Evidence of meeting #50 for National Defence in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was disinformation.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Jonathan Quinn  Director General, Continental Defence Policy, Department of National Defence
Lou Carosielli  Cyber Force Commander, Canadian Armed Forces, Department of National Defence
Marcus Kolga  Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual

4:20 p.m.

RAdm Lou Carosielli

Absolutely, Canada has definitely taken a very specific posture in supporting our allies, in that we ensure they maintain control of their networks. We provide them with the support that they need, either through engineering tools or throughout an intelligence perspective.

That said, we have capabilities that are improving consistently. There is still a lot that we need to be doing. We are working with our allies so that all of our capabilities are improved. We're ensuring that we're not duplicating each other's efforts.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON

Following up on that, cyber and cyber-type attacks have been in the news a lot more recently. However, when I was in Estonia, we were talking—this was years and years ago, pre-COVID—about cyber and what happened in Estonia because of Russia. That was long before the invasion of Crimea. Globally, and being in this space, is it fair to say that Canada has been preparing and building its resources?

On the point you just made, Admiral, about the constant changing of the threat and being always ready, even being ready yesterday is going to look very different weeks from now, months from now or years from now. I look back at the Estonian case, when their entire digital infrastructure was successfully hacked by Russia. Was that a wake-up call in Canada back then? How are you continuing to prepare, based on what's happening in other countries and not just what's topical in the media at any given moment?

4:25 p.m.

RAdm Lou Carosielli

I won't be able to talk about what was topical back then because I wasn't involved back then, but definitely since “Strong, Secure, Engaged”, cybersecurity is at the forefront for both the Canadian Armed Forces and the CSE. We have seen that with the CSE's standing up of the Canadian cybersecurity centre and its responsibilities for Canada in general.

The question is related to the threat to all of Canada, not just the Canadian Armed Forces, and that threat is taken seriously. As indicated, there are indications of ransomware or cyber attacks in the media quite regularly, and it is important for us to take those seriously and to prepare. The way the Canadian Armed Forces is doing that is by ensuring that its network defences are up and monitored on a daily basis. We also ensure that we exercise in some very complex scenarios so that we are not just preparing ourselves for yesterday's fight but can understand what's coming in the future. Ties to research and development are important there.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON

Thank you.

In terms of questions about universality of service and the ability to recruit, the CSE has talked about.... I think it's a known fact that you're competing with, for example, Silicon Valley and things like that in this space. Does universality of service create an impediment for those who might be most trained in this space?

That also includes ensuring diversity in this space. Are you attracting women? Are you attracting people from different backgrounds? Are you attracting people with language skills that would be important, and not just Canada's official languages? Are you also ensuring that people in this space, in cyber, are actually wanting to be part of the CAF and cyber-defence?

4:25 p.m.

RAdm Lou Carosielli

As I indicated earlier, the recruitment of personnel that represent the diversity in Canada is very important to us, not only from the diversity aspect but from an operational aspect, because having multiple languages helps us. As one who speaks three languages, I know it definitely is advantageous, and that is something that we do.

The universality of service is something that we don't control from a trade perspective; it's the Canadian Armed Forces. As I indicated, we are operational personnel, so we have to remain operational. We do have abilities for personnel to join the public service. However, most importantly, one of the biggest attractions of the Canadian Armed Forces and the CSE is the type of work that we can do. There are not many entities in the country or around the world that could do the work that we do and have the authorities that we have, so that is one of the biggest attractions. As someone previously said, when you can have “cyber force” in the title, our population is typically pretty intrigued with it.

4:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Thank you, Ms. O'Connell.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON

Thank you.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

I think Mr. Fisher is going to be lining up for that business card pretty soon.

4:30 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Before I let you go, I want to ask you a question about the offensive operations.

The CSE has limitations on offensive operations with respect to Canadians, yet we are in a war situation, and it's reasonable to assume that there are people in this country who are supporting the other side, for want of a better term, and who may be of considerable interest to our security. I'm thinking particularly of people on the sanctions list, but others as well.

