Danielle Smith, widely recognized as a key figure in discussions about foreign interference in Canada, has been granted a “Top Secret” security clearance, according to her press secretary on Thursday.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, clear-eyed about the United States (Photo: Bank of England/Flickr).
Sam Blackett mentioned during a conversation with The Canadian Press that “the premier has now obtained her top-secret clearance in order to receive briefings on issues related to national security.”
Earlier this spring, a reporter from CP noted that Ms. Smith requested the clearance “so she could be aware of any foreign interference attempts in the province.” This request seems somewhat unnecessary. One could simply keep an eye on the Twitter/X and Truth Social feeds of U. S. President Donald Trump and his close associates. But then again, who knows?
In March, Canadian security and intelligence expert Wesley Wark described Ms. Smith’s desire for clearance as “both naïve and an admission.”
“The naïve part is that foreign interference will happen if any foreign entity, state or non-state, decides to pursue such a campaign in its own self-interest,” he wrote. “The confession part in Smith’s request for a security clearance is a clear acknowledgment that provincial bodies have no capacity to understand the prospects of foreign interference targeting Alberta.”
On the surface, the argument for granting Ms. Smith such a security clearance – remember, “Top Secret” means something serious in Canada – doesn’t seem particularly convincing.
Canadian security expert Wesley Wark (Photo: Balsillie School of International Affairs).
Whether it’s been through her work with foreign-funded ideological think tanks or her studies influenced by outside ideologies at university, or even her support for Alberta’s separatist movement where some amateur diplomats are trying to negotiate Canada’s division with foreign officials-throughout her career, Alberta’s premier has associated with groups aiming to influence or take control over Canada.
Does she consider herself a separatist? She says no. She claims to support an oddly defined sovereign Alberta within Canada. However, her actions suggest she leans strongly towards being a committed separatist who seems very taken by MAGA ideas.
Most of the external influences Ms. Smith has engaged with largely come from corporate interests based in the U. S., though some individuals she took selfies with during her visit to Mar-a-Lago last January had ties with various U. S. government agencies.
Canadian media often perceive influence from non-state actors like foreign companies as harmless simply because it doesn’t originate from official government sources. This line of thinking is clearly misguided.
Moreover, it seems tough for Canadians to acknowledge that our neighbor across the world’s longest undefended border may not have our best interests at heart-and might even wish harm upon us-despite plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise.
Despite Prime Minister Mark Carney’s apparent awakening regarding this issue, it’s likely that many involved in safeguarding Canadian national security haven’t fully grasped it yet. When vetting Ms. Smith’s security background, they might have focused more on her alleged Ukrainian great-grandfather’s loyalties than on hers.
However, Dr. Wark noted there exists “huge potential for foreign interference from the United States in the separatist process in Alberta,” especially given U. S attitudes towards Canada and all the talk about making Canada its 51st state emerging from both White House rhetoric and right-wing social media platforms.
Even without considering her ideological background, Ms. Smith poses significant risks for holding a security clearance due to her opportunistic political style and tendency to speak freely. Conservative commentator Andrew Coyne recently likened her behavior to that of a magpie; it’s hard to believe she’d resist using secret information for political gain if given access-something Canadian security agencies surely recognize.
It’s unclear how exactly these security clearances are managed for provincial politicians; whether Ms. Smith underwent thorough questioning or just filled out paperwork remains uncertain.
“The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Government Security Screening program investigates and provides security assessments on persons whose employment with the Government of Canada requires them to have lawful access to classified information or sensitive sites such as major ports, airports nuclear facilities or the Parliamentary Precinct,” states federal documentation.
But does this same procedure apply when it comes to provincial politicians? That still isn’t clarified.
According to CP reports “the Privy Council Office-which answers directly under Prime Minister Mark Carney-is responsible for issuing security clearances.” (Emphasis added.) However it raises doubts whether they possess enough expertise or personnel necessary actually conduct proper checks.
The federal website mentions three levels concerning sensitive information whose release could damage national interest: Confidential, Secret and Top Secret; but realistically there may be even higher classifications along with substantial need-to-know restrictions.
Do these classifications also extend toward provincial politicians? Once again-not entirely certain.
