THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, October 22, 2025
The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade met this day at 4:14 p.m. [ET] to examine and report on such issues that may arise from time to time relating to foreign relations and international trade generally.
Senator Peter M. Boehm (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Good afternoon, honourable senators. My name is Peter Boehm. I am a senator from Ontario and the chair of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
[English]
I would ask the committee members participating in today’s meeting to introduce themselves.
Senator Kutcher: Stan Kutcher, Nova Scotia.
Senator Patterson: Rebecca Patterson, Ontario.
Senator Adler: Charles Adler, Manitoba.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Amina Gerba from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Woo: Yuen Pau Woo, British Columbia.
Senator Harder: Peter Harder, Ontario.
Senator Boniface: Gwen Boniface, Ontario. Welcome.
Senator Wilson: Duncan Wilson, British Columbia.
Senator M. Deacon: Marty Deacon, Ontario. Hello.
Senator Al Zaibak: Mohammad Al Zaibak, Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Martine Hébert from Quebec.
[English]
The Chair: Thank you, colleagues. I wanted to note that Senator Patterson of Ontario is with us today in a guest capacity and that Senator Coyle of Nova Scotia is entering the room as I speak. We may have one or two others joining us as we proceed.
Colleagues, I want to welcome all of you as well as those across Canada who may be watching us on Senate ParlVU. Today, we are meeting under our general order of reference to discuss the situation in Ukraine. For our first panel, we are honoured to welcome to this committee — for the first time since presenting his credentials on September 24 to the Governor General — His Excellency Andrii Plakhotniuk, Ambassador, Embassy of Ukraine to Canada. Ambassador, welcome to the committee. Thank you for being with us today.
Before we hear your opening statement and proceed to questions and answers, I would ask everyone present to please mute notifications on your devices and keep your earpiece in the little circle, if it’s not plugged in. If you’re speaking with your earpiece on, do not have the earpiece come close to the microphone. These are for safety reasons, particularly for our interpreters.
Mr. Ambassador, the floor is yours.
His Excellency Andrii Plakhotniuk, Ambassador, Embassy of Ukraine to Canada, as an individual: Dear Mr. Chair — the Honourable Senator Boehm — and distinguished senators and members of the standing committee.
[Translation]
Thank you very much for this opportunity to address the committee and to update its distinguished members on the current situation in Ukraine. It is my profound honour and great privilege to be here today. With your kind permission, I will continue in English.
[English]
Let me start with words of sincere gratitude for Canada’s consistent and strong leadership in supporting Ukraine.
Canada was among the very first countries to recognize Ukraine’s independence on December 2, 1991. Since then, our two states have been close friends and allies. Our friendship is deep and strong, as it is based on shared values and warm people-to-people ties rooted in the Ukrainian-Canadian community of almost 1.4 million people.
In this regard, I wish to use this opportunity to sincerely thank all the Senate members for unanimously supporting the draft law, sponsored by the Honourable Senator Kutcher, which designates the month of September as Ukrainian heritage month.
Since the start of the full-scale Russian military invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, Canada has been demonstrating strong leadership in supporting Ukraine, being the largest financial contributor per capita among G7 countries. We are sincerely grateful to Canada’s G7 presidency for prioritizing Ukraine, as well as for Prime Minister Carney’s first visit to Ukraine on our Independence Day which was August 24.
We will never forget the following: the first tranche of the microfinancial support we received from Canada; the first Leopard 2 tanks delivered to Ukraine were from Canada; and the Canadian Armed Forces have trained over 46,000 of the Ukrainian military in the framework of Operation UNIFIER.
Canada is a strong leader in continuous support of the sanctions regime against Russia and a valuable participant of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group as well as the coalition of the willing. Canada is an active member of the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List, or PURL, initiative, allocating $500 million for strengthening the defence capabilities of Ukraine.
We highly appreciate all these and many other efforts, including Canada’s leadership and co-chairmanship in the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children. In this regard, let me once again sincerely thank all the Senate members for the adoption of the motion, tabled by Senator Kutcher and seconded by Senator Ravalia, on condemnation of all Russian attacks on Ukrainian children and interference in their lives.
Honourable senators, unfortunately, the war is still going on, as Putin has no will for peace. These days, the Russians use every single day to strike our energy infrastructure, targeting gas extraction facilities, coal mines and electric power grids. The Russian terrorists are shelling and bombing civilian areas far from the front line — critical power infrastructure — which is a clear act of genocide and a war crime.
Since the start of Russia’s full-scale armed aggression, more than 50% of Ukraine’s energy capacity has been destroyed, damaged or occupied. According to the latest World Bank assessment, the needs for restoring Ukraine’s energy sector amount to about US$68 billion.
Ukraine’s most urgent needs today are to restore its energy sector and its critical infrastructure, as well as financial support to cover our gas shortages to survive this winter. Any immediate contribution to that end is crucially important.
Any war is about numbers and stocks. Any war is also about technological race. To win this war, we desperately need to increase the number of weapons and to refill our stocks.
Our long-standing top priority is air defence, missile defence against ballistic threats, deep strike capabilities, combat aircraft, artillery systems, long-range missiles, electronic warfare systems, engineering equipment, drones, ammunition, et cetera.
Ukraine is ramping up arms production both domestically and in cooperation with our partners. Currently, about 60% of the weapons in the hands of the Ukrainian military are produced in Ukraine. We need to produce more weapons. Ukraine is ready to develop joint production of defence matériel with our partners, including Canada.
In this regard, Canada’s continued military and financial assistance to Ukraine in the framework of our bilateral security agreement is crucial. We will be extremely grateful if the new aid packages of at least the same size as last year will be included in the federal budget for the 2026 fiscal year.
Honourable senators, Ukraine wants just, comprehensive and lasting peace like no other country in the world but stands ready to continue its fight for freedom and independence, as we have no other choice to survive. We strongly support President Trump’s efforts to stop the fighting immediately on the current line of contact.
Unfortunately, Putin wants to continue killing and destruction. He will only stop when he is forced to. We must maintain the increased pressure on Russia’s economy and its defence industry until Putin is ready to start bona fide negotiations on peace.
We must develop mechanisms to use the full value of Russia’s immobilized sovereign assets so that Ukraine has the resources it needs. In this regard, we are sincerely grateful to Canada for providing C$5 billion of the G7’s $50-billion initiative — the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration, or ERA, mechanism — from the profits of the Russian immobilized assets.
We hope that Canada will maintain its leadership and create a global legal precedent according to the international law by adopting the draft law, which is sponsored by the Honourable Senator Dasko, on a review of the possibility to allow the confiscation of frozen sovereign and sanctioned assets through a simplified executive-led procedure.
We should substantially strengthen the sanctions regime and target shadow tanker fleet, as well as key sectors of the Russian economy: the military-industrial complex, energy, the metallurgical industry, the nuclear and chemical industries and the IT and financial sectors. Further bold international steps to exclude the possibilities for Moscow to circumvent sanctions are also overdue.
In this regard, we hope that the Canadian government will soon announce a new strong sanctions package, including in alignment with those imposed by Ukraine.
Honourable senators, Russia must not prevail. Ensuring Ukraine’s victory in the war is a central pillar of any credible strategy to address the Russian threat. Moscow will only be willing to engage in genuine negotiations when and if the Kremlin sees its current strategy failing.
Russia is weakened. Despite the Russian propaganda claims, Russia is not winning, and Ukraine is not losing the war. In 2025, Russia has occupied less than 1% of the Ukrainian territory. Meanwhile, Ukraine has liberated 183 square kilometres.
Therefore, we should multiply our joint efforts to put pressure on Putin and make him stop this war. This is the only way. The concept of “peace through strength” has proven its effectiveness multiple times throughout the world’s history. Now it is time to use it once again.
Thank you for your attention. I stand ready to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much, ambassador. I’d like to acknowledge that Senator MacDonald of Nova Scotia has joined us.
Colleagues, I want to remind you that you will each have a maximum of only three minutes for the first round. This includes the questions and answers.
[Translation]
Therefore, to members and our witness, please be concise. We can always go to a second round if we have time.
