Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2024

The Current Transcript for November 11, 2024

Host: Matt Galloway

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

NAHLAH AYED: He says we might have a job for you, but it involves you going back to France behind enemy lines. And she goes, Well, how do I get there?

MATT GALLOWAY: Sonya D'Artois was hardly shy about adventure. 80 years ago, she was part of a secretive group during the Second World War, a hidden front of ordinary people parachuted into danger to help with the resistance against the Nazis. The CBC's Nahlah Ayed tells her tale and the love story at the centre of it in a fascinating new book. And on this Remembrance Day, we revisit our conversation about secret agents, the untold story of Canadians behind enemy lines, and the lessons we can learn today about conviction and resilience. That's coming up in an hour. Also this morning, the U.N. climate summit kicks off today in Azerbaijan, and ringing in the ears of attendees will be the words of the U.S. president-elect.

SOUNDCLIP

DONALD TRUMP: We will drill, baby, drill.

[Sound of crowds cheering]

MATT GALLOWAY: In 30 minutes. What a second Trump presidency will mean for the fight against climate change, and the steep hill that Canada has to climb to have any shot at meeting our climate goals. But we begin in the kitchen with an innovative program helping veterans both transition out of the military life and cope with PTSD. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway, and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Canadian veterans forge new identities in culinary world

Guests: Mélissa Paris, Frank Oeullette

MG: Serving in the armed forces is both a career and a lifestyle, and for many, it's also an identity. And so when the time comes to transition from military to civilian life, it's often not easy. For the past few years, though, dozens of Canadian veterans have taken that leap by exchanging serving their country to serving up fine French cuisine.

SOUNDCLIP

DEAN BRACKNIS: [Inaudible]

DEAN BRACKNIS: So it's our final exam practice. Those are turnips. I'm making those off because I've got to turn those into a puree. And those are turnips as well, just in an orange sauce. And that's going to be the garnish. And my [inaudible] is in the oven right there.

MG: That's Dean Bracknis working on his Duck à l'orange at Le Cordon Bleu in Ottawa. It's the only North American campus of the famed French Culinary Institute. Dean retired in 2016 after more than 20 years with the Royal Canadian Navy.

SOUNDCLIP

DEAN BRACKNIS: I wanted to see the world, you know, had an insatiable desire for adventure. I've been to almost all the seven seas with the Navy. The big thing was soon after the Towers fell in September 11th and December, my ship was gone to the Persian Gulf, and later on in my career, I was deployed to the Gulf of Aden, off the coast of Somalia, doing anti-piracy and off the coast of South America doing any drug operations. So, I had a wide and varied career. And in 2016, I said, you know what, time to do something else. So I went into the private sector for a number of years, and then for some reason I decided to, to do this again. And here I am sweating again and, and wearing a white uniform. That's not totally clean right now. But, you know, but I know at least I know how to iron it. So, just like my uniforms, right? Back in the day.

MG: It turns out that wearing a crisply pressed uniform isn't the only similarity that Dean found between the military and culinary worlds.

SOUNDCLIP

DEAN BRACKNIS: The training system here is almost, it's a lot like the military, right? When the French have designed their kitchens and stuff. They've designed it on a military system where you have the chef, you have the sous chef, and just like a company in the Army, right? So, you know, you've got to make your timings here. You've got to show up on time, you got to take notes, you got to perform. And even though I'm in my 50s, I have someone over me, look at me, looking at me with a, with a clipboard, judging my performance. So, I knew I was in for it when my first class day, I was doing the Julienne cuts on my vegetables and they brought out the ruler to measure. So, I knew that was serious. But it's really rewarding.

[Dean communicating about getting his duck, and bringing it home]

MG: Dean Bracknis isn't the only veteran who gets the added benefit of class leftovers. About 30 former forces members have trained at Le Cordon Bleu in Ottawa, thanks to a Veterans Affairs education and training benefit. And our guests this morning are graduates of that program. Mélissa Paris is in our Ottawa studio. She's about 21 years in the forces. And Frank Oeullette is in our Fredericton studio. He spent nearly 15 years in the military. Good morning to you both.

MELISSA PARIS & FRANK OEULLETTE: Good morning.

It's great to have you here. Mélissa, can you tell me what it was that that attracted you to the military? Why did you want to serve?

MELISSA PARIS: Well, there was a history of military service in my family, my father was Vingt-Deuxième Régiment. And I enrolled from Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. I had an interest in the physicality of it. But also, like all the, the benefits that they gave for education as well as travel. For me, I had a big desire to travel and I did see the world with the military.

MG: Frank, what about for you? What was what was the path for you to serving?

FRANK OEULLETTE: My path started in high school when I joined the reserves. Initially, I wanted to see if I was actually going to like it, as this was a choice that I told myself in the fourth grade that, Hey, I'm going to go in the Army. And so following on that with the Reserves, I fell absolutely in love with the job as an infanteer and transferred over to Reg Force and went to military college after that.

MG: You both have some similarities in how your military careers came to an end. You were both medically discharged after struggling with PTSD, and I was wondering if I might ask you about that, Mélissa. Just in terms of what you're comfortable in talking about, but tell me a little bit about what led to your discharge from the forces.

MELISSA PARIS: Absolutely. I went to Afghanistan, Kandahar twice. First tour was about three months and that wasn't, that wasn't too bad. Second tour deployed with the RCR. I was their, their company clerk and I spent approximately eight and a half months in the Panjwaii region, so Sperwan Ghar, the patrol base over there. There wasn't a lot of females in the camp, so that was very difficult. But also the constant fear and also the things I saw there, just the difficulties that people the human suffering. And finally, what really kind of what, what, what? Yeah. At the end, it was grief, you know, losing so many friends. And then when we came back from that mission, I was enrolled at the military college. Like I was selected under the, the non-commissioned member training, a university training plan. So, as soon as I got back from Afghanistan, my last tour, I started RMC for four years and I just never decompressed. I just started school right away. Well, RMC which is some challenge. It felt like I never left Afghanistan. Like I'm sure a lot of my peers that lived that experience, we brought Afghanistan home with us. So, just the constant stress and keep pushing, keep pushing and never taking, taking a knee, as we say in the Army, never taking a break and to pause. The last thing I will say is back then, you know, resilience, training and that sort of thing wasn't, wasn't popular. It is now. But back then, they didn't really train us how to how to handle our, our minds per say. So, we just took on the stress and didn't really have a coping mechanism and how to deal with letting go of that stress. So, yeah.

MG: How are you doing now?

MELISSA PARIS: Now, I'm doing really well. [MG: Yeah.] Yeah. Yeah, I got that, a clear release in 2018. So it's been a while. When I got released, I was really sick, to be honest. I was sent to a treatment centre in Kelowna, B.C., which really saved my life. It was a fabulous program solely focussed on PTSD. I regained my strength and my life there. And coming back from there to tie in the culinary world, we had a nutritionist with us on the program and I learned that not only food was, you know, good for, for bodies and that sort of thing, but also food as medicine. And through food, I managed to heal myself quite a bit. I've always been a foodie, but I started cooking only when I was released. And through food, I found a new purpose. It's my biggest coping mechanism. When I was having some really bad days, I would cook and I would really help me, you know, gain control and be grounded again.

MG: I'm really glad that you found that. Frank, what about for you? I mean, what led, I just wonder whether what Melissa has said sounds familiar in terms of what led to your discharge?

