Evidence of meeting #56 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 nato.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, how much time do I have left?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Emmanuella Lambropoulos Liberal Saint-Laurent, QC
Thank you.
You've both spoken a lot about the new offensive that is going to be taking place in the spring and summer, and I am sure that Ukraine feels strong going into this and has been feeling a momentum going forward.
Do you think that it will be a successful offensive? Do you think that they are going to gain back some of what they've lost? What can you say about what you believe may happen in the next coming months?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Again, that's an important question, but Ms. Lambropoulos has run out of time. I'm sure that question will weave itself through the balance of the morning here.
Ms. Michaud, welcome to the committee. You have the floor for six minutes.
9:10 a.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, witnesses, for your presence here today, which is much appreciated.
I was noticing this week that Jens Stoltenberg, the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, was in Kiev. There is increasing talk of Ukraine joining NATO soon or in the future, perhaps if it wins. Understandably, this will not happen in the very short term.
Ms. Buck, what does this NATO membership mean for Ukrainians? What does it mean for current NATO members? I know this may raise security questions or fears for some allies.
9:10 a.m.
As an Individual
In 2008, at the Bucharest Summit, the allies agreed on a rather important sentence in the final declaration. I don't remember the French translation, so I'll tell you in English.
It was that Georgia and Ukraine “will become members of NATO.”
However, since then there have been no concrete technical steps along the path to membership. That became more complicated in 2014, when Russia took part of Ukraine and illegally annexed Crimea, because the argument from some inside NATO was that this would create an immediate article 5 situation.
What do I mean about that? Article 5 is what I call “The Three Musketeers clause” of NATO—all for one and one for all. If a NATO ally is attacked, other allies are meant to come to that nation's defence. It complicated it politically, and yet that language stayed about Ukraine becoming a member of NATO. What NATO allies have done consistently since 2008, and even more since 2014, is provide a very significant program of support for Ukrainian military security, and also, outside of NATO, there has been a lot of support on the civilian front.
What will happen in Vilnius? As I said, I don't expect an answer to that question about Ukrainian membership, but I do find it really significant that Jens Stoltenberg said yesterday that Ukraine's rightful place is in the Euro-Atlantic family and that its rightful place is in NATO over time.
The debate at the Vilnius summit will be crucial. I don't expect answers at that time unless something miraculous happens with the course of the war between now and Vilnius.
9:15 a.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you.
Gentlemen of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, do you have anything to add?
9:15 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
There's a great meme going around that says nobody has done more to increase support for Ukraine's membership than Vladimir Putin. It is very clear that Ukraine has decided that its future is going to be in the European Union, in the Euro-Atlantic alliance in some form, immediately and long term. With the ascension of Finland and the potential for other countries to join NATO, Ukraine sees a path for itself as part of the alliance. As we know, Ukraine has close working relationships with Canada and others bilaterally, and then with international groups on the training front.
It remains an open question, as the ambassador said, but we see public support in Ukraine moving very strongly in that direction.
9:15 a.m.
Bloc
Kristina Michaud Bloc Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Thank you very much.
You were talking earlier about what to expect from Canada in terms of help going forward. You were talking a lot about weapons and training. We know that Canada is present in Latvia. Is this presence sufficient at this time? We know that the Canadian Armed Forces have resource problems and a shortage of personnel. Can the transition from battalion to brigade be made despite these challenges? Should the focus be on training, whether in Latvia or elsewhere?
9:15 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
I think the issue we have with our capacity to increase training is the same issue we have with our capacity to increase the production of weapons. It's a matter of the government making it a priority and investing the necessary funds in it.
In terms of what is available right now to augment these missions, I think we do have some capacity to increase training missions for Ukraine now, but certainly that is a long-term commitment and a long-term issue, and I think we need to be making those investments in our defence now.
9:15 a.m.
As an Individual
At the last NATO summit, there was agreement by all allies that the size of the existing battle groups that were created in 2017 would be increased and that new battle groups would be put in place. That commitment is there across all allies, and Canada has to meet that commitment.
I can't speak to the stage of preparedness now, but I'll go back to the letter that I and others signed about the need to invest more. One of the main gaps in the CAF right now is people, so they're working as hard as they can to increase recruitment and retention. It's something that needs a lot of care and feeding, but the government is committed to increasing its size and presence in Latvia, and that's vitally important to NATO deterrence. I know that was the rationale. I was there when we made the decision to take on that battle group and I know the Canadian policy has been that deterrence has to be sufficiently robust.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Ms. Michaud.
Madam Mathyssen, go ahead for six minutes, please.
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Thank you.
Thanks to all the witnesses today for appearing.
London has provided the LAV out of GDLS, General Dynamics Land Systems. When I was speaking to the Ukrainian ambassador to Canada, there was a lot of frustration in terms of the delay on that. Could you give us an update in terms of what you've heard, if anything, on the delay on the delivery of those LAVs and the use of those LAVs?
9:20 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
I don't have the details. I know they were focusing on the ones that were nearly built or that were being built very close to the time of the announcement, as opposed to just sort of being started from scratch. It's been a matter of media speculation, and I think that for operational reasons, the Ukrainians and the Canadians are not revealing exactly where they're at. I do understand that the fact that they were not in place as soon as they were supposed to be is within the scope of the procurement issues that have been described before.
9:20 a.m.
NDP
9:20 a.m.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Okay.