[English]
Senator Kutcher: Thank you, ambassador, for being with us today. It’s my opinion that democracies and the international rule of law are under attack globally, and Ukraine is the canary in the coal mine for Western democracies. The war is not only about Ukraine’s survival and must end with Ukrainian victory, but it is also a war that has to be won to ensure the democratic experience continues.
My question has two parts. The first part of the question is: What are Ukraine’s military priority asks? How can Canada best respond to these asks?
The second part of the question is: Free trade between our two countries has a solid agreement and framework to work on. What are your thoughts on how Canadians can better invest in Ukraine?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Honourable Senator Kutcher, thank you very much for your question. When it comes to our most urgent priorities, our military asks and what we are working on, I have just stated that. Once again, what we are talking about — and these needs are always and very frequently submitted to all our partners through different channels — is certainly air defence systems on the one side and also deep strike capabilities.
Ahead of the winter period, the main idea now is definitely to protect Ukrainian civilians. This is task number one, and we are doing everything possible so that we save people’s lives. Certainly, we need everything like any country that faces continental warfare. We are profoundly grateful to all the assistance we receive, and certainly we prioritize the assistance. I would prioritize these three things: air defence, deep strike capabilities and ammunition.
When it comes to your second question regarding what can be done to ensure investment, there are different ways to make investment happen, and certainly we understand the current risk of doing business in Ukraine. My message to all our friends in Canada here is we should use each and every opportunity to start business in Ukraine with Ukraine. When I say “with Ukraine,” I mean to start business in neighbouring countries. My major message is not to wait when there’s time and when we have post-war reconstruction efforts. We need your presence now. We need your good advice, and we need capacity building and many other things.
When it comes to achieving practical methods, we have certain instruments; we are definitely talking about war risk insurance. We are talking here about Export Development Canada and about FinDev Canada to find ways to support the implementation of projects in Ukraine.
The Chair: Thank you, ambassador.
Senator Al Zaibak: Congratulations, ambassador, for your appointment here.
Ambassador, earlier this year, in April 2025, Ukraine and the United States signed a landmark 50-50 joint reconstruction investment fund agreement centred on Ukraine’s critical minerals and oil and gas resources in exchange for U.S. contribution to future military assistance and the premise of protection against further Russian aggression.
Could you please update this committee on what tangible outcomes or progress has emerged from this agreement in terms of protecting Ukraine and deterring against further Russian aggression?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you very much for this question. This is a milestone agreement that was negotiated with our American friends and partners. The most recent update that I have is we are moving forward when it comes to institutionalizing how the system will work with these mechanisms and joint body. When Prime Minister Yuliia Svyrydenko travelled to Washington a week ago, she continued these discussions with the Secretary of the Treasury. Sorry, I have no further details about that.
When it comes to deterrence, we are working on that to ensure that all our partners continue to be engaged in the Ukrainian cause.
Senator Al Zaibak: Switching to another topic, which you referred to in your remarks, according to the RCMP, Canada has frozen about $140 million of Russian state assets. What are your recommendations regarding the legal and diplomatic pathways for expropriating these assets and redirecting them toward defending or rebuilding Ukraine?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: That’s another most important question for us because we’ve been promoting the idea that we should use the body of the Russian sovereign assets in order to use it for the needs that Ukraine now has, especially for reconstruction efforts.
When it comes to the legal perspective of this issue, certainly it is absolutely crucial for all of us to find the formula to ensure everything is perfect from this point of view. The Russian state wouldn’t come to the courts and have the rulings that would destroy the system, which would make it impossible for all of us to use these assets.
The important thing that we extremely urge all of our partners to do is get engaged in real negotiations and find the solution that will be acceptable for all of us and will help us use this money for very good purposes in Ukraine. In the long run, Russia should be held accountable for what it is doing in Ukraine.
Senator Coyle: Welcome to the Senate and welcome to Canada. We’re very happy to have you here.
You’ve been very clear on what is needed. I’m interested to know: On the ground in Ukraine at this moment, how is the population feeling, just to get a sense of the Ukrainian population? How much of an impact, if any, is the Russian misinformation machine having on Ukraine directly and Ukrainians and also in the surrounding countries?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Dear senator, thank you very much for this question. When it comes to people, certainly people are very tired, especially when we have these combined missile attacks every day. Even yesterday, we had more than 430 missiles and drones targeting our civilian infrastructure. A kindergarten was targeted in my native city of Kharkiv, and we have two children who were killed. That’s how we see and feel and what we think about the atrocities that Russia brings to our home.
At the same time, people remain united because we have suffered a lot, and we are defending our country. We have no right to be tired, and we have to continue because the resilience of Ukrainians is well known to the outside world, but we need to continue.
When it comes to disinformation methods, what we see now is Russia increased its budget for next year for this kind of propaganda work, and it sends a clear signal that whenever they’re not efficient and effective on the battlefield, they will use these hybrid means to target all our partners in the international community in order to send disinformation and to disseminate this kind of fake news. We will be fighting together with partners and try to explain, but we need everyone together with us to counter this propaganda.
Senator Boniface: Welcome. At this point of the war, what forms of economic pressure are really needed on the Russian economy to try to get us to a solution?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you very much for this question, dear senator. First, when we are thinking about the Russian economy, we should be fully aware of the fact that what they produce in their official statistics is not true. The situation is certainly different from that, but we should bear in mind two considerations: They managed to survive during sanctions, they managed to adapt their economy and their economy works. Nobody is taking into consideration the needs of ordinary Russians. They are investing everything into their military economy.
When we talk about economic pressure, we are talking primarily about sanctions. I mentioned this in my brief remarks. Everything is understandable. We need to work hard together with partners in order to have a united front on sanctions, to target their shadow fleet, to target their oil and gas industry and certainly to create opportunities when they have no chance to circumvent the sanctions. Certainly, we should be targeting industry that supports their military and wartime efforts.
Senator Boniface: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Welcome to Canada, Your Excellency.
Last June, Canada renewed access to the Canadian market for Ukrainian products by extending the tariff exemption on Ukrainian imports in the current context, where the country has been severely affected by the war.
My first question would be, how is the business ecosystem functioning in Ukraine today? Is it in recovery mode? Do the exemptions we’re announcing here complement the free trade agreement between Canada and Ukraine? How is the Ukrainian economy doing?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you very much for this question. When it comes to this important decision on the tax exemption, I would like to mention only one thing. Whatever is being done to support Ukrainian exports and to show solidarity with Ukraine truly means a lot because it changes the situation on the ground. We are talking about foreign revenues, taxation and supporting the families of Ukrainians who are working very hard in Ukraine.
When it comes to the way businesses operate in Ukraine, I would call it survival mode. We are thinking about recovery. We are trying to do whatever we can, but it’s about survival. At the same time, when it comes to business, I would like to reflect on one initiative by Ukraine, which we are now realizing, which is called the Grain from Ukraine initiative. It is about exporting Ukrainian food products to those countries that need it desperately. We ensured this quota goes by our military with support from our partners from NATO, like Bulgaria, Türkiye and Romania. We demand the sea lanes but we are exporting. We are growing in export and we are supporting the countries, sending a clear signal that we want and will be a strong contributor to international food security.
Whenever we find the opportunity, we are not afraid of challenges. We are not afraid of threats. We are supporting ourselves, and we keep our economy afloat. When it comes to government and the national bank and currency, it’s operating. We are all operating, despite all the difficulties. Certainly, it’s with support, specifically microfinancial support from all our partners, in particular with our words of gratitude once again to Canada.
Senator Harder: Thank you, ambassador. I’d like to ask whether or not Ukraine asked that the contract for the refurbishing of military vehicles be cancelled.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you very much for this question. What I can present here, addressing distinguished senators, is that certainly when it comes to defence matériel, we would be happy and be grateful for any kind of system we can get. Ukraine’s armed forces managed to muster 600 pieces of defence matériel. When it comes to this specific contract, this issue should be addressed to the Ministry of Defence. Certainly, we will continue working to receive new packages of assistance, not only thinking of generous donations from the Canadian government but also thinking about how to produce more.
Senator Harder: If I could move to another aspect of equipment, did President Zelenskyy ask for Tomahawk missiles?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Yes, we asked. We are trying to use everything we have. Sometimes people say we have a zoo when it comes to defence matériel because everything is from everywhere. I’m not military, but I think it’s important to use everything in tactics.
