Secure Line

In this episode of Secure Line, Jessica Davis, Stephanie Carvin, and Leah West are joined by leading Canadian national security law expert Craig Forcese to unpack a timely and complex question: is international law breaking down—or simply evolving under pressure?
The conversation begins with the concept of “rupture” in the global order, sparked by recent political rhetoric and shifting geopolitical dynamics. Drawing on history, Forcese argues that disruption is not new to international law; rather, it has always adapted alongside great power competition. The discussion explores whether today’s challenges—particularly U.S. behavior, Russian aggression, and conflict involving Iran—represent a true break from the rules-based system or a continuation of long-standing tensions.
The episode dives deep into the legal frameworks governing the use of force, including self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter, and examines how states justify (or fail to justify) military action. A key theme is the importance of legal discourse: even when states act unlawfully, they typically invoke international law to legitimize their behavior—raising concerns when they stop doing so.
The hosts also explore the weakening role of the United Nations Security Council, the rise of “grey zone” tactics that operate below the threshold of war, and the growing complexity of attributing state responsibility—particularly in conflicts involving proxies like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis.
Despite these pressures, the episode offers a cautiously optimistic view. International law, while imperfect and often contested, still shapes state behavior, constrains escalation, and underpins global alliances. For middle powers like Canada, the challenge is not to abandon the system, but to reinforce it—maintaining the “grit” that slows the slide toward conflict.
Ultimately, the episode asks: if international law isn’t dead, what role should it play in an increasingly unstable world?

This episode of Secure Line features Dr. Cassandra Steer, a leading expert in space governance and space law, for a timely conversation on the growing national security risks at the intersection of space and cyber. Drawing on a recent workshop she led on the “space-cyber nexus,” Steer explains why satellites and cyber systems are now so deeply interconnected that vulnerabilities in one can quickly become vulnerabilities in the other. The discussion explores how modern societies, militaries, and economies depend on space-based infrastructure for everything from communications and GPS to financial transactions and earth observation, making the disruption of these systems a major strategic risk. 

The episode also looks at how Canada is positioned in this evolving landscape. Steer highlights both Canada’s strengths, including trusted diplomatic relationships, strong commercial and sovereign space capabilities, and its reputation as a middle power and norm entrepreneur, as well as its weaknesses, particularly the extent to which Canadian space policy has historically been shaped in deference to the United States. The conversation digs into the policy, legal, and operational challenges of bridging siloed expertise across government, industry, defense, and academia, and reflects on why greater “space literacy” is needed among policymakers and national security practitioners. 

A particularly important part of the discussion focuses on the gendered dimensions of conflict in the space-cyber domain. Steer explains how outages or attacks on dual-use space systems can have disproportionate effects on women and girls, especially in conflict settings where access to communications, education, financial services, and humanitarian protection may depend heavily on satellite connectivity. As cyber and space become ever more central to national security, Canada has an opportunity not only to strengthen its own capabilities, but also to lead internationally on the legal, diplomatic, and human-security questions emerging at this nexus.

Correction: In this episode, Dr. Steer said that Sapphire was a Canadian Earth Observation mission, but she meant that it was a Radarsat Constellation Mission. Sapphire is a space situational awareness capability (capable of tracking objects in space).

In this episode of Secure Line, Stephanie Carvin and Leah West unpack Canada’s latest attempt at “lawful access” legislation through Bill C-22—an overhaul of previously criticized provisions from Bill C-2. The discussion explains how the government has narrowed controversial powers, replacing broad “information demands” with more limited “confirmation of service” requests, and clarifying the legal thresholds for obtaining subscriber and transmission data through production orders.
The hosts explore the balance at the heart of the legislation: enabling law enforcement to investigate increasingly digital crimes while protecting privacy rights. They highlight key improvements, including stronger safeguards, judicial oversight, and limits on systemic vulnerabilities in service providers’ systems, while also acknowledging ongoing concerns—particularly around data retention, regulatory powers, and constitutional thresholds.
The episode also examines the second part of the bill, which creates a regulatory framework requiring service providers to maintain capabilities to comply with lawful warrants. This raises important trade-offs, as enhanced investigative capacity may introduce new privacy and cybersecurity risks.
Finally, the conversation situates Bill C-22 within broader international cooperation frameworks, including mutual legal assistance treaties and emerging cross-border data-sharing regimes, while addressing critiques from privacy advocates.
Overall, the episode presents Bill C-22 as a meaningful improvement over past efforts and a serious attempt to strike a workable compromise—though its ultimate effectiveness and constitutionality will depend on implementation, regulatory design, and future judicial review.

Research security is quickly becoming a core pillar of Canada’s national and economic security. In this episode of Secure Line, Steph, Leah, and Jess explore why protecting research and innovation has become such an urgent priority as geopolitical competition increasingly centers on intellectual property, emerging technologies, and scientific talent. Universities and research institutions sit at the heart of this challenge, balancing openness and global collaboration with the need to safeguard sensitive technologies, data, and partnerships.
The hosts are joined by Akshay Singh (University of British Columbia’s inaugural Director of Research Security) and Jessica Adam (Director of Research Ethics and Security at Carleton University). Together, they unpack what research security actually means in practice—from intellectual property theft and covert technology transfer to foreign interference and dual-use technologies. The conversation explores how research security teams conduct due diligence using open-source information, how governments identify sensitive research areas, and why fields such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, and aerospace are increasingly at the center of global strategic competition.
The discussion also tackles difficult questions around academic freedom, international collaboration, and the growing complexity of research security frameworks across countries and institutions. Ultimately, the episode highlights why protecting publicly funded research is not just about safeguarding innovation, but about ensuring that Canadian science and technology are not used to advance authoritarian military, surveillance, or human rights abuses abroad.

In this episode of Secure Line, Stephanie Carvin and Jessica Davis break down several recent Canadian national security developments that, taken together, raise concerns about government messaging and policy direction. In what they jokingly call a “natsec bitch sesh,” they examine three stories from the past two weeks: controversy surrounding government comments about Indian foreign interference, Canada’s evolving response to the US-Israel–Iran conflict, and a major shuffle of senior public service roles related to national security.
First, the hosts discuss backlash over a briefing in which a senior government official suggested Indian foreign interference was no longer a concern for Canada, despite ongoing warnings from security agencies and reports of threats to members of the Sikh diaspora. They argue the comments were dismissive and poorly communicated, highlighting the broader challenge of balancing diplomatic engagement with transparency about national security threats.
Finally, Carvin and Davis examine Canada’s shifting public statements on the Iran crisis and a restructuring of the National Security and Intelligence Advisor role within government. While the bureaucratic changes could allow more focus on key security challenges, they worry the split might weaken coordination and the role of intelligence in policymaking. The episode closes with cautious optimism about progress toward a new Canadian financial crimes agency, alongside lingering concerns about how national security priorities are being communicated and managed.