National Defence Committee on March 2nd, 2022

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

Thank you very much.

I will continue on with the more conventional side of war. We've seen that Russia has not yet achieved air superiority in Ukraine. We believe that it hopes to do so in 15 days, but it faces ample resistance on the ground.

How can Canada help ensure air force resistance to prevent Russia from rapidly achieving air superiority?

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, I can offer some words on this.

Just from a NATO perspective, there are many nations that are offering military aid to Ukraine. The kinds of aid that are being offered in some cases are quite significant, and some countries are offering weapons and systems to deal with air threats.

At this point Canada is not in that group of nations. However, from a NATO perspective, it's not a NATO function to provide military aid to Ukraine, but individual nations within NATO are providing Ukraine with military aid that spans a spectrum of capabilities.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Madame Normandin.

I see that lights are flashing. We have a motion to carry on.

How much time do we have, Mr. Clerk, to carry on?

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Grant McLaughlin]

It's 29 minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

We have 29 minutes.

Madam Mathyssen will have six minutes, and then we'll have a truncated second round.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We continue to see Russian advances west towards the NATO countries. Those eastern borders are moving west.

If the Russians are able to hold that territory, what are the long-term consequences and considerations for NATO allies?

[David Angell]

I can take a first stab at it, Mr. Chair, and then turn to the vice-admiral.

In response to the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, we began to reinforce the eastern flank. The enhanced forward presence battle groups in the Baltic countries and Poland, one of which we lead, are part of that response, but there are many other elements, including air policing, that we participate in as well.

What we have begun to do in response to this new, more severe violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity is to shore up those eastern flank defences, and that will continue for as long as required, Mr. Chair. SACEUR has done an outstanding job of leading the alliance in reinforcing that flank.

We're doing this in part through setting up new eFP-like battle groups, but also through the movement of troops and a whole range of other measures. So if there is a longer-term risk to NATO's eastern flank, there will be a much longer term NATO reinforcement of that flank.

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, I think it's an excellent question.

I would just highlight that NATO is in the midst of updating it's strategic concept. This is something that the leaders will decide on at the Madrid summit in June.

I think what we're seeing, regardless of how things play out in Ukraine, is going to have a significant impact on the development of that strategic concept. I think this is already generating a lot of discussion in NATO about how we need to examine our defence and deterrence posture, particularly along the eastern flank.

I think there is going to be a call from many of our allies, particularly those who are in that eastern part of the alliance, for NATO to take a serious look at a significant increase in the capabilities that NATO maintains along the borders with Russia and along NATO's eastern flank.

Those discussions are already starting, and I think this will have a significant impact on NATO regardless of the outcome in Ukraine because it has shown Russia's hand in terms of being an unpredictable and irresponsible actor on the international stage that's willing to take extraordinary and irresponsible risks and violate international law, so it is going to have an impact.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Canada has already made a lot of commitments through Operation Unifier and Operation Reassurance. Do those operations shift as we come into the Madrid summit or into those conversations going forward in the long term?

[David Angell]

Mr. Chair, both of those plans—Operation Unifier and Operation Reassurance—offer a degree of flexibility, so that the government is able to introduce new steps within the terms of those operations as circumstances change. As with all military plans, they come up for renewal by cabinet, so the approach can be fine-tuned by cabinet. Operation Unifier was just renewed for a further three-year period, and it's deliberately flexible, so we've been able to do some training. We've been able to do a whole range of things under both of those plans, but the flexibility is there and the renewal process allows for a degree of redesign as necessary.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I'll shift a little and maybe go back to Major-General Wright, who's been patiently listening. Yesterday, we saw the targeting of the Ukrainian television stations, cutting off that communications infrastructure in an effort to silence Ukraine. Are there ways that Canada can help in that surveillance or logistical framework to repair the communications infrastructure? What logistical support can we provide? Also—and I guess this may be for a couple of the witnesses but more so for Major-General Wright—there's been a real shift, with the added pervasiveness of social media in this conflict particularly, across the world in so many different ways. How does that change what we do on the ground?

