THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, December 3, 2025
The Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade met this day at 4:15 p.m. [ET] to examine and report on such issues as 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: Honourable senators, my name is Peter Boehm. I am a senator from Ontario and chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade.
I would now invite all members of the committee here today to introduce themselves.
[English]
Senator Adler: Welcome back. Senator Charles Adler, Manitoba.
Senator MacDonald: Michael MacDonald, Nova Scotia.
Senator Ravalia: Welcome. Senator Mohamed Ravalia, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Woo: Senator Yuen Pau Woo, British Columbia.
Senator Harder: Senator Peter Harder, Ontario.
Senator M. Deacon: Welcome back. Marty Deacon, Ontario.
Senator Coyle: Senator Mary Coyle, Antigonish, Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Welcome, Your Excellency. I am Martine Hébert from Quebec.
[English]
The Chair: I wish to welcome all of you, colleagues, as well as those all across our country who may be watching us on ParlVU at this time.
Today, we meet under our general order of reference to discuss the situation in Ukraine. For our first panel, we are very honoured to welcome to the committee for the second time during his short time here in Canada, His Excellency Andrii Plakhotniuk, Ambassador of Ukraine to Canada. Welcome to the committee. Thank you for being with us today.
Before we hear your opening statement and proceed to questions and answers, I wish to ask everyone present to please mute notifications on your devices — this is an unnecessary distraction — and observe the rules set out on the card in front of you with respect to the use of the microphone and the earpiece.
Ambassador, you have the floor.
His Excellency Andrii Plakhotniuk, Ambassador, Embassy of Ukraine to Canada, as an individual: Dear Mr. Chair, Honourable Senator Boehm —
[Translation]
Honourable Senator Boehm, distinguished members of the Standing Committee, thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. With your permission, I will continue my remarks in English.
[English]
I would like to start my briefing today by expressing our profound gratitude to Canada for its continuous leadership in international efforts to support Ukraine in our fight for freedom and independence against the brutal Russian aggressor.
I would like to use this opportunity of addressing distinguished senators to sincerely thank the Canadian government for today’s announcement by the Honourable Anita Anand, Minister of Foreign Affairs, at the Meeting of NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs in Brussels of $35 million in funding for NATO’s Comprehensive Assistance Package, or CAP, for Ukraine.
Canada’s support will bolster NATO’s multi-donor trust fund to help address Ukraine’s immediate, medium- and long-term security and defence needs in urgent non-lethal military assistance, medium- and long-term capacity building, as well as in planning and recovery initiatives.
We are also very grateful for today’s announcement by the Honourable David J. McGuinty, Minister of National Defence, of Canada’s new purchase of a package of critical military capabilities sourced from the United States under the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List, or PURL, initiative, in partnership with other NATO allies, that will amount to $200 million.
Today’s announcements, like all other previous decisions by Canada, are vital for the defence of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as for saving the lives of ordinary Ukrainians.
Distinguished members of the committee, let me proceed with a brief overview of recent developments in Ukraine, in particular, regarding the peace negotiations process to date.
On November 20, 2025, the U.S. Secretary of the Army, Daniel Driscoll, presented American proposals for a peace plan to the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. During the meeting, President Zelenskyy emphasized that from the first seconds of Russia’s invasion, Ukraine has sought peace and has supported all substantive proposals capable of bringing real peace closer.
Since the beginning of this year, Ukraine has supported President Trump’s proposals aimed at ending the bloodshed and stands ready to work constructively with the United States and with other partners to ensure a genuinely just, comprehensive and lasting peace. President Zelenskyy underlined that we highly appreciate President Trump’s efforts to end the war, although some points of the proposals required further consultations.
Following the meeting, both sides agreed to work through the plan’s provisions in a way that would lead to a just end of the war.
The Ukrainian delegation held a series of meetings aimed at discussing steps to restore peace with the American side and European partners on November 23 in Geneva and with the U.S. representatives on November 30 in Miami. As a result of both meetings, the peace plan was reviewed. Both sides agreed to remove some points and amended others. Our delegation reaffirmed our strong position that security decisions about Ukraine must include Ukraine, and security decisions about Europe must include Europe. The most sensitive issues, such as the issue of the temporarily occupied territories, should be discussed directly by the leaders.
Today, our negotiating team was in Brussels to meet our European partners and allies. The Ukrainian negotiating team has been invited to the United States to discuss the outcome of the meeting in Moscow.
Our red lines remain unchanged: respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, our inalienable right to choose alliances, no limitations on defence capabilities and the size of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and robust security guarantees for Ukraine. The decisions regarding transatlantic security should be discussed with and agreed upon by all those involved: Ukraine, Canada and Europe.
The updated peace framework was presented by the American delegation headed by the U.S. President’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff at the meeting with Russia’s President Putin yesterday.
Here, I have to note that we have no official information about the results of the meeting, at least for now, as both sides agreed not to disclose the details of the talks. Therefore, in my further comments, I will be relying on official statements released so far.
After the meeting that lasted five hours, Putin’s aide Yuri Ushakov said that the talks were “useful” but there is “a lot of work” ahead. He noted that the parties had discussed the “essence” of the conflict rather than specific decisions and that we are “. . . no closer to ending the war in Ukraine.” He underlined that there is “no compromise option . . .” for the peace plan yet, and some U.S. proposals are acceptable for Russia but others aren’t.
I have not seen any comments from the American side so far. Therefore, we have to admit that after yesterday’s meeting in Moscow, we are not closer to the end of the war, as Russia continues to obstruct the peace process. Only this year, there have already been dozens of opportunities for a ceasefire and for more meaningful steps to guarantee a stable peace, but Russia has spurned all those peace proposals. Moscow has not yet shown any intention to stop its aggression against Ukraine and continues to strike critical infrastructure and civilian facilities.
On November 19, 2025, Russia targeted Ternopil with a missile attack. There were 34 people killed, including 6 children; 94 people injured, including 18 children; 1 residential building destroyed; and 1 residential building damaged. Throughout the week of November 23-30, the Russians launched nearly 1,400 attack drones, about 1,100 guided aerial bombs and 66 missiles of various types against Ukrainians. On December 1, 2025, a Russian missile strike on Dnipro killed at least 4 people, and 40 were injured.
The Kremlin is not ready for genuine peace negotiations, making unrealistic demands on Ukraine and on the West. All they want is to continue their war of attrition, biting into Ukraine’s territory piece by piece and blackmailing the world.
Just before meeting with the U.S. delegation yesterday, Putin issued a stark warning to Europe, declaring that Russia is “. . . ready right away” for a military confrontation if one were to break out. He added that any European move toward war could lead to “. . . a situation in which there won’t be anyone to negotiate with.” Putin’s official spokesperson, Peskov, said at a briefing, “Through peace negotiations we must achieve the goals set within the framework of the special military operation . . . .”
However, whether there will be peace does not depend on Russia’s threats or any ultimatums it issues. It depends on the conditions the world establishes to prevent this aggression from continuing and on what we can do to defend our state, our people and our rights. Therefore, it is crucial that support for Ukraine continues steadily. The stronger we are in our defence on the front line, the more we can achieve in diplomacy.
Mr. Chair, distinguished members of the standing committee, Ukraine is currently at a critical juncture and is working closely with the U.S., with European partners and others worldwide to define steps that can end Russia’s war against Ukraine and ensure real security for Ukraine and Europe and the non‑repetition of Russia’s armed aggression in the future.
