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.
Conservative
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Jenkins, we did see a lot of Russian men flee the country to escape conscription. Is that starting to play out among the populace, as they do not want to be sending their sons, daughters, husbands and wives to the front?
Senior Adviser to the President, RAND Corporation, As an Individual
I think that was significant. In fact, given that those individuals are probably the best educated, well trained and, therefore, most likely to find employment in other countries, that represented a significant loss. At the same time, it probably reduced some of the sources of internal pressure on Russia.
A lot of the recruits for the Russian forces are coming from distant provinces, different towns. They're not sending the sons of the elite middle classes in St. Petersburg and Moscow into this war yet. That would change things, possibly.
One aside I want to make here very quickly is that we're talking about human resources and trained human resources. Finding a way to usefully employ and exploit that exodus from Russia is something we should be paying very close attention to. These are people who have made personal decisions to avoid the draft. They have pulled up their roots and left the country. That is a potential resource. I'm not talking about giving them rifles and sending them into the front in Ukraine, but that is a significant resource that could be useful to the west.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you, Mr. Jenkins and Mr. Bezan.
Ms. O'Connell, you have the final five minutes.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you both for being here today. It's been very interesting to hear your perspectives. Certainly, tying it back to the past and sometimes not reinventing the wheel, we can see what's playing out.
One of my questions alludes to what was already said, but it's for both of you if you'd like to chime in.
With regard to the misinformation piece, I find it very interesting that especially in the U.S. you see Republican right-wing commentators now talking about their support for Putin. Never did I think I'd see the day when members of the Republican Party would support Putin outright and share very clearly Kremlin-type lines or Russian media lines.
I have two points or questions. With regard to misinformation in the west, we probably even see it on all of our social media. If you ever post in support of Ukraine, all of a sudden you get all of these anti-Ukraine messages. How critical is misinformation in the west in terms of the overall public support for us as Canadians to continue to support Ukraine?
As to the second point of this question, in the U.S. political sphere, how solid are the institutions? If there were a change in leadership, do we risk the U.S.'s support of Ukraine not being as strong? Let's be honest. The U.S. contribution to supporting Ukraine is significant, like Canada's, but that would be crucial.
I know that was a long preamble, but could you speak to any sort of change or concerns with regard to the U.S. political situation right now?
Senior Adviser to the President, RAND Corporation, As an Individual
Since you mentioned the U.S. so many times, let me go first very quickly.
First, I am ferociously non-partisan, but that doesn't mean I'm not aware of the political situation. The partisan divide in the United States has been growing deeper over the years and is so deep now that in fact it has projected deep into the realm of the national security and foreign policy of the United States. That accounts for a certain amount of the criticism of U.S. support for Ukraine. It's because of who is in the White House right now and because of the attitudes of the previous occupant of the White House.
In addition to that, there's a further layer, in that Russia portrays itself as being a defender of certain values against certain liberal decadence in its propaganda of transsexual predators and things of this sort. That resonates with an extremist portion of our population, so we're talking about a values issue as well. That's in addition to the very traditional people who are determined to promote peace and who approach it from the other side of the spectrum.
I honestly watch this carefully. I don't know how this is going to play out in 2024, but I would say that it is certainly going to be part of the political discussion in this country going forward.
Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute, As an Individual
Speaking not on the U.S. thing but in general and to your question about misinformation, the antidote to misinformation is education. If people are not being educated—and there has to be self-education in this as well—there will always be people who get duped.
If you watch the information spaces—the experts do—you can start to pick up pretty quickly what is generated misinformation versus the valid information, and you can make your own.... However, you have to be an educated person to actually watch the stuff, and you can see after a while what's fabrication. It has an artificiality to it and, of course, it's inconsistent over time if you watch for that.
Education is really the antidote, and I think there's a universal acceptance by people that that's how you have to deal with it. There's been a lot of that in the Baltic states and in Finland. They have worked hard to do that by educating the population. There is no magic answer other than education.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Thank you.
Unfortunately, we'll to have to bring our time to an end.
On behalf of the committee, I want to thank both of you for extending your time and for being very informative and very thoughtful.
Some of us on the committee have just returned from Taiwan. Probably one of the most impressive sessions we had was on how the Taiwanese deal with misinformation and disinformation. Their standard is to have a response within two hours. Their regular practice is to have it within an hour. We could learn a lot from the way the Taiwanese deal with misinformation and disinformation. We're not nearly as coherent as they are.
With that, thank you for your presence here. It's been very helpful.
Colleagues, before I bring the gavel down, I want to make note that the Latvian Minister of Defence will be here on May 9 and 10. Unfortunately, she's not available during committee times. She is available on May 9, from 8 to 12, or on Wednesday, May 10, from 12 to 5:30. If you could indicate to the clerk your preference—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
The Latvian Minister of Defence can't meet during committee time. She is available Tuesday, May 9, from 8 to 12, or Wednesday, May 10, from 12 to 5:30. Just give an indication to the clerk of what you'd like.
You know about the April 28 meeting on health and transition. On May 2, it's the minister. May 5 is cancelled. On May 9, 12 and 16, it's the health and transition study. May 19 is cancelled. On June 1, it's the French embassy, and presumably we're going to get invitations for June 1. The Polish deputy minister of defence is coming on May 8. We're awaiting confirmation of the room and services.
Go ahead, Mrs. Gallant.
Conservative
Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON
Would the clerk please put that down on a calendar for dispersal among all the members?
Liberal