Wednesday May 24, 2023
So there we have it. Former Governor General David Johnston delivered his long-awaited report on Chinese interference in our federal elections. It's fairly thorough, looking at the intelligence process in Canada, the importance of democracy, how governments make decisions, etc., etc., etc. And finally, Johnston advised against creating a public inquiry into the matter.
Hip, hip, hooray… to an extent. I have argued on these pages and elsewhere that there is no need for a public inquiry into what Beijing has done to undermine our electoral process. My reasons are varied: a public inquiry would not allow the broadcast of highly classified and highly sensitive intelligence; inquiries in Canada have a habit of making many recommendations that are rarely acted upon; inquiries cost money and money is scarce these days; we already know a lot about what happened thanks to intelligence leaks.
And yet his report feels to me like something written by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau himself, questioning why we paid Johnston in the first place. Trudeau's team is absolved of any serious responsibility for not taking action to prevent/punish the Chinese regime for its actions. Blame lies elsewhere, primarily with the country's intelligence services and the partisan abuse of the problem by the opposition party.
Champagne bottles must be uncorked at 24 Sussex Drive! Oh wait, the place is under renovation and Trudeau currently lives on the Governor General's estate, of which Johnston was one, so... (conspiracy theorists will play with that!).
I may be biased, having spent 32 years in Canadian intelligence - with both CSIS and CSE whose senior figures were allegedly consulted on the report - but the blame game seems to be a classic case of 'shoot the messenger'.
Johnston says that there is something wrong with the way intelligence is distributed in government: this is probably true, but contrary to his suggestion, it is not the fault of CSIS/CSE, but rather of the recipients of this valuable information. Intelligence may be sent to departments rather than individuals, but this is done to ensure maximum exposure (by sending to one person, you run the risk of messages getting lost in someone's inbox while on vacation).
In addition, Johnston also devoted considerable time and space to undermining intelligence, calling it "rumor" and piecemeal, suggesting that it is neither necessary nor reliable. Yes, not all intelligence is accurate (human sources can lie: ask the Americans about Curveball and Iraq's weapons of mass destruction), but the foundation of intelligence is multi-source confirmation.
I may no longer have access to this data, but from what I have read in OSINT (open source intelligence), it is clear that the information handed over on a silver platter to senior government officials was from multiple sources and was collected, processed and analyzed. for many, many years. This was not the "single brush stroke" that Johnston described in his report.
He also made sure to reiterate the point that intelligence can lead to a racist mentality. I find this very shameful because it suggests that our intelligence agencies are part of a smear campaign against Chinese Canadians in some kind of anti-Asian campaign. His mere emphasis of this point in several places in his report calls for an apology to the men and women of CSIS and CSE who work hard to provide the information needed to make better decisions.
Overall, I was struck by how Johnston's words left a very strong impression that the intelligence was not very good: if that was true, why would any government use it? Again, this is inaccurate and unfair.
Then there's the allegation of "maliciousness" by the individual who leaked CSIS intelligence to The Globe and Mail. No, I do not support such leaks, although I do share the leaker's frustration at decades of government inaction in the face of such blatant foreign interference. However, if this information had not been made public, Canadians would have been unaware of this threat and the government's inaction. Calling it "malice" is an insult to the individual, and a remarkable assumption on Johnston's part.
The bottom line is that this report was a waste of time and money. The government leaves more or less without a cow (um, is that a racist saying?) and we all move on. Our own officials do not care enough about our democracy to defend it. And China and others are learning that screw-ups in our society go unpunished.