We are making every effort to bring this war to an end, and it must end with dignity. The Ukrainian people deserve a just peace and want it more than anyone else. We are ready for a full and immediate ceasefire as the first important step to a comprehensive and durable peace.
As I mentioned during my previous briefing in this committee, Putin will stop the war only when he has no illusion of the eventual victory on the battlefield and when the price of continuing the war exceeds the price of stopping it. Collectively, the international community has sufficient capacity to make this price unbearable for Putin. Any decisions that weaken pressure on Russia for this war should be opposed as long as war and occupation continue. All the pressure on Russia must be increased. Russia must not be rewarded with stolen Ukrainian lands or thousands of kidnapped Ukrainian children.
At this moment, the UN General Assembly is voting for the “Return of Ukrainian children” resolution tabled by Ukraine and co-facilitated by Canada and the EU. We hope for its major support from the international community. We urge all our international partners to exert every effort to help return all the children abducted by Russia and all the prisoners still held in Russian jails and camps, many of whom have been there since 2014, when Russia launched its war of aggression against us and occupied our Crimea.
We should double our efforts to ensure the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine functions effectively and holds all war criminals accountable for their crimes, as unpunished evil returns.
Mr. Chair, honourable senators, over the past year, the Russian Federation has substantially increased its efforts to obtain international recognition of Ukraine’s temporarily occupied territories as sovereign Russian territory. The main emphasis has been placed on promoting the de facto recognition by using such mechanisms as encouraging diplomats accredited in Russia, foreign politicians, public figures, media representatives, famous cultural figures, business structures, et cetera, to visit the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, including the Autonomous Republic of Crimea; and including the representatives of the occupation administrations into the Russian delegations to participate in international events. We urge our partners to be decisively responsive to these unlawful Russian efforts.
We need to defend the principles of the Helsinki Final Act: The internationally recognized borders cannot be changed by force, war criminals must not evade justice, and the aggressor must fully pay for the war they started.
We should continue to strengthen the sanction regime, develop an effective framework for the Coalition of the Willing, agree on mechanisms to use the full value of Russia’s immobilized sovereign assets so that Ukraine has the resources it needs, work tirelessly to ensure accountability for the crime of aggression and war crimes and, most urgently, strengthen Ukraine’s defence and resilience capabilities. In this regard, we count on Canada’s strong support, solidarity and strategic leadership.
[Translation]
Thank you very much for your attention. I am available to answer your questions.
[English]
The Chair: Thank you for your remarks, ambassador. On behalf of all members of this committee, we realize that you have to be circumspect with your answers. There are negotiations that are under way. We know the type of position that you are in with that, in that respect.
I wish to acknowledge that Senator Stan Kutcher of Nova Scotia has joined the committee.
As per usual, colleagues, you have three minutes in the first round, so keep your questions precise, and that will mean, of course, ambassador that you too should try to be as economical as you can with your answers — but not in their content.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: I’ll try to be as brief as possible.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Harder: Ambassador, welcome back. I wish to raise an issue that has been used by some to undermine the integrity of President Zelenskyy and the efforts of his government. That is the issue of corruption, which has had a recent series of events. I welcome you to put on the record the activities that the president himself has undertaken to deal with this.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you for this question.
I want to reaffirm that Ukraine remains fully committed to reforms and the fight against corruption. Even the latest resonant case at Energoatom demonstrates that Ukrainian independent anti-corruption institutions are really working. It is not about whether a country has corruption — many countries do — but about the reaction of the government, of the president and of the parliament. Ukraine’s immediate and strong response clearly demonstrates it’s a democratic country that considers the fight against corruption as one of its core national interests.
As of today, the president and the prime minister agreed to have a reset of supervisory boards of major state-owned energy and defence companies. This will be done in the most effective, most transparent and fastest way possible because the president has mentioned on numerous occasions that we will do anything to have international credibility. We don’t want to face any questions from our international partners.
Senator Harder: Thank you. That is very welcome.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you for coming again. It is really important to the work of this group.
I have a couple of questions. I will start off with the time of year. As we enter another winter, Russia has become more adept at targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure, particularly with evolving and improving drone attacks. We read about military assistance, but is there any way Western powers can assist in keeping the lights on in Ukraine through targeted aid and equipment?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: As winter approaches, Russia has intensified its attacks on Ukrainian critical infrastructure and civilian facilities as well. This is a constant process that takes place every day. When we are talking about this, we should keep two things in mind. We need more systems for our air defence, and we certainly need more equipment and spare parts to make repairs to our energy and electricity system.
We are getting this support, but we need more. What we see now from the European partners and partners around the world is that there are a number of announcements of most urgent winter packages. They are most welcome. We are profoundly grateful for them. In order to be effective, we need air defence to better protect our civilians.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you. There’s another piece here as we listen and watch. Russia has a history of, we can see, breaking different peace agreements, even using that time in breaking a peace agreement to build up their forces for further hostilities.
How can we, in your opinion, have faith that any peace agreement signed will be worth more than the paper it is written on? Will anything short of Western troops being stationed in Ukraine give you confidence that this will be respected?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: My answer, in the most general terms, is that we need to make Ukraine stronger when we have genuine negotiations together with our partners and with the Russians.
The second point is that for us to avoid the repetition of aggression, we need really strong security guarantees that would prevent Russia from attacking Ukraine once again. Ukraine should be stronger militarily, institutionally and financially, on the one hand, and, on the other had, we need the most serious and robust security guarantees.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: It is about armed forces, air defence and many things.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you very much.
Senator Ravalia: Thank you, ambassador, for being here.
The 28-point peace plan, in my opinion, was essentially a pro‑Russian foundational element for so-called peace. To what extent is Ukraine concerned about the U.S. position in the current talks? Can we realistically expect peace without the unconditional support of the U.S.?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: I will start with the second question. Ukraine, the European partners and all international partners need American leadership. We need the American side to be engaged in European affairs and in finding a genuine, lasting peace for Ukraine.
We need to work with American partners. Certainly, we need their defence material; we need their defence equipment. I mentioned in my remarks that today’s announcements at the NATO meeting in Brussels regarding new contributions to the PURL initiative are very important and timely. Another US$1 billion for the PURL initiative and purchases is truly important.
When it comes to the proposal we are working on now, it has been discussed and amended and will be further discussed by the European and American partners as well. In negotiations, we usually say that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. This is a permanent process.
What I would like to stress is Ukraine will do everything, together with our partners, so that the Russians have no ability to blame Ukraine that we blocked the peace process and that we are considered to be a major problem when it comes to finding a peaceful solution to this international armed conflict. We are ready to move as fast forward and as constructively as possible. This is our principal position. We discussed the proposals that are on the table.
Senator Ravalia: Thank you. I was wondering about the position that Hungary has taken as a part of NATO and as a part of the Coalition of the Willing. They still seem to be strongly sided with the Russians. Is this to be a concern for us in the long term?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: For us, on one side, the major issue we are thinking about and working on daily is having all of our partners united around us, supporting the Ukrainian cause and the Ukrainian position when it comes to achieving a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.
On the other side, it is our principled position to have good neighbourly relations with Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. We will be doing everything we can and act as constructively as possible to solve all of the issues that we have in our bilateral relations. That is about our survival, support and future membership in the EU and in NATO.
Senator Coyle: Thank you very much, Your Excellency.
