentum were to continue beyond what is reasonable, with respect to the current situation, into something that could actually cause a series of much more serious problems.