When we receive any kind of equipment from our partners, we will try to integrate it into our system.
Senator Harder: Did you discuss this with the Americans with respect to Tomahawk missiles?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Yes, absolutely, and deep strike capabilities. We discussed and mentioned it publicly by the President. It’s important, and, ultimately, not only this but also Patriot systems. We want to buy Patriot systems with the support of our partners. We are talking to our German friends to get their capabilities and defence matériel. It is constant work. We will continue to present new arguments in order to get everything we need.
Senator Harder: Could I ask about the ongoing discussions with the Americans? Do you anticipate a presidential meeting with President Putin in the near future?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: I can refer only to what the official sources from the United States comment on that, which is that the meeting and diplomacy should be prepared and bring deliverables and good results so that the members and teams can implement it.
As of now, Putin will try to use this time and will try to sell something new, but frankly speaking, I don’t see that this meeting will take place in the near future.
Senator Harder: Thank you.
Senator Adler: Everyone here respects you as a professional diplomat, but everyone here has compassion for you because you are Ukrainian.
The question I have for you, sir, is more than toward diplomacy. It goes to your Ukrainian heart. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that President Putin wants to reconstitute the ancient Soviet Union, including every single acre of Ukraine. Does your heart think or feel that President Putin has changed his mind about wanting every single acre of Ukraine?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Senator, in my humble opinion, he is trying to reassemble the Russian Empire. Second, no matter what happens — because I’ve been dealing with Russia since 2014 to 2020 — no one in Ukraine will ever trade our territories, never. Despite everything, despite the hardships, the military will stand strong on the battlefield, in the trenches and on the front line. This is about our kids, our parents and our grandchildren. It is so existential for us.
He will continue. He will not stop — I mean Putin. For him, the success story of Ukraine — I mean success story — as democratic, free, independent and prosperous is an existential threat for his people and for his regime. So we will continue to stand strong. We have demonstrated it throughout these years, and we will continue.
Certainly, we will rely on international partners, but what is important to mention here and what we are really doing now is we are transforming ourselves from being a net recipient of generous assistance to being a provider of knowledge and technologies and a partner who stands ready to share its experience on how to deal with challenges, not only military challenges and threats but also economic, disinformation, the cultural front and many other things.
Senator Adler: From my Canadian heart, we love you very much. We love the people of Ukraine, and we wish you all the best. We’ll do whatever we can to be helpful.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you very much, dear senator. We have the same feelings to Canada and to Canadians.
The Chair: Thank you. It’s appropriate and touching.
Senator Patterson: Thank you for giving me an opportunity to ask a question.
Ambassador, it’s always good to see you. We’ve talked a lot about military hardware, but we know there is a cost on Ukrainian people: on your soldiers, on your wounded, on your veterans, on your families and on your children. Are you able to provide a priority for us in terms of support in the health and psychosocial domain? What are your priorities?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Dear senator, thank you very much for your question. When it comes to most urgent priorities in the medical sphere or veterans’ issues and affairs, the gravity of the challenges is absolutely enormous because we face the shortage of personnel. We are talking with partners about capacity building, and certainly when it comes to veterans’ care and issues, as of now we have about 1.5 million veterans since 2014. When the war is over, we anticipate we will have 5 million to 6 million.
The range of problems and challenges is absolutely challenging because we start with prosthetics, economic and social integration and medical, psychological and physical rehabilitation. Then other issues that are very important are how to integrate them into society and how to treat the pain of their families. This is a very complex issue, and we are really looking for partnerships.
We have such partnerships, but we will further build on them in order to have more cooperation on capacity building and on the implementation of specific projects, not only here in Canada bilaterally but also with the participation of third countries that are like-minded from Europe or from Asia. This is also a priority issue for us.
Senator Patterson: Thank you very much. One thing that we do know is: As horrifying as it is to go through war, we learn a lot on the medical and health care front about how to care better for all of us. One thing you mentioned previously is about sharing your experiences. I’m wondering where Ukraine is headed in terms of research and data collection so that we can start generating lessons to share and we can learn to be better prepared, should we also face the same type of aggression.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: When it comes to data collection, certainly we have different projects that are implemented with the financial support and intellectual contribution of all our partners. But when it comes to this practical experience that we share, I know that we have so many delegations at various levels that come to Ukraine or invite us by our international partners. We share this experience.
What is more important is this experience is translated in very practical textbooks, which are translated and then practically implemented either in the armed forces or in rehabs. We will continue to do that, but we need to somehow get impetus and have more research in this area. Certainly, we need resources for that.
The Chair: Thank you, ambassador.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you for the opportunity. We’ve heard a little bit about family, health and kids. I would like to ask you a little bit more about the young people who are Ukrainian and are in different places in Russia right now. We’ve heard some high numbers. We’ve also heard that Melania Trump will work with Putin to help displaced children, which I find so disturbing, even the use of the language there. At least it reminds us of these young people.
I’m wondering if today you have a sense of the total number of children who are missing and the return potential, or anything you can share. We hear different numbers in the news clips on it.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: It’s one of the most painful issues for Ukrainians because according to our investigation and law enforcement agencies, we have up to 20,000 abducted children. In other words, they were kidnapped. The problem is very difficult. Why? Because what they do is change biometric data. They force the families to adopt these children, and they change names and everything, and they are all over Russia.
Another challenge in this regard is certainly that they are hiding this information. We are working not only with governments — and certainly we are grateful for the strong leadership of Canada in the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children, but we are also grateful to all partners from all continents for their good services when it comes to discussing with Russians the way to return our children back home. These are our children. We will fight until the moment when we return all of them.
Another challenge in this regard is also that some institutions, especially private institutions, now desperately need funding which is engaged in all technologies and research, trying to find and trying to locate the children in Russia. This is a very complex issue, but once again, we need unity, continuous pressure, permanent attention and a high level of awareness among all partners. These issues are really crucial for Ukraine and for the outside world.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you.
Senator Woo: Good afternoon, ambassador. In the aftermath of the meeting between President Zelenskyy and President Trump, the EU put together an emergency aid package to help Ukraine, as I understand it, acquire military equipment that they couldn’t have acquired otherwise. Is it the idea, then, that this money is essentially used to buy equipment from Europeans that they wouldn’t provide gratis or that this money is used to buy equipment from the Americans that the Americans would not have otherwise provided?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: After the meeting of President Zelenskyy with President Trump, all of us saw the strong statement by European leaders when it comes to peace for Ukraine, supporting President Trump’s commitment to achieve an early ceasefire. On the other side, there are clear messages regarding the territorial integrity and sovereignty. Now we are ready to work with our partners on various mechanisms regarding how to receive what we want. If some of our partners feel that they are not ready any longer to provide this assistance as a generous donation, we will continue to work with them in order to receive this equipment using different credits like leasing and other things, and definitely we will ask other partners in Europe to support us doing this.
We need good weapons. We need strong defence for Ukraine. We will be working using different mechanisms with Europe and with the United States.
Senator Woo: Is it the case that there are some weapon systems that the Americans are not willing to provide unless they were bought and paid for, if I can put it that way?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: There are a number of defence equipment produced only by the United States. Certainly, we have strong European and Asian producers of defence matériel, but we understand what we need. We have the experience of how to use this weaponry, and we are ready to provide our feedback to the defence industry. We talked to the partners who have these weaponry systems.
Senator Woo: Thank you.
Senator Wilson: Your Excellency, I’m curious about the Russian propaganda machine, and we have talked about many aspects of the war. It seems to me that until the Russian people start to rise up and revolt against Putin and what he is doing, it is going to be very difficult for us to break parts of this logjam. I’m curious to know what successes you may have had breaking through the propaganda machine and to what extent the Russian people are actually getting the message of what is happening. Is there more that can be done specifically to counteract the disinformation campaign?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: First, the disinformation is also connected with cybersecurity. Every day, we face constant cyberattacks on our infrastructure. We support our partners with technical and financial support. We manage to cope with the threats, but it’s a matter of strong coordination and cooperation.
When it comes to Russian society and its response to huge losses of their military, they have lost more than 1 million people in this war of aggression. Frankly speaking, we don’t see many peace rallies and demonstrations demanding him to stop. This is the issue that we should take into consideration: As of today, the number of casualties and the problems with their economy and with social supports for their people hasn’t resulted in demonstrations against this war. It doesn’t happen.