You spoke about the collective strength of having the international community with you. We have heard of some examples here. We talk a lot about Europe. Of course, we talk about Canada. We talk about the U.S. and their role. I’m interested in other countries and other regions. I know you used to be in China. We know there is a Chinese relationship with Russia. I am curious if you could talk about other countries and how they are either hindering or helping the Ukrainian cause.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: First, thank you for this question.
The resolution was supported; that’s new information. Thank you, Jocelyn, for that, for supporting me with this issue.
We need the support of all countries, all members of the United Nations General Assembly. The support can be totally different, starting from this important vote on a sensitive and important question for Ukraine. Then, we go to humanitarian efforts to support providing good service when it comes to negotiating with Russia on the return of our children, possibly humanitarian assistance, energy equipment and economic assistance. Everything matters. We are grateful to all partners in Asia, Latin America and Africa who support us in different ways.
Some countries support us militarily; some countries support us with humanitarian projects, and some politically within international organizations. We will be working with each and every country. If the country has a different opinion on how this conflict should be settled, we will continue to work with them so that support for Ukraine becomes their position.
Senator Coyle: Thank you. I am not sure I completely heard what you were saying. I thought I heard you saying that Russia is holding some high-profile events in occupied territories —
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Yes.
Senator Coyle: — in order to legitimize their occupation, obviously. Would you like to expand more on that so we understand that phenomenon?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: It started in 2014. Understandably, from the perspective of the international law, no one acknowledges or accepts this reality. But when it comes to the situation on the ground, they were doing, they are doing and they will try to have a de facto recognition. What do I mean by saying this? They will try to arrange different events, try to invite different people to different events in Crimea, in the occupied territories of Donbas in order to bring politicians and media in order to create conditions to have the de facto recognition transformed into formal recognition of these territories as sovereign Russian territories.
What I mean by saying this and by raising this issue is we should always be on alert and pay attention to what is being done, because they will use their tool box of different instruments, slowly, but moving in the direction of the recognition of these territories.
Senator Coyle: Thank you.
Senator MacDonald: Thank you for being here, Your Excellency. The last vote in Ukraine was in 2019. I was there for it. I was with the international observer team over a three-week period, and, as far as I was concerned, everything I saw was above board. The elections were well run.
This 28-point draft peace proposal called for an election within 100 days after the war and after everything is settled. I have two questions. Is that a reasonable time frame? Do you think it will be accepted? Once the election is held, would Ukraine again ensure that there is an international team there to observe the election?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: First, we have clear legislation when it comes to the election process. We have held a number of elections — presidential, parliamentary, local authorities — and certainly we have always invited international observers because it’s about, once again, international credibility, support of our partners. We had different recommendations which we were implementing on a regular basis.
When it comes to the elections which will be held when we have the appropriate conditions on the ground, certainly, we will invite international observers to observe and to deliver this information to their public opinion worldwide.
As to the first point that you mentioned, we have current legislation when it comes to the time frame of how the election process is organized. Certainly, this is a very unique situation which we have now. We don’t have any kind of ceasefire. We don’t have any preconditions to have elections and to hold elections. So first and foremost, we should have a ceasefire, then create conditions for these elections to happen.
Certainly, it is up to our legislature to decide what kind of elections they will be, the sequence and the time frame. So it’s up to our Parliament, based on proposals of the Central Election Commission and based on proposals of experts on the ground. We will be following our legislation.
Senator MacDonald: As we know, Canada just made another substantial contribution. We support our contribution to Ukraine. When it comes to what Canada is providing with its money, in terms of its military hardware, is there hardware that we’re not providing that Ukraine would want access to? Are we giving you everything we should be giving you or that you need?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Once again, I want to say that we are profoundly grateful for all assistance that we have received from Canada; defence material, financial assistance, support for Ukraine is here.
Certainly, there are different ways to move forward with assistance. One way is to have this joint production of the defence material that we need. We have the legal framework for that, and we are working on that.
Another possible sphere on how to do things in another way is to support international initiatives like the Danish model where another country is investing in Ukrainian production of defence material in Ukraine. So there are different ways. If something is not produced or is not possessed by our Canadian friends, we can find a way to join efforts and have a team of partners who could get this defence material from another country, from a third country.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Thank you, Your Excellency. In your remarks, you talked about “robust security guarantees.” Those are the words you used. We know those guarantees are part of the peace plan discussions. With my colleague Senator Ravalia, you touched a little on the issue of safeguards when it comes to the United States, but can you explain what you mean by “robust security guarantees”? Can you give us more details on that?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you very much for this question. When it comes to robust security guarantees, certainly it’s not only about increased support in defence material. Certainly, it’s about how to make the Armed Forces of Ukraine — we are a strong power, but it’s about how to make our armed forces even stronger because the Armed Forces of Ukraine are the major force which defends our country and defends civilian lives in Ukraine.
The third point is certainly defence production. Another point is to have air defence systems on the ground, to have production of ammunition. So a lot of things should be thought about and deliberated as one big issue that would contribute to this term that I used, “robust security guarantees.”
We should make Ukraine stronger. That’s the main idea. Ukraine should be stronger militarily.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: What you’re saying is there are certainly things that can be done in the short term to ensure this security lasts. Can you shed some light on the short- and medium-term priorities for security?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: The things that I mentioned are short-term, mid-term and long-term. When we’re talking about strategic issues, certainly we are talking about NATO membership, collective defence for Ukraine and for the European continent.
Senator Adler: The chair said right at the outset it might be difficult for you to offer as much candour as possible on certain questions because of negotiations.
Having said that, I don’t think anyone here believes this is the war of the Russian people. It’s very much Putin’s war. So it’s entirely possible that your country, which we all support, is up against something perhaps stronger than the Russian military. It’s up against Putin’s world view. I think most people agree the world view of Putin is that the West is weak. That could go back all the way to World War II, when most Russian nationalists and certainly communists believed very strongly that the West did not defeat Hitler. It was the Russian forces; it was the Soviet Union that defeated Hitler.
So my question is this: Is there anything that the West can do to change his world view?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: To change —
Senator Adler: To change the way Putin sees the world. Regardless of how pathetic his economy is, and in some respects his army, his belief, his core belief, is that the West is weak.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: First, if I may, we think the opinion polls show that Russians in their majority support what Putin is doing in Ukraine. The war of aggression, started by Putin, is supported by his population; 70% or 80% of people support what he is doing.
On the other side, to make them change their mind, we should be united, and we should be very strong in our responses: diplomatic, political, economic. That would be my answer.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: I apologize for my late arrival. My question might have already been asked, Your Excellency.
I’d like to come back to the president’s statement on Monday suggesting there was a lot of optimism that an agreement could be reached to put an end to this war. He added, through a White House statement, that the American envoy Steve Witkoff was heading to Moscow. Do you share that optimism?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: First, we had a number of constructive discussions with the American partners, and they happened, as I mentioned in two different places. And after that, we saw the comments not only by the President of the United States but also by our president that we had constructive discussions and the American delegation would travel to Moscow to inform the Russian side of the results of these negotiations.
These negotiations, they continue. Certainly, a number of issues will be further discussed. But the president mentioned three major points. One major point is the issue of the temporary occupied territories, which he wanted to discuss with President Trump, and he is ready for discussions with Putin.