As you know, I like to talk about London all the time. In my riding, there's an international test pilot school. They're world renowned. They've trained allied fighter pilots, as I said, from around the world. They learn to train with those jets and they use flight simulators. There have been numerous conversations about ensuring that Ukrainian pilots come to test at this facility and, as I think Orest said, there's this transition to NATO equipment and NATO weaponry, so that kind of training by NATO allies is key.
There have been, unfortunately, a lot of barriers that each side has come up against, so I'd really love it if you would talk again about that specific training and increasing the training. I know that Operation Unifier has been an incredible resource for troops in Ukraine, but I mean in all the different ways that Canada can train troops for Ukraine.
9:20 a.m.
Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
One of the most important things to remember about training is that our Canadian army is also learning from the Ukrainians. To the extent that we can enlarge any of these missions and move towards training fighter pilots, we're going to do it eventually anyway, so we might as well do it now. In these missions, there is always a large benefit to our military as well, and I think we need to look at it not just as our helping the Ukrainians but as the Ukrainians helping us as well.
9:20 a.m.
Senior Policy Advisor, Ukrainian Canadian Congress
If I can I just chime in on the support programs, I was at the Invictus event last night with some of the members here, and it's beyond just the training of the test pilots. I think there is a real scope....
Ukraine is a country of veterans and of families of survivors of those both injured and killed. I think there is a whole-of-society need in Ukraine for broad mental health support and supports for veterans, and for entrepreneurship, now and after the war.
We have certainly had a flood of people come to our office with proposals of every kind for each of those spheres on what Canada can do as Canadian business, as Canadian government, as a non-profit sector and as community. I don't think there is any lack of ideas or support. Sometimes it's a matter of funding and finding the right partner.
At this point, I think Ukraine is eager to take on partnerships with any kind of partner that will help it to this victory in the nearest time. However, we also need to be thinking about those men and women who are serving, and their families, in the midst of this.
9:20 a.m.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Ms. Buck, you talked about Canada increasing many different types of spending.
I want you to potentially expand on what you were talking about in terms of that diplomatic spending, what Canada is not doing, and where we need to go on that diplomatic side.
9:20 a.m.
As an Individual
It's about presence, skills and diplomatic initiative. It's not always about investing more money in our foreign ministries to get the product, but it is about investing some more money.
I won't go through the world and list where I think we shouldn't have shut down missions and where we should establish missions. It's probably beyond the scope of this committee and the scope of my notes, which I have to do myself now that I've retired, and it's a real challenge. However, I have seen what I find is a real diminution of our capacity internationally, our knowledge base internationally and our skill set internationally, on some issues, and we need to rebuild it. When we're faced with a conflict like Ukraine, you need a whole-of-Canada effort to work and build support with our key allies, our like-minded partners, to maintain support for Ukraine. As I said, I give kudos to Ambassador Rae and his team in our missions around the world, but it's going to take constant care and feeding.
The other thing is that we have to talk to some of the countries that have leverage with Russia. That is going to be key to bringing about some kind of peace at some point, when President Zelenskyy calls the time for a peace settlement. We need China experts and people who are close to India and other places who can help to apply some pressure to Russia. You need a full-court press to convince President Putin that it's time to either lay down arms and come to a table or.... I can't even start to guess where this war will go in its next steps.
It's diplomacy, capacity and expertise, and links to talk to the bad guys and to the good guys to build up that support.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
We're going to have to leave it there. Thank you.
Colleagues, we will move on to the next round.
I'm going to let it go as a full round. Our next panel is one witness, and we may be able to make up some time there.
Ms. Gallant, you have five minutes, please.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
To our former NATO ambassador, the NATO Secretary General indicated that the 2% of GDP aspirational goal for defence spending will become the minimum expenditure. What are the most immediate and effective measures that Canada can take to both bolster Ukraine and their defence forces and shed our reputation in NATO as a freeloader?
9:25 a.m.
As an Individual
I think that our reputation in NATO is pretty good, but the 2% goal—and it is a goal, and Canada has been clear that it is a goal and non-binding to governments now—is a very important political standard, a very important political measure that is becoming more important. It's becoming more important because of the war, but for us it's also because all of our allies are climbing higher and higher, and we're not. Part of it is because our GDP is doing a bit better than that of some of our allies, so that's good news, but the percentage is dropping. Part of it is because of under-investment over successive governments that's coming home to roost now.
What happened in 2017 with “Strong, Secure, Engaged” was that they had a plan for a 73% hike in spending, which is impressive, but that 73% hike in spending, which is the most significant hike in defence spending that we've seen in decades, hasn't quite come to fruition because of not enough people, procurement processes being too slow, etc.
We have a lot to do, and our stats at NATO are bad. In 2022, we were 25th among the allies in terms of percentage of GDP spent on defence, and in terms of percentage of defence spending that is spent on equipment, we were second to last, and that's not great. We need to do more, and thus came about the letter that I signed, as I said.
In terms of support for Ukraine, it's weapons, weapons, weapons and training, training, training. When the war does come to an end, I think that we could have a really useful role in helping the Ukrainian military transition to a peacetime footing, and we'll learn a lot from them too from their war experience and help them move up to that NATO interoperability standard and maintain it.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
It sounds like we're just aspiring to the 2% rather than recognizing that it will become the floor. They need to move forward on it becoming the floor, because nobody is really ever getting to that 2%; they just get closer to it. It's like the law of diminishing returns.
With respect to that, how would you say that we could strategize? What should be the strategy to move forward for Ukraine and help win this war in Ukraine in our role as support?