Event Details

The event NATO at a Crossroads: Present Challenges and Future Trajectories was held on Friday November 7 to examine various challenges and demands NATO is currently facing due to an increasingly multipolar and conflictual world. The emergence of new hostile actors, hybrid threats, and attacks on the neoliberal order places an additional need for NATO to be adaptive and resilient.

As an influential member in NATO, Canada’s defence strategy is taking a noteworthy shift in light of a rapidly changing international environment. Prime Minister Mark Carney’s budget – referred to as Canada Strong – plans to invest an estimated , aimed at strengthening the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) while reaffirming its role in multinational organizations and NATO exercises. With this rapidly evolving domestic and international contexts in mind, EETN’s conference brought together an array of academics and political practitioners to discuss ongoing developments with the Alliance, its current status, as well as critical next steps to ensure a stable future.

Panel One: Academic Institutions

Our first panel convened scholars and researchers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds to reflect on NATO’s future, as well as the evolving landscape of Canadian defence and security. Speakers addressed persistent gaps in Canada’s defence posturing; they went on to highlight the need for more transparency and open communication with the public on national security priorities. They also examined how external actors– including the United States (US) and key European Allies – shape NATO’s strategic direction and, in turn, Canada’s position within the Alliance.

Speaker One: Dr. Christian Leuprecht (Professor, Royal Military College and Queen’s University)

Dr. Leuprecht’s presentation looked at the grand strategy of the US to reflect on how this has influenced NATO to previously change its approaches to global security, as well as how Canada should organize its own strategy. Dr. Leuprecht remarked on how despite the current unreliability of the US Administration, we should not be excessively concerned for the future of the Alliance. He highlighted that the grand strategy of the US has shifted historically and unpredictably since 2000. In 2007, its pivot towards Asia and the Indo-Pacific reflected a similar systemic shift; this being said, its land mission in Europe remains a priority requiring continued collaboration.

While the US may not be able to support Europe in the same way it has historically as a result of ongoing domestic economic struggles, it will remain essential for additional actors to supplant resources to boost European defence. Dr. Leuprecht identified that a major issue for Canada continues to be its lack of engagement and depth to its international partnerships. For example, Canada continues to struggle to establish deep and effective ties with the European Parliament. Dr. Leuprecht advised that it is a necessity for Canada to partner with fellow middle powers to reaffirm its international role and relevance. This includes countries in the Black Sea region, as well as the Weimar triangle – regions that remain critical threat vectors in the war with Russia and integral to maintaining peace in Europe. Therefore, Canada should look to give more to these partners and deepen bonds. When it comes to increasing defence spending, he states we need to clearly identify what we need to buy, how it is bought, and how it is paid for.

Additionally, considering when to focus on defence investment versus procurement remains a critical question. Overall, if Canada hopes to improve its ability to support its partners as well as cement its role in the international order, such domestic considerations, external pressures, and ongoing shifts need to be made transparent and clear.

Speaker Two: Dr. Benjamin Zyla (Professor, University of Ottawa)

Dr. Zyla’s presentation focused on four key themes: ongoing debates surrounding how much defence spending is “enough”; the diminishing coherence and contested meaning of “the West”; the importance of avoiding excessive pessimism when assessing global security trends; and the effects of no living memory of great war in Canada. On the question of minimum spending, Dr. Zyla noted this was a question of reduced importance; instead, policymakers need to identify where the maximum lies, what the money is spent on, and how this balances against sectors being cut. Money allocated to defence often does not get completely spent in a fiscal year, raising questions about internal logistics. Additionally, the grand story of why Canada needs additional defence spending is missing, making it difficult to convince the public that such spending is necessary. This disconnect can cause further friction between citizens and the government.

In response to the decline and diminished coherence of the West – a trend targeted and exploited by Russian actors – Dr. Zyla noted how much of this decline comes from within. The erosion of democratic norms within the transatlantic community, he highlights, has contributed to such a decline in status, enabling interference and external attacks by foreign actors. The solution to this normative decline must come from within the transatlantic community itself, and more importantly, it is vital Canadians remain optimistic. The current international system provides many opportunities for middle powers to work together, including in instances of mediation, niche diplomacy, and multilateral cooperation.

Finally, Dr. Zyla suggested that Canadian decision-makers must contend with the fact that the current generation has no living memory of great war. This has a significant impact on the ways threats are framed in society, the way civil society perceives such frames, as well as the government’s ability to respond through defence spending. A major takeaway from his presentation is that improving Canada’s defence is not about obvious concrete actions, but the subtler ones which work to legitimate and support Canada’s national and international ambitions.

