US-CANADA PERMANENT JOINT BOARD ON DEFENSE (PJBD)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 OTTAWA 001508 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/02/2018 TAGS: PREL MARR MOPS CA SUBJECT: US-CANADA PERMANENT JOINT BOARD ON DEFENSE (PJBD) REF: OTTAWA 1068 Classified By: PolMinCouns Scott Bellard, reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) ¶1. (SBU) Summary: Canada hosted the 222nd bi-national Permanent Joint Board on Defense (PJBD) meeting in Quebec City, November 12-14, 2008, with U.S. Chairman George Nethercutt and Canadian Chairman Rick Casson leading the discussions. The PJBD's Record of Decision (ROD) recognized the merit of a measured response to Russian long-range aviation and maritime activity in the Arctic and the Western Hemisphere, took note of the successful first use of the Canada-U.S. (CANUS) Civil Assistance Plan (CAP) in the aftermath of Hurricane Gustav in August 2008, and encouraged the signing of the CANUS Emergency Management Agreement at the earliest opportunity. The ROD endorsed the further development of the CANUS Maritime Defense Plan within the framework emerging from the ongoing Tri-Command Study. The PJBD further expressed support for the collaboration among Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) and its U.S. and other allied counterparts. The ROD also encouraged the CANUS Military Cooperation Committee (MCC) to inventory relevant bi-national and bilateral agreements and arrangements that concern CANUS defense and security cooperation. The PJBD members received briefings on Canada's defense engagement strategy for the Americas, its hosting of the Banff Conference of Defense Ministers of the Americas (CDMA),Canada's political-military engagement with Mexico, and the USG's "Merida Initiative," leading the ROD to urge the two sides to continue their deep collaboration in the hemisphere. End Summary. -------------- - Relations with Russia in a Continental Context -------------- - ¶2. (SBU) ROD Text: The Board discussed Canadian and U.S. relations with Russia in a global and continental context, focusing on the increased tempo of Russian long-range aviation and maritime activity in the Arctic and the Western Hemisphere. The Board recognized the merit of a measured allied response to this activity and recommended increased consultation with allies to foster a common approach. The Board saw the need for ongoing attention to North American aerospace defense and warning. While there cannot yet be "business as usual" with Russia, the Board saw utility for the U.S. and Canada to pursue with Russia common approaches to issues of global concern. 
 ¶3. (C) Discussion: Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) Director General for International Security Donald Sinclair launched the discussion on Russia with the observation that Canada and its partners had over time seen Russia's negative resurgence in Moscow's effective withdrawal from the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) process, its "unreasonable" response to transparent U.S. efforts to expand missile defense into Poland and the Czech Republic, and its insistence on a sphere of privileged influence including Georgia and Ukraine. Russian long-range aviation (LRA) and maritime activity in the Arctic and the hemisphere ought to be seen in this light, Qthe Arctic and the hemisphere ought to be seen in this light, he said. Sinclair attributed current Russian "petulance" to a combination of a deep-seated grievance at not being respected by the West and of self-confidence due to high oil and gas revenues. Russia unfortunately has been fairly effective in using its newfound wealth to drive wedges between the transatlantic and European NATO members, and between European states that do and do not depend on Russian energy, Sinclair observed. ¶4. (C) State WHA/CAN Director Ned Nolan commented that provocative Russian missions and the risk of unscheduled flights affecting civil aviation were causing concern in the U.S. interagency community. He also noted the upswing in Russian naval activity in the Caribbean and its broadening collaboration with Venezuela. However, Nolan stressed, it has been U.S. practice to avoid aggressive intercepts or to overreact to Russian naval activity so as to deny oxygen to Russian and Venezuelan propaganda campaigns. Canadian Commodore Calvin Mofford noted that NORAD earlier had made progress in its effort to get the Russians to file flight plans in advance of long-range flights in the region, but OTTAWA 00001508 002 OF 005 that such cooperation had ended with the invasion of Georgia. ¶5. (C) Looking ahead, Board members agreed that it was up to Canada, the U.S., and other like-minded allies to press NATO members to unify behind some "hard messages" that need to be sent to Russia with one voice, including: NATO is unified in the face of Russian provocations; Russia does not have a veto over which countries join NATO; and, the world rejects Russia's claim to a "sphere of privileged influence" along or near its borders. ¶6. (C) At the same time, Board members agreed, the West must make it clear that it is not seeking to isolate Russia. NORAD, NATO, and other allies and friends can send this message by engaging the Russians where interests are shared, such as Afghanistan, non-proliferation, and search-and-rescue missions in the Arctic. To this end, US NORTHCOM Major General Chris Miller underscored NORAD's willingness to engage Russia in this way, while making it clear that NORAD will not overreact -- or under-react -- to potential threats at or near the