National Defence committee  Could I make a very brief comment in response?

National Defence committee  Okay. I won't, then.

National Defence committee  There is a complex relationship here. The UN charter called for the development of a military staff command of real operational resources for the UN that never came to pass, so whenever the UN authorizes an operation it is relying on states to respond either through some kind of a coalition or through an alliance.

National Defence committee  Does Paul want to answer this question? I'm happy to answer, but Paul may have some thoughts, given that he mentioned Russia in his presentation.

National Defence committee  I think the question I was trying to uncover is really what kind of Canadian Forces would provide the most influence mainly in multilateral efforts, whether we're thinking of NATO or UN types of operations. If you took the Libya example, you would say you want advanced interoperable aircraft.

National Defence committee  I think that is where diplomacy is very important. Think back to Libya. One of biggest enabling factors for a council-authorized action was the request from the Arab League. Now, in retrospect, there's been lots of analysis of why that request was made and what the configuration was in the league; nonetheless, the fact that regional actors wanted action was huge.

National Defence committee  You raise a very general question about the responsibility to protect that I think is important to clarify. It is a principle that encompasses a broad range of measures that in some ways, if you think about the spectrum, including prevention, can even be non-coercive at a very early stage.

National Defence committee  Let me clarify my comments. I agree that it has been one of the sources of the deterrent effect, but the way it has been interpreted, particularly after events in Turkey, as being an ironclad guarantee of a response isn't quite right. If you look at the actual article, you see that an attack upon one is equal to an attack upon all; however, for it to be activated, members of NATO have to agree, first, that there has been an attack.

National Defence committee  Let me take the first question first, because they're two different questions. Your question about what NATO should do if the Security Council is paralyzed, I think, is highly relevant. I foresee a very difficult period ahead for the Security Council, but currently we have no other form of accountability for the council other than political accountability.

National Defence committee  You identified building capacity and civilian assistance for what you call nation building. I wouldn't disagree that building that capacity is important. The question would be whether NATO is the right instrument for it. If we think about how NATO is perceived globally, I think there would be huge issues around NATO driving those kinds of civilian activities.

National Defence committee  I wouldn't call it a legal obligation yet. I think what we've seen is a belief that a Security Council authorization is politically and even morally desirable for NATO. Although it is true that under article 51 of the UN Charter force cannot be used except in self-defence or as part of a collective security operation, that doesn't mean that NATO always has to act under a council authorization.

National Defence committee  You raise a very interesting point about the dilemma of a collective alliance and there being particular unilateral actions and statements on behalf of individual states. To a certain extent, I don't think there's much that can be done about those individual state statements, if you will.

National Defence committee  Thanks very much. It's a pleasure to be with you. In my 10 minutes I thought I would comment on the six points that are in the preface to the NATO strategic concept of 2010 and would begin with the first point in the preface: that the strategic concept is reconfirming the bond between our nations to defend one another against attack.