National Defence Committee on March 2nd, 2022

[MGen Michael Wright]

I could be available, yes, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

That's excellent.

We'll have three people on the panel. We'll invite Admiral Bishop and Ambassador Angell to present. Then we'll have another round of questions, and we'll run that as far as we possibly can. Is that okay?

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Chair, can I get one question in with the vice-admiral before we suspend?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We have a minute and a half.

I'll give you a 30-second question only because you're a nice guy, Todd.

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I really appreciate both of our witnesses being here.

Vice-Admiral, are we prepared, and what is the plan should the war be brought to our shores, whether missiles are fired overhead, or indeed, there's an attack with missiles landing here in Canada?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Admiral, you could be forgiven—

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

I think the admiral could be forgiven for not answering that question. That is a huge question for him to answer.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Let him answer.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Let him answer—in 15 seconds?

[VAdm J.R. Auchterlonie]

I will give it a short try.

I think we've already alluded to it. The fact is that we don't just work alone in Canada; we work with our allies and partners. We have a strong relationship with NORAD. We have a strong relationship with our partners in NATO, and we have a strong partnership with our other government departments in the Government of Canada, so it is not necessarily a military response but a whole-of-government response, working with our allies and partners.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Admiral Auchterlonie.

General Wright, we'll look forward to seeing you on the other side of the vote.

With that, the meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We are joined by Admiral Scott Bishop.

It's good to see you again, Admiral Bishop. I'm not sure how many years it has been, but it is good to see you.

Ambassador Angell, it's good to see you as well. Thank you for joining us at this late hour.

I'm advising the committee that we have a hard stop at 5:30, which I think we'll be able to achieve.

I'm recognizing Madame Normandin, who has a statement to make, and then I'll call upon the two of you for your opening statements. I appreciate General Wright's staying around for the fun.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to raise the following issue, just to get it on the record. Considering the number of votes scheduled for today, I would like to bring to the attention of the clerks and all those who organize the committee schedules that we have the option of voting remotely, but we're not going to automatically take advantage of it. I may want to vote in person most of the time.

I just wanted to reiterate that, to the extent possible, schedules should not be set with the assumption that everyone will vote remotely. I believe some want to vote in person.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We will miss you.

With that, I will move to Ambassador Angell for a five-minute opening statement.

On behalf of the committee, I want to recognize that you are six hours behind us and you have made special arrangements to be here. We do appreciate that. I have only a remote appreciation of how hard you are working on behalf of us all. I think we need to recognize that you are really in the centre of things these days, and we appreciate your work.

[David Angell, Ambassador and Permanent Representative, Joint Delegation of Canada to NATO]

Chair, thank you for your comments and for the opportunity to join you.

My name is David Angell and I am the Canadian ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO is a defensive alliance founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and rule of law. Its task is to guarantee the security of the Euro-Atlantic area and of the nearly one billion citizens of the now 30 allied countries.

Canada was an architect of NATO, which has remained a cornerstone of our security for seven decades, and we continue to play a leadership role within the alliance. For example, we have led the enhanced forward presence battle group in Latvia since its inception and we were the founding framework nation for the NATO mission in Iraq.

Our role within NATO reflects our values, including our commitments to diversity and pluralism. Recently, Canada's three most senior NATO commanders were all women, a demonstration of commitment to gender equality that no other ally can match.

NATO's strength derives from its ability to adapt in a constantly changing geostrategic environment. NATO is involved in a far-reaching reform process, NATO 2030, to ensure that it remains fit for purpose. A milestone in that process will be leaders' adoption, in June, of a new capstone strategic concept, which will chart a path forward for NATO for the next decade or so.

NATO's strength also draws upon the unity of its allies, all of whom committed under article 5 of the Washington treaty that an armed attack against one should be considered an attack against them all. Alliance unity and adaptability have both been evident in response to Russia's violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. Following Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014, NATO developed far-reaching new defence plans and arrangements to defend alliance territory and deepened its close partnership with Ukraine.

In addition, Canada trained more than 30,000 Ukrainian military personnel through our Operation Unifier and we contributed to security sector reform in Ukraine. NATO has demonstrated extraordinary unity in responding to the present crisis, offering Russia a credible diplomatic track to avert the crisis and championing unprecedented sanctions once that diplomatic option was spurned. In addition, NATO pre-emptively implemented enhanced vigilance measures and activated its advanced planning mechanisms to shore up its deterrence posture while individual allies are providing unprecedented support to Ukraine. Throughout this crisis, the alliance has remained united and faithful to its values.

Allies are also following closely China's activities to understand their implications for Euro-Atlantic security without seeking either to cast China as an adversary or to close off co-operation in key areas such as responding to climate change. China's opacity in implementing its far-reaching military modernization is cause for concern. So, too, is China's growing military co-operation with Russia, including in joint exercises.

NATO is working to respond to these challenges in co-operation with close partners such as Australia, Japan, Korea and New Zealand.

The alliance is also working to fight terrorism as a transnational threat. The alliance has been actively engaged in the fight against ISIS and has developed an action plan to counter international terrorism, which is updated annually.

NATO also faces a global environment in which emerging and disruptive technology and hybrid activities are changing the very nature of warfare. The Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic, or DIANA, will be a concrete example of the allies working together to maintain the alliance's technological edge.

NATO and the various allies also face increased exposure to malicious activity in a world dependent on digital infrastructure and technology. To address this, the allies will need to continue to work closely together. The allies recognize the security implications of climate change as a threat amplifier and the importance of reducing military emissions, equipment and activities if we are to meet climate change targets.

