Should Canada build a spy service to collect foreign intelligence through human sources?

This is a question that is worth asking because the country faces the increasingly unstable relations with its neighbor in the neighborhood, to which Canada has long relied on the admission of key intelligence.

Stephanie Carvin, a former national security analyst, says it’s “something we should consider” or at least discuss – and she is Not alone advocating for Canada to evaluate how it can Increase efforts in foreign intelligence.

However, developing such a service would require significant resources and political shopping to move forward.

“It’s not something you do-not-newill,” said Carvin, an associate professor of international affairs at the Carleton University of Ottawa.

Why would we like it?

Considering the unpredictability of US President Donald Trump’s intention to Canada, it is fair to be concerned about the influence that could be shared by Washington with Ottawa.

Separately, each side of the intelligence service collected by other parties will not necessarily do so with regard to Canada’s interests.

So, there are already limitations to what Canada has direct control when it comes to foreign intelligence service.

Don’t Canada collect intelligence?

Yes, but not necessarily the way it could be dedicated, the human service of foreign intelligence.

Existing Canadian security intelligence service (CSIS) collects intelligence, but his efforts are aimed at security threats That Canada is facing. The Canadian army also collects intelligence information on the threats associated with the defense.

There is also a establishment of communication safety (CSE), a country agencies in the country, which collects foreign intelligence service But by electronic means, not human sources.

The Canada Foreign Affairs has a small program known as the Global Security Reporting Program (GSRP), which includes graduates of information collection, but openly. It’s a relatively small program, Including approximately 30 people. This is not an intelligence agency.

What about five eyes?

Canada was part of the intelligence exchange network with five eyes-with the US, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand- for decades.

It was a useful arrangement for these members – including Canada.

“We consume more intel than we produce,” said Phil Gurk, former analyst CSIS -A CSE.

Yet the financial time Reported in February That Peter Navarro, an older Trump advisor, floated with the idea of ​​throwing Canada out of the net – though Later denied the allegation.

“Never, we would never endanger our national security – ever – with allies like Canada,” ” Navarro told reporters.

The story, however, expressed concern that American willingness to share vital information in the future could be less guaranteed – although some say it is unlikely that Canada could be started from five eyes.

Former CSIS Analyst Jessica Davis said that the division of the Intel among the five eyes was usually guided by “interests and operating exchanges”, and now Canada has overlapped more strongly in certain issues, such as the usual threats on the border.

“The United States really can’t throw us out,” she told CBC Radio Current last monthNoting that this would be harmful to the wider group.

While gourmet agreeing, “no mechanism” to remove a five -eyed partner, she admits that if Canada lost access, “we would have to fill that gap somehow.”

Do our allies do that?

Yes, and as gorge points out, Canada is the only member of the five eyes without a human service of foreign intelligence.

The secret intelligence service of the United Kingdom, also known as MI6, has has been acting for more than a century.

In the United States, the central intelligence agency was created after World War II.

Down below, the Australian secret intelligence service (Assis) “quietly protecting Australia and his lifestyle” Since 1952. A new Zealand security intelligence service (NZSIS) was founded, which also has national security and the role of foreign intelligence service A few years later.

Both Germany and France have their own foreign intelligence services, while the European Union has been persuaded create your own.

Did this idea appear before?

Yes, but he never rooted.

“This is a problem that occurs every 10 years,” Carvin said.

Conservatives, for example, suggested the development of such a service as part Their electoral platform 2006.

But the proposed Canadian Agency for abroad never came after winning the elections, and Stephen Harper became a prime minister, or during the next two terms of his party.

No such service has been developed even with former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. 2023, his then national security adviser Jody Thomas said that “she was not on the agenda of politics” at that time.

Wouldn’t that be hard to do?

It would probably take years to appear, given the tasks of the installation of a legal framework for this, the construction of an organization of scientist and training spies that would serve.

In 2006, former CSIS director Reid Morden estimated that he would take about 10 years in order to train enough staff to meet the needs of such a service. And at that time he put a price of $ 200 million in a neighborhood.

Gurus and Carvin agree that this will not happen quickly.

“Creating one of Zero is simply a non-stain,” Gurk said, “because it would take so long.”

Are there any other options?

Gourn says that he thinks that – and for him the answer is spreading the reach of CSIS outside the borders of Canada through legislation.

This would also mean turning the CSI organization that would make both foreign and security intelligence service. Gourdes points out that there are other organizations in the world that work both, and the NZSI -and in New Zealand, is one example. The Netherlands also has a double service.

CSIS should be more resources as a result.

Carvin, similarly, says he believes Canada can do more with the tools he now has.

Is there a political will?

CBC News asked five major political parties if he would support Canada in the development of his own human foreign intelligence service.

Bloc Québécois said the concept was worthy of studying, although it could not say if such a step would be needed. This suggested that Canada may seem to deepen his partnership with France and other allies who are not part of five eyes.

The party also raised the point that spying carries different risks, including harmful relations with other countries.

The Green Party Elizabeth May Party said the party did not support the launch of a new service, saying that our “existing apparatus for the gathering of intelligence data” and our diplomatic ties are sufficient. But the party says it is crucial to maintain a five -eyed partnership “despite the recent threats of the US president.”

NDP spokeswoman Anne McGrath said that Canada “must have tools needed to defend”, expressing support for the work CSIS performs today.

“CSIS and his term are in force that the Canadians would be safe from international threats, including abroad in our democracy involvement,” McGrath said in a statement. “The new Democrats also support the stronger service of foreign sides, which will build Canadian ties and awareness of issues around the world.”

The Conservative Party did not answer questions by e-mail about the issue of the human side of intelligence.

Even the liberals did not return the comment, although the liberal leader Mark Carney recently said “we have to keep an eye on ourselves”, we have to keep an eye on ourselves, “we have to look out for ourselves” In the midst of moving security priorities neighboring USA