Evidence of meeting #57 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 ukraine.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Mr. Jenkins, would you agree that a counteroffensive should be an offensive by the west and we should really build it up?
4:55 p.m.
Senior Adviser to the President, RAND Corporation, As an Individual
Look, I certainly agree with my partner's comments on his analysis.
First of all, we don't have a good understanding of what the level of opposition is to Putin in either his immediate circle or the public at large. Putin is in control. We don't have evidence of any popular uprising against him. I think a change of regime to a more democratic regime is probably a long shot. If anything, we could see a change to an even more bellicose leadership in Russia.
We are in a very perilous time. This does not end with Ukraine. With whatever happens in Ukraine, we are back, I think, in a long-term global contest that can easily move in an existential direction. It is extremely difficult for current generations, especially given the current media, Internet and social media, to grasp what that means, but we are facing a long-term struggle and we have to be prepared for that.
The details of this offensive by the Russians or by the Ukrainians in Ukraine are, to me, interesting details, but this doesn't end in Ukraine either way.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
You have less than 15 seconds, but I think that's it for you Mr. Sousa.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Yes, I know. I owe you. You have to be of a certain age to know what Mr. Jenkins is talking about and I think I qualify.
Madame Normandin, you have two and a half minutes, please.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Christine Normandin Bloc Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you very much.
My next question is directed at both witnesses, but I'll start with you, Mr. Rasiulis.
We often hear about the Russian army's weaknesses, but not so much about those of the Ukrainian army. Thanks to the leaked Pentagon documents, we did learn that munitions supply was one of its main weaknesses. Are there any others we should be worried about, particularly in the long term, so that we're able to fix them right away if we can?
4:55 p.m.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
The principle weakness of the Ukrainian forces is people power. The west can supply the ammunition, and yes, there's a shortage, but at the end day you can bring things in. The Russians have supply problems too, but they can manufacture it and they are bringing it in.
The people issue is a factor that the west is not going to supply because we, the west, are not going to go to war in Ukraine. That means the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian people have to do the fighting. There are only so many Ukrainian men and women who are prepared to go and able to go compared to the Russians.
The question is, are there more Russians than there are Ukrainians who can actually go to war and do the fighting? Right now, the situation suggests that the Russians are able to sustain themselves. They have not yet fully mobilized. They've done limited mobilizations. They could do more. Putin is trying to avoid that right now. He's balancing, but he has the potential. Ukraine has no more potential to increase. It is doing everything it can.
5 p.m.
Bloc
5 p.m.
Senior Adviser to the President, RAND Corporation, As an Individual
I certainly agree with that. The issue here is a matter of human resources and, again, the will to fight.
We're making a lot of references to World War I in this conversation, which is fascinating. Going back to World War I, Russian forces were advancing successfully in 1917 in a great Kerensky offensive, and then the military simply collapsed. I would not rule that out. That's not a optimistic forecast. I'm simply saying that we have to consider the possibility that the Russian forces in the field, at a certain part, suffering certain levels of casualties, could collapse.
On the Ukrainian side, I agree that they don't have the human resources that Russia has, but the determination really suggests that they will continue. In fact, I would hazard a guess that, even if there was a regime change in Kyiv—a Russian takeover—we would still see a continuing armed resistance movement in Ukraine.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Unfortunately, we're going to have to leave it there. I don't think we'll have to charge extra for the history lesson on World War I, World War II, the Cold War and the Korean War. I think we've pretty well covered everything so far in the last hour and a half.
Ms. Mathyssen, you have two and a half minutes.
5 p.m.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
To just build off that conversation, I'll ask Mr. Rasiulis to weigh in on what was just said by Mr. Jenkins. In the last panel we had this last week, we were asking about Russia's biggest weakness, and a witness said that it's training and morale. That feeds entirely off what Mr. Jenkins was saying.
Mr. Rasiulis, do you want to add to that?