Canada is also a leader in this area. At the NATO summit in Brussels in June, Prime Minister Trudeau proposed that Canada host a NATO centre of excellence on climate and security. This initiative will significantly advance the alliance's work in this critical area.

NATO has never been as relevant and united as it is today, and Canada's contribution remains essential.

Let me close by thanking the members of the committee and by acknowledging with particular thanks those who serve or have served as members of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association.

I look forward to responding to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ambassador Angell.

Vice-Admiral Bishop, you have five minutes.

[Vice-Admiral Scott Bishop, Military Representative of Canada to NATO, Canadian Armed Forces, Department of National Defence]

Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to appear before the committee today and answer your questions.

Ambassador Angell has done an excellent job giving you a high-level overview of NATO, Canada's role in NATO and some of the challenges that we face. I wanted to take a couple of minutes to vector in on what I do at NATO, to give you some context of my function here.

My name is Vice-Admiral Scott Bishop and I am the Canadian Military Representative on the Canadian Joint Delegation to NATO.

Our delegation is a joint effort of the Department of National Defence and Global Affairs Canada.

I have several responsibilities, but my primary role is to represent the Chief of the Defence Staff on the NATO Military Committee in Brussels.

The military committee is the most senior of NATO's three military bodies and provides advice to the North Atlantic Council, which is NATO's highest political authority.

Of the other two military bodies, the first is Supreme Allied Commander Europe, known as SACEUR, and their staff at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, referred to as SHAPE, located in Mons, Belgium. SACEUR is responsible for the planning and execution of all of NATO's operations.

The second is the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, referred to as SACT, and their staff at Allied Command Transformation headquarters, located in Norfolk, Virginia, which we refer to as ACT. SACT is responsible for ensuring that the alliance is evolving and transforming itself to be relevant in the conflicts of the future.

In the military committee, I work with the senior military representatives of all of our alliance partners to provide military advice to the North Atlantic Council on a wide range of military issues. This includes the review and endorsement of the military planning undertaken by both SACEUR and SACT.

From a national perspective, I work closely with key stakeholders at the National Defence headquarters in Ottawa to ensure that DND and Canadian Armed Forces interests and perspectives are included in the military's planning and decision-making. We also work very closely with our Global Affairs colleagues in our joint delegation to NATO to ensure that we remain closely aligned on our national positions.

Defence diplomacy is also a key aspect of our work at NATO headquarters, and we regularly work with allies to gain support for Canada's views among the other military delegations.

Furthermore, our position at NATO Headquarters gives us a privileged point of view to understand the major issues that drive the alliance. We are therefore able to relay these important considerations to Defence Headquarters in order to inform the discussions in Ottawa.

In recent times, our efforts have been focused on Canada's active contribution to NATO's response to Russia's aggression against Ukraine. We have also focused our efforts on the following objectives: providing input into SACEUR's deterrence and defence plans; promoting greater transparency and accountability in the development of NATO's capabilities; advancing climate and security initiatives; promoting the role of women in peace and security issues; and advocating the importance of innovation within the alliance.

Thank you again, Chair, for the opportunity to give you a brief summary of what I do. I look forward to addressing the questions of the committee tonight.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Vice-Admiral Bishop.

We will go to the six-minute round with Madam Gallant, Madame Lambropoulos and Madame Normandin.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Through you, this is for His Excellency Angell. Recently, the Secretary General said that article 5 could be invoked in the event of a cyber-attack.

Would NATO need confirmed attribution for that to be triggered?

[David Angell]

I said in my introduction that NATO is constantly adapting. One demonstration of that is the incorporation of both cyber and space as new domains. NATO is now active across five domains, including land, sea and air.

It was decided by the alliance that a cyber-attack could trigger article 5, which is the article of the Washington treaty under which we are committed each to support each other militarily. Joint attribution would not be required, joint attribution being the public indication of who is responsible for an attack, which, for many allies, is something that's done nationally rather than on a joint basis, but there would have to be consensus, because all of NATO's decisions are done on a consensus basis, if article 5 needed to be tripped.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

What would the nature of the cyber-attack have to be? Would it need to be damage to critical infrastructure? Would it have to be something that caused loss of life?

What is that threshold that needs to be met for it to be triggered?

[David Angell]

Mr. Chair, the threshold would be very high. Article 5 has been triggered only once in the alliance's 72 or 73 years. That was in response to the 9/11 attack in the United States.

There is no specific written definition of the criterion that would need to be satisfied, but it would certainly involve loss of life and massive military impact. It's something we are discussing in terms of trying to codify it a bit more clearly, but it's very clear that there would be a requirement for loss of life and massive impact.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON]

There are growing calls for a no-fly zone in the airspace above Ukraine. Is there any way at all that allied forces could police the perimeter without becoming involved and in some way triggering a war or being considered a provocation and a pretext for Putin to go all out?

[David Angell]

Mr. Chair, the Secretary General has been speaking, I think, for the vast majority of allies in expressing enormous concern at the possibility of a no-fly zone. Leaders of some of our largest allies, including the American president, have been very clear on this point as well.

The concern is that, if NATO were to be involved in the enforcement of a no-fly zone over Ukraine, first of all it would involve putting our service personnel in a position where they would risk interacting with Russian personnel linked to that. Second, it would create a situation where there was a very significant risk of escalation, so alliance leaders have been quite clear that enforcement of a no-fly zone is not something that is being considered at the moment.