How does the policy of not conducting offensive operations against Canadians—which I assume can also mean residents—intersect with the security issues that we currently face when we're in a war?

4:30 p.m.

Director General, Continental Defence Policy, Department of National Defence

Jonathan Quinn

Feel free, Admiral, to supplement.

I would say that's a great question. It's certainly a concern, but it's not a Canadian Armed Forces mandate. We have other agencies within the federal family that would play a lead role in, I think, what you're referring to there. CSIS, I think, would jump to mind as a more appropriate entity to tackle that side of the coin.

4:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

The CSE is part of the Department of National Defence, and it is the one that has the limitation on the policy. I don't want to pursue the question too far, but I think it's in part what Mr. Fisher was getting at in his questioning about the limitations on conducting operations against Canadians.

In deference to my colleagues and my great esteem for you, Mr. Quinn, I won't push the question any further.

With that, colleagues, we're going to suspend.

On behalf of the members, I want to thank you for being here and particularly for your straightforwardness in responding the questions. Thank you again.

With that, we'll suspend.

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

We're back, colleagues. I hope that was a more vigorous bang of the gavel.

4:35 p.m.

An hon. member

Not really.

4:35 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

4:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

No? I'm going to have to practise. I'll have to take lessons from Mr. Bezan.

Colleagues, before us again is Mr. Kolga, who is becoming a familiar witness at this committee.

I don't need to tell you about the drill, sir. You have five minutes for your opening statement.

Thank you.

February 14th, 2023 / 4:35 p.m.

Marcus Kolga Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and esteemed members of this committee.

I will focus my remarks today on primarily the information operations aspect of foreign cyberwarfare and the threat it poses to our information environment and our national security. I will talk about the direct impact Russian information warfare is having on our understanding of Putin's invasion of Ukraine and how the Russian government seeks to intimidate and silence Canadian critics of Russia's war.

Last week Alina Kabaeva, the head of a major Russian state media organization and Vladimir Putin's partner, characterized Russian government information operations as a weapon of war. She said that in terms of importance to Russia, information is in no way inferior to a Kalashnikov assault rifle.

Indeed, information warfare has become a primary tool in Russia's hybrid and cyber tool kit over the past decade, and it has directly targeted Canada. Russian disinformation operations targeted Canadians during the pandemic and last year's Ottawa trucker protests. Russian information operations have also targeted Canadian Forces stationed in Latvia. The Russian GRU's Ghostwriter campaign published false stories that claimed Canadian soldiers were spreading COVID in Latvia during the pandemic. Today, the Kremlin's anti-Ukrainian narratives aim to erode public support for Ukraine and to intimidate and dehumanize Canadians of Ukrainian heritage, including those elected to government.

The broad goal of Russian information warfare is to undermine public trust in our democracies and the cohesion of our societies. They do this by weaponizing issues and narratives that have the greatest potential to polarize us. They inject and amplify narratives that exploit both Conservative and Liberal biases and any issues that have the potential to drive wedges between Canadians.

Since Russia's initial invasion of Ukraine in 2014, we have witnessed Russian information operations target both Conservative and Liberal leaders. Prime ministers Harper and Trudeau both, with their governments, have been falsely accused of supporting Ukrainian neo-Nazism by Russian state media and its constellation of proxy platforms for their support of Ukraine's sovereignty and their criticism of the Putin regime.

During the course of Russia's latest invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin has significantly intensified information operations designed to erode Canadian public support for Ukraine. Among the most successful is the Kremlin's ever-present fearmongering about military escalation, including the possibility of nuclear war. It prevented us from arming Ukraine after Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. It prevented us from first sending shoulder-fired anti-tank missiles, then artillery and then tanks to Ukraine. Today it prevents us from sending fighter jets to Ukraine.

