Preserving capacity, General Tom Lawson, Chief of the Defence Staff, Keys to Canadian SAR
Issue link: http://vanguardcanada.uberflip.com/i/476674
central authority over all professional and force generating aspects of the military intelligence function, including training, and enhanced influence over intelligence budgeting and capital procurement. The first conference panel then consid- ered whether Canada has a real strategic intelligence capability. Do we really know what strategic intelligence is? These were questions addressed by panelists Dr. Rob- ert McRae, the director of Carelton Uni- versity's Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies and a former Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet in the Privy Coun- cil Office, and Dr. Peter Archambault, a defence scientist and operational analyst in DND. They concluded more could be done to help government and the public understand this level of intelligence activity. Moreover, to adequately cover all strategic intelligence issues facing Canada requires more resources than are currently available. Therefore, government must continue to prioritize intelligence targets and accept the associated risk. Rear-Admiral Peter Ellis, the Deputy Commander (Expeditionary) of the Cana- dian Joint Operations Command (CJOC) provided an interesting outline of the op- erational intelligence apparatus exploited by the CAF. CJOC is another successful CAF restructuring to enhance operational effectiveness and efficiency. The former CAF structure included two distinct operational levels of com- mand, one to control military operations abroad (Canadian Expeditionary Forces Command – CEFCOM), one to control military operations in Canada and conti- nental operations in concert with United States military forces (Canada Command – CANADACOM), and one to support the other two (Canadian Operational Sup- port Command – CANOSCOM). Given international and national security concerns beginning with the build-up of Canada's combat mission in Afghanistan, the need for two high-level commands was apparent and they worked well. However, CEFCOM, CANADACOM and CA- NOSCOM had considerable administra- tive overlap and required extensive com- mand and control resources, particularly in skilled headquarters personnel. In 2011 a review of the organization and functions of DND and the CAF rec- ommended the integration of CEFCOM, CANADACOM and CANOSCOM. The consolidation of the three commands would close functional gaps, eliminate administrative duplication, and permit the redistribution of resources to support new and emerging operational demands. Consequently, CJOC was established in October 2012, to control all Canadian military operations at home and abroad, except those being conducted by Cana- dian Special Operations Forces Com- mand (CANSOFCOM) and the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD). A second panel investigated whether government is taking sufficient advantage of Canadian academia to deliver the ad- vanced intelligence education of current practitioners and future intelligence lead- ers in the public service. Panelists included Dr. Michael Hennessy, Associate Principal for Research at the Royal Canadian Mili- tary College of Canada, Dr. Kurt Jensen, an adjunct professor at Carleton Universi- ty, and Mike Trump, Dean of the School of Criminal Justice and Security and Office of International Affairs at the Justice Institute of British Columbia. They thought that government generally, and DND and the CAF in particular, could do more here. First, government should recognize the growing expertise in intel- ligence studies within Canadian academia. Second, government should clearly iden- tify the advanced educational requirements within the various intelligence disciplines. Third, there has to be a greater sense of partnership nurtured between government intelligence organizations and advanced academic institutions, each of which in their own way can be too parochial. The third panel tackled the question: Is it possible to have informed, meaningful and non-partisan public discussion of Canadi- an intelligence issues? The question arises from some frustration with the sometimes hyped and cynical coverage of intelligence issues by Canadian politicians and media, as well as government hesitation to explain its actions in any reasonable way. Panelists Tom Quiggan, a member of the Terrorism and Security Experts of Canada Network; Ian MacLeod, a senior writer with the Ottawa Citizen; and Peg- gy Mason, president of the Rideau Insti- tute and former Canadian Ambassador to the United Nations for Disarmament, all agreed there are valid considerations of security surrounding the release of some information related to intelligence issues, but that there are also many opportunities for government to be more open with the people of Canada in explaining intelligence activity. The international security environment continues to evolve in a less than preferred way, with religious extremism and terror- ism being all too prevalent. In times such as these, there is an even greater need for governments to engage their publics in an overall national intelligence effort. S SecuRITy www.vanguardcanada.com FEBRUARY/MARCH 2015 43