Parties should answer two specific questions as they campaign: How do you understand the current national security threat environment? And what do you propose to do in order to best meet these threats?Justin Tang/The Canadian Press
Wesley Wark is senior fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) and an adjunct professor at the University of Ottawa’s Centre on Public Management and Policy, where he teaches about national security and intelligence. Aaron Shull is managing director and general counsel for CIGI.
The federal election campaign of 2021 will be fought primarily on issues of the economy – and everything else will be a sideshow.
But while this is a perennial feature of Canadian election campaigns, there is one unacknowledged truth lurking in the shadows. Every party that imagines itself to be a (majority) government in waiting understands that once in office, a set of new and complex governance responsibilities awaits it – owing, in part, to the COVID-19 pandemic. Above all else is the foundational duty to provide for national security, and protect Canadians.
In older paradigms of governing, a party in power might draw on a deep well of public trust and a willingness to leave the national security file to elected officials and the career bureaucracy that supports them. That style of governance, however, no longer exists. Trust has been eroded, and paternalistic Ottawa-knows-best attitudes no longer hold. The public is much more engaged on formerly secretive and low-profile issues. The Cold War did not drive this new level of public scrutiny – but the 9/11 era certainly has.
Above all, the very face of contemporary national security is fast changing. The greatest change is that security threats now directly affect the lives of every Canadian – meaning they are not remote issues of geopolitics and incalculable danger, far removed from individual concerns.
Cyberattacks, especially those conducted by organized criminal outfits, target personal identities, personal livelihoods and our collective economic prosperity. Ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure are the new wild west. Digitally enabled foreign interference messes with our democratic processes and injects deliberate disinformation into the swirling online information environment. Foreign states, pursuing their own national security objectives, feel empowered to target populations within Canada to intimidate and coerce opponents and find willing supporters to back their cause.
Cyberespionage is on the rise and is being pursued by sophisticated foreign actors. Our digital infrastructure and the data that flow through it are now targets, and we have to respond by building more protection and resiliency into the system. Data from the public sector, private sector or individuals are not just at risk – they must also be considered a national security asset.
Bad actors at the switch are not our only concern. We now face non-traditional, “actorless” threats that are global in nature. We have learned the hard way – and are still learning – that inadequate preparation and response to a pandemic can have huge consequences on our security, causing economic disruptions, breaking supply chains, opening pathways to economic espionage and creating opportunities for polarizing public debate and malicious behaviour.
Anyone living in the path of a massive forest fire or other extreme weather event knows well that climate change also poses huge security concerns. The Indigenous peoples in Canada’s North are on the front lines of climate change impact. Our understanding of security needs to pivot as rapidly as the situation is evolving.
Political parties and their leadership must not leave doctrines of national security as something to be created only once they’re elected. If they do, they will simply be hostages to inherited legacy programs, or forced to make up policy on the fly. Instead, parties must inform Canadians about their policies on national security so that they can vote on them. A piecemeal approach on the campaign trail is not sufficient, nor are overly generalized statements about broad intentions.
Instead, parties should answer two specific questions as they campaign: How do you understand the current national security threat environment? And what do you propose to do in order to best meet these threats?
The old thinking would have been that no votes can be won on this issue because Canadians don’t really care about national security, and that there are plenty of political pitfalls to the question if it’s not avoided. But Canadians will care – so long as they’re presented with compelling options.
A winning campaign platform should produce a public national security strategy within 60 days of coming to office (it’s been 17 years since one was last issued); it should consult with Canadians about national security threats and responses; and it should start issuing an annual, holistic threat assessment to the public.
Our political parties and their leaders need to recognize that national security is central to governance and to cement their contract with voters by explaining their plans to keep Canadians safe.
Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.