National Defence Committee on Oct. 31st, 2024

[Dr. Michael Byers]

I don't want to imply any criticism of Canada's diplomats. I think they're doing an exceptional job in this domain, but there are some things I would like to see more of, and one is engagement with China and India on these issues. India is also a significant space power. We obviously have difficult relations with China and India on other issues, but we have shared interests with regard to space. Diplomacy isn't about talking with your friends. It's about talking with your adversaries. It's about finding opportunities and compromise. As a middle power, those kinds of bilateral and track-two conversations with China and India could help move this ball down the field. Again, it's not easy.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Again, I'm sorry to keep interrupting here.

Madame Normandin, you have 90 seconds.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Steer, I have a question for you.

There has been a lot of talk about the consequences of attacks under international law, but are forums adequate for what could be accidents between allied countries? Are potentially accidental activities somewhat under the radar, or are they not addressed?

[Dr. Cassandra Steer]

There's a lot of discussion about the need for transparency and communication around particular activities in space, particularly as we see more space counter-operations—satellites being able to sidle up to each other, either to repair them or interfere with them. The need to communicate intent and have transparency and confidence-building measures precisely to avoid...if that's what you meant by accidental interferences or misreadings of what those activities are.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Let's imagine disputes arise in the public domain, more so than in the defence domain. Are there appropriate forums to deal with them? If so, are allied countries participating adequately?

[Dr. Cassandra Steer]

There probably aren't sufficient forums for that. There are more and more discussions about needing to have points of contact. We need to have better sharing of information about space debris and space objects, but there isn't sufficient international governance around this. There are a lot of discussions to try to advance that in the UN—multilaterally, bilaterally and minilaterally—and there is a lot of involvement of the private sector, because they very much need to be involved. It's not under the radar in the sense that there is awareness that the forums are insufficient, but we're not quite there yet in terms of having those mechanisms of engagement.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

We'll go to Ms. Mathyssen for 90 seconds.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Ms. Lapointe asked a bit about what I was going to ask. I'm totally going to pun this out, but I want to drill down a little bit more on that resource extraction.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I couldn't help myself. It's the coffee.

Dr. Steer, maybe you can talk about this. In terms of the U.S.-led Artemis accords on this and the potential resource extraction interests that the Americans are leading, are the Artemis accords different?

What should Canada be concerned about in that regard on resource extraction?

[Dr. Cassandra Steer]

I think Michael's right that the outer space treaty left it a little bit open to interpretation. It is prohibited to appropriate in space. If you ask any country where other countries or companies have come in to take their natural resources, they will say that is appropriation.

There are debates as to whether or not the Artemis accords themselves are perhaps—some countries would say—a violation of the outer space treaty. The U.S. has simply said that it is their interpretation of the treaty that space mining is lawful and will take place. Any country that has signed on to the Artemis accords has thereby agreed with that definition, which includes Canada. It includes Australia. Australia is one of just three countries that have signed both the Artemis accords and also the 1979 moon agreement, in which it said that no entity can own any part of the moon, and that, if space mining is about to take place, we need to have an international regulatory regime in place.

There are discussions ongoing at the committee on peaceful uses of outer space. There are three or four different regimes, and China and Russia have their own alternative regimes. We just don't quite know what the outcome is going to be.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

Mr. Bezan, you have three minutes.

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

Thank you

I just want to follow up quickly on a couple of things. First of all is RADARSAT and the use of it in Ukraine. I was a member of the government back in 2015, and we had rigorous debate on whether or not to provide RADARSAT images to Ukraine in 2015. We made that decision, and I was proud to be part of it.

In 2016, of course, with the government of the day under Stéphane Dion as foreign minister, the Liberals cancelled that, which was directly seen as a reset or an appeasement of Putin. For six years, we argued from the Conservative side that we should reinstate that, which finally happened under the former minister of national defence, Minister Anand, and something that we applaud. It is necessary to have that intelligence-gathering capability so Ukraine knows what's happening on its doorstep.

When talking about RADARSAT, our understanding is that National Defence has only one satellite dedicated to ISR, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

I ask this to you both. I know, Dr. Steer, that you work directly with the Department of National Defence.

