Evidence of meeting #67 for National Defence in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was nato.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Defence Studies, As an Individual
It was in Tallinn in 2008, a few years ago.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Have resources been flowing to it in an appropriate manner, in your opinion?
4:15 p.m.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Defence Studies, As an Individual
We could always do more, because the cyber domain is an emerging domain. It's hard to catch up with the challenges, and each piece of breaking news about what the Russians have been doing relating to the U.S. election means that we all the more have to put a huge effort into trying to prevent such activities; it's a form of self-defence.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Then in regard to other threats that NATO may look at or be experiencing, do you see anything on the radar that maybe NATO should take a little more time and look at a little more seriously? Is there something they haven't given the appropriate time to or shone a light on appropriately that is a potential threat to NATO that they need to acknowledge?
4:15 p.m.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Defence Studies, As an Individual
Do you mean threats besides cyber and—
4:15 p.m.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Defence Studies, As an Individual
Yes, okay.
Hybrid warfare is an old form of warfare that is finding new ways of being used, and it's extremely dangerous. It uses your own sense of humanity and dignity to try to co-opt and coerce people to not engage, as gradually the military initiative is being taken in a very deliberate fashion. The seizure of Crimea was done using hybrid warfare. They used the fact that the Ukrainian soldiers did not want to shoot at other individuals to gradually take over the Ukrainian bases and stations. We have to find means to deal with that.
Here's a key area where there's a new area for a revolution, and that's non-lethal weapons. To deal with the cyber-threats as well as the threats of hybrid warfare, we need means to deal with that gradual escalation of the use of force that stops short of using lethal force.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr
Thank you.
Just to respect your time, I'm going to give Mr. Spengemann three minutes, and we'll get you out of here at 25 after the hour..
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, very much. I'll use those three minutes judiciously.
Professor Dorn, thank you very much for being with us. I'm going to put a statement to you that comes, to my knowledge, out of the Jim Baker and Condoleezza Rice administration, Bush I, and it's the statement that we don't nation-build. To what extent is that still true, whether as a function of official policy or as a matter of fact on the ground?
Also, could you circle back to some of what you said in terms of the whole-of-government approach pre-conflict, conflict, post-conflict and the tentacles that NATO has at its disposal to connect with other institutions like the UN and OSCE institutionally?
4:20 p.m.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Defence Studies, As an Individual
Well, I think the Bush administration had to swallow its words when it had to do major nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan. It just goes to show how you can't take military action without some building afterwards in the continuum that you mentioned.
This is a role in which the U.S. has not proven particularly effective. In fact, I think the long, slow approach of the United Nations is much more effective. That's an area where Canada can also make a major contribution and receive gratitude from the United States if we're going to be committing to the long term, just as we have done in Haiti. The U.S. was very worried about boat people coming to the shores of Florida and were quite happy that Canada has been engaged in the initiative to try to keep the Haitian problem from overflowing and causing massive migration.
I think we can see that as an expertise for Canada. It's just that we ourselves have to get back to where we once were with places like the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre to be able to do the training.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
I'm sorry to interrupt, but what are the key institutional connecting points between NATO and the UN and NATO and the OSCE and potentially other organizations, even like the OECD, depending on how far down the root cause question you would like to go?
4:20 p.m.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Defence Studies, As an Individual
We need more peacekeeping training centres. There have been so many since the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre was founded, but there needs to be specialization, for instance, in nation-building. How exactly do you do that?
The Security Council is now thinking about sequenced mandates. How do you sequence a mandate? What are the best steps to do first, and how do you customize it for specific countries? Hopefully, we'll see nation-building done in Libya, in Yemen, eventually in Syria, and you'll need to have a good study of lessons learned and novel ways of tackling these very difficult questions.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Sven Spengemann Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
In my final 30 seconds, why do you think NATO is behind the UN on the status of women in peacekeeping and security?
4:20 p.m.
Professor, Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Defence Studies, As an Individual
I think that NATO has a history of being a macho organization that prides itself on the ability to use force and on being capable of using force. It takes a cultural shift from that to see that integrating women will still keep you an effective fighting force and actually increase your capacity to do many other things, including nation-building.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Stephen Fuhr
Thank you.
Dr. Dorn, thank you very much for coming. We very much appreciate your comments and your opinions on the Canada–NATO front.
I'm going to suspend for a minute so we can say our good-byes, and we'll come back for committee business in camera.
[Proceedings continue in camera]