FRANK OEULLETTE: Absolutely. It's. I can see a lot of myself in what the, what she described. So, what led to my medical release? I fell into a burnout. Severe depression followed or hand-in-hand, I should say. But that's, that's a lead up of, again, not decompressing, a lack of personnel, needing to pick up wearing six hats when you're just supposed to be wearing one kind of thing. And eventually, just caught up and it was too much. And I was told that I was going to be medically released on high risk. There's nothing I could do about it. But that the lead up to that for me comes way back to 2012. I was sent down to Colombia for a course and just there are things that got a bit out of hand, just sort of like in the movies. People die. There was a lot of chaos on the course. It was the patrols, we always had like real grenades, real bullets in case we would actually come in contact with the rebel forces down there as an, as an actual live real threat all the time. The people that lost their lives is just not something that, it's something that stuck. All that fear that we. Things are different down there. Just it came back with me. And at the same time, I feel there's a portion of me that got dropped and left in the jungle that never came back. Will say.

MG: How hard was it? I mean, given all of that that you went through? I said that that being in the military is a career, but it really is also part of your identity. How hard was it to transition to that for you, Frank?

FRANK OEULLETTE: It's, it's still a process today. I've been out for four years now, and I still struggle with things on a, on a daily basis. We'll see. [MG: What do you mean?] Maybe like the shift in mentality where like, you're used to being in the military, everything's always pedal to the metal, the attitude, the personality needs to go with it, and now you're more on a softer side of things. We'll see on the civvy side where, well, people treat each other differently and it's just a switch in mindset that needs to be done where, hey, I'm not in the army anymore, but since it was a lifestyle for so long and it becomes who you are, that part of, you can't get rid of it. Another part of you doesn't want to get rid of it, but it's just that finding that soft spot between your new life and your old life, and it's not always easy.

MG: What about for you, Mélissa? Was it difficult, I use Frank's language here, to embrace the civvy style and the civvy lifestyle?

MELISSA PARIS: Well, I think Frank said it perfectly and I totally agree with him. It was, it was very difficult for me. When you get that medical release notice, it's, it's not that, I was 38 when I was released, so I still had lots and think, yeah, like you're forced out. And I joined when I was 18. Like, you know, I did the reserves like Frank when I, that's how I started my career.

MG: That's a long time. A large part of your life.

MELISSA PARIS: Exactly. I was still in high school when I joined. So overnight, you wake up and you don't know who you are anymore. You look yourself in the mirror. And I was like, okay, like, who am I?

MG: Is that, is that literally how you felt?

MELISSA PARIS: Yes. I didn't even look the same. Everybody that knows me, that was my biggest complaint. I looked at myself in the mirror in the morning. I was like, I don't know who you are anymore. But obviously the PTSD played a huge part in that. The biggest thing I want to say today is that transitioning is not easy, whether it's for, whether it's, you're medically released or not. And like Frank said, it's so ingrained in us for, for everyone out there. They're going through transition. It's important that they, they think about it and also they talk about it, discuss how they feel through it with their families, with their friends. And the good news is there's so many services and there's so many tools out there now, including the education training benefit through VAC that can truly help military folks transition out. So after I was released, I jump into the wellness sector because I my background is psychology. So, I was doing some coaching and some resilience coaching, that sort of thing. And that's what helped me transition out was helping others. That's why I joined. I wanted to help and serve, so I help through that. And then, that's where I started doing the cooking at Cordon Bleu. I wanted to, to push and be able to, to serve my family and friends and be able to cook for them.

MG: Did you say that you only started cooking? So, you never cooked before?

MELISSA PARIS: No, no, I actually, it's funny. My, my mother is, is always fascinated because I just honestly, I had no time. I like, I was so busy, I never sat down. But the fascinating thing's, I've always been a foodie, so I've eaten at five star Michelin. You know.

MG: The fancy restaurants.

MELISSA PARIS: Yeah, like Michelin star restaurants. I've been all over the world. I've been to Paris. You know, I've eaten some of the most amazing at some of the most amazing tables. But I did not know how to cook myself. So, when I got released, I thought, okay, well, after my treatment, I really learn how to cook there because you have to cook for yourselves. And that's where I really, I found a huge passion for, for cooking and, you know, clean eating, that sort of thing.

MG: What about for you, Frank? Were you a big home cook?

FRANK OEULLETTE: Oh, I was. So, when I got to Valcartier in 2012, that's when I started cooking. We'll say, for survival. And then I told myself, Hey, you might as well make it fun. So, I started looking around online. YouTube, mostly masterclasses, fell on Gordon Ramsay. Then, I was like, 'Oh, this is French cuisine. Okay.' So, then it just launched off from there. So, forward seven years. In 2019, I started a at home catering chef. I don't want to call it a business because it's not big. It's more of a hobby, we'll say. I kept catering for people while I was in the Army. At that point, I had already been announced that I was on a medical release, so I kind of started driving that ship towards the culinary world and just practising, taking more online classes, anything and everything I could. Started having big parties, like 16 people, five course meals at my house, just cooking for people and having a blast.

MG: Lucky them.

FRANK OEULLETTE: Yeah, right. And that's where I saw that I really had a passion for cooking. It was, it was my thing. It was something I could do that I felt like I was a natural at. So, for me, it was a no-brainer to go to culinary school once I was being released, we'll say. So, what was nice there's that on my last six months in the forces, I was on a Evoke rehab program, so I was able to go work wherever I wanted to in town. So I chose to work in a restaurant at the Brewbakers in Fredericton. That was a fantastic experience. And also the chef Jay Rosado is also French-trained, so he got me ready for school once I got accepted at Le Cordon Bleu.

MG: Did you see I mean, we heard earlier this idea that there's a similarity in some ways between the military and culinary school. Dean Braknis was talking about that [FRANK OEULLETTE: Absolutely] and it's part of the uniform, but also how kitchens are organised? You say absolutely.

FRANK OEULLETTE: Yeah. So the but, after the First World War, War I believe, it was Auguste Escoffier that brought the brigade system to the culinary world, amongst other things like preservation, canning, all that stuff. But Chef Escoffier was drafted to the military, got the system, brought it back, implemented it, and from there it got very militarised was in that sense. So, it's like you're leaving one family to come back and sort of like the same family.

MG: I've seen on your Instagram, some of the things that you've been cooking, [FRANK OEULLETTE: Yes.] Frank. One is a Brownie, Nutella Basque cheesecake with creme anglaise. [FRANK OEULLETTE: Yes.] I would like that. What is your, what's the favourite thing that you've learned how to prepare?

FRANK OEULLETTE: My I have to say that my favourite protein or favourite thing to prepare is duck. It's very versatile and just the taste is just out of this world for me.

MG: What about for you, Melissa?

MELISSA PARIS: Well, it's interesting because I'm a pescatarian, so I don't really eat meat. So I learn how to prepare it for my family. But for me, my, my speciality is curries, Chinese noodles. Yeah.

MG: Where do you see this taking you? I mean, you now have the cooking bug. You didn't cook before. Now, you're all in.

MELISSA PARIS: While I did this for my, for my own personal gain and for my, my own knowledge, it's going to take me to my friends and my family.

MG: So, they are, they are the lucky recipients of this.