5 p.m.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
Yes. He was referring to the Brusilov offensive, which I fully understand. That's because things were really bad in Russia back home. The Russian army was not being properly supplied and they collapsed, and the Russian Revolution was starting.
We're not at the point yet where there is a Russian revolution starting. The Russian military, while not having 100% supplies, is still being supplied, so it's not the way it was in 1916 and 1917. Could it become that? It could. We just don't know. However, right now—
5 p.m.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
Again, the sanctions haven't done everything they were supposed to do because the Russians have done workarounds. I'm not an economics specialist, but I will say from my understanding of history that the only time sanctions have actually worked and you get the political effect was in South Africa, where the apartheid sanctions took place. Apartheid ended because of sanctions.
The Americans have had sanctions on Cuba since 1959 and they keep going. For Iran, North Korea, you name it, sanctions do not usually effect the political outcomes the people putting on the sanctions want.
The Russians have done workarounds. They are able to have their internal economy.... They have actually strengthened their internal economy. The Russian ammunition factories are working around the clock. There's a Russian tank factory in Siberia taking old T-62s and remodelling them constantly. They're running around the clock, and they're putting them into the front line.
5 p.m.
NDP
5 p.m.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
Yes, the merchants of death and all that sort of thing.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Ms. Mathyssen.
Colleagues, we are in the third round and we're at the last two questioners. Mr. Bezan, you have the final five minutes for the Conservatives, and Ms. O'Connell, you have the final five minutes for the Liberals.
5 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We talked about the comments made by the Chinese ambassador to France. We had recent comments made by the South African ambassador to Canada, who criticized us for not being the soft power that he envisions us to be and for being too closely aligned with Ukraine.
I'm just wondering if those are appropriate comments to be made by so-called diplomats—to be more engaged in bilateral relationships with the countries they're stationed in. Is this part of a greater strategy to undermine western support and to question the resiliency of the alliance, particularly here in Canada? Essentially, I think some people have described it as “wolf“ diplomacy.
5:05 p.m.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
I think we've spoken about the Chinese factor, and we know that's not the Chinese position. However, South Africa is an interesting one, and Mr. Jenkins has alluded to the colonial histories and so on. We just spoke about apartheid. The Soviet Union in the Cold War was very much supportive of the anti-apartheid movement, and they are the ruling party so they remember that.
What we get from South Africa, and we've had this for months now.... The Chinese navy, the Russian navy and the South African navy have been exercising. In fact, they were doing it around the anniversary of the war in February.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
April 25th, 2023 / 5:05 p.m.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
They're still doing it right now.
The point is that South Africans have a historical legacy, and they're speaking to that. That's where they're coming from.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
The Chinese ambassador made the comment that the former Soviet states don't have any way to be recognized internationally. Can the same argument then be made about Russia, especially given their never accepting the UN charter and never passing a single resolution in the Duma to recognize the UN charter or provide them the ascension to the UN Security Council? It perturbed me greatly to see, just a couple of days ago, Sergei Lavrov chair the UN Security Council meeting.
5:05 p.m.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
The point is that international states become legitimate when they have international recognition. That's really not even 100% based on the United Nations.
When the Soviet Union came apart, it was individual countries.... For example, Canada was one of the first to recognize a number of the countries involved, such as Ukraine and so on. It's about the actual states' recognition.
The United Nations is an umbrella organization, but it is not a world government. It's the actions of individual states that count. Individual states have recognized certain countries, and that's what counts.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Jenkins, you recently wrote, “The longer the war drags on, the more risks Putin might be willing to take.” The question I have for you is this: When we talk about resiliency in Canada and the U.S. and among our citizens, how much longer are the people of Russia prepared to sacrifice their young men and women in this war?
5:05 p.m.
Senior Adviser to the President, RAND Corporation, As an Individual
I would love to be able to answer that. We have no way of providing an answer to that.
I certainly agree with my partner here that we have no evidence of a significantly strong anti-Putin movement in Russia—