When it comes to our access to Russian citizens, we are trying our best to have our messages be sent to the temporarily occupied territories so that our citizens have our information and understand that we are really working hard to achieve peace and bring all these territories back to our country. It is very difficult because they have countermeasures and are working against our influence. But certainly it requires, once again, a lot of financial contributions and permanent attention from all agencies involved all over the world. It is a problem that refers and relates to all of us.
I would say whenever they find our weakness — our lack of coordination — they will try to use it to disseminate information of a false nature to send signals and to make everything such that we have no unity. Unity is absolutely important and crucial for all of us — unity here, unity in Europe and unity in Asia — when it comes to upholding international law and when it comes to speaking out loud what is happening in Ukraine about this war of aggression, about suffering and about ordinary people.
The Chair: Thank you. We’re at the end of the first round, but I’m going to use my privilege as chair to ask a question as well, ambassador.
In the room, we have got a number of colleagues and individuals who have experience in preparing high-level international meetings. You have a very hard-working embassy here. You, like many of your counterparts around the world, appear before legislatures such as this one. Of course, your President is constantly either going to a summit or coming back from one or receiving leaders in Kyiv.
What is the state of your foreign ministry? It is like you are going at 200% all the time. Do you have a relève — as we say in French — and do you have others who are being recruited to help? What about the internal machinery and the esprit de corps?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Mr. Chair, we are wartime ambassadors. When it comes to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and diplomatic service and presence, it is arranged according to wartime realities. Certainly, when it comes to manpower and the means that we have and can operate, certainly we need and we try to find each and every person, especially young ones, to engage and to bring new and bright minds to our structure.
Certainly, sometimes it is very challenging, but at the same time, we understand here in Ottawa and everywhere that our colleagues in Kyiv spend their time at night — and not only at night — in shelters. They send instructions. They are committed. We have no other way to use the scarce resources that we have to achieve maximum results. That’s all about us and our families. It is challenging, but we manage to meet this challenge, and we will certainly overcome that. But we are working with young students. The minister travels everywhere, trying to bring new blood to the ministry and to have new ideas.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Kutcher: Thank you very much again. I’m going to change the discussion a little bit. It is my understanding that there are a number of illegally imprisoned Ukrainian citizens — non-combatants — who belong to the category of prisoners who need immediate medical attention. They are political prisoners who have been tortured and who have been abducted by Russian forces. What work can Canada do to bear or raise international awareness of this challenging problem, and is there anything that Canada can do to help solve this problem?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Dear senator, this is another evil practice that we have been seeing since 2014. It is about civilian detainees, but I sometimes use the word “hostages.” So these people are kept. No international organizations or volunteers with knowledge of this have access to them. We have been fighting for that for 11 years now to provide access, medical service and opportunities for them to return and to get medical treatment.
What our partners and friends here and what politicians in Canada can do is definitely participate in this advocacy campaign to raise awareness, to try to build unity and to send the signal that these people are not forgotten. It is very hard. Most certainly, the Russian authorities will not respond. But at the same time, it’s by mounting and by having more and more pressure and by communicating regularly that this is a serious problem and that these are civilians — they are not combatants or prisoners of war. They should be released immediately, and regarding the access of international organizations — whether it be the Red Cross or other organizations — we need to talk about this. The more we talk, the more chances we have that they finally will be released, hopefully alive.
Senator Kutcher: Thank you.
Senator Al Zaibak: As someone who has followed both conflicts closely and many other conflicts, I can’t help but note certain parallels between the war in Ukraine and the earlier war in Syria that was prolonged for 10 years because of the Russian intervention, particularly Russia’s direct military intervention and its use of indiscriminate aerial bombardment and the deliberate targeting of civilians and infrastructure to break morale.
From your perspective, how does Ukraine understand Russia’s operational behaviour in light of its record in Syria? Do you see a continuation of its similar tactics of prolonged war and, for example, the systematic targeting of hospitals, energy grids and residential areas being replicated in Ukraine?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Yes, senator. I think the message they use, they have been using for centuries. Absolutely barbaric warfare and a lot of atrocities, blood and pain is how we can characterize their military efforts.
We clearly understand what is going on. I think that what they are going to do is try to redirect international attention from the war in Ukraine and try to create conflicts all over the world so that more and more attention will be refocused to other areas.
Sometimes they create crises and then they provide their services to act as a mediator. It is clearly seen. They create and they support these efforts to create chaos and do other things, and then they say, “We can solve the issue and solve the problem. Please talk to us.”
We see that. We work with partners who also see that. We are working on that. Certainly, the main idea is to do everything possible so that they stop what they are doing in Ukraine and elsewhere. If they are present somewhere, then we will be thinking of something very bad to happen in the future.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Coyle: I’m going to switch the topic a little bit, ambassador, to the humanitarian situation within the country.
We have been told in our briefing that the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has estimated in Ukraine, there are 13 million Ukrainians, or about a third of the country, needing humanitarian assistance. Could you describe for us the nature of that need? What sort of humanitarian assistance is needed? Who is helping out with providing that? Are you able to get it to the people in the Russian-occupied areas? What is the situation there and then the areas on the front line as well?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: This war has resulted in internally displaced people, and many of them had to leave their homes which, on many occasions, were simply destroyed. They had to settle temporarily in other territories, which have been considered relatively safe. But now we face Russian missiles that sometimes reach even the areas in western Ukraine.
Certainly, the number of challenges that we are facing and we are trying to solve with our partners is starting with educational facilities, housing and business opportunities just to solve their everyday problems. The regions are now better prepared to receive new Ukrainians coming from the areas close to the battlefield, but the number of challenges is certainly very big.
When it comes to support, United Nations organizations are actively working in Ukraine. Sometimes they are also targeted by Russian drones in order to create this kind of chaos and to decrease their activities in Ukraine. But the point is that we need to accumulate funds to support the project activities of these agencies. I’m talking about the Red Cross, the World Food Programme and other agencies. They are working.
When it comes to temporarily occupied territories, I’m more than confident that we have no access, and our humanitarian organizations have no access and cannot reach the people who need this assistance. Sometimes people try and manage to communicate with their relatives in the temporarily occupied territories as well as to former colleagues. Sometimes it is very helpful when it comes to returning people from occupation. But there’s no major access, and I don’t think that any kind of aid has been provided on a regular basis to Ukrainians who live in the temporarily occupied territories.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Mr. Plakhotniuk, I would like to know one thing: Given the Russian disinformation, what is the psychological state of young people? How are they reacting to this disinformation? What motivates them today? What is the state of mind of Ukrainian youth today?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Ukrainian youth continue to study and continue to find their place in this very difficult life of Ukraine. It is a very challenging time.
When we are talking about disinformation, it is not the thing that we started yesterday or two years ago. We started to target Russian media outlets, which are not media as we understand they should be. They are propaganda machines. We targeted them with sanctions back in 2015. We started to work very actively, and we started to decrease the influence not only on ordinary Ukrainians but also, in particular, on Ukrainian kids and teenagers.
Most certainly, almost every family has relatives — they have parents, brothers and, generally speaking, relatives — who are fighting on the battlefield. Many families have lost their relatives as a result of this war. But, certainly, we face a lot of challenges.
One of the challenges when it comes to youth is certainly to provide them with many more opportunities when it comes to education. Education is very important. They have to study online, and they have to study in shelters. As a result of this war, we feel the lack of trained professors and teachers. Many of them, especially women, have left Ukraine, saving the lives of their children. This is the kind of challenge that we are working very hard on: how to provide more knowledge and how to introduce new methodology.
Another issue that is seriously discussed in Ukraine, by the way, is that the level of mathematics and how the students have their grades is absolutely not sufficient for them to find their place in life. There are a number of challenges, but we in Ukraine — well, every ministry and every person in charge of the ministry — have to solve numerous challenges every day.