The second question is the issue of sovereign assets of the Russian Federation, and the third issue, the most difficult one, as my president mentioned, is the issue of security guarantees. So this is a constant process. Negotiating teams travel to different places in order to have these in-depth discussions.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: I understand. I’d like to know what the parameters of an acceptable peace agreement would be for Ukraine?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: The president mentioned — and I think that he represents the will of Ukrainian people — that we want just, lasting and comprehensive peace. Certainly, our most recent opinion polls show clearly that Ukrainians, the majority of Ukrainians, will not trade and make any concessions on our territories. This is a very important thing to understand. Ukrainians are not ready for peace without observing our sovereignty, observing and adhering to our territorial integrity. There are certain very strong red lines for Ukrainians and for Ukrainian leadership. For us, this is an important issue.
Another important issue is the justice that should be served. By justice, I mean accountability for the crimes that were committed and are committed by Russians in Ukraine. Certainly, we are talking about how to compensate for the losses, financially, which this war cost the Ukrainian economy and ordinary Ukrainians. There are a number of issues that can be considered our red line, and this is how we see it. We had initiated the peace plan of the President of Ukraine, which is based on the United Nations Charter. This is our strategic goal. This is what represents the political commitment of our leadership and the true wish of the Ukrainian people.
Senator Kutcher: [Ukrainian spoken]
As far as I’m aware, Russia has broken over 150 agreements signed with Ukraine and the international community, and I have never historically seen a peace occur until there has been a ceasefire.
The Wall Street Journal had a fascinating article a couple of days ago where it pointed out that Steve Witkoff and Kirill Dmitriev, who actually wrote this 28-point proposal, did this with the help of Jared Kushner and various oligarchs in both the U.S. and from Russia, including people interested in mining rare earths in the Arctic and ExxonMobil, with meeting with Rosneft. This is less a peace plan than a real estate deal.
So the issue here is this is another one of multiple peace plans: China, Brazil, Indonesia, African collaborative, Saudi Arabia and now numerous U.S. peace plans. It seems that every time we have a peace plan, the West engages in a peace discussion, and in the meantime, Mr. Putin continues to build Russia’s military capability, including bringing weapons and factories from China and North Korea. Is this a bit of a chimera, all this peace plan discussion?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: First, I would like to stress a couple of points. One thing is that we are ready to work with any proposal on how to achieve a just and lasting, comprehensive peace which is based on international law. We have been doing this and engaged constructively during the previous periods.
When it comes to the current situation, it’s important to mention one thing. We can achieve the best result, and it will be very effective for us to combine two things. One thing is having more pressure, economic and political pressure on Russia. Here, I’m speaking about sanctions. On the other side, we should continue to be engaged constructively in negotiations with our partners: Ukraine, Europe, other partners and the United States.
So two things should be combined: more pressure and more substantive negotiations and consultations.
Senator Kutcher: Thank you. I know every time I talk to my Ukrainian colleagues, they always thank Canada for their support, and we would like to give more. Nobody wins a war or any game that I’m aware of by only playing defence.
Jake Sullivan created the Biden administration’s approach, which is to let Ukraine bleed but not bleed out. Four years later, into this war, the West still denies long-range military weapons that will allow Ukraine to strike military targets in Russia. How much longer do you think we can go on playing defence?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: When it comes to long-range capabilities, what we are facing on the ground is certainly we get the support from our international partners, when it comes to information sharing, when it comes to certain capabilities of long-range strikes. There is another part of this story, which is that we are using Ukraine-produced material and weapons to target legitimate military targets on the Russian territory. What we are doing now is we are scaling up the production. It’s one way, the fast way to do that, together with our partners on their territories, in our territory. But on the other hand, certainly we will continue. We’ll continue to find and we’ll find new arguments in order to get the equipment that we desperately need. Here, we know what we are talking about — long-range capabilities, Taurus missiles and other things that will certainly help us protect Ukrainians.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We’re going to the second round.
Senator Harder: Thank you ambassador. My question is a bit of a follow-up in the sense that you have given us a pretty comprehensive update on the situation in Ukraine, the situation in the negotiations. Could you give us an update on the offensive portion of the battlefield that Ukraine is fighting? I say that because I think our news reports what is happening offensively in Ukraine, and that can be dispiriting, of course, but the Russian lines don’t move much. So there has to be a story that isn’t being told about the offensive capacity of Ukraine.
Could you, to the extent possible, give us an update on what is happening at the battle front from a Ukrainian perspective, vis‑à‑vis Russia’s deteriorating position?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: The situation when it comes to the battlefield is difficult, especially in the area we’re talking about, like Pokrovsk and some places in the Kharkiv region. What we all saw a couple of days ago in our media and in international media, as well, is that despite all of their attempts to advance strategically, they achieved nothing.
When we are talking about Pokrovsk, it is about everyday hostilities. We are doing everything so they cannot advance. We are trying, when it comes to Kupiansk, for example, the commander-in-chief of the armed forces reported that he got some positive news because we are trying to make Russians withdraw from the territories. It is a dynamic situation on the ground.
To achieve major breakthroughs and to advance, we need weapons, we need ammunition, we need capabilities, and we need drones.
The war which is now happening is about this dynamic situation where, for example, some Russians advance; we try to defend our positions, and then we liberate certain territories in specific areas. No major breakthroughs and advancements were made by Russians. That is important. Strategically, the line of contact remains the same.
Senator Harder: Can you give us any details on strategic offensive efforts on Russian territory?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Strategic offensive efforts, on numerous occasions, were mentioned by Putin. On the one hand — this was basically commented on by his spokesperson — they want to achieve the goals of their so-called special military operation. They want to occupy the entire territory of two oblasts, two regions of Ukraine — Luhansk and Donetsk — and they will try to do everything possible and impossible to create so-called buffer zones.
Senator Harder: I’m talking about Ukrainian offensive efforts on Russian territory.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: For Ukrainian offensive efforts, what we want to achieve is to liberate our territories, our sovereign territory, and we want to have Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders. This is our mission. To defend our country.
The Chair: Thank you. I would like to note that Senator Wilson of British Columbia has joined us.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Your Excellency, you highlighted in your opening statement the significant humanitarian costs of war. You also talked about damage to infrastructure. Do you have an estimate of what the cost of rebuilding would be if a peace agreement were reached? How much would it cost to rebuild infrastructure, and how much would humanitarian aid cost during this rebuilding period?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: According to the last preliminary assessment by the World Bank, the cost of the reconstruction efforts, which will be major infrastructure projects lasting a decade, will be more than $0.5 trillion. That is a preliminary assessment based on the current situation. As long as war continues, the situation will change.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Thank you. According to some media, it’s difficult to mobilize the Ukrainian military and the population. There’s a lack of engagement. Winter is coming, and the conditions can often be difficult. Can you give us an overview of the humanitarian aid to the public, the needs and the mobilization issue?
[English]
Mr. Plakhotniuk: First, I will answer the question with regard to the humanitarian situation for Ukrainian citizens. Some experts consider this winter will become one of the hardest and toughest winters we have faced since the beginning of the full‑scale invasion. By targeting critical infrastructure, they tried to create chaos and to bring more difficulties to people.
Even in the capital city of Kyiv, which is the best-protected place in Ukraine, over the last couple of weeks, we had times when during the day, there were only several hours of electricity, and then it could be 5 to 7 to 12 hours without electricity. This is the situation we are facing. The government, the Minister of Energy and the technicians are doing everything to repair the electricity grid. We enjoy the support of our partners, but the situation is very difficult.