Source link
Canadian security expert Wesley Wark (Photo: Balsillie School of International Affairs).
Whether it’s been through her work with foreign-funded ideological think tanks or her studies influenced by outside ideologies at university, or even her support for Alberta’s separatist movement where some amateur diplomats are trying to negotiate Canada’s division with foreign officials-throughout her career, Alberta’s premier has associated with groups aiming to influence or take control over Canada.
Does she consider herself a separatist? She says no. She claims to support an oddly defined sovereign Alberta within Canada. However, her actions suggest she leans strongly towards being a committed separatist who seems very taken by MAGA ideas.
Most of the external influences Ms. Smith has engaged with largely come from corporate interests based in the U. S., though some individuals she took selfies with during her visit to Mar-a-Lago last January had ties with various U. S. government agencies.
Canadian media often perceive influence from non-state actors like foreign companies as harmless simply because it doesn’t originate from official government sources. This line of thinking is clearly misguided.
Moreover, it seems tough for Canadians to acknowledge that our neighbor across the world’s longest undefended border may not have our best interests at heart-and might even wish harm upon us-despite plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise.
Despite Prime Minister Mark Carney’s apparent awakening regarding this issue, it’s likely that many involved in safeguarding Canadian national security haven’t fully grasped it yet. When vetting Ms. Smith’s security background, they might have focused more on her alleged Ukrainian great-grandfather’s loyalties than on hers.
However, Dr. Wark noted there exists “huge potential for foreign interference from the United States in the separatist process in Alberta,” especially given U. S attitudes towards Canada and all the talk about making Canada its 51st state emerging from both White House rhetoric and right-wing social media platforms.
Even without considering her ideological background, Ms. Smith poses significant risks for holding a security clearance due to her opportunistic political style and tendency to speak freely. Conservative commentator Andrew Coyne recently likened her behavior to that of a magpie; it’s hard to believe she’d resist using secret information for political gain if given access-something Canadian security agencies surely recognize.
It’s unclear how exactly these security clearances are managed for provincial politicians; whether Ms. Smith underwent thorough questioning or just filled out paperwork remains uncertain.
“The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) Government Security Screening program investigates and provides security assessments on persons whose employment with the Government of Canada requires them to have lawful access to classified information or sensitive sites such as major ports, airports nuclear facilities or the Parliamentary Precinct,” states federal documentation.
But does this same procedure apply when it comes to provincial politicians? That still isn’t clarified.
According to CP reports “the Privy Council Office-which answers directly under Prime Minister Mark Carney-is responsible for issuing security clearances.” (Emphasis added.) However it raises doubts whether they possess enough expertise or personnel necessary actually conduct proper checks.
The federal website mentions three levels concerning sensitive information whose release could damage national interest: Confidential, Secret and Top Secret; but realistically there may be even higher classifications along with substantial need-to-know restrictions.
Do these classifications also extend toward provincial politicians? Once again-not entirely certain.Can we trust that Ms. Smith ‘s assigned level actually corresponds correctly as Top Secret , per what stated by Her Press Secretary ? Insufficient proof exists. I suspect it likely aligns more closely as Secret , similar suggestion made by Dr. Wark ‘s March 19 Substack piece.
Additionally , it’s probable The PCO decision was purely politically motivated , meaning secrets available To ms. smith – primarily communicated orally – probably won’t be anything off-the-shelf high-level classified info.
Finally , echoing Dr. Wark’s observations: can Ms. Smith ‘s separatist-heavy United Conservative Party effectively collaborate With Canadian Security Agencies while continually framing matters As grievances against Ottawa ?
“The very best weapon To respond Foreign Interference is Being able To inform The public That It Is happening,” declared Dr. Wark.“Would The smith Government put itself In A position Of dependence On Federal authorities ? Would It Be willing To communicate With Albertans About Foreign Interference possibilities And realities In regard To their separative petition Or referendum?”
It’s pretty obvious The answer Is No For Both questions posed above.
So Will Ottawa correct Any misinformation Should ms. smith misrepresent Or spin Information Gained From Her ‘top secret’ Briefings? That’s anyone’s guess.
Source link
