National Defence Committee on Sept. 14th, 2017

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

The last time a round of sanctions was put on North Korea, they retaliated with the underground detonation registering 6.3. Kim Jong-un stated specifically that it was a reaction to the sanctions. Now we have another round recently this week—

[Stephen Burt]

I think it would be a mistake to characterize the testing and development they're doing as reaction. They do take advantage of the symbolic value, but we see their work being driven by engineering considerations, frankly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Thank you, Mrs. Gallant.

Ms. Vandenbeld, you have the floor.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much.

I think Canadians are rightly very concerned about this issue at the moment. I think your testimony has been very helpful.

Mr. Gwozdecky, you indicated that North Korea perceives Canada as a peaceful country. I think you even used the word “friendly”. Given that Mr. Burt said that our minister is seen as having the ear of the United States and that we're not perceived as having a particular agenda, is this something we can use to advantage in the sense of using multilateral discussions, multilateral talks, to be able to prepare the ground in the pre-negotiation phase first of all, as you discussed, but also to start the six-party talks again and maybe even go beyond that and engage a wider Asia-Pacific community in that?

[Mark Gwozdecky]

First of all, let me say that the kind and courteous words you hear across a diplomatic table are not always 100% the case. We're not naive in terms of hearing some words from North Koreans and assuming that they absolutely consider us to be peaceful and friendly, but they are some of the preliminary indications. We have to prepare for other considerations as well.

I think we feel we can play a role. I think the minister feels we are a serious player and we're listened to by all the key players, and we have been pushing to create the conditions where those talks could start. What specific role Canada might play would be up to the principal parties. In historic terms, the six-party talks have been the mechanism that brings together the six key parties. We don't presume that Canada would be among those, but as I indicated, the minister has made it very clear that we're prepared to support in any way we can. If the parties feel that having a Canadian voice at a table, or having Canada express something to another player...we're more than ready to do that.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

In other parts of the world, particularly if you look at the Balkans and the Caucasus, Canada through OSCE, through multilateral organizations, has been able to participate, and that in many ways has been successful in containing very severe conflicts. Is that perhaps something we could look at in the Asia-Pacific region, that kind of dialogue, that kind of discussion, looking at maybe a model of OSCE?

[Mark Gwozdecky]

Indeed the OSCE, which is the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, is one of the network of multilateral institutions that are important in promoting European security and stability. Those are absent in the Asia context. The absence of those kinds of security infrastructures in the Asia region has been a concern for many, including Canada, for some time. We have spoken, but right now, I think my colleague would agree, it's not yet something that the Asian countries themselves are ready to embrace.

Is that correct?

[Sarah Taylor]

I would just add that there is one venue that brings together North Korea and a lot of other regional players, which is the ASEAN Regional Forum. That was the setting in which Minister Freeland was able to engage recently with the North Korean foreign minister. But that is not exclusively or primarily focused on the northeast Asia region.

The South Korean president has recently put forward some proposals for enhanced trilateral cooperation: Japan, China, South Korea. That exists, but to broaden that and focus it more on regional security, he's also spoken beyond that about some sort of broader regional entity, and I think if that comes into play there might be a role for Canada there. Certainly we work very closely with South Korea as a very close ally and one that's very directly concerned with it.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

So for Canada as a Pacific country, this might be an area where we could pursue some diplomatic options in terms of trying to promote that kind of idea.

[Sarah Taylor]

Yes.

[Mark Gwozdecky]

Most certainly, we are committed to the kind of confidence-building measures that the OSCE provides in Europe. We would think that those would be very welcome in an Asian context as well.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Mr. Bezan, you have the last question for this panel.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank our witnesses for being here.

Mr. Gwozdecky, you said that North Korea now sees Canada as peaceful and friendly despite the battle of Kapyong and our involvement in the Korean peninsula war. Minister Freeland said just this summer that when Canadians' allies, including the United States, are threatened, we are there.

If you can just square the circle for me, how can North Korea see us as peaceful and friendly when we're standing with our allies?

[Mark Gwozdecky]

Well, I can't speak for the view in Pyongyang. I can only tell you that in the discussions that have taken place—they haven't been plentiful discussions, but there have been some with the North Korean regime—they tell us that they don't see us as a threat. That's what we are basing those comments on. Now, it's not inconsistent at the same time for the minister to say that we have allies, and we are prepared to stand shoulder to shoulder with our allies.

[Sarah Taylor]

If I can add to that very briefly, while we're obviously happy that we're not seen by the North Koreans as an enemy or a threat, I think that stems in part from their very laser-like focus on the U.S. and their relationship with the U.S. In fact, one of the messages we have been trying to put across is that it's not just the Americans who don't like what they're doing and who are pushing for sanctions; it is the international community as a whole. We do think that a very important message to put to them is to continue to say that we and others strongly disapprove of what they are doing, but certainly I would attest that they have told us they see us a friendly country, including in direct discussions I've had with North Korean counterparts.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

If you're trying to ramp up diplomatic relations, I hope we're not talking about reopening an embassy in Pyongyang.

[Sarah Taylor]

No, absolutely not.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

I would like to thank our guests, Stephen Burt, Mark Gwozdecky, and Sarah Taylor, for appearing in front of committee today.

I will suspend while we bring in our next panel.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Could I ask everyone to take their seats, please, so we can get started with our second panel?

