National Defence Committee on Nov. 7th, 2024

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Thank you.

As I continue on the thought of AI, to your knowledge, do you think the government is doing enough to try to integrate this AI technology? How would you compare us when we're looking at our allies? Is there anything that you understand to be...or that you could compare us to in terms of where we are? You mentioned we have the capability and the ability, but how do we fare against our neighbours south of the border?

[Dr. Branka Marijan]

I think if we compare it to the United States, the United States is an absolute leader in defence applications of AI. I don't think we have the budget or the capacity to compare ourselves to the United States, because they far outpace every other nation.

However, if we compare ourselves to similar states, I would say that we're generally in the range. We haven't fallen behind. I think that's one of the misperceptions. We have a lot of investment into AI research, both for civilian and for military purposes. A lot of this technology is dual-use, so it's coming from the civilian sector into the military sector. I think later witnesses will talk about procurement and what that means. That's not an issue that I focus on, but I will tell you that I don't think we have fallen behind. I think we're quite concerned and at the forefront of thinking about the integration of these systems.

Again, what we're seeing, though, is that there are countries like the Netherlands and the Republic of Korea that are leading in these international discussions. I think we could model ourselves on them a bit more to see how we can contribute more, because that's where the lag really is. It's not on the technical side; it's more on the regulatory side.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Thank you.

I have one last question around the same issue.

You talked about some of our allies and the U.S. I have a minute left. I would like to get your thoughts on how we would maybe compare to places like China and Russia. Do you have any thoughts on that?

[Dr. Branka Marijan]

Yes, I think it's much more interdependent than people think. There's a perception that China and Russia can outpace the U.S. and its allies; that's not accurate. The United States still controls a lot of the hardware and the technical know-how in terms of the most advanced AI systems. I think what we see when we see Russia and China deploying certain systems is that they're still dependent on western components and on western technologies, so that relationship is much more interdependent than we are often led to believe. That means there are critical minerals that come from China and Russia for some of this technological development that we need to be aware of.

I think focusing on interdependence would be much more helpful than on a race between the great powers.

[Dean Allison, Conservative, Niagara West, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Allison.

Mr. Powlowski, you have five minutes.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Agustin, mabuhay.

I was interested in what you had to say about human rights abuses in the Philippines. Certainly, under Duterte, the “shoot first, ask questions later” policy was rampant, which he seemed proud of.

My wife is from Davao, so I follow things. I thought things had improved quite a bit under Marcos. You certainly don't hear nearly as much about killings related to drug abuse. In the killings in the drug war, as you know, they weren't just going after drug traffickers, but it was people who used drugs, or even people who were suspected of using drugs, or people who were accused of using drugs who were routinely killed.

You are saying that things haven't improved under Marcos. Or have they improved somewhat? How does it compare now under Marcos as opposed to Duterte?

[Jess Agustin]

Cristina could also answer that.

Definitely, the drug war and the killings kind of eased a bit, but they still continue, and we have all the data to prove that. The extrajudicial killings, the arbitrary arrests and the targeting of journalists continue, and there has been no real marked improvement.

The focus now.... The senate is unravelling. The brutality of the drug war.... The problem is that it overshadows the current situation in the Philippines, where Marcos Jr., the administration, continues with human rights violations under this whole national security approach. This approach targets people who oppose, for example, the question of mining and the way they look at the economy of the country, which is not improving. Anyone who opposes that and criticizes the government gets arrested.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

You also talked about people being killed in the counter-insurgency movement. Is that against the NPA, the New People's Army? Is that Abu Sayyaf, or is it a combination?

You also talked about what would seemingly be politically motivated killings because people opposed the government. Certainly, drug-related killings were prominent under Duterte. Has the nature of the human rights abuses shifted so that it's not so much related to drugs now? Is it more related to political suppression and counter-insurgency? How has it changed under Marcos?

[Jess Agustin]

Cristina.

[Cristina Palabay]

I think, qualitatively, there has been a shift in terms of, one, the bodies in the drug war; there are definitely not as many as before. There's no rhetoric, just like the previous administration, but indeed, the drug war continues because the policies have not been rescinded, and the memorandum circulars of the police have not been rescinded, so we think that's the reason the killings continue.