MELISSA PARIS: Yeah, absolutely. I have some really good friends, [inaudible]. They, they have a beautiful cottage. And a couple of weeks ago, I went over there and I cooked for three couples. That's pretty much my, the extent of my, because I do get stressed easily still. But for me, it was more so to take away the stress from working in the kitchen. Like I said, I cooked and I enjoy it. But I wasn't efficient and I just, I had a hard time doing two things at once. My brain just couldn't, couldn't manage that. So, Cordon Bleu helped me know how to use my kitchen properly.

MG: And that's part of that healing process that you were talking about earlier.

MELISSA PARIS: Exactly. Yeah. Like, before Cordon Bleu, I was told by many medical specialists that my brain was, was pretty injured and like, just I wouldn't think the same or I would learn the same. And probably it was a huge challenge for me. For me, I wanted to see if I was able to do it. That was the biggest thing. And some people [inaudible] right away for the diploma, but me, it was just the basic and then through the basic, I said, Yeah, you know, I think I can keep going. So, I did intermediate. So, the flexibility of that gave me some, some control and took away my anxiety.

MG: Was it difficult? I mean, the kitchen's a noisy place and it's a busy place. And I mean, it's not just the cliches of chefs yelling at people. Like there's a lot going on, right? Was that difficult given, given what you were dealing with, with PTSD?

MELISSA PARIS: For myself, yes. I won't lie. It was, it was very difficult. That's why I needed some accommodation. Sometimes, I had to leave the kitchens and just take a breath just to bring down my nervous system. You know, you've got knives, you got heat, oil, fire going. So, my nervous system was definitely activated. And this is as far as, I didn't do the Superior because I knew Superior would be too much for me. But what I've accomplished, I was, I was really proud and happy that I did. Like Frank was saying, you meet a new type of family there and it truly is like the military with the discipline and the teamwork. For that, I really enjoyed it.

MG: Can you imagine where you'd be without this?

MELISSA PARIS: I don't think so. It brought back so much confidence in me. I know that I can do things now that I thought I wasn't able to. So, moving forward, I know that I can do more than, than what I thought.

MG: This is a really important program for, for folks like yourselves who, as I said, have transitioned out of a career and an identity and a lifestyle. What are you thinking about? I mean, it's Remembrance Day as we're talking. So, what are you thinking about on this day, given what you've been through, but also where you are now? Frank?

FRANK OEULLETTE: Actually, this was a conversation that I was having with one of my friends last night. I realised that this year is the first year where it's, we'll call it a busy period in my head, but it's not negative, it's not chaos or bad things. We'll say it's mostly out of like remembering the guys that the, the nice experiences. We've had the good stuff. It's, there's a shift this year for me which is fantastic, I have to say.

MG: What about for you, Melissa?

MELISSA PARIS: I like to hear that, Frank. It's the same for me. For the last few years, I, Remembrance Day was very difficult, even some. I couldn't even go to a to a ceremony because I can hear the gunshots or those sort of things. Even the, you know, the music that's being played reminds me of Ramp ceremonies. So very difficult. But this year, I feel, I feel a lot better and I'm even going to go with my husband, actually on Remembrance Day, to the Cenotaph this year and give it a shot. I'm going to bring some earplugs, but I think I can manage the crowd. And we have, we have a plan. But yeah, same here.

FRANK OEULLETTE: That's awesome.

MG: I'm really glad to talk to you both. Your friends and family are lucky to have you around, not just because you're great people, but also because you're great chefs and you can feed them. [FRANK OEULLETTE: Yeah], but the program has been really, really helpful to both of you as well, and to others. Thank you for talking to us.

FRANK OEULLETTE: Thank you.

MELISSA PARIS: Thank you.

MG: Take care of yourselves.

MELISSA PARIS: Thank you.

MG: Mélissa Paris and Frank Oeullette are both veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces and graduates of Le Cordon Bleu, the Culinary Arts Institute in Ottawa.

MG: Your CBC News is coming up next. And then, [Music: Theme fading in] the U.N. Climate Conference, known as COP 29, opens today in Azerbaijan. It opens in a country that is a big fossil fuel producer, has bet large on that world, but also comes at a time where there is very little commitment from wealthy countries to help cover the cost of climate change. And the backdrop here, of course, is that there is a second presidency, Donald Trump in the United States coming. We will hear what all of that means for the transition to renewable energy and the fight against climate change. That's coming up in six minutes. I'm Matt Galloway, and you're listening to The Current on CBC Radio and the CBC Listen app. Stay with us.

[Music: Theme]

How Trump’s victory affects climate change policy

Guests: Catherine Abreu, Jonathan Foley, Kate Logan

MG: Hello, I'm Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current. COP 29, the annual U.N. climate negotiation summit kicks off today in Baku, Azerbaijan. US President-elect Donald Trump is not there in person, but you can bet that attendees are thinking about him.

SOUNDCLIP

DONALD TRUMP: We're going to drill, baby, drill. We're going to bring it back so fast. Remember, we have more liquid gold under our feet than Saudi Arabia, than Russia, than anybody. When people talk about global warming, I say the ocean is going to go down 100th of an inch within the next 400 years. That's not our problem.

MG: That's Donald Trump speaking on the campaign trail this past year. He has in past dismissed climate change as a hoax, promised to roll back support for electric vehicles and expand fossil fuel production. COP is taking place in the shadow of Trump's victory, as many there consider what a second Donald Trump term could mean for the fight against climate change. Catherine Abreu is in Baku attending the climate summit. She is a Canadian climate activist and director of International Climate Politics Hub, which is a network of organisations working in climate diplomacy. Catherine, hi.

CATHERINE ABREU: Hi, Matt.

MG: This is the first day of these negotiations of this summit and it's just wrapping up now. How large does Donald Trump loom over COP?

CATHERINE ABREU: Well, you know, obviously, I think those election results are on many people's minds and it certainly doesn't make our job in these spaces any easier. That being said, it's important to remember that the United States is, while, you know, a very large, influential, powerful and rich country, one country. And I think there's a bit of a myth that because of these election results, we are not seeing leaders show up to COP 29. We're not seeing the amount of political investment in these talks, and that is simply not the case. Over 90 world leaders are here in Baku. Even more ministers are here to get down to the hard work of the negotiations. And really, all, all indications at this point tell us that, that the government officials are here to do their job and to talk about the next climate finance pledge. So it's, it's I would, I'm not going to claim it's not on people's minds. Of course it is, as is, you know, the devastating climate impacts that are only mounting around the world. However, I think the feeling in these halls is that we are continuing the momentum and this space is actually kind of designed to help us all weather shorter-term political shifts.

MG: Can I go back, though, just to I mean, to your point, there are other conversations that are happening. But when the leader of that large, influential, powerful and rich country, the next leader, has said that climate change is a hoax, that he wants to drill, baby, drill, what are the conversations that you're having? Just even on that first day with other people there about what that's going to mean?

CATHERINE ABREU: You know, it's interesting, Matt. I feel like we have an annual conversation around COP. [MG: We do.] I've been at this for, for a long time, and I think a conversation has really shifted from when I first started doing this work where if there was a prominent political voice on the world stage denying climate change, that would send a kind of shock through the system. But at this point, the evidence of the escalating climate crisis is so clear to all of us. We are all feeling it on an almost daily basis. This is the warmest year on record, the most expensive year when it comes to climate impacts for Canada, as the Insurance Bureau of Canada just told us. So at this point, we're all paying for it. We're all feeling it. And no matter how much a bombastic politician might claim that climate change isn't real, that kind of shockwave does, no longer occurs in these spaces because everyone understands that tackling this crisis is really critical. So, I think really the response is more, 'Okay, well, this gives us a sense of the extent to which those who benefit from the status quo, those who are wanting to continue the ever-increasing expansion of fossil fuels, have done a good job buying some politicians.' And I think we can all look to Trump as in some ways a bit of a reaction to some of the momentum away from fossil fuel dependence and climate disaster that we are still seeing ongoing in the system as we turn to renewables.