Speaker Three: Dr. Anne Fitz-Gerald (Professor and Director of Balsillie School of International Affairs)

Dr. Fitz-Gerald focused her presentation on the importance of considering data and technology in future defence planning. She suggests these dimensions of war have changed in recent years, requiring new approaches to address cognitive and data-driven tactics. Power has become increasingly vested in who owns the most intellectual property (IP) and who controls data, having ramifications for a nation’s sovereignty.

Dr. Fitz-Gerald suggests this new technological environment continues to be a major weak point for Canada, who has not built up the skills, products, and resources to excel in this industry. Civil and government workers do not have the tools to navigate this intangible world, both in policy and in threat responses. Decisions on deployment and sunsetting of legacy systems, along with innovation towards future ones, will have to be made. She presents Canada as an excellent candidate to become a specialist within this new context if the appropriate steps are taken.

A key component to this strategy is the Arctic, as reflected in Carney’s budget, which has the ideal environmental conditions to store, process, and receive data. Developing data centers in northern climates would also provide Canada with a stake in setting the rules of the technological game. Canada can use this to advocate for safe and responsible use of technology, reinforcing liberal values. Canada requires value-added products and services to prosper, which would create a technical specialist role, create passive income through IP, and create opportunities for collaboration with international partners. Otherwise, Canada may continue to face a drain on talent and patents, remaining ill-equipped to handle the new emerging frontiers of security.

Speaker Four: Dr. Luca Ratti (Professor, University of Rome III)

Dr. Ratti outlined the various historical crossroads that NATO has faced and advocated for its ability to resurrect itself. NATO’s history of adaptation makes it well-equipped to be able to handle various challenges and structural changes, suggesting that there should be a more positive outlook on the future of the Alliance. He noted how the crossroads today look different than before; there will certainly be setbacks, but the need to pivot is not a new experience.

Dr. Ratti went on to outline four major dynamics for the current resurrection of NATO: the revival of American leadership; the need for Europe to back up its defence promises with concrete action; the consolidation of the Nordic and Eastern flanks; and the consolidation of NATO’s values. The first two points both create an opportunity for transformation within European members, where countries can begin to strengthen their commitments and capabilities. This will create a stronger NATO, and in doing so, a stronger Europe. The final two points emphasize the need for geographic and ideological consolidation; the two newest members, Sweden and Finland, demonstrate good progress in consolidating flanks closest to Russia, leaving hope for the future. Finally, the neoliberal values of NATO need to be reaffirmed and fully committed too. The fractures between neoliberalism versus more traditional conservative ideologies have caused internal conflict, polarization, and an overall lack of cohesion, leaving NATO vulnerable.

Speaker Five: Dr. David Sichinava (Adjunct Research Professor, ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University)

Dr. Sichinava presented the results of his survey research conducted in Estonia, Latvia, Armenia, and Georgia. The goal of the study was to track the perception of public and security issues in the Baltics and South Caucasus. Conducted via interviews, the result provided interesting information regarding perceived threats, sentiments regarding allies, as well as challenges perceived by citizens. His study measured many different questions, however a few key ones stood out.

Regarding the perception of the biggest threat to their country, publics in Estonia, Latvia, and Georgia all ranked Russia as the first; Armenia ranked Azerbaijan as its leading concern. Political instability was the second biggest threat to all. The impact of actors like Russia, China, and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) were mixed, but generally skewed negatively (especially in Baltic states). Alternatively, Western organizations were seen more positively, though with mixed answers in the South Caucasus. Publics in the Baltics voiced strong support for the West, stating they believed the West would come to their aid in the case of an attack. Other countries however, still charged themselves with their own protection and survival. The impact of Canada was seen positively in the Baltics and inconclusive elsewhere.

Important conclusions drawn from the study include notes reflecting on the positive perceptions towards NATO and the European Union (EU) continuing to be common, even in the South Caucasus, where much uncertainty and distrust remains. This means there is still space for organizations that promote neoliberal values to connect with the population and mitigate autocratic influence. Additionally, in the South Caucasus, an area especially vulnerable to malign influence, there is a strong awareness and readiness to mobilize against threatening actors.