They have to solve challenges when it comes to school, when it comes to heating, when it comes to finding professionals, when it comes to finding shelter and when it comes to ensuring that our kids have access to education. It is also very difficult, but we are working on that. Certainly, once again, it’s with great support and solidarity from our partners — not only government but also private initiatives are very important.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Harder: Thank you, ambassador. I want to follow up on one of your comments about the Ukrainian diaspora living in neighbouring countries. There have been reports of increasing frustration, I guess, from host governments due to the long length of time that this is going on, and perhaps even from host societies. Could you give us a bit of an update on the state of bilateral relations with some of your neighbours? I’m thinking particularly of Hungary and Poland, but I would welcome any comments that you would make. I mean, it is rather odd that your neighbours are also our allies at NATO, and we are to be aligned.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: When President Zelenskyy came to his office as the head of state, one of the major tasks that he instructed his diplomatic team, certainly the Minister for Foreign Affairs, was that we should have good neighbourly relations with all our neighbours in Europe, and we have been working constantly on that. We have no other way to work with our neighbours because the relations with neighbours are most important for us.
When it comes to Poland, Hungary and Slovakia — by the way, we had a very excellent discussion that happened a couple of days ago. Our Prime Minister visited Slovakia, and it is important that we discussed a number of issues that resulted in a number of very practical agreements and very practical economics that will bring tangible results to people, such as different projects on energy infrastructure, on support of these transborder links and so on and so forth.
We will be working with Poland on this important issue of our joint history. It is important, and it is difficult, but we stand ready to address the challenges and bring new arguments, and I think I can state this: Throughout these years, we have always been very constructive in working at different levels: at the level of the President, at the level of government, at the level of the institution and at the level of civil society and scientists. This issue should be discussed. This issue should be addressed, but we should be fully aware that we have common threats that we should be ready to cope with, because these threats are not coming from Ukraine. These threats come from Russia.
Senator Harder: Is that threat shared by Prime Minister Orbán?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Dear senator, being a civil servant at the foreign service for almost 30 years — I’m sorry for quoting myself — we will be working with them. We will be opening new trade routes. We will be opening new transborder cooperation. At the same time, we will be working with national minorities that we have, providing them with equal opportunities. We will see. We are not afraid of these challenges. We will be working with them. Hungary is very important, like all our neighbours, and we need all of them united when it comes to the Ukrainian cause and when it comes to our future membership in the EU and NATO. We will be working. That’s what we are paid for — I mean diplomats.
The Chair: Thank you very much, ambassador. That was a great response to Senator Harder’s question and brought back a sense of nostalgia for some of us.
Ambassador, on behalf of the committee, I would really like to thank you for being with us today. We were honoured by your presence, and I want to thank you for responding to our questions. We wish you good luck on your assignment in Canada. With that good luck will come an invitation to come and see us again in the future. So I thank you.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Mr. Chair and honourable senators, I’m truly honoured and privileged to address this distinguished audience, and I stand ready 24-7 whenever you need me to provide feedback and to provide our personal feelings and personal notes about what is going on in Ukraine and how we continue to fight for our independence and dignity — freedom and dignity, which are two words that characterize Ukrainians.
The Chair: Thank you.
[Translation]
Colleagues, for our second panel, from Global Affairs, we welcome back Alexandre Lévêque, Assistant Deputy Minister, Europe, Middle East and Arctic Branch, and Martin Larose, Director General, International Security Policy and Strategic Affairs Bureau.
[English]
Welcome back, Mr. Lévêque. You are a frequent visitor here. I suspect we will be seeing you here as a witness on a number of issues. It is good to have you back. Mr. Larose, you are in a newer assignment, so you have just started in that capacity. Share opening statements, please. Mr. Lévêque, you have the floor.
Alexandre Lévêque, Assistant Deputy Minister, Europe, Middle East and Arctic Branch, Global Affairs Canada: Thank you very much for the warm welcome back. It’s always a pleasure to join this esteemed committee. Mr. Chair and honourable senators, I want to begin by thanking you for the opportunity to speak today about the situation in Ukraine and Canada’s ongoing response.
[Translation]
Russia’s large-scale invasion is now in its fourth year, and it has been more than 10 years since Russia started this brutal conflict.
The situation in Ukraine remains critical. Russian forces continue their slow but devastating advance. Russian drone and missile strikes have increased significantly since June, and recent weeks have seen a marked intensification of attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. The humanitarian toll is overwhelming.
[English]
This year — 2025 — has seen efforts to bring the parties to the negotiating table, but these have yet to lead to a cessation of hostilities. While Ukraine has agreed to an unconditional ceasefire, Russia has not and continues its maximalist demands that run counter to international law.
[Translation]
Canada’s position remains unequivocal: We strongly support Ukraine in its fight for sovereignty, territorial integrity and long-term security in the face of possible future aggression by Russia. Our commitment is based on the principles of a rules-based international order and the belief that peace must be just, sustainable and based on accountability.
[English]
Canada has consistently been among top donors since 2022. Whole-of-government assistance has totalled almost $22 billion in multi-faceted support, including financial, military, humanitarian, recovery and reconstruction, security and stabilization and immigration assistance. Canada is providing critical assistance to displaced populations, war-affected communities and civil society organizations working on the ground. We are currently prioritizing energy support, democratic governance, social protection and economic growth.
In recent months, Canada has significantly expanded its support. At the G7 summit in Kananaskis, Prime Minister Carney announced additional support, including the final tranche of our $5-billion reconstruction loan funded through interest on frozen Russian assets and $2 billion in military equipment, such as advanced drone and counter-drone technologies, air defence systems and joint production initiatives between Canadian and Ukrainian industries.
Canada is also leading efforts to address the human dimension of the war. We co-chair the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children and the Kyiv-based Working Group on the Release of Prisoners and Deported Persons. These initiatives are vital, confidence-building measures and humanitarian imperatives. Just last month, President Zelenskyy and Prime Minister Carney co-hosted a high-level meeting of the coalition on the margins of the UN General Assembly, where over 50 delegations reaffirmed their commitment to these efforts.
[Translation]
We continue to support Ukraine’s path toward EU membership and Euro-Atlantic integration, and we remain active in multilateral forums, including the G7, NATO and the Coalition of the Willing. Canada has committed to providing scalable military assistance to Ukraine following a ceasefire, and we are working closely with our international partners to ensure that reconstruction efforts are transparent, inclusive and consistent with Ukraine’s European aspirations.
Finally, Canada is strengthening sanctions against Russia, targeting more than 200 ships and dozens of entities that are helping Moscow circumvent the sanctions. These measures are designed to further weaken Russia’s ability to sustain its war machine.
[English]
In closing, Canada’s support for Ukraine is not just about defending borders; it is about defending values. We remain committed to helping Ukraine achieve victory, rebuild stronger and secure a future rooted in peace, democracy and resilience. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Lévêque. We will start the question round. As before, colleagues, please be concise with your questions. You will have three minutes.
Senator Kutcher: Thank you for being with us. I will concur with your comment, Mr. Lévêque, that Canada’s support for Ukraine is extremely appreciated. My relatives in Kyiv mention this to me frequently. We do recognize that.
I wonder how the seizure of Abramovich’s assets is going and when we will see that being used for supporting Ukraine. This is the second part of the question: Politico just reported that the EU leaders are set to instruct the European Commission to use the billions of frozen Russian state assets that came out today, and it wouldn’t stand in the way. What is Canada doing on two fronts? One is to assist in this clear release of the frozen Russian assets for this use. Second, my understanding is that Canadian banks hold about $22 billion, which they control in frozen Russian assets — what’s happening on that particular file?
Mr. Lévêque: Thank you very much for the question. On the first element of your question on Roman Abramovich’s company, whose assets were seized, I want to say it is in the realm of $23 million or $26 million of a financial transaction. The process is basically following judicial procedures right now. We always knew — with this new piece of legislation that was introduced three years ago, allowing not just for the freezing but also for the seizure and the confiscation of assets — that it would need to go through probably lengthy legal processes, judicial review and challenges.
This is the phase we are in right now. I wish I could say that the results are going to be expedited, but one of the flip sides of being a country that is based on the rule of law is that we follow legal procedures, and I’m sure the people who claim ownership to this money will do everything to test the legality of these measures. The process is ongoing, and we’ll likely be in that situation for some time.
On frozen assets, I want to make sure we distinguish clearly because, including in the previous session, I sometimes heard in an interchangeable way references to Russian assets and Russian sovereign assets. They’re two very different things, obviously. When we talk about, for example, the aircraft at Toronto Pearson which is the Antonov An-124 or Mr. Abramovich’s funds, those are private assets that fall under the legislation, which we have frozen and are trying to see through to confiscation and redistribution.
