Was Chris Alexander Fed False Intel about a So-Called Russian Asset?
ON OCTOBER 27, 2025, former MP Chris Alexander appeared before a parliamentary committee studying Russian disinformation. Such committees are struck to help senators better understand foreign threats and shape recommendations to strengthen Canada’s defences. Alexander, a former diplomat with extensive national security experience, has long been an outspoken critic of Russian aggression—particularly in Ukraine. It’s easy to see why he seemed like the kind of witness who could offer valuable insight into Russia’s information-warfare tactics and their implications for Canada and its allies.
But for anyone following Alexander’s activities last year, his return to Parliament was puzzling. The last time he testified, on October 24, 2024, he levelled an explosive accusation: that long-time Ottawa Citizen reporter David Pugliese was a paid Russian asset, brandishing what Alexander claimed were photocopies of incriminating KGB documents as proof. The allegation made for splashy headlines. Pugliese pushed back. The media moved on.
Maybe they shouldn’t have. As Taylor C. Noakes reports in this issue (“Spy Games”), international experts who reviewed the materials said they bore markings of fabrications. The documents used a computer font created in 1993 on papers dated 1990; displayed letters with repeating identical “dust specks,” suggesting digital manipulation; and showed handwriting too uniform to be of different people. Unbelievably, almost no one has reported on this. Beyond a few online outlets, the findings barely registered. Did Alexander, a man who once ran for leadership of the Conservative Party, peddle fake material to smear a respected journalist? The question alone sounds incredible. But if the answer is anything short of an unequivocal no—if there is even the insinuation of a maybe—shouldn’t it be a bigger deal?
This made Alexander’s encore appearance—before a similar committee, speaking on the same subject of disinformation—all the more astonishing. Not one senator was moved to ask Alexander about the revelations. For his part, Alexander has not publicly offered any new documentation or fresh corroboration to back up his extraordinary allegations. That obviously raises questions about the quality of information officials have access to. Perhaps he was fed bad intel—it’s not impossible. But it also leads to a second, more troubling question. If this is the calibre of analysis shaping our politics, what does that say about the judgment of the media that’s supposed to vet it?
Canadian journalists face a formidable barrier. We are mostly consumers of second-hand information rather than participants in its production. We don’t have access to raw intel collected by agencies. Instead, we rely on leaks and delayed access-to-information disclosures. We also depend on official statements made in parliamentary sessions. But that can’t excuse a lapse in skepticism. Our silence isn’t neutral—it shapes public truth. It leaves the impression that even when facts are available, we are too deferential or too intimidated to chase them down.
Power has a way of spooking us. When an accusation comes from someone with a serious résumé—former cabinet minister, diplomat—newsrooms might simply stand down. We tell ourselves that the risk is too high, that maybe they know something we don’t. Self-doubt is the most effective psy-op of all. It’s one we run on ourselves, convincing us to stay quiet.
But let’s just recap where we are. A journalist is branded a traitor in the halls of our government. Then we learn there’s a credible possibility the accusation was baseless. And now—the most unsettling part—we’re left with a profession that has shown no urgent instinct to dig, challenge, or even ask what really happened.
Does Canada still have a press able to call out a lie when it sees one?
The post Was Chris Alexander Fed False Intel about a So-Called Russian Asset? first appeared on The Walrus.
Comments
Be the first to comment