National Defence committee  It's because each government under which I've served has not wished to see NATO vessels in our Arctic. It's as simple as that.

National Defence committee  But it's not irrelevant to your question. NATO has developed partnerships with Japan, Australia, South Korea, and New Zealand. They were all active in ISAF in Afghanistan. Those four countries have been partners of NATO. We suggested, while I was at NATO, to those four partners t

National Defence committee  I think there would be nothing wrong with the NATO secretary general pursuing this with these individual countries, these four in particular. It really comes down to their calculation as to whether having closer ties with NATO is a net positive for them in their security environm

National Defence committee  Well, there is a debate about this, about engagement with Pakistan, including a debate in Washington right now. The debate has always been around whether we should cut them off, not talk with them anymore, cease providing any kind of technical assistance or support. My personal v

National Defence committee  That's a very good question. We should be clear. As Mr. Fadden said, although we use Turkey as a hypothetical case with its involvement in Syria, the leaders of other member states of NATO seem to be closer to Mr. Putin than they are to the secretary general of NATO, so clearly t

National Defence committee  To be absolutely frank, I don't think there would be much traction for this discussion around the NATO table because of that, because clearly some nations will feel they are the subject of this discussion.

National Defence committee  Again, I think this is a very important question. If we are concerned, the first conversations and perhaps others in terms of what we do would be with our closest allies: our U.S. or U.K. counterparts. There can be concerns about NATO allies sharing information with other cou

National Defence committee  Thank you for the question. It's not dissimilar to this issue around the Arctic. The Norwegians, Iceland, and others, including the U.S., have sought to have the Arctic as an area of interest of NATO in its public documents and statements, and so on. Canada has been the one coun

National Defence committee  In terms of missile defence, the defensive systems are oriented really towards one very specific threat, which is what we would have called a rogue state, with a limited number of missiles and weapons. In the current climate, that's a North Korea and potentially an Iran in the fu

National Defence committee  I do, yes. It's a good question.

National Defence committee  I think it's a good question. NATO has made it clear that any armed attack on the territory of any member state would be met with a collective response. The secretary general I'm sure is reiterating that, including in the case of Turkey and, conceivably, Syria, which might take a

National Defence committee  If Syria or Russia, highly unlikely.... But if another country in response attacks Turkey, that would be an article 5 event. The Turks have come to the NATO council in the past, because this has been a long-standing issue with Syria, and they have asked for consultation around th

National Defence committee  I would ask Denis to follow up. I have to say that Afghanistan was a bit of a wake-up call. The idea of pooling resources in a combat mission with our closest allies did not really pan out. I think that even today in NATO, when the secretary general, as a way of overcoming budge

National Defence committee  I think it's a good question. I don't have inside information as to what the debate in Canada was on this issue. Certainly, hybrid warfare, as we've discussed, is an important new issue that NATO needs to confront. On the surface of it, I would agree. I would suggest that this is

National Defence committee  Canada's definitely on that list. We've participated, I think, in pretty much every NATO operation, whether it's sea, air, or land, that I can recall. There have been a lot of operations since the end of the Cold War. We're interoperable with the U.S., and that's what counts, by