One year ago we were told that Vladimir Putin's three-day special operation was intended to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine's government. This same narrative about Ukrainian support for Nazis is today being aggressively deployed to dehumanize, devalue and discriminate against Canadians of Ukrainian heritage. Such narratives are leading to an alarming rise in threats and violence toward Canadians of Ukrainian heritage and other central and eastern European communities.

Direct intimidation of these communities and critics of the Putin regime is equally concerning. A recent article published by a Russian independent media outlet, Meduza, reports that the Russian embassy in Canada is actively monitoring the social media activities of Russian diaspora members and critics of the Putin regime in Canada. One Russian Canadian was sent a message by the Russian embassy in Ottawa warning him, “We know you, we're watching you, we know what you do.” Last year the Estonian honorary consul in Toronto received a letter threatening to spread anthrax if Estonians continued to support Ukraine. There have been reports of attempted phishing attacks in various diaspora communities as well.

Canadian parliamentarians also face a daily barrage of emails and trolls on social media that seek to influence their decision-making. I've been told by some members that their support for Ukraine is frequently attacked by anonymous social media accounts. Such political intimidation and manipulation, artificial or not, may result in suppression of political and military support for Ukraine.

While I've focused on current Russian threats, Chinese government information operations also represent a significant and persistent threat to our national security and defence.

I'll leave it there for now, and I very much look forward to your questions.

4:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal John McKay

Thank you, Mr. Kolga.

Mr. Kelly, you have six minutes.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

Thank you for that statement.

When you were here at the committee about a year ago, you talked about how Putin is exploiting democratic nations and trying to drive wedges within western alliances like NATO. Obviously much has changed over this past year. Do you want to update your thoughts on the situation as it relates to our cybersecurity study?

4:40 p.m.

Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual

Marcus Kolga

I think that we knew and that we could have anticipated one year ago that Russia would be intensifying their information operations in the context of the war in Ukraine. We also anticipated that they would try to erode Canadian public support for Ukraine. Those operations have only intensified during the past 12 months.

As someone who observes these operations and these narratives and who monitors and analyzes them on a day-to-day basis, I'm deeply concerned that domestic elements in Canada on the far left and on the far right are both adopting some of these narratives and are using them to create a wedge between us. This is, in effect, legitimizing some of these Russian tactical narratives. It's something I think we should be deeply concerned about in the context of national security.

4:40 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

You've commented that the Canadian Armed Forces have been the target of disinformation campaigns. Can you describe what they look like?

4:40 p.m.

Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual

Marcus Kolga

Absolutely. These campaigns against the Canadian Armed Forces have been ongoing since around 2015, when Prime Minister Harper ordered our forces to Ukraine and to Latvia as part of Operation Unifier and Operation Reassurance. With the operations in Latvia specifically—and this was around 2017 or 2018—they injected narratives into the Russian state-controlled media that were operating in Latvia. There were stories that suggested that our then defence minister, Harjit Sajjan, because of his appearance, was leading a Muslim army to conquer Latvia.

There was another story that featured an image of convicted serial killer Russell Williams in uniform and also in women's lingerie, suggesting that Canada was sending this individual to lead troops to, quote, “homosexualize” Latvia.

Those are two narratives that are quite well known that tried to target Russian-speaking Latvians in order to turn them against our forces. Also, I mentioned—

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

These were campaigns that were more designed against the civilian population where our forces were deployed as opposed to targeting our forces.

4:45 p.m.

Senior Fellow, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual

Marcus Kolga

I'm not so sure. I mean, they were specifically targeting Latvians and Russian speakers in Latvia, but by targeting them, they were also targeting our forces. They were trying to manipulate the opinion of those local Latvians to turn them against our forces.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB

I've got it. That's just unbelievable stuff, really.

You've talked about the consular offices in the embassy and the diplomatic mission here and the way they intimidate Canadians and the Ukrainian and Russian diasporas in Canada.

In terms of responding to cyber-attacks, including those that may be initiated from Canada through their missions here up to the present, are we still behind our allies in using Magnitsky sanctions, naming names and going after individuals who undermine our security and safety here in Canada?