Should Canada build a spy service to gather foreign intelligence through human sources?
It is a question that is worth asking him as the country faces an increasingly unstable relationship with his neighbor next door, of which Canada has trusted for a long time to obtain key intelligence.
Stephanie Carvin, former national security analyst of the Federal Government, says it is “something we should consider”, or at least have a debate about, and is not alone to advocate by Canada to evaluate how you can boost your foreign intelligence efforts.
However, developing such service would require significant resources and a political purchase to advance.
“This is not something you do in Willy way,” said Carvin, an associate professor of International Affairs at Carleton University in Ottawa.
Why would we like this?
Given the unpredictability of the intentions of US President Donald Trump to Canada, it is fair to worry about the impact that Washington shares with Ottawa.
Separated from that, any foreign intelligence gathered by other parts will not necessarily have been done with the interests of Canada in mind.
Therefore, there are already limits of what Canada has direct control when it comes to foreign intelligence.
Canada does not gather intelligence?
Yes, but not necessarily in the way a dedicated service and foreign human intelligence could.
The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) collects intelligence, but its efforts are oriented to the security threats faced by Canada. The Canadian army, in the same way, brings together intelligence on defense -related threats.
There is also the communications security establishment (CSE), the country’s cyber intelligence agency, which collects foreign intelligence but through electronic means, instead of human sources.
Foreign Affairs of Canada has a small program known as the Global Security Reports Program (GSRP), which involves diplomats collecting information, but openly. It is a relatively small program, which involves approximately 30 people. It is not an intelligence agency.
What about the five eyes?
Canada has been part of the Five Eyes Intelligence Sharing network, along with the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, for decades.
It has been a beneficial agreement for these members, including Canada.
“We consume more intel than we produce,” said Phil Gurski, former CSIS and CSE analyst.
However, Financial Times reported in February that Peter Navarro, a Trump’s main advisor, floated the idea of expelling Canada from the network, although he later denied the accusation.
“Never, we would never endanger our national security, never with allies like Canada,” Navarro told reporters.
However, history raised concerns that the disposition of Americans to share vital information could be less guaranteed in the future, although some say that Canada can be torn from the five eyes.
The current23:05Could the United States expel Canada from the Five Eyes spy network?
The White House has denied the reports that the United States is trying to expel Canada from the Five Eyes, the espionage network that both countries share with the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. We observe the critical role that the United States plays in global intelligence and if it remains a reliable partner.
The former CSIS analyst, Jessica Davis, said that Intel’s exchange between the five eyes is generally driven by “interesting interests and exchanges, with the United States and Canada with more strongly superimposed concerns about certain issues, such as common threats on the border.
“The United States can’t really kick us,” he told CBC Radio The current Last month, pointing out that doing so would be harmful to the broadest group.
While Gurski agrees that there is no “mechanism” to eliminate a five -eyed companion, he acknowledges that if Canada lost access, “we would have to fill that emptiness in some way.”
Do our allies do this?
Yes, and as Gurski points out, Canada is the only member of the five eyes without a human service of foreign intelligence.
The United Kingdom’s secret intelligence service, also known as MI6, has operated for more than a century.
In the United States, the Central Intelligence Agency arose after World War II.
Below, the Secret Intelligence Service of Australia (ASIS) has been “in silence to Australia and its way of life” since 1952. The New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS), which has a national security role and foreign intelligence, established a few years later.
Both Germany and France have their own foreign intelligence services, while the European Union has been urged to create its own.
Has this idea emerged before?
Yes, but he has never taken away.
“This is a problem that arises every 10 years or so,” said Carvin.
The conservatives, for example, proposed to develop this service as part of their electoral platform in 2006.
But the proposed foreign intelligence agency never became after they won those elections and Stephen Harper became Prime Minister, or during the two subsequent mandates of his party.
Nor was this service developed under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. In 2023, his then national security advisor, Jody Thomas, said “was not on the policy agenda” at that time.
Wouldn’t this be difficult to do?
It would probably take years to make existence, given the tasks of establishing a legal framework for this, building an organization from scratch and training the spies that would serve.
In 2006, the former director of CSIS, Reid Morden, estimated that he would take approximately 10 years to obtain enough personnel to meet the needs of said service. And he put the price, at that time, in the neighborhood of $ 200 million.
Gurski and Carvin agree that it would not happen quickly.
“Creating one from scratch is simply a non -initial,” said Gurski, “because it would take so long” to achieve it.
Are there other options?
Gurski says yes, and for him, the answer is to expand the scope of CSIS out of Canada’s borders through legislation.
It would also mean CSI into an organization that would do foreign and security intelligence. Gurski points out that there are other organizations in the world that both do, being the New Zealand Nzsis an example. The Netherlands also have a dual service.
CSIS would need more resources, as a result, he says.
Carvin, similarly, says he thinks Canada can do more with the tools he has now.
Is there political will?
CBC News asked five important political parties if they would support Canada developing their own human intelligence human service.
The Québécois block said the concept is worth studying, although I could not say if that step would be necessary. He suggested that Canada could seek to deepen their associations with France and other allies that are not part of the five eyes.
The party also raised the point that espionage entails several risks, including harmful relations with other countries.
The co-leader of the Green party, Elizabeth May, said the party does not support the launch of a new service, saying that our “existing intelligence collection apparatus” and our diplomatic ties are sufficient. But the party says it is essential to maintain the Five Eyes association “despite the recent threats of the US president.”
NDP spokeswoman Anne McGrath said that Canada “must have the tools to defend us,” expressing her support to CSIS’s work today.
“CSIS and their mandate are in their place to keep Canadians safe from international threats, including foreign interference in our democracy,” McGrath said in a statement. “The new Democrats also support a stronger foreign service, which will build Canada’s connections and consciousness with the problems around the world.”
The Conservative Party did not answer the questions by email on the subject of a human service of foreign intelligence.
The liberals also did not answer a comment, although liberal leader Mark Carney said recently “we have to take care of ourselves,” amid the changing security priorities of the neighbors of the United States.