Before we get started, many of you may have seen a news alert on your phones that our colleague Arnold Chan passed away today. I would like to acknowledge that and obviously send our condolences from this committee to his family.

I'd like to welcome our guests to committee: Lieutenant-General Pierre St-Amand, Major-General Al Meinzinger, and Major-General William Seymour.

Thank you for coming today. I appreciate your time. I was told that two of you will speaking and that five minutes is about what you need. If you could keep it to that, I would appreciate it. If you see me hold up a paper in the question and answer period, that's the signal that you have 30 seconds to sum up. I have to be very disciplined with the time in order for us to move on to our third panel after yours.

Lieutenant-General Pierre St-Amand, you have the floor.

[LGen Pierre St-Amand, Deputy Commander, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), Department of National Defence]

Mr. Chair, members of the committee, let me first thank you for giving me the opportunity to join you to discuss NORAD in the context of the developments in North Korea's intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capabilities and the readiness of the Canadian Armed Forces.

I would also like to convey greetings from the commander of NORAD, General Lori Robinson.

Defending Canada and North America is the Canadian Armed Forces' most important mission. That is why men and women in uniform work side by side on a daily basis at NORAD, but also around the world, to protect our continent.

The importance of this defence relationship for Canada was reiterated in the new defence policy published a few months ago. The recent demonstrations of North Korea's growing capabilities in ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons are an increasingly significant concern for North American defence, a concern that has grown significantly and much more rapidly and extensively than the experts had foreseen.

The years 2016 and 2017 have been North Korea's most active years in the development of its nuclear weapons and missiles program. The country is looking for nuclear weapons and ballistic missile capabilities that can reach North America. In his five years as a supreme leader, Kim Jong-un has conducted almost three times as many ballistic missile tests as his father and grandfather in their combined reigns of 63 years in power.

Overall, when NORAD assesses the evolving ICBM threat posed by North Korea, it considers mainly two factors: capability and intent.

In terms of capability, North Korea has demonstrated, through consecutive ICBM testing, its ability to reach North America and its determination to address the remaining operational challenge.

As for the intent, North Korea was explicit about its will to use its weapons against the United States. However, this expressed will must be understood, at least in part, in the context of its overall strategic objectives to develop its own force—

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Lieutenant-General St-Amand, could you slow down a bit? Our interpreters are having a hard time keeping up. They don't have a paper copy, and they are trying to keep up with you as you are speaking.

Thank you.

[LGen Pierre St-Amand]

Sure. Let me start again at the last sentence.

However, this expressed will must be understood, at least in part, in the context of its overall strategic objectives to develop its own strategic deterrent force against the United States.

As a result, when we look at North Korea's capabilities and intent, we can say that North Korean intercontinental ballistic missiles represent a threat for North America and thereby a significant concern for NORAD.

As I am sure all committee members are aware, Canada does not participate in the U.S. ballistic missile defence system. However, in the context of its own mandate, NORAD contributes as a partner to the missile defence continuum.

The ballistic missile defence continuum is not only about engagement of an incoming ballistic missile. Once the threat is identified, we must find the threat, fix it, track it, target it, and then engage it. NORAD has three mandated missions—aerospace warning, aerospace control, and maritime warning.

Under NORAD's aerospace warning mission, NORAD routinely participates in some segments that enable ballistic missile defence, stopping short of the targeting and engagement segments, which are unilateral U.S. Northern Command responsibilities under their ballistic missile defence mission.

In addition, NORAD is responsible to both the United States and Canada to provide assessments of any ballistic missile activity globally that is a threat to North America and may constitute an attack on our shared continent. NORAD conducts this assessment through a process known as the integrated threat warning and attack assessment, which is a subset of the aerospace warning mission.

NORAD has assigned Canadian Armed Forces members to play key operational roles in the defence of potential missile attacks against North America. More than a dozen Canadians are directly involved and work hand in hand with U.S. personnel in the 24/7 surveillance and detection phases of ballistic missile launch, from radar stations from Alaska to Thule, Greenland, and within the United States. Canadians also work alongside the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia at the space-based infrared system mission control station in Buckley, Colorado.

In Colorado Springs, Canadian Armed Forces members man air, missile, and space domain stations and occupy command centre director positions in our NORAD and U.S. Northern Command centre. Canadians also occupy posts in the NORAD and U.S. Northern Command integrated staff, executing staff functions within, amongst others, intelligence, NORAD operations, and plans, policy, and strategy. These are all functions that directly or indirectly support our aerospace warning mission.

Canadian generals and flag officers hold positions at NORAD—in deputy director, director, and deputy commander positions—where they support the commander of NORAD in the exercise of her functions, which include helping to focus the command on current and future issues.

Canadians have a seat at the table and play an active role in finding, fixing, tracking, and assessing ballistic missile activity. When it comes to targeting and engagement, we have no active role. This does not mean that our job is done. We become observers for a particular engagement sequence, but our aerospace warning mission continues, and we never let go of the watch.

With this, I thank you for your attention, and I look forward to answering any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Stephen Fuhr]

Thank you.

Before I turn the floor over to Mr. Seymour, there have been a lot of phones making all sorts of noises. If you could just double-check your devices, the multiple ones that we all have, and make sure the sound is off, I would appreciate it.

Major-General Seymour, you have the floor.