Yes, and I believe that, if the Government of Canada were to define our interests in terms of a leading position in some areas of the international stage, it could serve us well. But, as long as we do not know what the government wants, I have no answer for you. I do not disagree with you at all. We might be able to take advantage of the vacuum created in order to make a place for ourselves, but what would we do with it? It takes us back to square one, which was: tell me what you want to do and I will tell you whether it would be better for you to take a position a little this way, or a little that way.
For example, the Canadian government is very closely tied to the security of Israel. George and I already mentioned it and I believe that it is in the document. As a principle, therefore, we should be very much engaged, much more so than we actually are at the moment, in all aspects of the conversation on the Middle East peace process. This is not just about some possible contribution to things going on along the Jordan basin. It is also about determining to what extent we as Canadians should become more committed to a dialogue with the countries in the area, instead of just ignoring them completely.
Egypt, the most populous country in the region, is right in the middle of a process that still remains to be defined. But, since March 2011, not a single Canadian minister has gone to that country to start a dialogue with the countries involved. If we really want to contribute to improved security for Israel, we must, exactly as you said, be a lot more proactive.