The second point you raised is about mobilizing efforts. It is a constant process. It is a very important issue because we are facing a power that has many more resources compared to Ukraine. This issue of how to raise the level of mobilized personnel in the Ukrainian army is constantly being discussed by politicians and by the military command. One of the president’s recent initiatives was to have a more balanced approach to how brigades on the battlefield are supported by the mobilized personnel. This is a constant situation.
Senator Coyle: I am interested to know about the situation with the displaced Ukrainian population, both those displaced internally in Ukraine — what the situation looks like now — and, particularly, those in those countries that are in close proximity, like Poland and others.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: This war has resulted in a huge number of people who were temporarily displaced either within Ukraine, from the eastern, southern and northern parts to the western part of Ukraine, and people who found shelter in the neighbouring countries but also worldwide.
When it comes to locally and domestically displaced populations, what we see now is that the government is trying to create conditions for them to be able to have employment, for their kids to go to school, for them to have medical and social treatment. This is a constant issue. There are a number of Ukrainian families who have had to change their place of residence a number of times. For example, those who left Crimea when the occupation started settled in Kharkiv, and then they had to travel once again and change location. The situation is very difficult because people have to be prepared for new conditions, social, economic and professional conditions. This is a big issue.
Another issue is when it comes to the people who are living on the territories of other countries. We are profoundly grateful for the support we have received and for all of the programs that have been implemented. For Ukrainians, it is important to have a clear understanding of what is going to happen in the next six months to a year to be better prepared. If the decision is made to create conditions for them to return, which is the major priority of our government, the people should be prepared.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you. As I am listening to all of this, Your Excellency, I am wondering what we are not asking you. Is there anything you want to share with us that we have not touched on today? This is an important time.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: I tried to touch on quite a number of issues. I would reiterate that for us it is a critical juncture right now. What we want to have is unity, unity in our strengths and in our responses. All of us should be very effective and fast when it comes to different things like sanctions, defence production, making ourselves and our country more resilient. This is a very important time.
Senator M. Deacon: Effective and fast.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Effective and fast.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you.
Senator Adler: The chair asked me earlier if I wished to ask a follow-up, and I chose not to ask the natural, sequential follow‑up. But I revisited that in the interests of the people of Ukraine and many Ukrainians living in this country and in my province. I owe it to them to ask this question, although it is uncomfortable. When I asked about what would change Putin’s world view, you offered the answer: Ukrainian diplomacy and, of course, the Ukrainian military. I need to ask you this: Would the full force of NATO engaged with Russia change Putin’s world view?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Ukraine has always been a peace-loving nation, but I think Putin needs to see our resolve and collective strength. I’m most confident that it can be done politically, economically and diplomatically — to send the strongest signal that he should stop, and not using the methods of war.
Senator Adler: We wish you the best with that. God bless Ukraine.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you.
Senator Kutcher: Anastasia Trofimova in her soft propaganda piece Russians at War portrayed the Russian military as a bunch of nice guys trying to get the job done so they could all go home. Russia has invested heavily in disinformation and propaganda in the West. It’s all designed to decrease support for Ukraine. It has been sophisticated. The citizens of many Western democracies do not realize that Russia may be at war with us while we’re not at war with Russia.
What could be better done by our Western democracies to counter this disinformation and propaganda?
Mr. Plakhotniuk: They will be investing a lot of money in their budget next year for these disinformation campaigns because they think that they can still achieve the result they want to achieve. They want to create chaos. They want to disunite us. They want then to work using hybrid methods with all countries.
I mentioned this last time during my previous briefing to this distinguished committee. One thing is certain: We should cooperate most actively when it comes to disinformation, bilaterally and multilaterally, to exchange information about what is going on, about cyberattacks, their campaigns, Telegram channels and their methods for how they want to influence the process, especially in the countries that are going through election processes. Some European countries will certainly be targeted by hybrid methods.
The success of this work depends on our strong coordination. Certainly, we should stay on alert when it comes to their campaigns, like portraying Russian soldiers, what they do in the battlefield and portraying them as if they are suffering from this war.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
“Chapeau!”, as we say in French.
[English]
You have given us an excellent presentation. You’ve answered our questions. You are a true diplomatic professional. We thank you for joining us today.
With that, I have to say that because of this situation, we will have you back again, maybe even sooner, as matters develop. Thank you.
Mr. Plakhotniuk: Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, honourable senators. It was my true pleasure and honour to sit here and address all of your questions to the best of my knowledge. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you.
For our second panel, we are pleased to welcome, from Global Affairs Canada, Jocelyn Kinnear, Director General of the Ukraine Task Force and our former ambassador to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, based in Vienna; and Eric Laporte, Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division.
[Translation]
Welcome and thank you for joining us today. We are now ready for your opening remarks. We will then follow with questions from the senators, as usual.
Ms. Kinnear, you have the floor.
[English]
Jocelyn Kinnear, Director General, Ukraine Task Force, Global Affairs Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of this committee, for the opportunity to speak on the complex and challenging situation in Ukraine today.
On the front lines, as you have heard from Ambassador Plakhotniuk, intense fighting continues amid foggy, rainy and cold weather. Russia has intensified its offensive operations in eastern Ukraine and continues to make slow and incremental gains, at extraordinary human cost on both sides.
Meanwhile, Russia has also intensified air strikes on civilian targets since June, repeatedly launching record-breaking drone and missile strikes, damaging homes and communities and killing innocent civilians, with a particular focus on energy infrastructure.
In the face of Russia’s aggression, Ukrainians have continued to hold off Russian forces and to take care of their communities. However, Russia’s relentless strikes on civilian energy infrastructure continue to leave millions of Ukrainians in the cold just as winter approaches. You heard from the ambassador about the energy shortages and the power blackouts.
Canada remains a committed partner to Ukraine in the defence of its sovereignty and in the pursuit of peace. This means working with Ukraine and its partners to identify where support is needed and to coordinate our response. The renewed efforts by the U.S. to secure a sustainable peace in Ukraine and the ongoing discussions around these efforts are important developments.
The government welcomed discussions last week in Geneva among Ukraine, the U.S. and European partners, which have reinforced the centrality of Ukraine’s meaningful engagement if peace is to be just and sustainable. Canada has reiterated its readiness to support.
As we discuss the situation in Ukraine today, I would like to highlight Canada’s response to the human dimensions of the war, which is both a humanitarian imperative and foundational to any just and lasting peace. In February 2024, Canada and Ukraine launched the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children to address the issue of Ukrainian children deported or forcibly transferred to Russia. The coalition meets regularly and now comprises 45 countries and international organizations. Canada also co-chairs, together with Norway and Ukraine, a Kyiv-based ambassador-level working group that focuses on action around the return of prisoners and children, so prisoners of war and detained civilians.
These two bodies, both co-led by Canada, have been instrumental in focusing international attention on this vital issue and in coordinating concrete actions to help advance the return of Ukrainian prisoners and children and to support their reintegration into Ukrainian society.
[Translation]
Since 2022, Canada has committed $22 billion in multiform support to meet Ukraine’s immediate needs and long-term priorities. Global Affairs Canada is working in collaboration with the Canadian government to send the best tools where they are needed most.
I am pleased to say $22 billion, and not almost $22 billion. As the ambassador said, $35 million allocated to NATO was added yesterday, which brings us to more than $22 billion since 2022.
To meet urgent humanitarian needs, Canada has committed more than $396 million for emergency health services and vital services, and to protect and support displaced populations. These funds also support efforts to reunite families and facilitate the reintegration of Ukrainian children, who often return home traumatized and scarred by years indoctrination.