MG: The focus of COP this year is largely on climate change financing. And we know I mean, you talk about people who are attending, some of the folks who aren't attending are making a lot of noise for why they aren't there. Papua New Guinea pulled its main officials from COP 29 because it says the countries with the largest emissions aren't keeping their promises to provide financial assistance to lower income countries that, that are bearing the brunt of climate change. That country's foreign minister called COP, in his words, 'a total waste of time.' How likely is it that the conversations that are going to happen over the course of the next several days at this summit are actually going to be able to figure out a way to get rich countries to give more money to lower income countries? This is an ongoing discussion, but it feels like we're at the pointy edge of that discussion now.

CATHERINE ABREU: Yeah, that's right. I think we've kind of reached the, the limit to which we can expect the kind of goodwill of developing countries to continue in these conversations around climate co-operation without the equal goodwill coming from rich developed countries, saying we're going to bring real money to the table to help you both address the losses and damages that you're experiencing from climate impacts already, adapt to those climate impacts and take action to reduce your emissions. So, that is the lynchpin of these conversations. And that's why I say ministers and world leaders are here to get to work. And that is the feeling in the halls right now as we begin COP that it's not, this isn't going to be a glamorous COP. This is going to be a really hard working COP where those difficult conversations are going to have to happen and where developed countries and Canada has a real role to play, I think here are going to have to take themselves out of their usual position of backing away from making real financial commitments, because it's really clear that if the money isn't on the table, then we're just going to get less ambitious climate pledges from the developing world and from the developed world. And we're going to see that goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees get further out of reach.

MG: This is the question that you asked on social media earlier today. Where is the money? What is the answer from Steven Guilbeault? I know that, that he, Canada's climate representative, minister for the Environment and Climate Change, is there in Baku. So, where is Canada's money?

CATHERINE ABREU: [Inaudible] So there's kind of three things that Canada's got to do in this space. One, we have to along with other developed countries. And what's important to remember that while this election result in the U.S. looms large, it's still the Biden-Harris administration that is represented in the negotiations here. So, developed countries like Canada need to be saying, 'Okay, here's where we know we can take our climate finance assistance in the next few years.' Then they need to say, here's what we can add to that using innovative ways of raising money, like thinking about levies on high polluting sectors. This is a huge conversation that next year's COP president is bringing into the mix. Brazil is saying, 'How do we actually harvest some of the wealth that's really contained right now in the billionaires in the fossil fuel sector and the aviation sector and the shipping sector? How do we use some of those innovative sources of financing to up the ante on those sources of money?' And then beyond saying, 'Okay, here's what we can offer in terms of a dollar amount,' Canada has a role to play, especially with Minister Guilbault as someone who has credibility in this space. Bridge building between developed and developing countries to really hear, 'Okay, what are the needs that is coming from the global South and how to, what's the scale of response that we as developed countries need to put on the table to respond to those?'

MG: Just the last question on the money thing. I mean, is your sense that rich countries are actually going to pony it up and promise, deliver the money that's been promised? I mean, we saw Spain announcing today that it's providing something like 3.7, 6 billion more euros. After 10 billion Euros that it announced last week to help clean up after its own floods, those devastating floods that we saw in the last couple of weeks in Spain. So is there going to be money from wealthy countries to actually deliver on the promise that has been made?

CATHERINE ABREU: So we're hearing that a few more of those climate finance announcements will be coming from rich developed countries in the next few days. And I'm expecting an announcement even to come from Canada, hopefully in the next couple of days on climate finance. And I think there's a question to be put to the finance ministers. And important to note that simultaneous to the climate talks happening in Baku, the G20 leaders are meeting. And this is of course, a group that is formed to really speak about how the economic, the broader global economic system needs to function in order for domestic economies to be able to move forward with their agenda. So, we need that signal also coming out of the G20 leaders summit that those rich nations are willing to put that money on the table. And I think important to this conversation is that number needs to be credible. So, the last global climate finance pledge that we had, that $100 billion that came out of the 2009 Copenhagen talks, that was kind of developed countries throwing a number at the wall and they didn't necessarily know when they put that number out there how they were going to meet it. And I think a lesson was learned from that process. So, what I'm hearing developed countries say is we know we need to put the money on the table and we know we also need to have the plans in our pocket for how we're actually going to deliver those funds. So, that is what we're hoping to see in the talks in the next two weeks and we'll see whether we get there.

MG: Catherine, stay with us. I want to bring a couple other people into our conversation. Jonathan Foley is a climate scientist, executive director of Project Drawdown, which is a climate solutions organisation. He is in Minnesota this morning, and Kate Logan is director of the China Climate Hub and climate diplomacy at the Asia Society Policy Institute. This is a think tank that is dedicated to understanding Asia and its place in the world. She's in Washington, D.C. this morning. Good morning to you both.

JONATHAN FOLEY: Good morning.

KATE LOGAN: Good morning, Matt.

MG: Jonathan, you are in the United States. You've heard what Catherine's saying and the view from Baku. How concerned are you about the impact of another Trump presidency on the fight against the climate crisis?

JONATHAN FOLEY: Well, it's, it's not good. That's for sure. To elect a leader of the world's largest economy today that says he doesn't believe in climate change, that wants to roll back into the 19th century kind of economy of coal and oil is, is just crazy. But, you know, these you have to measure his words against what he actually can accomplish. You know, we still hopefully live in a democracy where the presidency has a lot of power, but not absolute power. And there are 50 states or numerous countries. There's Wall Street, there's Silicon Valley. There's, it's a very big country. And any one person, even, even a president, has limited power to really change things as much as he likes to think. So it's not going to be good. But all is not lost for sure, as we saw in the first Trump presidency. Other, others respond. The states, the cities, the bulk, by far the bulk of the U.S. economy continued to decarbonise during the Trump administration. So, it's about time for working on climate. But I think we have to shift our focus elsewhere to other levers to change in the U.S., as you know, as the dynamic, very large, innovative economy. And we continue to lower emissions even during the last Trump presidency. So, no one here wishes this was happening. But it's, we're going to have to find a way around it. This is a.

MG: Big sigh as you were answering that question. I mean, practically, what does this mean if he talks about, for example, repealing the Inflation Reduction Act, which shovelled billions of dollars in climate change incentives toward things like renewable energy and electric vehicles, and we know that the largest emissions in the United States come from the transportation sector. What is that going to mean practically for the United States?

