House of Commons, Committee on National Defence

The letter · 26 September 2026

Re: RE: Supplement to my brief of 29 August — the Emergency Management Act requires a plan for war, and none appears to exist

Hello,

On 1 September 2026 the committee wrote: "The brief (both parts) will be translated. It will be circulated to all committee members and published on the committee's web site once it is available in both official languages."

On 26 September 2026, 25 days later, the page of the study Arctic Transformation lists 4 briefs. This brief is not among them.

A second supplement follows below. It adds 2 documents of this week that did not exist when the brief was filed, and 2 recommendations.

1. Confirm in writing the date on which the brief and the supplement of 30 August were circulated to the members, or the date on which they will be
2. Add the second supplement to the document for members, and publish the 3 parts together on the study page
3. Remove the street address and the telephone number from the 2 earlier parts before circulation and publication, and keep the name

Answer by 2 October 2026. After that date the request goes to the Chair of the Committee, and the dates go into the public record at https://dzyuban.com/legal/record/

Respectfully,
Danilo Dzyuban
----------------------------------------

SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO THE BRIEF OF 29 AUGUST 2026.

Study: Arctic Transformation: Opportunities for Security, Defence, and Partnerships in the North.

Submitted by Danilo Dzyuban, Ottawa, Ontario
26 September 2026

WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAID THIS WEEK.

On 23 September 2026 the Prime Minister told the New York Times that he had prepared for the "extreme tail risk" that the United States might order military action against Canada. CBC News reported the interview on 25 September 2026.

On 25 September 2026 the Government announced a non-binding term sheet with Saab for 6 GlobalEye airborne early warning aircraft. The release states that the capability will "defend Canadians and enhance Canada's security by detecting and deterring threats across the Arctic and beyond", and that it can "detect, track and prioritize threats at long range, including aircraft, missiles and drones".

WHAT THE BRIEF SAID ON 29 AUGUST.

The brief told the committee that surveillance and infrastructure programmes in the North assume that escalation beyond the conventional level is somebody else's responsibility. On 25 September the Government announced one of those programmes.

An airborne early warning aircraft carries no weapon. It sees the missile coming and has nothing to stop it with. The release calls that deterrence.

WHAT THE DEPARTMENT WILL NOT SAY.

The brief asked the committee to require the Department of National Defence to state in writing whether it holds any assessment of the assurances by allied states to defend Canada against nuclear attack. The supplement of 30 August asked for the plan that paragraph 6(2)(d) of the Emergency Management Act requires in the case of war, and for whether the risk of nuclear attack has been identified under paragraph 6(1)(a).

On 17 September 2026 the Department answered 3 access requests on those questions, 14 items in all, with the same 46 words. It neither confirms nor denies that any record exists. 3 complaints against that answer were filed with the Information Commissioner on 20 September 2026.

In the Prime Minister's words, the Government has prepared for the "extreme tail risk" of military action against Canada by the state on whose nuclear forces Canada's defence against nuclear attack rests. The Department will not say whether it has identified nuclear attack on Canada as a risk at all.

TWO ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS.

8. That the committee ask the Department of National Defence whether the planning for extreme tail risk that the Prime Minister described on 23 September 2026 covers nuclear attack on Canada, and on which state's assurance that planning relies

9. That the committee ask the Department what stops a nuclear attack on Canada once 6 airborne early warning aircraft have detected it, and require it to name the instrument that obliges any state to respond

Danilo Dzyuban
Ottawa, Ontario