Speaker Six: Dr. Mihai Sebe (Lecturer, University of Bucharest and Head of the European Affairs Department; European Institute of Romania)

The final speaker of the panel discussed the importance of the Black Sea in the shifting geopolitical context, advocating for NATO to pay more attention to this region. The Black Sea region (BSR) is both a critical target for Russian threats, and a vital part of international trade with Europe. Dr. Sebe suggested that Romania as an important emerging actor in this region, highlighting its strategic geography and ongoing security initiatives. Critical to Romania’s strategy to defend the Black Sea is the Danube River, an important trade route that connects to the Balkans and beyond, which Dr. Sebe argued must be better utilized.

Looking to the future, the rebuilding of Ukraine will involve these trade routes, further underscoring its importance. Productive involvement from the BSR necessitates better and deeper cooperation with TĂĽrkiye, an area of opportunity.

A key part of Russia’s actions in the BSR is the development of hybrid tactics, which NATO needs to improve its responses to. Dr. Sebe pointed to the increasing automation of warfare, which has several important security implications, including the need for improved general regulation of technology, especially in domains of artificial intelligence (AI). In conclusion, the Eastern flank and BSR continue to experience rapid developments; NATO must be prepared to support and respond to these challenges.

Panel Two: Policymakers and Practitioners

Our second panel brought together four practitioners from the fields of defence, foreign policy, and diplomacy. Their discussions largely concentrated on the concrete steps already being taken to bolster NATO’s defence capabilities, as well as the strategic initiatives shaping the Alliance’s future trajectory.

Speaker One: H.E. Witold Dzielski (Ambassador, Embassy of Poland)

Witold Dzielski, Abassador to the Embassy of Poland, took the time to discuss the commitments that Poland has made towards NATO spending, bolstering the Eastern flank, as well as improvements that can be made to the strategic defence of Europe. As one of the top spenders in NATO, Poland has invested a greal deal in procurement, providing a robust defence framework. Dzielski also highlighted the extensive defence partnership that exist between Poland and Canada. The two have a long history of joint military cooperation and training bilaterally, as well as through NATO exercises. He noted how Canada recognizes the significant contributions of Poland in supporting Ukrainian refugees at the onset of Russia’s full-scale invasion, as well as Ukrainian resilience and defence capabilities overall. For Canada, deepening its ties with Poland is an important strategic move. This is reflected through the recent announcement from Prime Minister Mark Carney and Prime Minister Donald Tusk that they will continue to enhance interoperability and collaboration. This will be an important move in reaffirming Canadian partnerships to cement its role in defending European security.

Speaker Two: Eric Laporte (Executive Director, Defence and Security Relations Division, Global Affairs)

Eric Laporte focused on discussing how the framework of decision-making and strategy-setting have changed. He suggests that we are witnessing a reversion back to “classical” geopolitical norms and dynamics, in which power politics, balancing behaviour, and strategic interdependence are growing increasing important, accompanied by renewed concerns over absolute gains. There is also a renewed focus on deterrence as countries seek to contain various malign actors.

For Canada, key questions on sovereignty have emerged: what is sovereign capability? And what does it look like in a Canadian context? Important to agenda-setting will be determining what Canada needs in order to reinforce its independent capabilities, and how this will be acquired. Laporte also emphasized that the way hard power is implemented has changed, influencing the direction of spending.

Laporte ended with a reflection on how NATO is being enhanced through transformation, as the Alliance adapts itself to respond to a new reality. He outlines some key developments from Canada that should boost innovation in defence technology. First, a new climate change centre in Quebec that addresses the unique security risks that are emerging as a result of climate change; and second, the NATO Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA) has opened its North American Regional Office in Halifax, Nova Scotia. These recent events indicate important ways that Canada is contributing to NATO’s ongoing transformation.

Speaker Three: Kerry-Lynn Nankivell (Director, NATO and Europe, ADM(Pol) Department of National Defence)

Nankivell discussed the importance of policy alignment between Canada, NATO, the Department of National Defence (DND), and Global Affairs Canada (GAC). She identified a high level of alignment with NATO through the replication of key bureaucratic structures in Canada’s defence policymaking. She also emphasized that DND and GAC work closely together to ensure objectives and procedures are closely aligned, creating a robust policy framework for Canada. Canada is responding to not only Russia, but also the threat of Russia with others. This creates a need for a comprehensive defence plan between Canada and others in the international community.

Nankivell identified several challenges that need to be resolved, including responsible spending, which is an area of increasing concern and responsibility. She also identifies challenges around innovation and increasing the amount of available personnel for the CAF. She generally had a positive assessment towards the steps that Canada is making, and will be making, to ensure it establishes a productive role on the global stage.