JONATHAN FOLEY: Well, it's really not good, that's for sure. But, you know, the Inflation Reduction Act is really the first serious federal legislation in 30 years ever really to address climate issues. And it spends about $35 billion a year of federal money on climate solutions, essentially. And some of it's very inefficiently used. Sometimes government funding can be, but some of it's been incredibly helpful for heat pumps, for electric vehicles, for basically, you know, encouraging spending. It's kind of a tax break. It's investing money in different things. The U.S. CHIPS Act is probably even more important in some ways, too. So, these investments which, you have to give Joe Biden a lot of credit. He was the first real American leader to figure out how to do climate policy here. It was about carrots, not sticks. He had to put money on the table and show people how this is going to help them, not regulate CO2 emissions. That was never going to politically be tenable in the United States. But to encourage the transition to renewables faster. But that $35 billion is, it's big and it's really important, but it's trivial compared to the size of the private sector's investment in climate. Venture capital alone, it's about $100 billion a year, three times what the federal government spends. And not to mention private equity and all the investments of states and cities. So, progress on climate is far from going to be dead here, it's just going to be slower and not accelerating the way it could have if Trump gets his way. The other interesting thing, though, is Republican governors and members of Congress might oppose him on that because most of the money going from the Inflation Reduction Act is going to Republican communities. It's creating jobs in Republican areas. And he might have a hard time actually repealing it. And so, you know, there's a Trump campaign promise and there's an actual Trump presidency. We'll see what happens.

MG: Kate Logan Let's talk about China. China has the highest emissions in the world, also has an enormous and growing renewables sector. Where does China stand in lowering those emissions and meeting emissions targets?

KATE LOGAN: Sure. Thanks, Matt. You know, China is obviously the biggest elephant in the room in a lot of ways, and in these conversations. And I think, you know, to what Jonathan was saying about concerns about Trump's presidency, on one hand, you know, when you look at China, the pace and ambition of China's climate action is really determined primarily by domestic factors. So as you alluded, China is the massive, most massive renewable buildout in the world. But at the same time, they're still adding coal-fired power plants and the pace and trajectory of China's emissions reductions will really determine whether or not we can keep the Paris Agreement's 1.5 degree target alive. And part of the past experience also suggests that the role of other countries around the world is important for whether or not China moves even faster on its emissions reductions. And there are certainly key challenges, especially from an economic perspective, with China facing a slowdown and also how to, to manage that in the face of increasing energy consumption. So, even though they're adding massive amounts of renewables, integrating these into the grid as fast as possible so that they can cut away at the fossil fuels that are on the grid as well and maintain energy security. Those are absolutely immense challenges. And I think, you know, given the results of last week's election in the U.S., one of the things that will be really important is for other key players around the world to sort of step up and vocally raise their expectations for China in this regard. I think, you know, we can expect China. You know, the last time Trump was elected, China was quite vocal and stepping up very quickly and reiterating its strong, firm commitment to multilateralism and the Paris Agreement. And that's been absolutely unwavering. But I think, you know, on one hand, stepping up its commitment to multilateralism, you know, is useful, but stepping up its actual emissions reductions and accelerating them is another piece. And that's where the EU in particular, some of the other key developing countries like Brazil that holds the G20 presidency is hosting COP next year in 2025, really have a key role to play.

MG: So, that there is a possibility for the international community to lean on China and say take a leadership role here or do more. Is that what you're suggesting?

KATE LOGAN: Yeah, no, I think that's certainly true. And I think that's where the expectations of the rest of the world are really important. And I would add to the, the players that I mentioned so far, also the role of vulnerable countries. You know, China is investing massively in developing countries around the world, many of which are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, including islands in the Pacific, you know, least developed countries in Africa, Southeast Asia. And, you know, I think a real test of China's credibility in the multilateral system and whether or not its actions actually match its rhetoric is whether or not we'll be a constructive player for the dialogue and the negotiations around the new global climate finance goal that's being negotiated. And to that point, on one hand, China is actually already contributing massive amounts of finance. They're just not captured in the way that, that finance has tracked because of the split between developed and developing countries. But if China can show goodwill and work with other countries to come to a ambitious new goal that sort of captures what it's already doing and motivates it to improve the quality of what it's doing going forward, I think that would send a really important signal.

MG: Catherine, where is Canada in all of this? I mean, the country's environmental commissioner, the federal environment commissioner, came out with a report last week, says emissions have declined by just over 7 per cent since 2005. It's a long way to go to get to 40% required by 2030. He was suggesting that we have essentially six years to do 20 or 30 years' worth of reductions. Does Canada have a hope in reaching those targets?

CATHERINE ABREU: Well, I mean, you asked where does Canada sit in all of this? And so I just want to reflect a little bit on some of what Jonathan and Kate have offered. First, let's also remember what happened when Trump was elected in 2016 in terms of building out that kind of coalition of countries that could come in and fill that vacuum. It was the EU, yes, as Kate mentioned, who joined up with China, but it was also Canada. They together, China, the EU and Canada created something called the Ministerial on Climate Action, which for years has brought together ministers from all around the world to talk about climate and climate politics, just prior to the climate negotiations. So, you know, there's a question there of whether Canada has a role to play in reviving that. I think given some of what we heard from Jonathan in terms of the levels of investments in the US that are being made that are really turning the tide and make it much more difficult for a new president to kind of walk back from some of that progress. I think, you know, Canada has also been making some of those investments. But there's a question to ask of whether we're putting the right carrots on the table to drive and accelerate those emissions reductions and that transition to a climate safe economy at the scale and the pace that's needed. How have we been doing so far? Well, it is the case that Canada spent the last few decades missing every climate target that we've had. So, we had a lot of catching up to do when this current government got serious about emissions reductions and climate policy. In 2023, we saw emissions go down about 8% in the EU, which is a huge number. It was about 2% in the United States largely, and thanks to the IRA and it was about 1% in Canada. So, if we look at our major trading partners, we've still got some work to do, accelerating those emissions reductions, not just because it's the right thing to do for the climate, but because it is increasingly what we need to be doing to be a major player in the global economy that is moving increasingly toward that, that clean climate, safe opportunity. And so, you know, those investors who are looking for where to put their money are often looking to put their money in places whose emissions reductions and policies are in line and are predictable for the future. So, I think that's actually something that not only our current government, but future prospective governments in Canada need to be paying attention to and asking themselves, can Canada afford to keep losing out on this global momentum and this massive shift that's happening in an economy? Do, or do we need to step it up and take advantage of those opportunities?

MG: Do you see an opportunity for China? Because in addition to, as you mentioned, coal, it's also the largest generator of renewable energy and creates a lot of the infrastructure for the renewable energy sector. Do you see an opportunity for China to play a bigger role in getting that technology out around the world?

KATE LOGAN: Certainly, I think that's a massive opportunity. And I think, you know, one of the key motivations for China right now to take forward its climate action, both in terms of what it's doing domestically as well as internationally, is really leveraging that immense prowess in the renewable energy sector. So I mentioned the climate finance goal. If that pie increases, that will create more market opportunities for China to deploy these technologies faster around the world and help other countries also benefit from these cheaper and more widely available technologies. And, you know, from a domestic perspective, China's been facing a lot of concerns about overcapacity in these sectors that they're able to deploy faster. You know, that's a win-win both for some of the economic challenges as well as its emissions trajectory.

MG: Jonathan, we're just about out of time, but let me end with you and something that you said at the beginning of, of our conversation when I introduced you and you said that, I mean, yes, this is a thing in terms of an impact on the fight against climate change, but that you weren't going to throw up your hands and you said this, that now is not the time to throw up our hands to the time to roll up our sleeves. What keeps you optimistic despite the setbacks that the U.S. might be facing?

