thank you for your analysis of the rather Bland report presented by the Canadian security intelligence service for 2025.
I think what is remarkable is actually toning down the PRC‘s active espionage and recruitment processes so as to make it more vanilla.
Sure, one could read between the lines for those of us who actually follow the aggressive, transnational repression, digital repression, and cyber attacks by the Chinese communist party and their other proxies as part of the CRINKS Alliance but I I’m interested in knowing whether or not you feel that this report provides significant cover for the current government to pursue their wrongheaded strategic partnership with the Chinese communist party.
I’ll be writing my own analysis on my Substack, but I’ve already tweeted about my concern as has former CSIS intelligence analyst Denis Molonaro.
Much better division of labour, as long as the various separate agencies don't silo themselves or get captured by their overburden. The lateral connections need to remain strong, like the load-bearing beams of a house, so the intelligence is shared across all of them.
Might it not be rather less disruptive to keep CSIS roughly as is and establish a separate foreign intelligence agency, perhaps modeled on Australia with ASIO and ASIS?
Rick you are right that we need. to have the CFIS Canadian Foreign Intelligence Service but it can not report directly to Public Safety but rather a committee of parliamentarians. “High level” security cleared because less than 20 would qualify and that might be generous.
But a necessary process to ensure we understand the global threat environment and better understand the externalities of global economic security ebbs and flows.
a new agency with a clean slate, different mindset, training and recruitment standards, and none of the 'old guard'. prevent the mistakes of when CSIS grew from the RCMP and inherited years of a blended, problematic culture that still permeates.
This is a much appreciated & thoughtful analysis. I'm an American based in DC who is new to your writings, Mr. Wark. It's immediately apparent that I've missing some important insights. Especially with reference to the impact that punative tariffs and President Trump's Arctic pressures are having on security imperatives on both sides of the border.
Thank you for an insightful article Mr. Wark. Not knowledgeable in these matters it appears to me that an ad hoc committee should be established to analyze the entire CSE, CSIS, cyber processes and determine, as you recommended, the best approach to these matters. Do this right and do this once without creating any organizational silos. If that makes sense.
And judging the numbers of comments from persons versus the posted comments, thank you again for blocking the Cubanterroristnonsence commenter…
Dear Wesley,
thank you for your analysis of the rather Bland report presented by the Canadian security intelligence service for 2025.
I think what is remarkable is actually toning down the PRC‘s active espionage and recruitment processes so as to make it more vanilla.
Sure, one could read between the lines for those of us who actually follow the aggressive, transnational repression, digital repression, and cyber attacks by the Chinese communist party and their other proxies as part of the CRINKS Alliance but I I’m interested in knowing whether or not you feel that this report provides significant cover for the current government to pursue their wrongheaded strategic partnership with the Chinese communist party.
I’ll be writing my own analysis on my Substack, but I’ve already tweeted about my concern as has former CSIS intelligence analyst Denis Molonaro.
The report was as bland as English cooking.
"To be that leading middle power in a broken international system, Canada needs more foreign intelligence, a lot more."
Much better division of labour, as long as the various separate agencies don't silo themselves or get captured by their overburden. The lateral connections need to remain strong, like the load-bearing beams of a house, so the intelligence is shared across all of them.
Might it not be rather less disruptive to keep CSIS roughly as is and establish a separate foreign intelligence agency, perhaps modeled on Australia with ASIO and ASIS?
Rick you are right that we need. to have the CFIS Canadian Foreign Intelligence Service but it can not report directly to Public Safety but rather a committee of parliamentarians. “High level” security cleared because less than 20 would qualify and that might be generous.
But a necessary process to ensure we understand the global threat environment and better understand the externalities of global economic security ebbs and flows.
Agreed. Public Safety has proven far less effective that its predecessor Solicitor General Canada was.
a new agency with a clean slate, different mindset, training and recruitment standards, and none of the 'old guard'. prevent the mistakes of when CSIS grew from the RCMP and inherited years of a blended, problematic culture that still permeates.
It's not surprising that instead of aiming your hurtful words on criminal syndicate you aim them on CSIS. Good is good. Good can never be evil.
This is a much appreciated & thoughtful analysis. I'm an American based in DC who is new to your writings, Mr. Wark. It's immediately apparent that I've missing some important insights. Especially with reference to the impact that punative tariffs and President Trump's Arctic pressures are having on security imperatives on both sides of the border.
Thank you for an insightful article Mr. Wark. Not knowledgeable in these matters it appears to me that an ad hoc committee should be established to analyze the entire CSE, CSIS, cyber processes and determine, as you recommended, the best approach to these matters. Do this right and do this once without creating any organizational silos. If that makes sense.
And judging the numbers of comments from persons versus the posted comments, thank you again for blocking the Cubanterroristnonsence commenter…