To support Ukraine recovery and rebuilding priorities, Canada has committed more than $700 million in development assistance, including support for governance reforms to ensure Ukraine’s future as a vibrant and resilient democracy, and a member of the Euro-Atlantic community.
To help Ukraine meet its urgent balance of payments needs and sustain its macroeconomic stability, Canada has committed $12.4 billion in financial assistance, primarily in the form of loans.
To help Ukraine meet its immediate military needs and sustain its long-term security, Canada has committed $6.5 billion in military assistance, and close to $230 million in peace and security programs.
Apart from its financial contribution, Canada promotes trade and technical cooperation with Ukraine, imposes sanctions on Russia and its accomplices to hold them accountable, and uses bilateral and multilateral diplomacy to coordinate support for Ukraine and put pressure on Russia. To accomplish all this, Canada capitalizes on its G7 presidency by actively participating in the coalition of the willing and the NATO-Ukraine Council, and co-chairing the international coalition for the return of Ukrainian children.
Thank you again for giving me the opportunity to speak to this vital topic. At this critical juncture, Canada reaffirms its unwavering commitment to Ukraine, its sovereignty and its democratic values. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We will now proceed to questions from senators.
Senator Gerba: Welcome to our witnesses.
On November 25, 2025, the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s special representative for the reconstruction of Ukraine, and president Zelenskyy met in Kyiv. After that meeting, it was understood that Ukraine could count on the support and participation of Canadian businesses and investments to help its rebuilding efforts. The Ukraine ambassador just said that rebuilding the country would cost $3 trillion.
How do the Canadian and Ukrainian governments work together to determine which priority sector or project Canadian companies could participate in to help rebuild Ukraine?
Ms. Kinnear: Thank you for the question. I hope you will allow me to answer in English. I will put my faith in your expert interpreters.
[English]
That way I can make sure I am clear.
I was, in fact, at a dinner with Special Representative Freeland and the G7 ambassadors, hosted by our Ambassador Natalka Cmoc last Tuesday, immediately following the special representative’s conversation with President Zelenskyy. Just after returning from Ukraine this weekend, I was at the Rebuild Ukraine Business Conference in Toronto, which is hosted by the Canada-Ukraine Chamber of Commerce and brings together a number of different Canadian companies that are interested in participating in Ukraine’s reconstruction.
I will say that the reconstruction needs are vast. The Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment — which is conducted every year — conducted in February this year, done by the World Bank Group, the European Commission, the UN and the Government of Ukraine, estimates $524 billion will be needed for Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction over the next decade. That was as of February. Of course, there have been further damages since then.
This will be impossible without the active participation and mobilization of private sector capital. Engaging the private sector in this activity will be very important. Of course, there are obstacles and challenges for private sector participation. We have been working on war risk insurance together with our international partners to try and unlock and help to de-risk some of those investments. Fundamentally, there will be needs from the front lines over to the west of Ukraine to invest.
There is definitely a strong will from Canadian companies to be engaged, and in the budget that is before Parliament, we have seen a proposal for additional concessional financing that would help to support and de-risk and incentivize some of those.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Ravalia: Thank you both for being here today.
Canada has invested a significant amount of material resources, military resources in the hopes of ultimately attaining a peace process in this complex war. Reading between the lines and putting together what the ambassador said and what is out there in the media, in my mind, there is a disconcerting trifecta of corruption potentially tainting the integrity of the Ukrainian leadership, compounded by Russian disinformation; the concerns about a declining combatant pool in the face of increased Russian aggression; and negotiations that generally seem to primarily be started by the U.S. and Russia, often with the exclusion of Ukraine and with the Ukrainians and the Coalition of the Willing coming in on the tail end of many of these negotiations.
Given this current dilemma, are you hopeful that we can attain a peace that the ambassador was so hopeful would guarantee Ukrainian security in the long term?
Ms. Kinnear: Thank you for this question. I am hopeful. There needs to be a negotiated peace. Ukraine has proven extremely adept at ensuring that their voice is at the table, and that has been important throughout the year. We have seen a lot of shuttle diplomacy going on over the past week. For the first time in this round of negotiations, we have seen a concrete, on‑paper reference to security guarantees from the U.S., which is very important to the Ukrainians.
As the ambassador said, there are a number of different areas that remain to be worked out, but I am certainly hopeful, given the intense conversations that are happening right now, that this round of discussions will bring us closer to something. We’re not there yet, I don’t think. There are a lot of pieces — and the ambassador mentioned them — that are very important around territorial integrity, around Russian assets, around pieces that are fundamental to Ukraine’s sovereignty, its military, its ability to defend itself and, ultimately, to have strong and robust security guarantees from partners, including the U.S.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Coyle: Thank you for being with us. I would like you to build on where you were going with what is giving you hope. You have mentioned these intense diplomatic conversations that are going on, a little recognition of some of what Ukraine is looking for. Are there other things that are giving you hope at this time? Are you seeing other things working? Are the sanctions, for instance, having any impact? In the big picture, what is moving? Are you seeing the needle move in other ways, caused by other things?
Ms. Kinnear: Yes, absolutely. I’ll maybe try to answer about the other things, but I’ll also pass to my colleague, Eric Laporte.
Every time I come back from Ukraine, there is something very contagious about the resilience and the determination of the Ukrainian people. Every Ukrainian you talk to — or certainly every Ukrainian I’ve talked to — I come away with just a very strong sense of confidence in their determination. That can’t help but give you hope.
You referred to sanctions. The level of coordination we have seen on sanctions has been really unprecedented. Canada has worked very hard on this in the context of our G7 presidency. We have created a Shadow Fleet Task Force, which is sort of a piece of how to address Russian attempts to evade sanctions through finding black or grey market ways of selling oil and exporting other materials.
Those two things certainly do give me hope. Eric, is there something you would add?
Eric Laporte, Executive Director, Regional Security and Defence Relations Division, Global Affairs Canada: Thank you for the question. In addition to everything my colleague mentioned, in addition to Ukraine being resilient and having the will to fight, as we have seen for almost four years now, they are not alone in this. Yes, negotiations are ongoing; yes, there are some discussions, but you saw the European response when we saw the leak of the 28-point peace plan, a very strong reaction on the part of European allies and Canada in terms of wanting to ensure that some of the more difficult or problematic elements of that 28-point peace plan were not pursued. There was an intense discussion, some intense diplomacy, and there is the sense that Ukraine is not alone.
We had the Meeting of NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs today in Brussels, which Minister Anand attended, but there was a NATO Ukraine Council meeting with Foreign Minister Sybiha of Ukraine where there was a strong recognition and reaffirmation of support for Ukraine, including additional announcements, including from Canada, for military assistance going forward. Ukraine is not alone in this context.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Kutcher: I have a two-part question, part A and part B. Part A: Canada is a co-chair of the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children. There has been some progress. For example, Save Ukraine is an admirable organization which returns, rehabilitates and resettles children, but it seems to have been bogged down in terms of the numbers. What can Canada do to reinvigorate and push this process forward?
Part B is completely different than part A. I recently wrote an op-ed in The Hill Times on the importance of increasing business investment in Ukraine and Ukrainian business investment in Canada. Is there anything that Canada could do to kick-start investment in Ukraine under the Canada-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement, or CUFTA?
Ms. Kinnear: Thank you for those questions. I might relabel them as two totally separate questions, 1 and 2 instead of parts A and B, but yes, absolutely.
