Evidence of meeting #71 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 russia.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
Would there be a time when you do see that to be prudent—or not at all?
Assistant Professor, Political Science, Director, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
I think some big events would have to happen before we considered that, but I don't see that time happening any time soon.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Thank you.
I want to thank our witnesses for being here.
To follow up on Mr. Gerretsen's comment, Dr. Charron, you're talking about not having NATO exercises in the Arctic. We do our own exercises on an annual basis, Operation Nanook. Why wouldn't we invite in other NATO members to participate? One of the things I think Canada has to contribute to NATO is our Arctic capability, and part of that is training. We have Resolute. We're going to have the Nanisivik naval base up there fairly soon, plus we're going to have our Arctic patrol vessels. Wouldn't we want to do some collaboration with some of our NATO allies just as exercises?
Assistant Professor, Political Science, Director, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
There are a couple of points. First of all, we do invite individual NATO allies to come and participate. We've had Denmark, we've had the United States, etc. That can continue, but it's because of the propinquity of those allies with our Arctic. It makes sense for search and rescue and the like.
Next, the Nanisivik is not going to be a naval base. It's going to be a place to keep extra fuel in times of—
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
It's a naval station, or whatever you want to call it.
Assistant Professor, Political Science, Director, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
Yes.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
When we look at NATO, though, from a North Atlantic and European Arctic region perspective, where are the weaknesses, and how do we fill those holes? We talk about proliferation of submarines. We're seeing more activity, of Russia particularly, in the North Atlantic, and as you mentioned, it's not being well monitored. Are we talking about more submarine capabilities and how Canada contributes to that? What are we looking at by way of drones and unmanned systems to monitor those regions? I'm looking for some ideas here.
Assistant Professor, Political Science, Director, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
I'm suggesting that it's a particular area, the GIUK gap—the Greenland-Iceland-U.K. gap into the North Atlantic. That's an area where before, because we had SACLANT, we had strategic overview of coordinating exercises and working together at a strategic level. Now, I'm suggesting, we definitely still have the tactical operational connections, but because our attention has been shifted towards such things as terrorism, focusing on the Mediterranean and the like, perhaps we've forgotten to return to the North Atlantic and make sure that we have capabilities and co-operation there.
November 22nd, 2017 / 4:50 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
When you look at “Strong, Secure, Engaged” and at the Victoria class submarines with no replacement in sight, what would your recommendation be on tactical submarines, from a Canadian perspective, as part of the NATO mission?
Assistant Professor, Political Science, Director, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
I'm not a sub expert by any stretch of the imagination, so it's not for me to say what it is the military needs. The comment that has been made by many practitioners is that overall NATO and NATO allies have let their antisubmarine warfare capabilities atrophy, as a function of the different types of conflicts that are out there; perhaps now is the time to reconsider whether that kind of training needs to be looked at again.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Dr. Byers, you talked about the procurement of naval vessels. I know you were talking particularly about the surface combatants and the Arctic offshore patrol vessels, but what about submarines as part of the NATO mission?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
I'm glad you raised the question, because there needs to be an urgent discussion, in government and more broadly, about whether we replace the Victoria class. If we want to have submarines into the future, the capability, we need to make that decision really soon. It takes a long time to procure submarines. The Victoria class is getting very old—they're still capable, but very old—and that means we need to be having this discussion, this debate, within your committee right now. That's without my taking a view on whether or not we should replace them, but the question needs to be on the table.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
As a UBC professor from the west coast, where we have three subs while we have only one on the Atlantic coast, I know you're feeling well protected in Vancouver, but what about a larger fleet in the Atlantic region as part of the NATO mission?
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
One of those submarines should be moved to Halifax once it's repaired and ready to go. The plan is to have two in each fleet, but of course these plans have been delayed and messed up many times over, so who knows what will happen? Let me just say that you need your submarine on the east coast and we need our refuelling ship on the west coast, and right now there's no prospect of that.
