This is quite something to see.
A tweet from the Canadian prime minister
saying that he ordered this object
to be taken down over Canadian skies.
What more can you tell us?
It also speaks, in fact,
to the seriousness
of what's happened here
and the chain of command
and I will note that in his tweet,
the prime minister also indicated,
of course,
this is close coordination
with the White House
and with President Joe Biden.
At issue here,
Jim, is really
what is going on with these objects
and the threat that they pose.
Now, remember
that they would have been
given some kind of intelligence
when Nord
had actually spotted
this high altitude object,
as they're calling it,
to give an indication
that possibly there was a threat.
I would assume that if it was over
northern Canada,
that Canadian forces,
the Air Force, would have determined
that they could shoot it down
without a risk to people on the ground.
And more than that,
the prime
minister is now saying
the Canadian Forces
will lead the recovery effort again
to ascertain exactly what this is.
Does it pose a threat?
And who it belongs to?
Because remember, in the last objects
you were just talking to Natasha
about that second one, still a mystery.
Obviously, this a mystery as well.
What is it?
Why does it continue to enter both U.S.
and Canadian airspace?
And what can Canadian forces and the U.S.
now learn from having shot it down
and trying to recover the debris?
We don't have any more details yet.
We have reached out to the Canadian
Defense Ministry to understand
what kind of a recovery
operation is underway
and how complicated that might be.
But given the way the close coordination
has been happening between the U.S.
and Canada, remember
through Nora,
they're all
looking at the same intelligence
in terms of what is it?
Does it pose a threat?
They now need to determine
exactly what to do going forward.
At issue, though, Jim,
the most important thing is
you've lost two objects.
Who do they belong to
and why are they entering
both Canadian and American airspace?
And according to these tweets
from the Canadian prime minister,
Paula, Canadian forces will now recover
and analyze the wreckage of this object.
The prime minister
seems to have some degree of confidence
that there is wreckage
that is retrievable, recoverable,
at this point and
possibly available for analysis once
once it's all picked up.
That's interesting as well.
It is very interesting.
And obviously, as I said,
first and foremost,
they want to make sure
that assuming that down
there was no risk to anyone
on the ground.
But again,
the recovery efforts, what do they entail
given?
I'd imagine
you know, in terms of recovery,
what kind of debris field
are they looking at?
Again, it did not come down
as far as we know, in the water
that will make things
a little bit easier.
Again, they recover
that second high
altitude object
and they'll be in close coordination
with U.S. forces on that
Just to remind everyone, it
was actually just yesterday, on Friday
that Canada's defense
minister, Anita Anand, met with Secretary
Austin to discuss these issues.
And, you know,
President Biden
is expected to visit Canada in March.
You know, one of the key issues
that was already on the agenda, Jim,
before these objects started
appearing over U.S.
and Canadian airspace
was Arctic security.
Some of it is certainly menacing
from the point of view
about what Russia has been going on.
Has been had going on
in the Arctic region,
but obviously also China.
And given
these kinds of threats,
just poking their way into the airspace
this whole conversation
about Arctic security over both Canada
and the United States
will take on a very heightened urgency.
And again,
they are looking for a completely
new security architecture here
for the Arctic
and for the north over both countries.
And this will certainly feature.
You're absolutely right about that.
That's a very good point, Paula.
I remember from my days
covering the White House
that both administrations I covered
were becoming
increasingly concerned
about what was taking place
in the Arctic,
in part
because of the warming
that is going on up there,
but also because of the potential
for things like this.
Paula Newton,
thank you very much for your time.
Please come back to us
if you have any new information.
We'll take it
just as soon as you have it.
We appreciate it very much.
Joining us now
to discuss
this further is CNN transportation
analyst Mary Schiavo.
Mary is a former inspector general
for the Department of Transportation.
Mary, we were talking to you last weekend
about how weird it was to have a balloon,
a Chinese spy balloon
flying over the United States
and being shot down off the coast of
South Carolina.
And then lo and behold, here
we are one week later,
we had the incident that took place
in Alaska yesterday.
And then we don't even know
a whole lot about
what is taking place today.
The Canadian prime minister
ordering the takedown
of an unidentified object over the Yukon.
That is very strange.
Well, very strange,
but I've
been working in Alaska
for two and a half weeks
on a different airplane crash case.
The the difference
in the
activity here with military aviation.
I'm literally I can see it
you know, aviation,
an air base from here.
There are AWACS planes,
you know, the airborne early surveillance
radar planes
from the military base
circling around Alaska.
I mean, there's a tremendous increase
in activity here
just on surveillance activities
from from,
you know, fixed wing aircraft
and the AWACS
and the important thing to note
is the United States.
And, of course,
Canada has every right
to take these aircraft down
or wherever these objects are.
Balloons
because we have a series of treaties
with all nations of the world.
And we also have requirements
for aircraft
to identify themselves,
to be identified,
particularly at the altitudes
at which they're flying.
Yes, you can do
what's called visual flight.
You don't have to have
a transponder on board.
But at the altitudes
that some of these objects have been,
they will interfere with traffic,
with commercial air traffic.
I mean, some planes can fly at 40,000
50,000 feet.
And by not identifying what
the object is,
military aircraft can fly up to you.
Even if that's happened to me
when I was in flight school,
they can fly up to a civilian aircraft
and ask you to identify yourself
if you're too close
to military installations.
And Alaska
is full of military installations.
So I think the heightened surveillance
up here, in addition to realizing
there is something there
that the nations need to find out,
they're within their rights to do it now.
And you're absolutely right about that
in terms of the danger
to civilian aircraft,
because as we were discussing
about what took place
in Alaska yesterday,
that was the concern
that that unidentified object was
hovering around 40,000 feet.
That puts it at risk.
For colliding with civilian aircraft.
That makes it a huge
aviation security priority.
That's right. In the skies up here.
We're very busy yesterday,
not you know,
it's always busy
with civilian aircraft in Alaska
because that's a way of life.
But there was a lot of military presence
in the skies yesterday over Anchorage.
And environs.
And, you know,
are they just picking up more
now that everyone's paying attention?
Well, really, no,
because over the years
there have been many sightings
of various things.
But a lot of times
the government didn't
pay much attention to them.
And when I was inspector
general, the DOD,
obviously the FAA was underresourced
and there would be lots of reports.
Oh, the FAA is hiding
you know, is covering up.
Brown identified flying objects.
Now, when we investigated,
they always had an earthly origin.
But now with heightened attention,
I think probably more will be found
because that's generally how it works.
When you pay attention, you find more.
But they always have an origin
at least so far here on Earth.
Yes.
And let me ask you about
what was reported about Alaska
in that the object that was taken down
yesterday was described as being
about the size of a small car.
Does that sound like another balloon type
aircraft to you
or does that sound like a drone?
Well, there were some reports on pilots.
The pilots who went up
take a look at it
themselves, had mixed reports.
Some thought balloon
and some that it was a drone.
And, of course, you know, drones,
you know,
they look very different nowadays.
They don't look like aircraft of years
gone by.
So I think we'll have to wait
on the government to tell that.
But without a doubt,
the balloon that they got,
they now say, was doing
communications surveillance.
Which one would you know,
expect a balloon?
If you've got a satellite
to take pictures,
a balloon surveillance
would have to be
looking for something else.
But there's conflicting reports
on what it really looks like.
But since they have it,
they'll know soon.
And I imagine they'll be able to tell us
the origin of it.
Nation,
the national origin of
the object pretty soon.