[MGen Michael Wright]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think I'll start with the last portion, how that changes things. Modern warfare has changed in that we are seeing things—and perhaps it began with the Gulf War in 1991—and events transpire in real time. Certainly I think that is good, because we are seeing the lies that were perpetrated by the Russians and President Putin being called out as lies and the fact that they are still not telling the truth through Russian media to their own citizens.

In terms of your question about repairing the television station, that's not something that falls within my scope. I'm sorry, but I can't answer that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Mathyssen.

We have a limited amount of time left. If we're going to get through a full round of questions, I think we're going to have to go down to three minutes each.

Madam Findlay.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here.

I'll be quick. Vice-Admiral Bishop, have you seen indications that Belarusian forces have entered the war on Russia's side and are moving toward Kyiv?

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

This is something that we are actively monitoring in NATO. I would say that we are getting extremely good support from across the different nations in the alliance, which provide the alliance with all of our intelligence. We are particularly proud of the contributions of Canadians Forces Intelligence Command. Thus far, we have not seen any of those indications, but we are very concerned about some of the open source reporting, and we are very closely watching for that.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Are you seeing any unusual submarine activity by Russia in the alert status of its ballistic missile submarines?

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, what I could say on that subject is that NATO is very carefully watching all aspects of Russia's military forces. NATO has a 360° view of threats facing the alliance. We are not focused solely on what is going on in Ukraine. Again, we're relying on all of our allies to provide intelligence to the alliance and looking at every area in which Russia operates.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Ambassador, how would you characterize Canada's relationship with other NATO countries on the issue of 2% of GDP funding?

[David Angell]

The 2% of funding issue is part of a package of commitments that leaders entered into in 2014 to work towards spending 2% of GDP on defence and commitments relating to capacity as well and to actually doing the necessary in terms of military heavy lifting. Canada continues to make a very substantial contribution in terms of actual heavy lifting and putting our troops where they need to be. Under the “Strong, Secure, Engaged” defence policy, we've been increasing our defence expenditure by 70% over a 10-year period, which has resulted in Canada being amongst the allies with the largest actual increase in defence expenditure. At the moment, I think about half of the allies have a plan to reach 2%. We have a commitment to increase the defence expenditure, but not over the 2% line, by 2024.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Have we met the 2%, yet, yes or no?

[David Angell]

No. We increased expenditure by 70%, but we do not have a plan for 2%.

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Ms. Findlay.

Mr. Spengemann, you have three minutes please.

[Sven Spengemann, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Chair, thank you very much.

I would like to thank all three witnesses for being with us and for their service to our nation.

My question is for Ambassador Angell. It may in part take you back, sir, to your former role as DG for international organizations, and for human rights and democracy.

I'm looking at an Instagram post from Amnesty International issued in the last 36 hours indicating there have been attacks against civilian infrastructure, including explosive weapons strikes on a kindergarten, hospital, a restaurant and an apartment block. It indicates that cluster munitions have hit a nursery and kindergarten and multiple MLRS rockets have hit in urban areas.

In the caption to that post, Amnesty states the following:Amnesty International’s Crisis Evidence Lab analyzed digital evidence—including photos, videos and satellite imagery of indiscriminate attacks in #Ukraine. They have verified violations of international law which could amount to war crimes.

When we're talking about military deterrence, economic deterrence and introducing this additional deterrence of judicial accountability, how important is this evidence? How can this evidence be protected and presented in such a way that it's credible in front of an international tribunal?

Is there a role for NATO in that respect, to either generate, preserve and protect, or communicate onward that kind of evidence in a forward-looking way to create accountability for the Putin regime for the actions it's currently perpetrating against Ukraine?

[David Angell]

Mr. Chair, the question speaks to areas of Canadian leadership over many years. It was Canada that put the protection of civilians in armed conflict on the Security Council agenda back in 1999. Canada was one of the principal champions for the creation of the International Criminal Court. This issue of accountability has been very dear to our heart for a very long time through successive governments.

There are specialist entities that capture information for judicial purposes. I don't know whether NATO can play a role in that. The issue of accountability for what appears to be the perpetration of war crimes is something that we will take extremely seriously. We will want to work very closely with allies and other partners to make that happen.