Speaker Four: BGen Scott McKenzie (Director General, Canadian Joint Operations Command)

Scott McKenzie provided a presentation as a security practitioner on Canada’s ability to support NATO readiness. Canadian presence in Latvia has been a key part of this support, which has brought lessons and growth. The importance of pre-positioning was emphasized, where Canada participates in collective actions so that it can mobilize as fast as possible if a real threat occurs. Canada is increasingly participating in decision-making, rehearsals, plans, and drills which contributes to its role in NATO.

Since 2022, with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, NATO has been rapidly evolving and mobilizing, which Canada must ensure it keeps up with. McKenzie establishes that the fundamental problem facing NATO in regards to European security is its ability to demonstrate a sustained capacity to combat Russian threats over a long duration. The key to warding off Russia will be to demonstrate strength, which requires intense amounts of consolidation and cooperation. Consolidation remains an integral problem, as NATO countries still struggle to integrate forces on tactical and strategic levels. Countries also need to work on standardizing systems and equipment between each other to improve interoperability. Infrastructure also needs to be improved (ports, hospitals, borders, etc.) to enable rapid mobilization. This requires cooperation between militaries, governments, and private industries. Therefore, McKenzie advocates that overcoming logistical problems such as these are key to improving the effectiveness and success of NATO forces.

The post Event Report
NATO at a Crossroads: Present Challenges and Future Trajectories appeared first on Eastern European and Transatlantic Network.

Report Details: This event was held on Friday March 21st from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm to examine key security and defence issues in Eurasia and the Arctic regions that will shape Canada’s strategic landscape in 2025, particularly amid the uncertainty of a new U.S. presidential administration. As an Arctic country and NATO member, Canada has critical interests in evolving Northern and Eurasian security and defence environments. Canada has pledged to continue assistance to Ukraine and to safeguard its interests in the Arctic, has expanded its diplomatic presence in the Caucasus and must account for China’s ever-shifting global role, including in Central Asia. Bringing together scholars and practitioners, this conference will explore regional and global trends, identifying both emerging challenges and new opportunities for Canada in this complex security environment.

This event was organized by Eastern European and Transatlantic Network (EETN). For more, download the full report below:

The post EVENT REPORT: Navigating a Changed World: Security Challenges for Canada, Eurasia, and the Arctic appeared first on Eastern European and Transatlantic Network.

Overview: This hybrid event was held at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University aon Monday, April 7, 2025, from 4:00 pm to 5:30 pm, and co-hosted by the Eastern Europe and Transatlantic Network (EETN) and the Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence. The event featured a 50-minute lecture followed by a 40-minute Q&A discussion. Prof. Dr. Sven Biscop gave a compelling and timely lecture on the shifting realities of international politics, starting with Trump’s second presidency, followed by what it means for four key areas: Ukraine policy, European defence architecture, European decision-making, and global power politics.

Speaker: , lectures at Ghent University and leads the Europe in the World Programme at the Egmont – Royal Institute for International Relations in Brussels. He is a member of the Royal Academy for Overseas Sciences of Belgium and an honorary fellow of the European Security and Defence College of the EU.

Lecture summary: After the actions taken by US President Donald Trump’s administration, Dr. Biscop emphasized that we must stop relying on incremental responses, rather than committing to preparing for worst-case scenarios and forging an independent path forward for Europe. He outlined three of his guiding principles on which decision-makers can ground their strategies going forward: Trump will continue siding with Putin; there is the possibility of a J.D Vance’s presidency following Trump; Europe will be left on its own if there is to be a conventional war with Russia. Dr. Biscop elaborated on the following four key points:

Ukraine Policy

In response to Trump’s sidelining of both Ukraine and its allies, all the while undermining NATO solidarity, Europe must take the lead in shaping Ukraine’s security and future. Dr. Biscop argued that increasing defence spending and uniting Europe will aid in securing the continent rather than retrenching within national borders.

Europe should continue the EU accession process for Ukraine, maintain its independent sanction policy, and provide military support via the “coalition of the willing.”

Establishing a reassurance force to provide a security guarantee to deter further Russian aggression, ensuring Ukraine’s future security after a potential ceasefire.

Abandoning Ukraine would risk losing Moldova, Georgia, and other strategic access to the resources of Caucasus and connection with Central Asia while allowing Russia to expand its influence in eastern Europe.

If a ceasefire is reached, confirmation through the UN Security Council would be a novel way of pressuring China while ensuring Russian compliance given it would be politically difficult to veto their own ceasefire.