approaches to its area of responsibility. NORAD will continue to identify and intercept potential threats, he said. -------------- -------------- Tri-Command Study: Synchronization of Battle Rhythm -------------- -------------- ¶7. (SBU) ROD Text: The Board was briefed on efforts to coordinate among Canada Command, NORAD, and NORTHCOM. The Board noted the lessons learned from the successful first use of the Canada-U.S. Civil Assistance Plan (CAP) in Hurricane Gustav and other recent events. The Board supported the efforts by the commands in building on existing agreements to focus on priority areas, such as information sharing, to enhance the cooperation among the commands and with mission partners in other government departments/agencies. The Board encouraged the signing of the Canada-U.S. Emergency Management Agreement at the earliest opportunity. ¶8. (C) Discussion: Representing Canada Command, Colonel Jack Backstrom opened the discussion of the Tri-Command Study (TCS),noting that the TCS working group had broken the effort into two parts. The first part comprised some sixteen "quick hits" that could be put into effect within the current policy framework over the winter of 2008-09. The second set of issues was more complex, and would require political-level engagement, he said. To illustrate the nature of the TCS' work, Backstrom briefed one of the sixteen quick hits, the Synchronization of Routine and Contingency Activities (Battle Rhythm). ¶9. (C) The briefing underscored the importance of synchronizing battle rhythms among Canada Command, USNORTHCOM, NORAD, and other government departments and agencies (OGDs) when preparing for defense and security operations in the face of man-made and natural disasters. Backstrom described challenges to synchronization emanating from various causes, to include sovereignty issues, political realities, and incongruous command authorities among partners with complementary missions, despite differing organizational structures (Canada Command is organized regionally, while Qstructures (Canada Command is organized regionally, while NORTHCOM is organized functionally),as well as classified connectivity, intelligence and information sharing among partners. U.S. Department of Homeland Security Military Advisor RADM Dan Lloyd observed that incidents with the highest probability of occurring include floods, fires, tornadoes, and hurricanes, all of which would require military support of civil authorities. This fact, he said, further exacerbates challenges to synchronization. ¶10. (C) To illustrate the issue, Backstrom briefed the Tri-Command response in support of civil authorities for the first time under the CANUS Civil Assistance Plan (CAP) when Hurricane Gustav struck the U.S. Gulf Coast on August 30, ¶2008. Having the CAP in place facilitated the initiation, planning, and conduct of operations, he observed, and it pointed to a particular policy lead for activation of the CAP, thereby reinforcing the need for synchronization of military and OGD entities. Backstrom pointed to important areas for improvement, however, including the need for clearer, more unambiguous requests for support, especially OTTAWA 00001508 003 OF 005 given that the CAP does not cover all potential support constructs (for example, bilateral search and rescue agreements are already in place),as well as the need to clarify policies related to the arming of supporting forces for the purpose of self defense. Synchronization of routine and contingency activities will be a major item for discussion at the December 2-3, 2008, Tri-Command staff talks in Colorado Springs, according to Backstrom. -------------- Canada-U.S. Combined Maritime Defense -------------- ¶11. (SBU) ROD Text: The Board discussed the value of coordinating the maritime defense efforts of both nations as well as the relationship between the Combined Defence Plan and the proposed CANUS Maritime Defence Plan. Recognizing the unique requirements of the maritime domain, the Board endorsed the further development of a CANUS Maritime Defense Plan that is in concert with the Combined Defense Plan, the NORAD Maritime Warning Mission, and the framework emerging from the Tri-Command Study. ¶12. (C) Discussion: Canadian Commander Richard Dowker said that Canada Command and NORTHCOM were developing an operational to strategic level CANUS Maritime Defense and Security Plan (MDP),in part leveraging existing plans, agreements, arrangements, and initiatives. The MDP will be deployed alongside the CANUS bilateral Terrorism Combined Defense Plan, NORAD Maritime Warning, and the Civil Assistance Plan to close the gaps in current CANUS planning across the spectrum from defense to security to safety. Dowker requested, and the Board agreed, to recognize the gap in CANUS maritime planning, and to endorse, in principle, the development of a CANUS MDP. -------------- Canada Science and Technology Overview -------------- ¶13. (SBU) ROD Text: The Board was briefed on defense and security science and technology in Canada and the work of Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) and its cooperation with the U.S., the Technical Cooperation Program, and NATO. The Board was also briefed on a number of high-impact projects of relevance to both countries in the plenary session and during a visit to the DRDC's Valcartier facility. The Board supported cooperation and collaboration by DRDC and its counterparts in the U.S. on security, defense, and public safety research and development, and suggested a similar discussion and demonstration be organized by the U.S side at a future