JONATHAN FOLEY: I'm optimistic because we, we already know the end game. The endgame here is that the world will not go back to the 19th century. We already have solar, wind, batteries. These technologies are cheaper than fossil fuels. They're better. They're faster and easier to deploy. That is the future. The only question is how quickly can we get there and how much damage do we avoid along the way? That's the race against time that we're in, but we're not going to go back. It's just a question of how quickly we move forward now. And that's what keeps me cautiously optimistic about the future is the world moves slowly, slowly, slowly, then all at once and every change we've ever seen. And the game will be won by technology and markets, not by politicians. And so the politicians can slow things up and muck them up like Trump will probably do, but the inevitable path towards a renewable energy, clean climate-safe technology future is inevitable now. It's just who wants to be there first and how quickly do we all get there? And that die has been cast.

MG: It's good to talk to you all about this. Thank you very much. We will be watching certainly what happens in the next couple of weeks. But those next couple of weeks will influence the next four years as well. Thank you very much.

EVERYONE: Thank you. Thanks so much.

MG: Catherine Abreu is director of the International Climate Politics Hub. It's a network of organisations working in climate diplomacy. She's in Baku, Azerbaijan, at the COP 29 Summit. Jonathan Foley is climate scientist and executive director of Project Drawdown. It's a climate solutions organisation. He was in Minnesota, and Kate Logan is director with the China Climate Hub Policy Institute. That's part of the Asia Society Policy Institute. She was in Washington, DC.

MG: Well, coming up after your regional update.

SOUNDCLIP

NAHLAH AYED: It was effectively a secret army to work behind enemy lines where there is German occupation [Music: Theme fading in] ongoing and they would help deliver weapons, provide training, maybe even conduct operations of sabotage themselves to try to undermine the occupation from within.

MG: It is Remembrance Day, and we will return to my conversation with the CBC's Nahlah Ayed. An extraordinary story about stealth, bravery and how that and the work of a secret army changed the trajectory of the Second World War. We'll pick that up in 90 seconds here on The Current.

[Music: Theme]

And a WWII love story

Guest: Nahlah Ayed

MG: Hello again. I'm Matt Galloway. And you're listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

NADYA MURDOCH: She learned how to handle explosives. She learned how to make bombs. She learned how to blow up bridges. She learned how to do silent killing.

MG: That's Nadya Murdock speaking about her mother, Sonya d'Artois. Sonya was part of a covert force that helped change the trajectory of the Second World War. And her story is the subject of Nahlah Ayed's latest book. It is called 'The War We Won Apart: The Untold Story of Two Elite Agents Who Became One of the Most Decorated Couples of WWII. ' Nahlah Ayed, of course, is the host of CBC Radio's Ideas. We spoke about her book in May, and we thought on this Remembrance Day that we would revisit our conversation.

SOUNDCLIP

MG: Who was Sonya Butt?

NAHLAH AYED: Sonya Butt was, when we meet her in the book the first time, a 15-year-old girl who grew up mostly in France, who joined hordes of people who were trying to make their way off the mainland of Europe and back home to Britain. So, she lived in a broken family. Her father and mother had separated when she was very young. She was a bit of a tomboy. She was adventurous. She had one brother with whom she liked to spend time. But most of the time she knew how to operate on her own. And that is kind of her defining feature. She grew up as a French teenager. She knew what it was like to be French. She spoke French fluently. And in the future, of course, that helps decide what her role is during the war. But this was on the eve of war, she makes her way back and becomes, at the age of 17, a member of the WAAF, the Women's Auxiliary Air Force, which was designed for women to support the Air Force. And then the story unfolds from there.

MG: She had, I mean, you write in the book that she had a life that was charted by war sometimes. And grew up in a lot of trauma in her life. How did that shape who she was?

NAHLAH AYED: Yeah. I mean, it really boils down to that point that I mentioned just a moment ago, which is that she really had to rely on her own wits. When her mom and her father broke up, she was only three years old. By the time she was five, she had been taken to hospital with signs of abuse and malnutrition. She had, what she described as a mother who was neglectful, if not abusive. And so, she was then transported to the U.K., where she had to really fend for herself while living with her father and her stepmother. But really, she's had to watch out for herself throughout. And her life was charted by war. Her father was in the Air Force as well. She later marries a Canadian who was also a military man. Both of them are participating in the war effort, and so her entire life was charted by war. And interestingly, Matt, that she spends the rest of her life after the war trying to put that past completely behind her.

MG: Why did she enlist, do you think?

NAHLAH AYED: She talks about this in these extraordinary tapes that her daughter had arranged to have done, which are interviews with her with a professional interviewer, Robin Fowler. And she talks about that. She says she really, you live in this environment where everyone is looking at you and asking the question, What are you doing? What is your part in the war? So, she wanted to do so-called war work. And she wanted to do it so badly, Matt, that she did it behind her father's back, even before she was qualified to do it. So, she went and helped paint army trucks. She participated in the land army on farms, helping out. She helped feed and take care of downed airmen, you know, pilots. So, she was very eager to do the work. And she said she wanted to serve her country. But later, when she became engaged in the France story, it was another home for her--France. So, she was serving this other home for hers as well.

MG: We'll come back to her story. This is a book about two people. [NAHLAH: Correct.] Many people, but two at the centre of it. Who is Guy d'Artois?

NAHLAH AYED: Guy d'Artois, I think my favourite description of him is a thunderstorm of a man. He's 22 years old when we meet him, and he is desperate, like so many men at that time, to enlist and to do his part in the war. He had in his mind that he wanted to be a pilot, like many young men back then, because that really was the rock star of the war, if you will. Or would be eventually. He did not qualify for that. In fact, even did not qualify to be in the infantry because he had a condition when he was young that disqualified him. So, it was several months later, before he actually became a member of the military, was sent over in January of 1940, not as a pilot, not as an infantryman, but as a physical training instructor. And so, he becomes part of this convalescent depot, you know, kind of a hospital or a rehab centre that helped take care of soldiers who were injured.

MG: How do the paths of Guy and Sonia cross initially?

NAHLAH AYED: Initially. If I have my research correct, and it took a lot of work to figure this out, it would have been around December 4th, 1943, when a number of young men and women gathered in a smoky room in the middle of Marlboro in London, quietly waiting to be taken to the first phase of the get to know you of the Special Operations Executive. So, all these men and women had been recruited for a secret mission. They weren't told exactly what it was, and they were going to be weeded out first before they were told what they were being recruited for. So they met in that room. And, you know, Sonia again talks about what it was like to meet Guy and talks about him wearing-- he was at the time wearing an American uniform. I'll explain that if you like, in a minute. But he was wearing an American uniform because he was participating in a joint American Canadian force before he went over to London again. And she said that he looked like a Christmas tree, and she found him boisterous and loud and a bit obnoxious. And in fact, the two of them had, once they get into the training, a fairly antagonistic relationship where they, you know, they jostled. She pushed him into the river once. He smeared her face with mud. They had this kind of tension between them, and he called her a weak little girl. So, it was not entirely clear that they were actually going to end up as a couple later on.

MG: What was the Special Operations Executive? And I mean, put it in the context of the war. Describe kind of what's happening at that time in the war and what this thing is that's created.

NAHLAH AYED: Yeah. It would take a long time to explain entirely everything. But imagine the moment when Dunkirk, the evacuations from Dunkirk happened. And basically, the Allied forces and the British in particular, and the French have no way to fight against the German advance because there are no physical troops anywhere on mainland Europe. And so, what is left are two options. One is the fighting from the sky. So thus begins that phase of the war. And the other option was something that Churchill himself was interested in--the Prime Minister at the time-- and created what is called the Special Operations Executive. It was effectively a secret army. And what it was meant to do is to work behind enemy lines, to be delivered to those areas where there are German, there is German occupation ongoing. And they would help deliver weapons, provide training, maybe even conduct operations of sabotage themselves to try to undermine the occupation from within.