My point here is that it's time to light a fire under Seaspan and Irving so that these procurements can move forward, and fast, partly because you've made these commitments to NATO and partly because we're not going to have a functional navy unless things speed up.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, folks, for being here. I always enjoy the conversation when you're all here.
Ms. Charron, we've heard lots of people say, and I think most people on the street would say, that we're pretty famous or well known for or considered good at training, humanitarian aid, and maybe peacekeeping and things such as that. In your opinion, should we stick to our knitting? Is that what we're good at, and is it what we are best at offering NATO? Is that where you feel we should stay, perhaps as regional stabilizers or doing post-conflict reconstruction?
Assistant Professor, Political Science, Director, Centre for Defence and Security Studies, University of Manitoba, As an Individual
Well, no, we have a combat-capable Canadian Armed Forces who will do what they're called upon to do by the Canadian government. It's up to the Canadian government to decide what they do. I will note, though, that since 1990 Canada has contributed more to NATO-led or U.S.-led operations than they have to the UN.
I think the point that Dr. Byers made was that we can do both. It's not a matter of doing one or the other. It's a matter of getting direction from the Canadian government as to where they want the Canadian Armed Forces, and they will do what they're called upon to do.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Excellent. Thank you.
Dr. Byers, I know that the topic of NATO in the Arctic has been hashed over. I'm surprised how much discussion there has been around that topic tonight, when yesterday there was only one question. Notwithstanding your comments...and I agree with almost everything you said, that we don't want to go in there and spend billions, that there is currently no sign of aggression from Russia, and that it is thousands of kilometres away.
I think back to your comments in your opening remarks—excuse me if I paraphrase them a bit and get them wrong—where you had a conversation four years ago with somebody about the relevance of NATO, and that person at that time felt there was no relevance, and probably NATO shouldn't be. Now there are election issues, referenda, cyber issues. You used the term that we were better together. There is no question that in today's environment we need NATO and we need to be involved in NATO.
I'm wondering if you know what that professor, or that friend of yours, would say today, just four years later. I'm tying that to the comment about NATO in the Arctic and how there is no current sign of aggression from Russia...albeit there are thousands of kilometres in between. I'm interested to know whether or not you've spoken to that gentleman again. Do you know whether they've changed their mind on the relevance of NATO and our participation in it?
I'm sorry it took me such a long time to get that question out.
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
The person I referred to is Jack Granatstein, who is one of the most long-time and vocal champions of a strong Canadian military. I haven't spoken to him in the last couple of years, but I'm pretty sure he believes Canada should stay in NATO. Let me be clear that in 2013 he wasn't advocating that we pull out. He was simply asking the question. He was putting the question on the table.
The question is off the table. We need to stay in NATO. We need to be a supportive member. In the Arctic, though, we need to be smart. We need to recognize that the world is a complex place and there are dangerous places that need our attention. The Canadian Arctic really isn't one of those. We need to improve our surveillance. I was talking about ramping up to six satellites for RADARSAT Constellation.
Professor, Department of Political Science, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
I would also draw your attention to the northern communications and weather project, which was a plan to put two multi-purpose satellites in polar orbit to fulfill those civilian and military purposes. That plan unfortunately fell off the table during the change of government two years ago, and it should be brought back on: surveillance, partnering with northern communities and northern governments, and recapitalizing the Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker fleet. I know there are discussions about doing this now. That's a good thing. The Arctic and offshore patrol ships are not icebreakers. They are not able to go anywhere at any time. We need those red-and-white ships also. They are multi-purpose platforms, like the AOPS will be. They could fulfill a lot of roles, including that constabulary function, which will be all-important as the Canadian Arctic opens up due to the melting of sea ice and climate change.
Liberal
Darren Fisher Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS
Thank you, Mr. Byers. I'm pretty sure I know what your one recommendation to our government would be if you could make one.
Ms. Charron, do you have a recommendation? If you could make one recommendation to the government about how we would continue or increase our involvement in NATO, what would it be? I think Mr. Byers said he would light a fire under the shipbuilders.
