I agree. One point which I think is important and one of the things I didn't mention is that I'm a so-called distinguished fellow of the Asia Pacific Foundation. I was asked to chair a task force, which has just reported, and we'll make that report available to the committee. It was looking at—and only diplomats could create these words—regional architecture. I actually had an architect phone me up to ask whether he could be involved. What that really meant was to take a look at the institutions and the trade agreements in Asia. This was much broader than just Japan. The report, which is out, is entitled "Securing Canada's Place in Asia".
One of the points that I think comes to your point is that a straight commercial relationship is not enough. In Asia relationships matter. It is important that you have a full-fledged relationship across a number of sectors in each country. With that I'm talking about political, security, and in some cases defence, even though our capabilities in defence are not that great in that kind of context. It's not just about doing trade. It's also in where we can be allies in international agreements and international institutions.
One of the things that always struck me, and I think I'm being fairly objective when I say this, is the commonality of interest between Japan and Canada on so many issues. When I was deputy foreign minister, I was a G-7 or G-8 sherpa or personal representative of the Prime Minister. I found that on many occasions, Canada and Japan, the two non-nuclear members of that group, and it wasn't just because of that, had a great deal more in common in our outlook and approach than we had with people with whom we would normally associate our relationships. I think that's an important factor in the Canada-Japan relationship as well.