MG: It's like an invisible front.

NAHLAH AYED: Exactly.

MG: What was the role of women in the SOE?

NAHLAH AYED: Yeah. Well, it was a gradual inclusion of women in the SOE. Initially they were in the office. And the second, sort of the effective second in command was a woman, Vera Atkins, who is essential to this entire story. But women as field operators were few and far between at the beginning. But by the end of the war, there was a real recognition, and it's documented, that women actually were perfect candidates for this kind of work. [MG: Because?] Because they would they could, wouldn't be suspected. That, because they could move around much more easily than a young man could, because they weren't necessarily combatants. And, you know, and it was not lost on--and it was explicitly said by people who were involved--that it was not lost on them that pretty women in particular could get away with, you know, smiling their way through checkpoints. And so, so many women were pressed into service, and they were sought out for this kind of work. And so, Sonia was one of them. And I--there's this great scene where she describes her sitting across from Maurice Buckmaster and he says, you know, We might have a job for you, but it involves you going back to France behind enemy lines. And she goes, Well, how do I get there? She already had made up her mind that she was going to do this.

MG: I mean, in many ways, these are ordinary people who are being trained to do extraordinary things. Who were part of-- I mean, aside from these two-- who was part of this Special Operations Executive?

NAHLAH AYED: It's a really interesting question, Matt, because I tried so hard to find a common point between all of them. And I asked all the historians that were involved in this, and people who were involved in the story. And there was one thing, but if I had to say what they all had in common, I would say the fact that they straddled cultures. And they lived in more than one world. Which is, again, a reason that I found it compelling. They were kind of, they were called by one person, half and halves. They were people who knew French culture and language very well, but they also were British, or they were Canadian or they were from, you know, other countries.

MG: Which was a huge advantage.

NAHLAH AYED: A massive advantage. And perhaps, maybe for the first time, for some of them. One person described it this way, that for the first time in their lives, their divided lives, they felt that they could serve, you know, the divided parts of their personality equally. You know, countries that they had loyal to, to serve them both loyally. And so, this was a moment when they found themselves useful as people who were divided in their culture and language.

MG: They're going to be dropped behind enemy lines into incredibly dangerous territory. How were they trained for this? If these are ordinary people.

NAHLAH AYED: Yeah. Well, this is part of the criticism that happens later, but they are given a few weeks, a few months, I guess, about three months, depending on the person, of training. First, they were given a psychological assessment in which they were tested to see if you could actually handle the kinds of tests that you would face in a war zone, especially operating alone. And once you passed that, then they went to Scotland, to the Highlands, hidden away from the world. It's almost as though there's no war going on. It's quiet, you know, the sun sets at 3:30, and it's the perfect place to train a secret army. And so, they are taught how to-- they are taken to the local train station and taught how to drive a locomotive. Sonia hadn't learned how to drive a car yet, and she was being taught how to drive a locomotive.

MG: Because they might be thrust into these positions where they have to do almost anything.

NAHLAH AYED: Exactly. And where to put the charges, an explosive charge so that it blew up in a way that would derail it. How to use different kinds of weapons. And Sonia, as far as I could tell from reading her material, is that she had never handled weapons before. And there she was learning how to take them apart and grease them and put them back together. They learned how to do silent killing. They learned how to kill someone quietly. And they-- and what's interesting about this, Matt, is that even then, they weren't quite sure what their role was going to be. To the point that I found a quote somewhere in one of the books saying a woman had been, had asked out loud, you know, I'm not sure what we're being trained for here. I was recruited, I answered an ad for a bilingual secretary. And so, it's a very secret and quiet and very intense way of training. But by the end of it, these people can operate. They can unlock a door without a sound. They can steal documents quietly from a building, and they can kill someone if they have to.

MG: So, Guy and Sonia are part of this, and as all of this is unfolding, this is a story about these two agents and the agents that they were working with. But it's also a love story. How does that start to develop?

NAHLAH AYED: Yeah. As I mentioned, they had a very antagonistic relationship. And kind of, you know, they were teasing each other a lot. But, you know, in interviews that have been done with both of them, they both said it was all innocent. There was nothing to it. But at one point, it was Christmas, actually, just before--Christmas of 1943. The two of them joined a group of agents who decide to go attend Christmas mass. And so, for the first time since they joined this strange organization, they were going to experience a normal moment, a normal life moment. And so, they take this barge over to another place to go to the church. And it was there that they first held hands. And that night, they held hands throughout the church service. And as I say in the book, everyone felt the heaviness of that moment. They all knew that by then, that by the time the war ended, they may no longer be alive. They may not live out the lives that they hoped to live. And so, my sense is, and this is just my sense, that, you know, I'm sure you've heard all kinds of stories about wartime marriages that happened, that happened very quickly and were very hasty. And the question is, why? Well, there's this urgency to live.

MG: They eventually get married.

NAHLAH AYED: They do.

MG: How does that impact their roles in the war effort?

NAHLAH AYED: It's so interesting, Matt, watching some of this playing out in the documentation in their file, which is full of information, I got that from the National Archives in the U.K. And there was this debate going on in the background about whether that coupling would help them or hinder them in the field. But ultimately, after they have the short honeymoon, they're brought into the office again and they're told, We're really sorry, but you cannot go in together. And what happens then, Matt, is Sonia says, If you are not sending me in with my husband, then I am not going. And so she leaves. And that's how it ends for her until she's on the tarmac watching her husband of only a few weeks getting on, you know, Halifax. Gets on the plane, takes off, and Buckmaster assumes she's going back to her WAAF days and says to her, Is there anything I can do? And she says, Yeah, you can get me a mission as soon as possible. And five days later, Matt, she was gone.

MG: What is it that, what are some of the things that she and Guy did once they landed behind enemy lines?

NAHLAH AYED: Yeah. It's a long list. For Guy, he was basically responsible for training and equipping about 3000 men. He, himself, personally led one of the battalions that were formed between, you know, with the resistance that was already on the ground and operating. By the way, that's an important point. The resistance was operating. They were doing their thing. And the SOE agents went in and helped facilitate some of the work. And so, their job was to make sure that the lives of German forces were made difficult once the Allied forces landed. That they could not send reinforcements to Normandy to help out in the fight. And so, their job was to derail trains. Their job was to ambush convoys, to cut roads, to make it hard for these forces to move. And so, Guy participated in that. So did Sonia. She helped train men into ambushing convoys. She supported a network that actually ended up destroying a communication system in its entirety. And so, their job was to sabotage and to slow down those reinforcements as much as possible. And they both did that.

MG: What extraordinary danger. I mean, she, there's a story of her sitting, having, at a cafe with a member of the Gestapo.

NAHLAH AYED: Oh, it really is a heart stopping story. You can sort of visualize it. And she tells a story where she, she was living openly because she had lost track of what was parachuted with her, which was her clothing. In other words, if the convoy, a German convoy had picked up those, that clothing, they would have realized there was a female agent in the area that had just landed because they were still attached to parachutes. And so, she decided to live openly, which can you imagine what that's like? And not only that, to do that, she actually physically went to the black-market restaurants to have dinner where a lot of German officers did the same. And one day she was sharing a table with one of them and she dropped her purse. It fell off the back of her chair with an unmistakable thud of something heavy. And so, her companion or her, the person sitting next to her, reached down to get it, and she describes how she grabbed it just in time, and thank God she did, she says, because had he grabbed it himself, he would have realized instantly that there was something more than just makeup in this little bag. That there was a pistol in that bag and she would have been discovered. So that's how close she got. And there are many other examples of stories. That's how close she got to getting caught.