On children, you heard from Ambassador Plakhotniuk a little bit about the very lamentable and atrocious situation with regard to children. Canada has approached this in a number of different ways. First and foremost, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, we created, almost two years ago, this coalition for the return of children. We have worked very hard to increase its membership. As you know very well, senator, we hosted the Montreal conference last year, which was focused on trying to identify concrete ways that all of these different countries that come together, bringing different tools and different strengths to the table — how we could use them together as an orchestra to advance different elements of the project of finding, advocating for, returning and reintegrating these children. Those are four very different steps.
To date, there have been 1,819 children returned, to my awareness. In terms of ways that we’re concretely helping Ukraine on this and working with Ukraine to advance this, it is through partners in our bilateral programming. We work with UNICEF. We give to the UNICEF Better Care program, which is about supporting the reintegration of those children, helping Ukraine shift from an older Soviet-style model of institutionalization of children with no parents to a family-care model. That has been an important piece, but also providing reintegration support so that those children, as they return, and their families, as they welcome them back home, have the different supports and access to different tools and services they need. That’s one piece.
The Chair: I’m going to have to interrupt. We’re way over time. I know the senator was asking two questions and hoping he would get more time through that, but it doesn’t work that way, senator.
Senator M. Deacon: Ms. Kinnear, you touched on a bit of this with your numbers and information you were sharing earlier. Today it was announced Canada is to buy $200 million of the military kit from the U.S. for Ukraine through the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List, or PURL, part of the NATO program. But this, in addition to the $600-million or $700‑million investment in August, makes me wonder if you could provide insight into the workings of this program. Are the arms and equipment getting to where they need to go in a timely fashion? The ambassador focused on the importance of speed in our earlier conversation.
Mr. Laporte: Thank you for the question. I’m happy to take that one.
The NATO PURL program is one that has had a number of packages that are basically tranches of US$500 million each to procure equipment that the U.S. has either in its stockpiles or is willing to provide to allies to then give to Ukraine. These have been going on, essentially, since August. We took on one entire package earlier at the second or third package, and this time we’re contributing with other allies to a package.
These types of equipment are things that, as the name says, are on the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List. These are the priority items Ukraine is looking for that, frankly speaking, only the U.S. can provide, things in terms of air defence capability, in terms of specific ammunition types, et cetera. They are incredibly useful to Ukraine.
Are they getting there in time and at the required place? My understanding is they are, although we did see Russian attempts to disrupt some of those flows in Poland recently through the rail lines. But the flow of arms to Ukraine is still proceeding at pace.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you. Ms. Kinnear, could you elaborate and help Senator Kutcher finish that answer?
Ms. Kinnear: On the children?
Senator M. Deacon: Yes.
Ms. Kinnear: Another thing that we’re working with the Ukrainians on is working to consolidate a database so they have all of the information together in one place, validated and verified, that they can then use to give to Russia, for example, or to have other intermediaries give to Russia and seek those children’s return. So it’s specific information about the circumstances of each child’s absence or deportation from Ukraine. That’s another piece that we’re working to help them pull together.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you.
Senator Harder: I’ll give none of my time to Senator Kutcher.
Thank you, panel, for being here. I want to talk about the path forward, if you see one, for the repurposing of Russian-seized assets. That’s a huge challenge, but do you see a resolution, and in what time frame?
Ms. Kinnear: That’s a good question and a huge one. I’ll start by saying that Canada has been quite forward-leaning, as I’m sure you know, on being creative about how we collectively can use these assets. Canada does not have very many Russian assets in our jurisdiction.
Senator Harder: But the Europeans do.
Ms. Kinnear: The Europeans do. It’s very much something that, while we are happy to contribute to the creative thinking of what can happen — and we have done that and managed to bring colleagues together behind, for example, the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans that the G7 did — the EU are the ones who really have skin in the game.
Senator Harder: Do you see a path forward?
Ms. Kinnear: The path that I see forward goes through the next European Council meeting on this, which I believe is on December 18. That’s their next step in moving toward a decision.
Senator Harder: Is there any possibility the European Central Bank, the ECB, will change its mind?
Ms. Kinnear: I’m not sure that I have the expertise to comment on the ECB’s mind changing.
Senator Harder: Or ability to change minds.
Ms. Kinnear: Or ability.
Senator Harder: Thank you.
The Chair: That brings us almost to the end of the first round because I’m going to use my prerogative as chair to ask a question. I want to pull together a number of threads here.
As all of us in this room know, USAID has collapsed or been collapsed to some degree, and with it, there have been significant cuts in American official development assistance programming. It is under the State Department, of course, but there have been big reductions all over the world.
There were a lot of projects in Ukraine as well. It’s not clear to me as to whether other donor countries, including our own, can work with others to fill some of these gaps, including potentially unfinished projects in certain areas. That’s one part of my question.
To copy my seatmate, Stan Kutcher, there is a second part too, but it’s related to that. There has been a lot of attention on the government turning away from the feminist foreign policy, or, to be more specific, the Feminist International Assistance Policy. I know a bit about that from my past. There is a lot to do in Ukraine in terms of when reconstruction comes and before for women and girls.
Could you comment on those two aspects?
Ms. Kinnear: Absolutely. One of the meetings I was at last week in Kyiv was the Ukraine Donor Platform meeting, where we sit with 12 other major donors and discuss exactly the coordination of how we are best supporting — this is also partly the answer to a question I didn’t get to answer earlier — Ukraine’s priorities, its needs both in terms of development assistance and in terms of reconstruction as well.
At that meeting, my U.S. counterpart highlighted that while it’s not broadly publicized, following the winding down of USAID, they are, in fact, reinvesting in a number of different areas — not in all the areas they were invested in before, but I know energy was one of them. If I think of others, I’ll come back to that.
Certainly, Canada is working to make sure we continue to be a strong partner, and I know that our European allies are doing the same. Working with civil society is a piece that we are definitely trying to make sure we’re maintaining as we make decisions about our bilateral development assistance, being very conscious of the USAID gap that has been left. I hope that answers the first part of your question.
In terms of the feminist foreign policy, just looking at our bilateral development program, it has definitely been part of the Feminist International Assistance Policy, but within that, we have been doing things like strengthening governance and ensuring strong economic growth in Ukraine through a feminist lens. What I assume we are going to do going forward — I don’t think we’re going to sort of radically change what we’re doing; I think we will have a focus on exactly those things: governance, growth and human dignity. Woven within those will be women’s economic empowerment. We all understand that you are not going to be able to have strong economic growth without women’s economic empowerment and women’s political voices.
In terms of how we’re implementing the Ukraine bilateral program, I interpret it as a change of focus of the lens. We’re not turning away the camera; we’re slightly shifting the lens.
The Chair: Thank you for that answer. We’re going to move to the second round.
[Translation]
Senator Gerba: I’d like to come back to the second part of my question. Have you already compiled a list of priority sectors in which businesses could help to rebuild Ukraine? I’d also like to take this opportunity to correct some of the figures. The ambassador said about half a trillion would be needed to rebuild Ukraine. In French, we would say “un demi-billion”.
Ms. Kinnear: Yes, the figure the World Bank gave us is $524 billion. So, half —
Senator Gerba: Half a billion.
Ms. Kinnear: Billion. No, no —
Senator Hébert: More like $500 billion.
Ms. Kinnear: Yes, $500 billion.
Senator Hébert: I apologize Mr. Chair, the economist will speak.