Russian sovereign assets obviously fall into a different category. The fact of the matter is that there are actually very low amounts of Russian sovereign assets parked in Canadian financial institutions — I don’t have the exact numbers, but it’s in the tens of millions and certainly nothing bigger than that — compared to European banks, for example, where it’s literally in the tens of billions, upwards of $200 billion. We’re not in that category at all.
The conversation that’s taking place right now at the G7 — particularly because that’s where the finance ministers and the bulk of the thinking has evolved on how to deal with these assets — is looking for a way to bring all parties together to accept the legal risks and to find clever ways, using the international financial system, to make as good a use of these Russian sovereign assets.
For example, I mentioned the payment of $5 billion that has been supplied by Canada. This was on the — you’re about to interrupt me, Mr. Chair.
The Chair: I am because we are over the time. As fascinating and as important as your answer is, I’m sure we’ll come back to it.
Mr. Lévêque: There is a conclusion in sight, I promise.
Senator Coyle: Thank you. Feel free to finish that, and then I’ll ask my question.
Mr. Lévêque: With pleasure. Thank you, senator. Where was I?
That example was one of having used the principal of these Russian sovereign assets — I’m going to oversimplify here because I’m not an economist or financial expert — and using the interests from investments of those assets as an ability to give that money to Ukraine, basically.
What is being discussed right now among the G7 countries is another concept, and that is using the principal against the expectation that Russia will one day provide full reparation and pay for the damages themselves. That’s where, obviously, those European countries that have much more financial exposure are, let’s just say, reflecting a little bit more lengthily on the measures they might take.
Senator Coyle: I’m going to now ask my question. We’re now talking about the back end of the sanctions regime. I want to go back to the initial purpose, which wasn’t completely to fund the reconstruction, et cetera, but it was to cause serious damage to the Russian economy.
Do we know how effective the sanctions have been to date? Any sense of that? Any evidence?
Mr. Lévêque: This is a question I’ve tried to address many times in the past, including in my previous capacity when I was responsible for sanctions policy.
My answer, senator, will be that, yes, sanctions are effective in the sense that they have forced Russia to decouple its economy from the vast majority, if not the totality, of Western countries. They have been forced to source electronic equipment, for example, of lesser quality from other countries. They have had an enormous impact on the value of the ruble and heightened interest rates, so their economy is definitely depleted. Is it completely destroyed? No, they’ve continued to have a wartime economy. They’ve continued to be the producer and exporter of natural resources that give them enough cash flow to be able to continue the manufacturing of weapons and the waging of its war.
Sanctions are only as effective as the number of countries that can effectively implement them and create a complete barrier around another country. Obviously, this is not the case. Russia still has some trading partners. They are also experts at conducting sanctions evasion, which means that those of us who have sanctions regimes must also be experts at detecting, countering and anticipating where that sanctions evasion is going to take place and coming up with new mechanisms to curtail it.
Senator Coyle: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you. For the record, senator, I gave you an extra minute and 20 seconds because you were so generous at the beginning.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: Welcome back, Mr. Lévêque. It’s always a pleasure to see you here.
I’m going to talk about industrial cooperation. In June, the French Minister of Armed Forces announced that automotive company Renault will set up operations in Ukraine to manufacture drones. The automaker will be partnering with an SME specializing in defence with production lines on the ground. Is this a model that Canada would consider or is already using in its cooperation with Ukraine?
Mr. Lévêque: Absolutely, thank you for the question. What I’d like to talk about here is the partnership between the private sector and government. It is clear that, in our economy, private companies are the ones that drive the desire to do business, identify business opportunities and ultimately profits, and position themselves in certain markets.
I’d like to say that our trade commissioner service continues to serve Canadian companies that want to do business in Ukraine. We have a small delegation of trade commissioners, government employees and departmental staff working in Kyiv. As the ambassador in the previous panel said, given the risk that exists, both to their physical safety and to their investments, a lot of these business arrangements are outside the country. We also have a good number of our trade commissioners working in Poland who are supporting these companies. The fact is that the appetite of Canadian companies to do business in Ukraine remains relatively limited at this time.
That said, there are tools at their disposal. When there are reconstruction fairs — for example, there was one two years ago in Germany, and one this year in Italy — we send Canadian companies; we also send our ministers and trade commissioners, as well as Crown corporations such as Export Development Canada and the Canadian Commercial Corporation, which are there to facilitate this type of trade, especially when it comes to investments in the military sector or between governments.
[English]
Senator Harder: I have two quick questions. First, what can you tell us about the ending of the contract for refurbished vehicles? Was that done in consultation with Ukraine, and for what reason?
Second, since we were last together, Chrystia Freeland has been appointed to a role — you didn’t mention it in your update. I wonder how that role is progressing, how it is supported and what are the expectations.
Mr. Lévêque: Thank you very much. On your first question, I’m afraid I don’t have any information on this. This was something that was arranged between, I believe, the Canadian Commercial Corporation and the service provider and under the purview of the Department of National Defence, so I don’t have anything further to add on this, I’m afraid.
On Ms. Freeland, this is the position of Special Representative for the Reconstruction of Ukraine. It is something that we’ve seen pop up in a number of countries. Under the Biden administration, it was Penny Pritzker, a former cabinet-level person, who had this title. There are a couple of European partners that have this as well. We all do it a little bit differently. Ms. Freeland, I think, is developing the role as she’s beginning her functions in it.
Essentially, her role will be to detect opportunities; it’s a little bit of what I was talking about a minute ago about the Canadian private sector, finding investors and potential Canadian expertise, particularly in things like infrastructure development and the mining industry.
Senator Harder: How is the role supported?
Mr. Lévêque: She has a staffer of her own, and then the role is supported by Global Affairs. Technically, I believe she is a parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister, so there’s an element of the Privy Council Office that is also there administratively to support her. On content, it would actually be under my team that this is done.
Senator Harder: Thank you.
Senator Boniface: Thank you very much. Can you give us a sense, from Canada’s perspective, where we are in negotiations between the U.S. and Russia and Ukraine? It’s very hard to figure out what’s going on. Perhaps you can help us.
Mr. Lévêque: Senator, that would make two of us. It is very difficult to interpret or anticipate what the U.S. administration’s strategy is in conducting these peace talks. We kind of go with the latest pronouncements and do our best with the tools we have at our disposal to come in support of that.
You know very well what the Canadian position is: We stand with Ukraine. We believe that territorial integrity is not something to be negotiated or compromised on, but, ultimately, we want to be helpful to the outcome. As I said in my remarks, President Zelenskyy is the only one of the two who has accommodated U.S. demands and other demands so far by saying at first, “No, we can have no unconditional ceasefire,” to now saying, “Yes, we can do this as long as we have a proper process that will follow.”
Again, what we can do is come in support of any such initiative. The latest I saw is — and it literally came up as a notification on my phone as we were here for the previous session — the U.S. is now announcing new economic sanctions on two Russian oil and gas producers. That suggests that the tone is hardening on Russia at this particular hour. We’re kind of following it pretty much like you are.
The Chair: I’d like to follow up with a question. As I say this, colleagues, if you know, “I’m following up with a question” means we need more questioners because our list is running out, so think about that before we get to round two.
Following up on what Senator Boniface just asked, we have the G7 presidency until the end of the calendar year before passing on the torch to France. I think there’s a planned foreign ministers’ meeting, and it will be with Minister Anand. The last one in our presidency was when Minister Joly still had the portfolio.
Is this still an opportunity for Canada to demonstrate leadership, taking into account the yin and yang of the U.S. position going forward with respect to Russia and peace brokering? We do not have that much of a relationship with the Russian Federation, I would suggest, but we’re a very good friend of Ukraine and can help with other allies and certainly the other members of the G7. Since you’re very experienced in that area, Mr. Lévêque, I thought I would ask you the question.
Mr. Lévêque: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would have been surprised and disappointed not to receive a question on the G7 today.
You’re absolutely right. Actually, I would say that topics pertaining to the situation in Ukraine have been not only front and centre of every G7 discussion, including at the ministerial level, but it’s also been one of the few topics where I would say we’ve had relative ease at finding consensus over the course of our presidency.