PJBD. ¶14. (C) Discussion: DRDC's Dr. Robert Walker briefed the Board on Canadian R&D cooperation with Allies. Walker cited the impressive number of 450 cooperative projects undertaken by DRDC, nearly all including the U.S. either bilaterally, as part of NATO, or within the "ABCA" Technical Cooperation Group (U.S., Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). Projects that Walker touched on included improved protective gear for combatants, "green" munitions, next-generation communications capabilities, and battlefield medical devices. During the tour of the DRDC's Valcartier Qmedical devices. During the tour of the DRDC's Valcartier facilities, Board members witnessed efforts to upgrade the protection of military vehicles against improvised explosive devises (IEDs),including efforts to use high-energy pulses for detection and disruption. -------------- Military Cooperation Commission -------------- ¶15. (SBU) ROD Text: The Board was briefed on the latest meeting of the MCC. The MCC agenda was broad and addressed such issues as engagement in Afghanistan, the Canada-U.S. Threat Assessment, and NORAD's Maritime Warning operations. The Board noted that the MCC will take forward the Canada-U.S. dialogue on arctic cooperation, cooperation in the Americas, and the inventory of relevant military to military agreements and other substantial issues where opportunities for cooperation exist. OTTAWA 00001508 004 OF 005 ¶16. (C) Discussion: In his briefing of MCC activities, Canadian Commodore Gardam outlined the challenge of inventorying relevant bi-national and bilateral agreements and arrangements that concern CANUS defense and security cooperation. The Board expressed interest in this project and asked to be apprised of the MCC's resulting product. -------------- Engagement in the Western Hemisphere -------------- ¶17. (SBU) ROD Text: The Board received a briefing on the Department of National Defence's engagement strategy with the Americas, as well as a report on the 8th Conference of Defense Ministers of the Americas (CDMA) held in Banff in September 2008. The Board noted the success to date and encouraged the continuing cooperation between Canada and the U.S. to promote democratic principles in civil-military institutions within the hemisphere. The Board received an update on the Merida initiative and welcomed Congress' recent appropriation of funds to governments in Mexico as well as central America and the Caribbean, in order to confront transnational crime and gangs, which pose security threats to the hemisphere. Canada provided a report on its third annual political-military talks with Mexico. Canada intends actively to pursue this engagement with Mexico across a wide range of policy issues of mutual interest, including peace support operations and regional and global issues. The Board noted the defense and security opportunities for collaboration in specific countries and on specific issues, and agreed that the Canada-U.S. dialogue on the Americas, specifically on Mexico, remains of great importance. The Board agreed to be seized with and engaged in the hemispheric strategies of both countries. ¶18. (C) Discussion: Canada's Department of National Defence Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Colonel Al Stephenson, briefed Canada's strategy for the Americas. The strategy is meant to refocus a greater share of Canadian military-to-military engagement with the Americas. It fits into Prime Minister Harper's call for whole-of-government engagement in the hemisphere, with the goals of increasing prosperity, consolidating democracy, and protecting the hemisphere from security threats. DFAIT DG Sinclair interjected that PM Harper had just appointed a Minister of State for the Americas and raised the rank of the senior bureaucrat at DFAIT responsible for Canada's relations in the hemisphere. Col. Stephenson noted that the defense element of the national plan features four levels of engagement (reftel): -- partnership countries such as Chile, Argentina, and Brazil are to benefit from a broad range of staff and political-military relations, high-level visits, combined training and exercises, and exchanges of personnel and information. Canada will pursue interoperability with these forces, viewing them as potentially capable, like-minded partners that share common interests with Canada (and the U.S.); -- cooperation countries such as Colombia, Bolivia, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago will benefit from defense relations Qand Trinidad and Tobago will benefit from defense relations through courses, opportune high-level visits, and training activities. Canada will pursue partial interoperability and common tactics and procedures with these countries; -- contact countries such as Barbados and Cuba will be engaged in an effort to develop defense relations through basic defense activities and confidence-building efforts; -- interest countries include small island-states of the Caribbean not mentioned above. Canada will maintain minimal contact with these militaries. ¶19. (C) DFAIT DG Sinclair noted that, apart from the Caribbean, the prospect of concerted relations throughout Latin America was "new" to Canada, and that his government would welcome even more opportunities to gather lessons learned by the U.S. in the region. In response to a question posed by Chairman Nethercutt, Sinclair said that Latin America seemed to lack the "glue of regional architecture." This presented challenges to the U.S. and Canada, as well as *********************** * Missing Section 005 * ***********************