That is a complicated question, because there are military and political aspects.
The responsibility for giving military advice lies with the Chief of Defence Staff, who handles the entire military aspect.
I have observed three things that might help you in your discussions.
First, there are the ballistic missiles.
The missiles are here to stay.
I am not talking only about the intercontinental missiles, but also the short- and long-range missiles. In the future, we will perhaps see Canadians in theatres of operation that will be under threat of short- or medium-range ballistic missiles. We will be defended by coalitions and by NATO, so things are fine in that regard.
Some countries, notably North Korea, are working very hard to develop the capacity to attack North America. So ballistic missiles are here to stay. I think this is a threat that will continue to exist.
The second thing I have observed is this.
In terms of the approaches in North America, command and control are a little complicated in Colorado Springs. NORAD is responsible for assessing an attack or identifying a missile that might approach North America. The Canadians can tell NORAD that it is an attack on North America, but as soon as a decision is made, or a missile is identified, the defence is entirely up to the Americans.
The command of NORTHCOM and NORAD is somewhat separate for the same mission. For that same ballistic missile that is approaching, one element is under NORAD and the other element, under NORTHCOM, which is American only. If the missile came back into the atmosphere, NORAD would again be responsible for determining whether there is a nuclear explosion.
For NORAD and NORTHCOM, the command and control are complicated. We ask that decisions be made in the space of a few minutes, to defend against or to assess an attack. It is a bit complicated. If we were part of the missile defence shield, that would enable the binational commands to simplify command and control for that threat.
The third thing I have observed is this.
Given that Canada is not part of the system, it does not have access to the technology or to the strategy and planning, and it certainly has no influence on the decisions made. I am going to say the expression in English, because it is not coming to mind in French.
The United States doesn't have a need to share, and we don't have a right to know.
Anything we have, we have out of good will.
Certainly they cooperate with us. We have been very close allies for a long time, but we simply are not part of that mission.
The three things I have described give me the impression that it is an important matter to revisit. That is all I can say.