In the counter-insurgency campaigns, we think there was no let-up from Duterte to Marcos, precisely because the approach remains the same. The blueprint and the national security policy remain the same. The funds and the prioritization of resources have been much more under the current administration. There are what are called confidential and intelligence funds, and these funds are all across government agencies' budgets, including the office of the president. That is also one of the things being investigated now in our congress—the use of such funds in committing human rights abuses.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Powlowski.

Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

We talked about human rights, but we also talked about trade between Canada and the Philippines. We're facing somewhat of a dilemma: Should we continue to trade with a country where there are human rights violations? However, if we stop trading with that country, we stop creating wealth there. We think that, in the long term, if we create wealth, more liberal policies will probably be put in place by a government. Some observers will say that.

How important is it to put human rights at the centre of our defence policies? At what point do we do that when we're trading with those same countries?

[Jess Agustin]

We're not asking Canada to stop trading with the Philippines; in fact, we encourage Canada. However, there have to be human rights guidelines, and it also cannot militarize its relationship.

We're so proud of Canada. I work for a humanitarian organization. We are very impressed with Canada's DART program on disaster response during super typhoon Haiyan. When Marcos was overthrown, we actually encouraged Canada to start supporting the Philippines to rehabilitate its bankrupt economy. Canada is also well known for its contribution to development aid and to promoting small businesses and so on.

The Indo-Pacific strategy created a tension where support to the military—and the excuse is China—becomes the predominant concern in dealing with the Philippines.

When you look at our Canadian embassy talking about how great the government is and emphasizing the trade relationship without even mentioning—as Cristina was saying—the human rights violations that are continuing.... Corruption continues. You cannot have trade when the institution, the structure of the country, remains the same all the way from the time when the father of Marcos—

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Unfortunately, we're going to have to leave it there.

This has been a pretty wide-ranging discussion, and I've sat here and let it range. We are studying the defence policy update, so if you could, by some means or another, tie it back into Canada's defence policy update—the Indo-Pacific, the presence of our troops on Philippine soil and the interaction of our military relationships—that would be helpful. It's not as if what's being talked about isn't critical in the overall bigger policy, but this is a subset of a policy—namely, the defence policy update.

Ms. McPherson, welcome to the committee. You have two and a half minutes.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I note that you gave that warning before I spoke, which I think makes it seem like there may be a rationale for that.

It's wonderful to have you here today. Thank you very much for being here.

We were talking about human rights, and I know that's perhaps not something that has to do with defence, but it is an issue for me. I've worked with Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe a lot on Canadian mining companies and the impacts they have had on human rights in the Philippines and in other areas. However, let's keep this to defence.

Could you talk a little bit about how Canada could assist in terms of de-escalating the conflict in the South China Sea, please?

[Jess Agustin]

I think it's important that the whole South China Sea be demilitarized. I think the presence of the U.S. and other allies in the South China Sea only escalates the tension. It provokes China, and that puts the Philippines in a situation where it has to defend itself.

What we are discussing with our partners is to let the ASEAN countries deal with the problem of China and not other countries, like the U.S. If you look at the U.S. involvement in the Chinese intervention, you will see that the U.S. presence is all over the Philippines.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

That's for historical reasons, and for many reasons.

Can you comment very quickly on what change you expect, knowing the election results in the U.S.?

[Jess Agustin]

I think it will remain the same, but most likely Canada will be asked to pay more, given the current administration. Is that what Canada wants? No.

With regard to paying more, I think that Canada should put more investment in diplomacy, in peacebuilding, in humanitarian...with all the typhoons that are happening. Canada should do more.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you.

I couldn't agree with you more.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Mr. Stewart, go ahead for five minutes, please.

[Don Stewart, Conservative, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.

Dr. Marijan, I want to ask you about, first, applications of technology in our Arctic. With the defence policy update, do you think the government is providing adequate resources, from a technology standpoint, to our Canadian Rangers in the north, who are up there as our first line of defence?

[Dr. Branka Marijan]

Yes, I think there's a certain awareness about the need to provide technology. There are environmental conditions that are still a challenge for some of the technologies we're discussing, or for some of those that are still emerging. There's a need to further study how best to do it and what technology to provide.

It's something that should be further examined, and I think that's been pointed out in the defence policy itself. There's a whole lot of need to further look and understand. There are certainly technologies that will be very helpful for search and rescue, as well, so I think—

[Don Stewart, Conservative, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

I'm thinking specifically of the Canadian Rangers and whether you see any evidence of providing those personnel with better technology or more technology.

[Dr. Branka Marijan]

I think we're still, probably, in the early days of that, and—