Mr. Byers, you, from a NORAD perspective, have been studying this issue for a long time.

For our own Arctic sovereignty but also for our NORAD relationship, does Canada need to have more dedicated ISR satellites?

I'll start with Dr. Steer and then go to Dr. Byers.

[Dr. Cassandra Steer]

I would say, yes, Canada does need more sovereign ISR satellites. At the same time, Canada benefits from being part of CSpO, the combined space operations initiative, which started as a Five Eyes alliance but now includes Germany, France, Italy and Japan. That is about sharing space-based intelligence.

Canada is a middle-sized economy. It's a middle power. It can't do everything. No country can do everything on its own in space these days.

I also think that space technology collaboration can be used as a policy lever for other interests. However, when it comes to ISR needs in particular, yes, Canada needs more dedicated sovereign capability, but it can also continue to benefit from that international partnership.

[Dr. Michael Byers]

If I could just add—

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

I am also asking from a standpoint of NORAD, particularly the Canadian relationship with NORAD and how we can bring space-based ISR satellites into that conversation.

[Dr. Michael Byers]

If I could just add, we do have RADARSAT Constellation. I focused my comments on RADARSAT-2 because it's a commercial satellite, but we do have three very capable radar satellites that are owned by the Canadian Space Agency and are essentially tasked by the Department of National Defence.

I presume they're involved in supporting Ukraine also, but I've been focused on the issue of a commercial company providing support to frontline operations because that raises some really complex issues that need to be addressed by policy, as you've indicated was done after the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Bezan.

Just in our final few seconds here, over the course of this study, I've been concerned about the dual use of this technology, particularly that it's largely directed to commercial use, but with sometimes incidental military use. Occasionally that's reversed, but behind all of this technology and behind all of these companies are sometimes individuals who make erratic decisions, to put it generously.

I don't think I need to elaborate with Mr. Musk, but we did see that Mr. Bezos, with his Blue Origin technology, had an interview with Mr. Trump, and shortly thereafter, The Wall Street Journal didn't publish their opinion. Of course, that's not connected.

I would be interested in your thoughts, because we have gotten ourselves into a huge dependence on a very small group of individuals, which has created a vulnerability for all of our nations. I'd be interested in your reflections on that vulnerability.

[Dr. Cassandra Steer]

If could start, I would say that I think Elon Musk is an outlier. Other countries' commercial space companies don't have a monopoly over orbits and don't have the richest man in the world at their helm, who's having, essentially, state visits internationally.

He's a bit of an outlier, but I think that means we need—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

But a very important outlier.

[Dr. Cassandra Steer]

Absolutely, and that's why Canada needs to then decide, to what extent do we want our nation to be dependent on Starlink as a specific capability. It helps in connecting remote communities, for example, but what could Canada be putting in place to make sure that it does not become reliant on a capability provided by an outlier individual?

I think the commercialization of space is not only inevitable, but we've crossed the Rubicon in terms of asking if we want to engage with commercial actors. It's just the way it is; 75% of systems globally are commercially provided. DND buys commercial services, and that is going to continue to increase. Rather than question whether we want that relationship, we have to look at what the implications are.

I mentioned the workshop that we held in Ottawa last month. There will be a report coming out that delves into these issues in great detail and identifies further areas for further research. I would be more than happy to simply pass that report on to Andrew or to the chair to—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

That would be very beneficial.

I see Dr. Byers is itching to get in on this question.

[Dr. Michael Byers]

Yes. The Canadian government gave Telesat an extra billion dollars for its Lightspeed constellation very shortly after Elon Musk limited Starlink coverage in the Black Sea, thus compromising the ability of the Ukrainian military to target the Russian fleet in the Black Sea.

I connect those two developments. I think the Canadian government acted responsibly. We need our own sovereign communications constellation, and Telesat and MDA are building that for us right now.

The answer is, yes, we do need to reduce our dependency on large companies, especially those led by mercurial, inconsistent people, like Mr. Musk, but we have started that response already. I look forward to Telesat Lightspeed filling a big gap by providing us with that increased security and independence.

[Dr. Cassandra Steer]

Hear, hear!

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

On behalf of the committee, I want to thank you both for this absolutely fascinating conversation.