National Defence Committee on March 2nd, 2022

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

Thank you very much, Ambassador.

I have limited time, but I would like to turn briefly to our two senior military officials.

Is the evidence described by Amnesty, including satellite imagery, especially if verified to be accurate, the kind of evidence that could capture potential war crimes well and serve international fora to establish and sustain accountability for these kinds of actions?

[MGen Michael Wright]

Mr. Chair, I'm not sure of the exact ways in which the International Criminal Court or any other organization would receive such imagery, but there is a significant amount of commercially available satellite imagery over Ukraine that could likely be used for a case such as that.

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

Vice-Admiral Bishop.

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, I would say that it's extremely difficult to investigate these kinds of activities without people on the ground. That is a significant limiting factor.

I think we are all seized with what we're seeing and hearing and with some of the allegations about these potential war crimes and violations of the laws of armed conflict. We certainly would like to see these issues investigated properly at some point. In the midst of a conflict, it is always extremely difficult to conduct these types of investigation.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Madame Normandin, you have one minute.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Recently, we've seen Russia threaten Finland with retaliation if it joins NATO. It is a non-member country, but still a NATO partner.

What would Canada's position be in particular, and what would NATO's position be in general, if Russia did indeed retaliate against Finland?

[David Angell]

Mr. Chair, the choice of whether to seek to join the alliance or not is one that individual countries make. For historical reasons, neither Finland nor Sweden has chosen to seek to join the alliance. Notwithstanding that, we have very close working relationships with them. We're working especially closely with them now in view of the situation in Ukraine.

These are countries with very advanced defence capabilities. They have something to teach allied countries about the whole-of-society approaches to defence. We work extremely closely with them.

We have 40 partners and both Finland and Sweden are amongst the very closest.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Madam Mathyssen, you have one minute.

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

We've seen the economic sanctions that the world is putting forward working. Russian citizens, themselves, are taking action against Putin. The Ukrainians are doing an incredible job of holding them back, but we've also seen the Russians resorting to using thermobaric weapons. There was a suggestion by experts that turning to these extremes is showing a bit of desperation by Putin.

Can you comment on that and where that could lead in terms of that level of force and response?

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

That question is for Admiral Bishop.

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, within the alliance, we're following the developments in Ukraine as closely as we can, based on the intelligence we're getting from nations. We're, again, all very concerned to hear about further escalation in Russian tactics and their approach to this conflict.

We would certainly be very concerned to hear or verify that Russia was intending to use thermobaric weapons based on their indiscriminate effects, and we will watch for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you.

Mr. Motz, you have three minutes, please.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I'll start with this one first. There was a recent article that suggested that nearly half of Canada's air fleet was not serviceable to meet readiness and training standards in 2020 and 2021. Now we know that the current government has yet to be able to name a winning bid for the fighter jets and that the F-35 procurement process is already seven years in the making.

Your Excellency and Vice-Admiral Bishop, have either of you ever found yourselves in a position where you were working with our allied NATO partners trying to find other ways to assist NATO because our equipment was either not serviceable or inoperable without our allies' assistance?

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, I can't comment on the Royal Canadian Air Force's generation of fighter aircraft and capabilities in Canada; I can talk about the NATO perspective.

I would say that Canada has been a regular contributor of fighter aircraft in support of NATO's air policing missions. Along the eastern flank, Canada has been a regular contributor to air policing in Romania. Our efforts there have been extremely well appreciated by all of our allied partners. This is an extremely important mission for NATO and in particular for nations along the eastern flank.

We follow their deployments in Romania when they're doing these missions, and we get a lot of credit from our allies for the great job that our men and women are doing in those missions.

From a NATO standpoint, I would say that we do not see any impact in terms of our ability to deliver to NATO what we have committed to NATO to deliver.

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

You referred to air, and I know my question initially referred to air, but the question was specific to equipment beyond just air. Would you stay with the same position with all of our Canadian Armed Forces' equipment?

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Again, Chair, I am talking specifically about what we see in NATO and what Canada delivers to it in terms of capability, and we do extremely well. I think one of our major strengths as a nation is the contribution we make to the alliance. The ambassador highlighted that in his opening remarks.

In terms of capabilities, we have excellent capabilities in the battle group in Latvia. I've talked about how we have excelled in the air policing mission and our leadership in the NATO mission in Iraq.

When we come to the table and we provide capabilities to NATO, we provide excellent, high-readiness capabilities that are fully mission capable. That has always been our mantra, and our allies recognize that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Thank you, Mr. Motz.

[David Angell]

I would just add, Mr. Chair, that it's also true in the naval field, where we have been leading and contributing to standing naval maritime groups very effectively.

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, I should have mentioned the navy, being as that's my service.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

Yes. I was going to say, Admiral, that it's a major failing on your part not to have mentioned your service.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Yes. We are a very consistent contributor of naval forces to NATO's standing naval forces. In fact, we are one of the few countries that consistently contribute warships to those standing naval forces. I think that also is something that gets us a lot of credit here within the NATO community.

[The Chair, Liberal, John McKay]

In the report that Mr. Motz was referring to, the navy gets a 94% in readiness for operations—so the best in class.

Madam O'Connell, you have the final three minutes, please.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all for being here and for your service.

I want to follow up a question that Ms. Gallant asked earlier.

Vice-Admiral Bishop, it's my understanding that you were involved in the NATO no-fly zone and embargo against Libya. Again, following up on Ms. Gallant's earlier question about some of the information coming around, you often see, especially online, reactions to what should be done. Could you elaborate on your experience in Libya and how that then relates to a no-fly zone in Ukraine or the decision-making around that?

[VAdm Scott Bishop]

Mr. Chair, that's another really good question.

What we really need to keep in mind is the situations in Libya and Ukraine are two completely different situations militarily. The big issue with a no-fly zone is that you need to be able to enforce it. You need to be able to prevent the side from being able to operate aircraft in that no-fly zone.

In Ukraine it's just a completely different situation. The Russians have over 700 combat aircraft in that area. They have advanced surface-to-air missile systems. They have advanced integrated air defence systems. Any no-fly zone would almost certainly bring us into direct conflict with the Russian military. As the Secretary General and many others have indicated, this would be a really significant potential risk of escalation of the conflict, which NATO does not want to see.