National Defence Committee on Sept. 14th, 2017

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

It's very difficult to decide. We are a force employer and when it comes to discussions about BMD, the policy set is clear for us: we're not a part of it. To speculate as to how it would look, I think that probably I would not be able to bring any accuracies or any information on that topic.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Would it be as simple as, say, us going from being observer to participant? Would that be fair? That how that participation was structured would be determined by—

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

Again, it would depend on the policy and the end result of the arrangement, which would be, again, very speculative at this time.

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Durham, ON]

Before, you said that we have no organic defensive capability against this threat from North Korea or anyone else. Therefore, we're completely reliant on the U.S. and their decision in that “heat of the moment”, as you've said. Is that correct?

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

Yes, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

That's your time.

Mr. Gerretsen.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

I appreciate your illustrating what NORAD headquarters looks like. Within this room, there would then be a sectioned-off area that only Americans would be allowed to be present in. That would be the NORTHCOM part of the room. Is that correct?

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

I would qualify it more. There is a section of that room with consoles that only Americans are manning. It is not sectioned off. It is a part of the operations centre, but Canadians are not manning those stations.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

Switching over to talking about the modernization of NORAD, a couple of people have touched on it already. This is obviously not the first time there's been a discussion of modernizing NORAD. In fact, up until September 11, it's at least my understanding that all of the work NORAD was doing was looking at incoming threats, not within the borders. Things have changed quite a bit now, because NORAD is also monitoring what's happening within the borders of North America.

When we talk about modernizing NORAD and about the threats that are happening today, where do you see other potential threats, outside of missiles specifically, and what other areas of NORAD need to be modernized, essentially?

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

I'll refer to earlier remarks. NORAD modernization is pursued under the tri-command framework, and that is to signify, as the words in the policy say—“defence against all perils or threats”—that we are concerned with multi-domain approaches to North America. The main concern in the 1950s was with the air domain only; this is how we started. We have evolved at various times throughout our history, and now we are conducting prudent planning and analysis, internal to our headquarters, to take a look at other domains.

The maritime domain is becoming a concern because of the advances in sea-borne cruise missiles and subsurface-related capabilities. Cyber doesn't care about borders or oceans.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

When we talk about modernizing NORAD, are we talking about modernizing Canada's participation in NORAD or about modernizing NORAD generally speaking, in which case much of the input into that modernization would be through discussions and agreements with our partner?

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

It is about generally modernizing NORAD. It is about materiel solutions and non-materiel solutions—you've heard those terms before. It is about the commanders who jointly are responsible for continental defence, namely the Americans and the Canadians, coming together and asking the question underlying the original premise of NORAD: are we better defending together than we are unilaterally? Even though we can accord, can we do so in other domains and can we pursue other solutions?

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

When we talk about modernizing NORAD, it's not exclusively a Canadian discussion; it's a discussion with our American partners that has to happen.

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

It is, sir, and it is at the command level at this time.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Right.

General Seymour, you said in your statements—concerning Canada's role in NORAD, if I understood you correctly—that Canada is responsible for detection, and we also plan for response.

Did I get that correctly?

[MGen William Seymour]

Yes.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

How do we respond, if it's with regard to a ballistic missile and we're not part of the body that makes the decision on how to respond?

[MGen William Seymour]

I think we've missed a part of a fundamental issue. Regardless of where a missile hits, either in Canada or elsewhere in North America, the consequences of that missile's hitting are borne by both Canada and the United States, so that—

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

You're talking about the plan to respond after the missile has hit.

[MGen William Seymour]

That's correct. Our primary role—and we worked on this very much with NORTHCOM headquarters—is in consequence management. I've already described what it is we do federally and provincially as a part of that effort.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Yes, you did.

Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I guess my time's up.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Ms. Gallant has the last question to this panel.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Sir, Canada participates in BMD through NATO. How would what the personnel of the Canadian Armed Forces do in NATO with respect to BMD differ from what they would do were we involved in BMD at NORAD?

[MGen Al Meinzinger]

To answer your question, Ms. Gallant, we do not have any Canadian Armed Forces members engaged in the NATO BMD system. The extant government policy, pursuant to the Lisbon summit, is that Canada supports that policy. We are strong NATO allies. As you would know, we have about 850 Canadians currently deployed supporting our alliance in Latvia and, by way of reassurance measures, in a ship currently deployed, and we have air policing happening in Romania.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

We saw that on 9/11 a Canadian was in command when it happened. Now, were there to be a ballistic missile attack and a Canadian were in command, how would it work? You said that we don't have the decision-making authority.