I'm in favour of Canada being a joiner. We're a member of more international organizations than almost any other state. However, there is a problem that emerges with Asia-Pacific, with the Pacific in general and even with the Indo-Pacific. With all due respect for our military, for which I have the highest respect—I went to our national defence college at one point—our Pacific forces are extremely modest. We lack even the legs or the means to get our ships readily to Asia without the help of our southern neighbour. A number of our ships are getting older. Our air force is not new. We're a minor player. I think that, as long as that remains true, it's hard for us to be taken as seriously or to be an active member of those organizations.
When it comes to trade, there are more substantive links. We have, obviously, huge people-to-people links because Asia is the number one source of our immigration, etc. The AUKUS arrangement between the U.K., Australia and the United States has a particular focus on defence equipment, which I don't think Canada seems ready to acquire. When you think about our submarines, we went that route once, but it was never finished. I'm a bit skeptical it would happen.
However, I do believe that we should be at more tables in Asia. We shouldn't assume, though, that it's simply a question of asking. Our attention to that region has been episodic. It's alive for a while, and then it dies off. The question will be, in Asian capitals—in my view—whether we are going to show up on a regular basis and whether we can be counted on. If we can generate a sustained effort to be an active part of that region despite the distances, that's a great thing.