National Defence committee  I'm not very concerned about it, because the co-operation is not strong in the military domain. It's more in the economic domain, with China needing resources and Russia, as the largest country in the world, having abundant natural resources. That kind of co-operation, like the Shanghai Co-operation Organization and others, is primarily in the economic domain.

National Defence committee  Well, asking an academic to predict the future is a very dangerous thing. Our crystal balls are not very good. At the same time, I do appreciate that the United States government is acting in ways that aren't as predictable as they were for 70 years. We have to be aware that we might find ourselves in situations that will require new solutions to new problems coming from new sources.

National Defence committee  That's a great question. I don't feel that you can look on a binary success or failure for the treaties. The Minsk II treaty is still an important element of keeping the conflict in eastern Ukraine from becoming a war. We can look at it on a scale, and there could be much larger levels of fighting.

National Defence committee  There is an expectation. There are standards, but at the same time you have to ask if it is necessary that the smallest nations be ready. Their contribution will be relatively minor compared to the bigger players, but we do want to increase everyone's standards, and that's why NATO coordination and co-operation are so vital.

National Defence committee  It depends on which figures you use. If you use the percent of GDP, we're down on the list, around 1%, but if you look at threat and risk versus what Canada contributes, I'd say Canada is contributing what people can expect of it. Turkey, next to a civil war in Syria, will naturally spend six times the amount that Canada does.

National Defence committee  I think Russia's increased military spending comes out of its general view towards its position in the world. It wants to regain a superpower status. In so many areas, with the Russian economy declining, with population declining, and with so many challenges, they look to that as being one of their premier ways of showing that they are a force in the world.

National Defence committee  The Russians do call the former Soviet Union states the “near abroad”. They consider it a special status and they may view it as a kind of buffer to NATO. I don't like the term because it makes Ukraine look like it's a pawn in a chess match. Ukrainians are people who deserve to live in security and prosperity ,and they shouldn't be subjected to the great power politics.

National Defence committee  This is an area where we have to tread very carefully. Because we want the norm to be non-intervention and non-attack, we have to make sure that Canada and other NATO allies are not pushing the envelope. I am a strong believer in defensive measures against cyber-attacks and direct response in the form of self-defence under imminent threat, but creating an overall strategy for active or offensive cyber-operations is a very slippery slope that could lead the international community into a perilous domain in which real democracies will suffer most.

National Defence committee  NATO is the most powerful alliance in the world. It funds far more than any adversary. I would say—given that the U.S. spends well over $600 billion on defence and has formed the backbone of NATO—it's as good as you can get in the world of human affairs. The sense of “all for one and one for all” is important.

National Defence committee  Thank you, sir, for your consideration, and thank you for the honour of testifying before this important committee. My past testimony before parliamentary committees has been on arms control, Afghanistan operations, peacekeeping, and the United Nations. Those subjects are in my comfort zone.

Foreign Affairs committee  Yes, I have a very quick one. Certain things you can plan for. If you want to make sure that you're not assisting with cluster munitions, have it that American planes don't carry cluster munitions. These weapons are becoming anachronistic; they're something of the past. Let's really bury them, instead of trying to hearken to the very remote possibility that we might be stuck in a situation whereby we might possibly have to assist with them.

Foreign Affairs committee  I'll bring together the last two questioners' points. A cluster munitions ban is now part of international law. We do want to have it clear for the soldiers whether they can or can't use cluster munitions, so a good Canadian law also helps make that, as well as the directions from generals for good rules of engagement, ROE.

Foreign Affairs committee  Right. Well, “notwithstanding” can mean various things under labour laws, constitutional law, international law. This treaty came through a series of negotiations with amendments and compromises. The Canadian negotiator definitely did not want article 21 to become a loophole. He defended it against civil society groups, who said to watch about the danger here.

Foreign Affairs committee  I think General Natynczyk could give you very good examples of caveats from Afghanistan. Obviously, we signed the landmine convention and the United States hasn't. We don't want to be laying landmines if we're in a joint camp together. The caveats that came up frequently and were often complained about in Afghanistan were that the Germans wouldn't fly in the south and wouldn't engage in combat operations.

Foreign Affairs committee  That would come in the very rare possibility of a court case. The court might have to decide what active assistance is exactly. Participating knowingly, because there's the mens rea provision of law, and knowingly putting a cluster munition into the ground and shooting it is being actively involved.