You’re correct that officially the last full-fledged G7 foreign ministers’ meeting under Canada’s presidency was, I believe, in the spring when Minister Joly was the foreign minister. There has, however, been several meetings of the G7 foreign ministers — I want to say at least two or three — on the margins of other events. The last one was two or three weeks ago at the UN General Assembly in New York.
Every single time, topic number one is Ukraine. And every time, there’s a large agreement on how to move the needle forward. Every single time, we’ve had presence and representation from Ukraine. I’ve made it a point in life not to ever scoop my bosses as to what they may announce later, but the next meeting will probably follow that model, and that meeting takes place on November 11 and 12.
I would say the opportunity to continue bringing countries together — seeing the overlap in positions and taking it one step further — is absolutely there. I think more of that is going to happen on the coordination of sanctions.
Another notification that popped up on my phone during the last session — they must have known we were talking about Ukraine here today — was the fact that the EU has just agreed on the nineteenth package of sanctions. This one will also impose a ban on the import of liquefied natural gas, or LNG. That is really consequential. Can we build from that and broaden it? That combined with the announcement by Scott Bessent that was just made, I think there’s potential for forward momentum and a bit of a snowball effect, especially when the United States is at the table. As I say right now, the needle seems to be pointing in that direction.
The Chair: Thank you very much. It’s the second round now.
Senator Kutcher: Thanks again. My question has a part one and a part two.
Sweden and Ukraine just signed a letter of intent yesterday to supply 100 to 150 Gripen jets to the Ukrainian Air Force as they’re rebuilding that air force. The battle-tested components that Ukraine will put into those jets will help them, obviously. There’s a difference between military hardware and battle-tested military hardware. Canada has been having some discussions about Gripen jets.
Is this an opportunity for Canada, Sweden and Ukraine to work together in some joint defence industry development and potentially help our own air force not be completely reliant on the F-35?
The second question may not exactly be in your wheelhouse, but President Zelenskyy and our Prime Minister have recently met and talked about enhancing the capacity to bring stolen children back from Russia to Ukraine. We do understand Canada’s role in the international coalition. In fact, I’ve actually led a seminar on that at the last ministers’ meeting.
What new specific strategies are now on the table to address this?
Mr. Lévêque: Maybe I’ll ask my colleague Mr. Larose to address the first question on military procurement more or less, and then I’ll address the second one on the coalition.
Martin Larose, Director General, International Security Policy and Strategic Affairs Bureau, Global Affairs Canada: Thank you, senator, for this question. Actually, I would invite the committee to perhaps invite colleagues from the Department of National Defence on this one.
Obviously, the Prime Minister has recently indicated that a decision would be taken soon on the F-35 or other fighter jets, and I will not speculate here as to whether we should be doing this jointly with Ukraine in this context. Thank you.
Mr. Lévêque: The only thing I would add to that is the fact that there has been talk in the past about drone manufacturing and possibilities for cooperation between Canada and Ukraine, including the potential to manufacture in Ukraine. These considerations are definitely live and ongoing.
On the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children, the advantage of being Canada and having convening power means that we can literally bring the world together and start new initiatives. That is very much what we did with this coalition. It first started in Kyiv under Minister Joly. I recall the visit. I was there with her. It then followed with the Montreal conference, which was in October of last year, almost exactly one year ago.
The downside of being Canada and the current state of our relationship with Russia is that we’re hardly the country they are going to turn to in order to facilitate the actual return of children.
I would say our objective with the coalition is twofold: One is to maintain the spotlight on this atrocious practice so that it is not forgotten. If there is one thing that the vast majority of political leaders and populations around the world can agree on, it is that children should never be the object of warfare or be utilized in the way that they have been. We’ve been relatively successful in maintaining the momentum, again, with Prime Minister Carney and President Zelenskyy doing so at the United Nations a few weeks ago. Maintain the pressure, maintain the spotlight and, honestly, maintain the shame on the practice so that more countries and more populations revolt against it.
The second part is to bring together the humanitarian actors and the third parties and a number of countries that have decided for strategic reasons — not because they side with one or the other — to remain neutral parties so that they can be turned to when there is a need to collaborate. There are a number of Gulf countries, Switzerland and a couple of others. The Vatican has played a role in this as well, but particularly the Gulf countries have, under the radar and very quietly, facilitated the return of children to the tune of about 1,700, and that’s 1,000 more than when we started the coalition a couple years ago.
It’s branding, and it’s drawing attention to the fact that this is a practice, and then it’s creating the platform to bring these third parties who, in turn, can facilitate the physical return of children.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: I really wonder about the conditions that could lead to a long-term resolution of this conflict. For a long time, the conflict seemed to be played out primarily on the battlefield, with the idea that military force would determine the outcome. However, the situation seems to have become bogged down in recent years. The front line has changed very little or not at all. Casualties are mounting without any decisive breakthrough in sight. Do you think a diplomatic solution to this conflict is still possible?
Mr. Lévêque: Thank you for the question. My initial response is straightforward: The main condition that can lead to the end of the conflict is for Russia to cease its illegal war. It seems simplistic, but it is entirely dependent on Russia. It is well known that this country entered into this conflict for reasons that are now apparent and entirely imaginary.
That being said, you are right to say that the military situation is more or less stagnant. There is no indication that a military advantage on either side will lead to a military resolution of the conflict. The only solution that remains is the diplomatic route. The way we see the situation from our Canadian perspective is, first of all, to continue to put pressure on Russia at all costs, both reputational and financial pressure, through sanctions and measures that we can control, but also through the power of persuasion that we can exert in order to put pressure on countries that may have influence over Russia.
Together with our partners, we are trying to work on the major powers that are Russia’s customers so that they themselves show their impatience with Russia’s overall behaviour; it should be those countries that end up using financial and physical measures — think of North Korea, which has provided thousands of soldiers to Russia — and that they should be the ones who ultimately withdraw to force both sides into negotiations and a conclusion.
[English]
Senator Coyle: I have two quick questions.
One is with regard to energy. I heard you mention energy. We, of course, heard the ambassador mention energy. Could you speak in more detail on that?
The second is, I believe, you also spoke about governance, and you spoke about supporting Ukraine toward its European Union membership. This is something we’ve talked about in the past. Could you speak about those two issues?
Mr. Lévêque: Absolutely. Thank you for the question.
On energy — and this is something that’s happened every fall since the beginning of the conflict — Russia has targeted power plants, including nuclear power plants, and gas reserves as well as damaging the electrical grid to, literally, starve populations of heat, cooking gas and all of that.
Every year, we’ve, unfortunately, become accustomed to this now. We see this coming. There are a number of requests from the Ukrainian government. Thankfully, global systems and institutions have equipped themselves to be able to react more quickly to this.
What’s happening right now is a couple of things: A number of countries, particularly neighbouring countries, are able to provide and supply some equipment to replace broken equipment in the electrical grid of Ukraine. I say “neighbouring countries,” but, of course, Canada produces some of these things as well. First, it’s the wrong voltage, and, second, we’re much farther away, so the ease of transportation and the cost-effectiveness of it makes it, obviously, more appealing when it’s from neighbouring countries.
Number two is repairs. A couple of funds were created among a number of European institutions. We’ve contributed to these funds. Last year, we contributed $70 million to one of them. Some money remains in this fund, so we’re going to deploy that to be able to help with, again, the deployment of service people for repairs to the grid and to the infrastructure.
The third one is the purchase of stockpiles of gas in order to be able to sustain during the winter that is to come. Again, some institutions like the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the World Bank Group are setting up these financial tools for countries to be able to contribute to and buy some gas for the benefit of Ukraine.
Those are the main elements, I would say, that are in play right now on energy.
On the European Union accession, this is a major long-term objective of Ukraine. It is both an incentive to aspire to their European integration and also an incentive to accelerate their reforms, whether it’s on governance, transparency, rule of law or human rights, et cetera. Let’s remember that this is a country that was born out of the Soviet Union, where none of these things were particularly well developed. We’ve been, really, a partner of Ukraine since 1991 in developing these elements.
They are accelerating them, and they really are to be commended for the fact that despite being at war, efforts to continue with these reforms continue. That is, actually, the bulk of our development assistance. I talked about the multi-faceted nature of Canada’s assistance — military, macroeconomic, humanitarian and development assistance. The bulk of our traditional development assistance is to support Ukraine in implementing these reforms.
