Foreign Affairs Committee on April 21st, 2026

[Ari Van Assche]

We need to really think about strategic and non-strategic sectors very differently. Non-strategic sectors are where businesses should be able to do as usual, and we should be helping them. In strategic sectors, maybe industrial policy will be a bit more important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

We go next to Monsieur Brunelle-Duceppe for two and a half minutes.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Criticizing us for talking too much about China when it comes to Canada's Indo-Pacific strategy is like criticizing the Liberal government for talking too much about the United States when it comes to renewing the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement by saying that it includes Mexico. I think it just makes sense.

Mr. Ostwald, you talked about semiconductors. Let's say that Taiwan were taken over by a Chinese military action tomorrow morning. It is likely; we've been talking about such an action for a long time. What would be the result of such a Chinese offensive on Taiwan if all Taiwanese semiconductor production fell into the hands of the current regime in Beijing? Wouldn't that be an absolute global catastrophe?

[Kai Ostwald]

This is not an area of my expertise, but I think we can all agree that an invasion of Taiwan would be catastrophic on many fronts. Taiwan is integral to global supply chains, not just on chips, but on many other fronts as well.

That's not just because of the direct effect. The second-order effects of an invasion like that would deeply shake supply chains and confidence in the security of supply chains across the Indo-Pacific.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Isn't that another reason to strengthen our ties with Taiwan, to ensure that Taiwan is not subject to such a military offensive, and in particular to reassure our Taiwanese friends? Taiwan is a fairly important middle power. I believe it has the 16th highest GDP in the world. Isn't that the main reason that we should have even stronger ties with Taiwan and provide reassurances for its security?

[Kai Ostwald]

There are many arguments for building stronger ties with Taiwan. They go from tech over to security.

Of course, if I'm just speaking anecdotally about my experiences at the university, interests in Taiwan are very high among the younger generation. I don't know whether Canada has the ability to provide meaningful deterrence for Taiwan, but providing the support that it can, through economic exchange, the strengthening of economic ties and the sharing of expertise, is very sensible.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Signing the agreement with Taiwan that was approved a year ago would send an important message because it is an opportunity for Canada to have strong economic ties with Taiwan. It would send a message to Beijing. As it stands, Canada is not signing that agreement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Give a very brief response, please.

[Kai Ostwald]

Again, there are a lot of arguments to make for strengthening ties with Taiwan.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

We go next to MP Michael Chong.

You have five minutes.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON]

The government released the Indo-Pacific strategy in November 2022. Do both of you, as witnesses, agree that it's a good idea to have a written foreign policy on the Indo-Pacific region in a single document?

[Kai Ostwald]

I would certainly say that there are a lot of advantages to that. It does a number of things. It signals—

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON]

Do you agree that it's a good idea?

[Kai Ostwald]

It signals that Canada does prioritize the Indo-Pacific. It also—

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON]

Here's the question I'm asking. We've been told by the government in testimony this past week that they're not going to update the document. There have been changes to the Indo-Pacific strategy since it was originally published in November 2022. Those changes include the Prime Minister's announcing in Asia last year that Canada wants to expedite Canadian oil and gas to the region, wants to turn Canada into an energy superpower and wants to export far more quantities of oil and gas to the region. I think the Prime Minister made reference to doubling Canada's natural gas exports from the about 50 million tonnes a year expected by 2030 to 100 million tonnes by 2040.

When I asked the minister about updating the strategy to reflect this—because the words “oil and gas” do not appear in that strategy—she indicated that she had directed officials to update the strategy, which I took to mean to update the document. Now we find out that the document is not going to be updated in a singular fashion and may be updated through a speech the minister gives or in other ways.

We're back to the situation we were in prior to the Indo-Pacific strategy being published, and we're not clear on what exactly the government's policy is in the region. I am trying to get your views on whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.

[Kai Ostwald]

I can't speak to the government's decisions on whether or not to—

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON]

The question is whether or not it's a good idea to have a single published document that contains the government's foreign policy for a particular region. Many other countries do this. I believe France has a written document that's updated every five years. I think the United Kingdom also has a written document for its foreign policy that's updated through a regular process. The U.S. government's position on various regions of the world is clear through their publication of documents.

We now have a situation where it's not clear what exactly the policy is. The department has 13,000 people or so. If you want to coordinate the department and the whole of government, having a single guiding document seems to me to make a lot of sense.

[Kai Ostwald]

Communication is key, and clearly communicating that the Indo-Pacific matters and what Canada's approach is to the Indo-Pacific is critical. I don't know whether that will be in the form of a fully updated document or written notes that articulate how Canada's thinking is now different from the original strategy in 2022, but I would agree that communicating how Canada sees the region and that Canada sees the region as critical is important.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON]

I personally think they should be updating the document. I think that would be a good recommendation of this committee when it's completed its review of the strategy, but if experts don't feel like that's the case, it's more difficult to make that recommendation.

Is our online witness here? Dr. Van Assche.

[Ari Van Assche]

I can be very quick.

I think it would be very good to update the Indo-Pacific strategy to reflect the new reality we're facing. Of course, it would have to be very general. Not all of the details have to be presented, but indeed, as Minister Anand has already indicated, we are in a new reality, therefore the Indo-Pacific strategy should be changing. It's good to write that down.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills North, ON]

Thank you.

I have no further questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

We go next to Anita Vandenbeld. You have five minutes.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a number of questions, but on what my colleague Mr. Chong was saying, I did not hear the officials say there would not be a written strategy. I think it was just premature to say what form it was going to take. I think we have to be careful not to put words in people's mouths.

I want to address some of the things you said, Mr. Ostwald, because I was very interested in your comment about language, teaching Indo-Pacific Asian languages here in Canada and the level of knowledge. The obvious question becomes, what about the role of diaspora communities? I know a lot of the business that is happening. You have a large, very diverse community with links to the whole region, with the language skills and with the knowledge.

I wonder if you could comment a bit on that.

[Kai Ostwald]

The diaspora plays a role in this. Of course, the diaspora should be seen as an important resource for Canada. It strengthens people-to-people connections and lays out networks. I see the diaspora as part of the solution, not as a primary solution.

I'll answer that through an anecdote. I teach a class on Southeast Asian politics. A good portion of my class is Canadians with Southeast Asian heritage. Typically, they know one country well culturally. Maybe they have language skills for one country. Often, they have not been to the region at all, or if they have, they've been to that one country. It's a large region.

I think the diasporic connections, while they're important, do not replace systematic training across the board.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much. I think that's duly noted.

In 2018, when I was on this committee before, the committee travelled to the region. We chose to go to Japan, South Korea and the Philippines. We found the same thing at that time as you were saying. There was a tremendous desire, willingness and openness to have more of Canada and to build those relationships.

I'd like to ask specifically about South Korea and Japan. Strategically, security-wise, there are a lot of shared perspectives. What do you see as some of the opportunities?

If we could save some time for Mr. Van Assche on the same question, that would be great.

Go ahead.