MG: You said something earlier, which was that when the war was over, she went out of her way to try and put this experience behind her. [NAHLAH: Yeah.] In the rear-view mirror. Tell me more about that. And why you think she did that.

NAHLAH AYED: Yeah, it's a really great question. One thing that I know for sure, one of the reasons she did that, and didn't want to talk publicly about it, although she did at the beginning a little bit, is something her family indicated. She talks about a little bit in her interview, which is that she did not want to overshadow her husband. Her husband continued in the military and actually had some incredible feats of work after that, which are also in the book. But, so that was something, it was in deference to her husband that she didn't want to talk about her role in the war, which was equal or similar to what he had done. The other reason, I mean, she says this later in life in some interviews as well, in a British newspaper, she says that the war was not my whole life. It was just part of my life. She was a forward-looking woman. She appeared, it's my sense that she lived in the moment. That looking back, to her, was not always easy. It was not always something that she, that she looked back on fondly. She had had a very difficult childhood, and she had a very difficult time during the war and went through some horrific experiences. Some of the worst that a woman can go through during war. And so, for her to move on, I mean, she moved continents. She literally crosses the ocean by herself, comes to Canada to a place she's never seen, and is adamant about building a new life. And so, I think that motivated her. She was very resilient.

MG: Part of this is also about how women and their time in war were seen at that time. Right? And the way that that was acknowledged or not acknowledged. The incredible prominent role that women like Sonia played, that was dismissed or again, played down.

NAHLAH AYED: It's extraordinary to me, Matt.

MG: At the highest levels.

NAHLAH AYED: Absolutely. It's really extraordinary to me that these women were expected to go through some of the most dangerous places and dangerous tasks, and then when they came back from the war would not be given even something similar to the recognition that the men were getting. And so, I just want to tell you a quick story about that, that there were five women who were recognized by the King, who were inducted into the order of, became members of the order of the British Empire in the civilian division.

MG: Not the military division.

NAHLAH AYED: Not the military one. And so, one of the senior SOE members on that list, Pearl Witherington-- and by the way, that list included Sonia-- Pearl Witherington comes out and says, I am not accepting this award. And says, there is nothing civil about what I did. And so, that rebellion started a bigger rebellion. And a year later the king issues another decree. Those same five women, including Sonia, are moved from the civilian division to the military one. And that is a massive victory. But it took decades for those women to be properly recognized, you know, including the women who were in the office back in London, like Vera Atkins. It took decades for them to be properly recognized and to have a monument built in their name. Not until Sonia was in her 80s that she actually got a Legion d'Honneur from the French government. So, it took a very long time.

MG: Why did you want to tell this story?

NAHLAH AYED: This story, from the beginning, Matt, took hold of me and I couldn't let it go. Sonia was such a compelling character to me. She was both a combatant and a civilian. She was a fighter and a victim. And there she was, jumping out of a plane at 20 years old. I mean, I've always been interested in stories of immigration and war and especially women in war. And so, I've told stories like this from around the world. And this is a Canadian version of that. It fits right into the kinds of stories that I've told before, except it's in the past. And I could not interview the protagonists, which is, will be eternally something I regret. But it's part of our history, and it's an important story, and it needs to be told.

MG: You say in the book, 'She had defied all expectations. She thrived when they predicted she would fall apart. She imbued the next generation with the belief that they, too, could do anything.' [NAHLAH: Yeah.] You sound quite taken with her.

NAHLAH AYED: You know...

MG: Like, she sounds like an incredibly powerful person.

NAHLAH AYED: She really does. You know, I've maintained all along that this is a journalistic endeavor. I did this, you know, using my journalistic tools, using sources from the past, some sources from today. And so, you know, I had to maintain some distance from the subjects and from the story and from the family. And I have to, I'm really grateful for how respectful everyone involved was of my journalistic independence. But it's hard not to think about the fact that there are lessons to be learned from this story. And from both of their stories, from Sonia and her husband, Guy, and the way they were participating, did their part in the war, and the way they lived afterwards. There are so many lessons contained in the story. And I definitely felt her determination. I felt, I could hear in her voice, her resilience, her determination to move on was admirable. And her determination to outperform expectations was also impressive. I really was impressed with that. And so, I think we could, as a country, we can learn from her courage, from her determination and from her resilience.

MG: I was gonna say, how should we remember her? And it's not just her. There's Guy, as well. But she's quite a character.

NAHLAH AYED: Yes, she is. Yeah, I think, listen, that generation built the country and the world that I open my eyes to. And, you know, we're of the same vintage, I think approximately. And it's, that's, you know, it's a world that's now changing again. But, you know, we need to remember that they built this world that we live in and that, you know, what kind of world do we want to live in? And what of that do we want to preserve in the future? I think this story really makes us think of two things. You know, coming as it does at a moment, sort of an infection in our history, I don't want to be alarmist, but it's a very young century. We don't know what kind of century it's going to be, ultimately, but it has been rather violent for the first 24 years. And, you know, the doomsday clock, which is, you know, a metaphorical way of keeping track of how close we are to global catastrophe is as close to midnight as it has ever been. And they say that part of the reason is these wars that are going on right now, and the polarization that is going on right now. With climate change and the wars that that might bring on later. And so, you know, it really begs us to think about what roles we want to play if we are confronted with conflict, not just at home, which is, you know, who knows, but also abroad, which indeed we're in this moment right now. Are we going to do what Sonia and Guy did? Are we going to be conscientious objectors? Are we going to be protesters? Are we going to be charity workers or just people who bear witness, who honour the losses and the suffering of people abroad by listening and engaging with the news and just understanding what is happening in the world. And so, I think these stories help us, invite us to not ignore what is going on and to pay attention and to bear witness.

MG: Nahlah, thank you very much.

NAHLAH AYED: You're welcome.

MG: Nahlah Ayed is the host of CBC Radio's Ideas. Her recent book is "The War We Won Apart: The Untold Story of Two Elite Agents who Became One of the Most Decorated Couples of WWII." That is The Current for this Monday, the 11th of November. Q is up next on CBC Radio One. Later this morning, I'll be co-hosting the CBC Radio Remembrance Day special with Marcia Young from World Report. You can tune in at 10:55 a.m. across most of this country, 11:55 a.m. Atlantic, 12:25 p.m. in Newfoundland and Labrador. That's on the CBC Radio One service or through the CBC News app. If you go to the app and at the very bottom, there is a local button there. Push that Local button and then push the bright yellow Listen Here button. You'll be able to hear us as we talk about what's unfolding in Ottawa and beyond during the Remembrance Day special. We're going to leave you with a song from the great Newfoundland band, Great Big Sea. When a Canadian veteran started finding gently used guitars and given them to struggling vets, the former Great Big Sea guitarist, Sean McCann said, 'Sign me up.' [Music: Recruiting Sergeant by Great Big Sea fading in] He became an ambassador for Guitars for Vets. Their mission is to put the healing power of music into the hands of veterans. This is Great Big Sea, and 'Recruiting Sergeant.' I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current. Talk to you later.

[Music: Recruiting Sergeant by Great Big Sea]

Monday, November 11, 2024 Full Transcript

Social Sharing