Let me put to you another question, a related question. On the whole issue of partnerships, you described in your opening—perhaps Mr. Petrolekas can answer this—how a very large number of the partnerships that NATO has arose essentially as a result of the breakup of the Soviet Union and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council attempt to have partnerships for peace and other relationships with a very large number of countries that had once belonged to the Warsaw Pact or the Soviet Union, and then others even beyond that group, but geographically proximate.
In both of your recent papers, though, you talk now about the imperative Canada has to solidify security partnerships in Asia, and to do more in the Americas, where there are hard security challenges, as you were saying. You also mentioned Africa as a place where the state-building challenge and potentially the challenge of conflict on a large scale are perhaps the most acute anywhere in the world.
What are you saying about how Canada's partnerships in those regions should be structured? Do you see NATO as a vehicle in one or all of those regions? Do you think we should be going back to the UN to try again? Or is there some other kind of third option that you see, regionally specific...?
I think this is relevant to a discussion of the strategic concept, because the strategic concept—apart from the UN charter—is the only articulation of our shared security interest with allies that we have so far for 2012.