[English]
One trillion dollars is a thousand billion dollars, but in French, “trillion” translates to billion. So it is the same thing.
Ms. Kinnear: In English, it is $0.5 trillion, so $524 billion.
In terms of the sectors, I mentioned earlier the Ukraine Donor Platform we participate in. The process here is both a supply and a demand. We want to enable and support any Canadian companies interested in investing in Ukraine, but we also want to make sure we’re helping to matchmake in those areas where Ukraine specifically needs the most support. Through the Ukraine Donor Platform, we are supporting Ukraine in creating a prioritized list of nationwide investments, which is, in itself, a complicated task. It involves looking at all the different municipalities, villages and regions around the country and identifying what the highest-level priorities are. It’s a long process.
Broadly speaking, I would say that energy and infrastructure, including energy infrastructure, would be key areas. Engineering services is an area where Canada is very strong, and that’s going to be in big demand. I also heard a lot last week about housing and social housing.
But a lot of this ties together with job creation in front-line communities and welcoming people back, either from military service or, when the war ends, the displaced Ukrainians coming back to their home communities, either from outside of Ukraine or within.
All of those things are tied together. The needs will be vast.
Senator Gerba: Thank you.
Senator Coyle: This talk of reconstruction makes me happy because it means that people are really seeing that possibility. That’s great. It’s sad that it has to happen, but it’s wonderful to see that those plans are coming together.
You talked about working with civil society in Ukraine. I would love to hear a little more about the nature of that partnership work with Ukrainian civil society and also whether there is anything going on in terms of collaboration with Canadian civil society that has partnerships in Ukraine. We have talked about trade on the business side of things, but there may be things going on at the civil-society level.
Ms. Kinnear: Okay.
Yes, in terms of civil society, almost every one of our projects has a strong element of partnering with civil society or doing sub-grants with different civil-society organizations. Fundamentally, Canada stands with the people of Ukraine, and the Ukrainian civil society is just a really excellent manifestation of that. It’s very diverse and rich. We have, for example, programs where we are working to help front-line communities, and in that, we’re not only working to strengthen the capacity of municipal government to identify the needs of that community and strategic planning and budget requests from the national government; we’re also working to support civil society in those communities so they can be engaged in and part of that planning process. That is just to give you an example.
As another example, I had such a fascinating conversation. We have a project that is supporting agricultural co-operatives in Ukraine. It’s a fascinating story because Saskatchewan has a strong co-operative sector as a result of Ukrainians who came and brought that expertise 120 years ago. Now, we are re‑exporting, and Ukraine is reimporting that knowledge. This speaks to the rich and layered people-to-people relationship between Canadians and Ukrainians. That’s one example.
Also, the Canada-Ukraine Foundation is an umbrella foundation that works with a wide variety of Canadian civil society partnering with Ukrainian civil society. It’s definitely an important piece. It adds a rich dimension to what we do.
Senator Adler: Greetings.
When I worked in the U.S., it was catechism in U.S. politics that if it wasn’t seen on TV, it never happened. I have no idea how many Canadians are aware of the children being kidnapped by Russians. I wonder if the government would consider doing public service announcements or at least engage on social media to make the issue real by allowing us to see video or at least photos of the children. Is that something that Canada would consider?
Ms. Kinnear: That’s a really excellent question. I appreciate it being put.
If you’re interested, there was a U.S. Senate hearing today on the children’s issue, which I was watching just before coming here. One of the things that is at the core of everything we do related to children is around the best interests of the child.
First and foremost, we have to make sure the children are not retraumatized or in any way harmed by our efforts. In that regard, it is important to us that when we do things like testimonials, we try to use the parents’ testimony. I have been in places where a child was brought forward to give their testimony of having been taken prisoner, hearing his father being tortured in the next room and having been kept from his family for a long period of time. Obviously, that was that child’s choice. I hope it was that child’s choice. But I felt like I was sort of party to retraumatizing that child in some way. We try, in everything we do, to ensure that we are not doing that.
I do not know if that answers your question. Your question speaks to what an important issue this is, but also what a delicate issue this is, because these are children’s lives, futures at stake that are being affected. We try to do the awareness raising without actually implicating the children too much.
Senator Adler: I was referencing those children who are still in Russia, children who have been removed, kidnapped. Those are the children I’m referring to.
Ms. Kinnear: Yes. I am afraid we do not have a lot of video or pictures of those children. But, yes, it is a good question.
Senator Adler: Thank you for thinking about it.
The Chair: Senator Adler’s question evoked a memory in my mind when I was a child. There was the famine in what was then Biafra, and there was a lot of publicity and civic engagement on that with people, people donating. It was a different time, and the media has, of course, changed. Thank you for asking that question, senator.
Senator Kutcher: I don’t know if we did this, but if we did, I will do it again. I want to thank you and your team for everything that you do on behalf of our country and on behalf of our colleagues in a struggling-to-emerge democracy of Ukraine. It is incredibly appreciated.
I want to riff off Senator Gerba’s question.
With the realization that if you are not on the field, you don’t get to play, once reconstruction occurs, there will be a lot of money flowing and many companies jostling for position to obtain it. We have a modernized CUFTA, yet Canadian companies have been relatively slow to invest in Ukraine. We have been relatively slow to encourage Ukrainian companies to invest in Canada.
Are there any things we can do now that will speed up this process so that, at the time of reconstruction, our companies will be on the ground? Because the Europeans are already on the ground.
Ms. Kinnear: That is a great question.
Maybe I will start by responding to your thanks. I have on my team here two people from our respective teams, Billy and Serge, who are part of very hard-working teams who work on delivering Canada’s support to Ukraine on a daily basis.
I would also just give a shout-out to the team in Ukraine, the embassy there. They are working very hard day and night and often through air alerts, having to go down to shelters in the middle of the night, which I also experienced while I was there. It is exhausting. Thank you for your gratitude. It really goes to all of the excellent people who Eric and I get to work with.
In terms of the reconstruction piece and jostling to get there, it is an interesting conundrum in some ways. We certainly do have Canadian companies that are there. I find it interesting. The Canadian companies that are actually on the ground — not just the Canadian ones, all companies on the ground — have a lower perception of the risk of working in Ukraine than people who are thinking about whether to invest. I don’t know if that is because they are there, dealing with it every day, but I find that to be an interesting point. It certainly relates to the challenges around war risk insurance. Once you are actually there, people feel like they are reaping a huge, untapped dividend because the perceived risk premium is so much higher than what they actually feel on the ground.
Canadian companies are interested, but, again, many of them are waiting to see a peace or a ceasefire before they move in. What can we do around that? There are tools we can put in place to de-risk. A part of what was put in the budget addresses that. EDC is engaged on this. Ultimately, we’re there to support Canadian companies that want to go in.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Senator Kutcher, I think, expressed all of our sentiments. We admire your professionalism and what you do for Canada. That goes to your team members. I know there are a couple of them here and you have some back at the department and, of course, abroad in Kyiv. Thank you for your testimony.
The subject of Ukraine is something we return to from time to time in this committee. I dare say we will be seeing you again. Thank you.
Colleagues, we will reconvene tomorrow morning at 10:30 in this room for in camera consideration of our draft report on Africa, which was shared via email last week, on November 28.
Hard copies will not be available tomorrow. If you want a hard copy, you can print it out yourselves, but you can also work electronically. We are intentionally doing it this way. Make sure that you have access to the document, and we will have a good discussion tomorrow.
(The committee adjourned.)