European Defense and Security Architecture

The EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) has fallen short due to its internal paradox – European governments do not trust a scheme for the harmonization of defence planning that does not include the US. However, it is vital that this scheme is implemented as the US may not join. Currently, without the strategic power that US provides, Europe has a sizeable force that is unable to achieve full operational coherency.

• Developing a European pillar within NATO and its defence planning process (not an EU-only pillar) ensures operational readiness without US support.
• Reaching military autonomy would require a shared investment in large-scale defence capabilities lasting at least 5 to 10 years, but planning must start now.
• The UK and France – Europe’s two nuclear powers – must be at the core, with other non-EU states like Canada, welcomed into the defence industrial framework through flexible cooperation.
• The role of the EU is to supports its member states to meet these targets by relaxing budgetary regulation, investing in the defence industry through the EU’s budget, reforming the borrowing power of member states, and facilitating coordination between member and partner states.
• Dr. Biscop emphasized the value of France’s independent nuclear arsenal, suggesting that an expanded French guarantee – co-funded by those under its protection – may be a viable path to a European nuclear backstop, while also prompting a reassessment of the UK’s American-dependent nuclear deterrent.

European Decision-Making

The European security architecture is complex and there is no single place to discuss all relevant aspects. Additionally, the current decision-making framework within the EU and NATO, which requires consensus or unanimity, is not agile enough to respond to today’s fast-moving geopolitical environment and crises. That is why an ad hoc format of the “coalition of the willing” must be implemented.

• The de facto war cabinet sits within the coalition of the willing and would include key states like France, the UK, Germany, Italy, and Poland, alongside institutional leaders.
• Non-EU countries like Canada and Turkey could be closely associated, as their involvement brings additional weight, legitimacy, military capability, and industrial mass.
• Such a coalition could eventually influence NATO’s command structure so that even if the US no longer wishes to act as the Supreme Allied Commander of Europe (SACEUR), Europeans can assume full and independent operational control.

Impact on the Great Power Politics

The world is not entering a “new” order, but rather returning to a multipolar system where great powers constantly compete, cooperate, and rival with each other, with the balance of power is consistently shifting. Furthermore, the unique post-WWII transatlantic alliance is unravelling, especially under Trump’s transactional approach, which may weaken trust and embolden adversaries.

Europe and Canada still have the resources, capabilities, and strategic options to act.

The erosion of US commitment to its allies signals that security guarantees can no longer be taken for granted, making the global environment more volatile.

The US under Trump is not replacing one alliance with another but with transactionalism.

China is neither a friend nor an enemy of Europe. There exists a plethora of issues that Europe and China can work cooperatively on, while remaining cautious and conditional in it approach.

Europe must now reinforce ties with like-minded middle powers, such as Canada and Global South countries, who share an interest in maintaining a rules-based international order and avoiding a global cold war between US and China.

The retreating of the US and its undermining of multilateral architecture raises the question of whether a multilateral system is viable without US.

The post EVENT REPORT: The The Rediscovery of Great Power Politics, Presented by Dr. Sven Biscop appeared first on Eastern European and Transatlantic Network.

Report Details: The event, which took place on January 31st, covered various topics concerning defence and security issues in the South Caucasus. Some participants discussed the future of peace talks and conflict resolutions in Armenia and Georgia regarding the ongoing political turmoil. Geographical disputes and election results framed presentations on protests and regional tensions within the Caucasus. Finally, a look at Canada’s role in supporting the security and development challenges facing Armenia and Georgia rounded out the presentations, leaving participants thinking about how to approach these issues from an international perspective. 

This event was organized by the Eastern Europe and Transatlantic Network (EETN).

For more, download the full report below.

The post Event Report: Armenia and Georgia on the Edge appeared first on Eastern European and Transatlantic Network.

Sneak Peak: The 30 October 2024 hybrid expert panel conference on the results of the 26 October 2024 Georgian elections was held at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, and in a virtual format via Zoom.

This event was organized by the Eastern Europe and Transatlantic Network (EETN) and the Institute of Russian and Eurasian Studies (EURUS) at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University in context of the Georgian Parliamentary election, which determined the country’s path to either a pro-European or pro-Russian orientation. The event hosted academic experts from Canada and Georgia to discuss the integrity of the election results, and the domestic, geopolitical, security, and future implications thereof, given the anti-Western sentiment in the re-elected governing party, Georgian Dream. 

For more, download the full report below.

The post Event Report: Between Europe and Russia appeared first on Eastern European and Transatlantic Network.