OK, what next?

A tyro plans to continue

Dear Readers,

A confession (or two or three). I had no idea what I was doing when I started up this substack newsletter in October. I had no strategic plan. Also, I am a complete tyro when it comes to anything to do with social media, as my colleagues at the Centre for International Governance Innovation (Canada’s best think thank!) would laughingly acknowledge. I am not on social media, and don’t have a web page. I tend to share the colourful view of the fictional Jackson Lamb in Mick Herron’s spy series, Slow Horses, who likes to refer to ‘faceplant,’ ‘twatter,’ and (my own invention, (‘instantnanogram’). I get that many people enjoy communicating on these platforms, for many reasons. They just aren’t for me. I like long form writing and can indulge in that on substack. BTW, for anyone interested in spy fiction and film, the Slow Horse series and its TV adaptation (now in Season 2) with Gary Oldman and Kristin Scott Thomas is must read/must see.

A third confession. I had/have no imperial ambitions for this newsletter (Ha, they all say that). I expected to be writing for a very small audience consisting of loyal but reluctant family, and friends and colleagues in the field of national security and intelligence. This is, in Canada, a very small field and we all know each other, for better or for worse (as the Bilbo Baggins farewell soliloquy in The Hobbit goes) I thought maybe 25-50 or so readers would be good. But the readership has expanded to something close to 500 (and maybe it will continue to grow, who knows). Deduction—there are many readers who I do not know and this makes me want to continue. I have always said that there is a wider public interest in national security and intelligence issues than our political leaders like to think. Maybe this forum is a small proof of that.

I originally started this newsletter with the notion that there would be lots to write about as the hearings before the Public Order Emergency Commission got underway. And there was. I couldn't keep up with it all, as much as I would have liked to write something about every new revelation that came pouring out. Now the POEC has grown quiet-until its report is made public in February.

So what is my plan? I hope to continue to write about a range of interesting developments in national security and intelligence, primarily as they relate to Canada. Many of these issues get scant attention in the media—and I am not faulting the media for that. They go wide, I go narrow. But ever since I began my study of national security and intelligence issues, (an undisclosed long time ago) I remain fascinated and continue to believe in their fundamental importance to good governance and societal welfare (the old Canadian trope—peace, order and good governance).

Because this newsletter reaches beyond my circle of acquaintances and fellow experts, perhaps it is high time I said something about myself (who knows what assortment of bios is floating out there). So here goes. I am an academic by training and profession. I first got hooked on intelligence studies at Cambridge University, which is full of the ghosts of spies, and when I was a student there still had some senior dons (profs) who had worked in British intelligence during World War Two. I did a Ph.D. at the London School of Economics on British intelligence and Nazi Germany during the 1930s. When I came back to Canada to look for an academic post ( I got lucky, landing first at McGill, then the University of Calgary and eventually the University of Toronto), I arrived just as the MacDonald royal commission that led to the establishment of Canada’s first civilian security intelligence agency was winding up. Heady times—I learned Canada did intelligence. From the 1990s through to the post 9/11 period I became increasingly focused on contemporary issues and public policy matters around the state of Canadian national security and intelligence. This included a fascinating stint on an experimental body called the Prime Minister’s Advisory Council on National Security—an experiment that deserves reviving. I have testified over the past two decades before Parliamentary committees, served as an expert witness on national security issues before the Federal court and provincial superior courts, written reports for agents of Parliament such as the Auditor General and the Information Commissioner. I have written lots of Op Eds for the media. I suppose you could call it a public facing career, not the usual thing in academia. Its been a blast. I am especially proud of having been put on the Russian sanctions list, possibly for wondering why Canada had not bothered to expel any Russian intelligence officers, unlike all our NATO counterparts, since the start of the war in Ukraine.

So what next in this unplanned writing journey? I think the tempo of substack columns will vary—not sure when I will find the rhythm of this. I have two topics in mind for near term exploration—one on the recently announced Canadian Indo-Pacific strategy, the other on critical infrastructure. Other topics will come up, as they always do when it comes to national security and intelligence.

I will continue to encourage guest columnists.

I might get better at the technology of substack, but I make no promises. Maybe I will find a way to add AV bells and whistles, but the core will remain Op Ed style long-form essays.

I hope you will find a continuing desire to read this newsletter.

PS. The reason that this newsletter has such an unimaginative name is that I didn't realize I was naming it, as I staggered through the substack initiation, until too late. Now I am afraid to change it.

Sincerely,

Wesley