Senator Al Zaibak: I am also concerned about a prolonged war whereby this war, given the Russian capacity to sustain the fight, may extend to more than 10 years. While the Western powers are providing financial and military aid, it is not enough to enable Ukraine to achieve victory. They are losing; the Ukrainians are losing lives, and they are experiencing the destruction of their infrastructure.
In your assessment, how effective are the sanctions against Russia? Are they effective in achieving their intended objectives, given that Russia has the back doors to China and the ability to develop alternative markets and economic supports? I would just like your views as to the potential prolongment of this war and the effectiveness of our sanctions.
Mr. Lévêque: Thank you for the question. It gives me an opportunity to expand upon a similar one from before.
Again, I will say that any expectations at the outset of the war that sanctions would, all on their own, be sufficient to crush or to break the Russian capacity to wage its war were probably misguided. It was one of many tools for countries, particularly Western countries, with autonomous sanctions regimes and the ability — because, obviously, UN sanctions need to be approved by the UN Security Council, of which Russia is a permanent member. That was never going to happen, so it was up to the countries that have autonomous sanctions regimes to very quickly develop the expansive regimes they have in place.
Of course, it was never going to be enough and there are adaptive capacities, so maybe I can talk about how we pursue sanctions evasion. First, it is all about comparing and sharing information among like-minded countries and observing trade patterns. When small countries — I’m not going to name any, but it’s small countries that we know — have very open trading relationships with Russia and, all of a sudden, they double, triple and quadruple their level of trade in one year, that is suspicious. When that is the case, we have experts who correspond with the EU, U.K. and U.S. experts who look at HS codes to see which commodities or goods are increasing. That allows us to pinpoint the companies that are doing this. If they happen to be in our jurisdiction, we have the legal means to go after them legally. If they aren’t, we have the means to try to influence the host countries to crack down on them. Those countries might not know about this or might turn a blind eye, but they also fear reputational damage.
There are lots of techniques we can use like that to fight sanctions in some sanctions evasion. In some cases, we, ourselves, have also applied sanctions on entities in third countries — not in Russia — that were sanctions evaders themselves.
Those are all parts of our tools on how to make the sanctions world as effective as possible.
In the long term, again, I go back to how this will be brought to an end: Increase the costs for Russia, both financially and from pressure from other countries, forcing them to the negotiating table. The reconstruction of Ukraine, according to the latest assessment, is estimated to be $524 billion over 10 years, and that’s if the war ended today. This is going to require something of unimaginable proportions that will need governments, the private sector, creative financial tools and an ability to make Russia pay for the damages it will have caused unprovoked.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
I’m going to ask a question. In the last panel, Senator Harder asked a question of Ambassador Andrii Plakhotniuk about countries neighbouring Ukraine. We have the G7 presidency and missions in those countries. Are we using our diplomacy to send some messages? Given the dependence of such countries on Russian gas and oil, pipelines and the like, are we being a bit more forceful, or are we saying to the EU, “Okay, they are EU members. You deal with it?”
Mr. Lévêque: We are 100% leaning hard on those countries. Again, without naming them directly, I would say it has strained the relationships that we entertain with a number of these countries that we are constantly holding to account and pressuring. It has lessened the level of interaction at the political level and senior levels. It has lessened the appetite for doing trade or education or art exchanges — all the things that make countries interact with one another.
That strain is very much linked to — and we don’t even try to hide it — their lack of determined action.
Of course, we also leave a fair side of this to the EU to solve en famille, but because we are close enough to many EU members, I can say that many members turn to us and admit that within the union itself, there are some poor students and a lot of rolling of eyes when these positions are taken.
It is a strain on the union, the unity and, ultimately, the impacts of the European Union. It is a strain on the relationships we entertain with these countries because, at the end of the day, we’re not rolling over; we’re not just playing nice to be nice. We’re calling a spade a spade and making sure there is a small price to pay, at least, for those countries that don’t step up.
The Chair: Thank you. John Hannaford, the former clerk of the Privy Council, has been named the Personal Representative of the Prime Minister to the EU for European affairs and issues. Will his mandate include a Ukraine brief or raising Ukraine in his travels through the capitals in the EU?
Mr. Lévêque: I think indirectly it will. I think his primary mandate will be to keep the momentum and ensure the prompt execution of every element of the road map that Canada and the European Union agreed to in June at the last summit. Given the direct reporting relationship he’ll have to the Prime Minister, and as someone who is very credible, well known and respected in town, his mandate will essentially be to hold each department that has a share in this very detailed action plan — the New EU-Canada Strategic Partnership of the Future — to execute those elements. As you know, inertia has a way of settling in, and unless there is constant pressure, things do not happen as promptly as they could.
There are many elements, particularly in the security chapter of that road map, that have to do with joint support to Ukraine. Indirectly, it will be part of his mandate, and I know that it is something that is very much top of mind for him, because I have already discussed it with him a few times.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We’re on our final question.
Senator Kutcher: Again, thank you so much for your attendance here.
I assume Jens Stoltenberg’s book On My Watch: Leading NATO in a Time of War will be eagerly read by all of us here as soon as it becomes available to us. Today, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty posted something about the book, and in it, Mr. Stoltenberg says that the alliance let Ukraine down and that delayed arms deliveries, insufficient aid and a lack of decisive action from NATO nations have actually contributed to a war that has lengthened more than it should have.
One of the big issues is closing the skies over Ukraine. There is, as you know, the Sky Shield initiative. Many of the people around this table have come to a briefing on that run by former senator David Tkachuk. Given Stoltenberg’s criticism, maybe you can expound on it. I’m interested whether you think it is a reasonable criticism. Second, perhaps you could comment on whether or not Sky Shield is on the agenda or at least on the radar and the potential for discussions of that issue.
Mr. Lévêque: Thank you for this question. I will start and hand it over to my colleague. On a more human level, I admire and envy anyone who has time to read in such a way because in my life, it is briefing notes and speeches that have to be prioritized. I hope to be able to get to that book eventually.
On a more philosophical level, I would say that hindsight is always 20/20, and I’m sure some of the criticism that he will put forward will be warranted. Having been in many rooms where recommendations were made and direction was being given, what I know is that the resolve to support Ukraine and to do everything in our power with what we thought was the best or the most we could do at any given time — and I will speak only for Canada here; I will not extrapolate to other partners — was always there.
It is always a matter of balancing what you think is right, is more helpful and is in line with your laws, your philosophy and your values. I have never felt — in any of my colleagues or in any decision makers in the Canadian government — a hesitation or a desire to hold back or to hold a little reserve somewhere. Of course, when you look back, it is always easier to say, “This is where we made a mistake, and this is where we should have done more or less or different.” On some of the more detailed or technical aspects, I’ll leave the last word to my colleague.
Mr. Larose: Thank you, Mr. Lévêque. Thank you for the question, senator. First of all, I think we have seen within NATO a steady increase in terms of the support for Ukraine over the last several years. We have a NATO-Ukraine Council that is meeting regularly at a very senior level. We have a NATO mission to do some training in Ukraine to train some soldiers. We have a list of equipment that NATO is basically looking at to provide to Ukraine through a number of NATO member states; we’re doing contributions to the so-called Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List, or PURL.
There is a very significant amount of military equipment, including some of the things that the ambassador was mentioning earlier in the previous panel, which NATO member states are actually giving directly to Ukraine. There has also been a very significant training equipment donation of $1 billion from NATO itself to Ukraine. In recent weeks, we have seen the setting up of Eastern Sentry, the operation relating to Russia starting to do some hybrid operations across the region. NATO is right there. The NATO defence ministers, foreign ministers and leaders are actually talking Ukraine all the time. This is the principal topic of their meetings whenever they meet for summits or senior-level meetings. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank Mr. Lévêque and Mr. Larose for being with us today. Your professionalism shows through. Thank you for your candid answers. These questions are not always easy, and we know that public servants have to respond to political masters, and we know how that works. The update is appreciated. Again, thank you. We will likely see you again. Colleagues, that will be the end of our meeting. We will meet tomorrow morning at 10:30 a.m. in this room for a session on Mexico.
(The committee adjourned.)