Over the course of the revelations of recent weeks on foreign interference, Justin Trudeau has sometimes claimed ignorance to justify the reactions of his government. And what has come to light is not only the extent of the allegations of Chinese state interference, but also an intelligence chain with sometimes missing links — and which the government, in the view experts, ignored for too long.
Canadians have lost their innocence over the past three months. What was only a vague concept of foreign interference suddenly became very real, with targeted cases taken from reports and confidences of Canadian intelligence agents.
To defend himself, the Prime Minister retorted that he had not been informed. Nor a phone call between a Chinese diplomat and his deputy – now independent – Han Dong. Nor that the elected conservative, Michael Chong, was targeted by another diplomat of “precise gestures” also targeting his family in Hong Kong.
Justin Trudeau insists that his government acted when it was warned. Without however providing more details, national security obliges. The expulsion of Toronto-based Chinese diplomat Zhao Wei is a rare exception. And it allows the Prime Minister to chant that his government will not be “intimidated” by China despite the expulsion in return of the Canadian consul in Shanghai, Jennifer Lynn Lalonde, this Tuesday.
In addition to this diplomatic sanction, the fact that Justin Trudeau claims not to have been informed of secret information (or that he mentions in fragmentary detail the other actions he claims to have taken) does very little to reassure citizens. They have instead become aware of the sprawling scope of the interference carried out by the Beijing regime in Canada, as well as what looks more and more like systemic flaws in the intelligence information chain.
A system — and a prime minister — in question
Two subject matter experts say it is plausible that the prime minister was not informed of the threats against Michael Chong, although a nine-page CSIS report documenting threats against MPs — without naming him personally — was sent to the National Security Adviser at the time (a position then held by two acting individuals).
Former minister Catherine McKenna also opined on Twitter that it would be “not surprising”, although it would be “shocking”.
Intelligence reports are written by professionals who do not understand the needs of their political recipients, observes Artur Wilczynski, a former senior national security official now at the University of Ottawa.
The government receives an enormous amount of information, often in arid reports that do not isolate the elements likely to interest political actors. The threshold for sharing this information is also generally high. Or the political class has not asked for certain information, which means that intelligence agents do not proactively share it.
“It’s a perfect storm that we are seeing at the moment. Because all the weaknesses of the past few years are coming to light, which leads to a crisis of confidence in the way Canada manages its threats,” explains Mr. Wilczynski, who joined the Communications Security Establishment before his retirement. (CST) precisely to help the intelligence community better communicate with the government apparatus and elected officials.
The problems are also structural, adds the ex-analyst at CSIS, Stephanie Carvin. The Canadian prime minister receives only one in-person briefing a week, she said, and they focus on two pre-determined national security topics. In the United States, the president is entitled to such briefings every day. Intelligence teams, notably at the Privy Council Office, are also under-resourced.
“The system has flaws. But at the end of the day, the Prime Minister is responsible for the system,” emphasizes Stephanie Carvin, now a professor at Carleton University.
However, the Trudeau government is not particularly interested in these questions, like that of Jean Chrétien before him, she says, but unlike that of Stephen Harper, on the other hand. A minority since 2019, the Liberals are betting above all on their survival and are more interested in gun control than in major intelligence reform. “I think their heart is just not in it. But sometimes it doesn’t matter what your heart wants. Your brain should take care of it. »
More questions for David Johnston
These failures of the system do not convince the opposition parties either. No more than the former Canadian ambassador to China, Guy St-Jacques. “The impression that emerges is complacency or naivety at the political level”, he chants, recalling that if the source has decided to reveal everything to the Globe and Mail, it was because she was exasperated by the government’s inaction. All this confirms, according to him, the need for a public inquiry.
The government surely thought it could buy time by awaiting the verdict on this subject from its special rapporteur, David Johnston, by May 23. And maybe even months more if he recommends an investigation. China’s interference efforts, however, are now well established; the opposition and the experts are no longer waiting to demand the completion of the register of foreign agents envisaged by Ottawa and the closure of all “Chinese police stations” suspected of existing in the country.
Beijing may not wait to impose further reprisals on Canada either. Guy St-Jacques believes that they will nevertheless be moderate, because Xi Jinping cannot afford to harm his own economy or the image of a global negotiator he is trying to give himself. “If he made a petty gesture, China would lose its feathers,” opines the ex-ambassador.
A public inquiry seems increasingly inevitable. No longer just to measure the extent of Chinese interference on Canadian soil, but also — and above all — to remedy the flaws in the entire architecture itself. And thus prevent such efforts of interference from continuing, by China or by others.