FAAE meeting 31 · 2026-04-21 — Committee Evidence — LegisWatch

Summary

The House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development met to study Canada’s Indo-Pacific strategy, hearing from four academic witnesses appearing as individuals: Kai Ostwald, Ari Van Assche, Stephen R. Nagy, and Cleo Paskal.

Kai Ostwald, an associate professor at the University of British Columbia, said Canada has underinvested in the Indo-Pacific for decades, leaving deficits in capacity and knowledge, networks, and reputation. He argued the region must be a true priority for resources and attention, with progress measured in five- to 10-year blocks, and that effective delivery on trade and security pillars requires sustained investment in people-to-people connections and diplomatic presence.

Ari Van Assche, a professor at HEC Montréal, called for three fundamental shifts in the strategy: moving from export expansion to value chain positioning, from broad-based engagement to sector-selective focus on strategic industries like defence and semiconductors, and from diffuse regional engagement to targeted partnerships with countries such as Japan, South Korea, India and key ASEAN members. He proposed a 5P framework—pursue, protect, promote, partner, pinpoint—to operationalize a more security-driven, whole-of-government approach aligned with economic security and industrial policy goals.

Stephen R. Nagy, a professor at International Christian University and senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, identified four Canadian national interests: being at the table on regional agreements, preventing traditional and non-traditional security issues, preventing the emergence of a regional hegemon (China), and planning beyond political cycles. He recommended anchoring the strategy in the strongest possible relationship with the United States, developing bilateral and minilateral relationships with dependable partners like Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Vietnam and Indonesia, and strengthening Canada at home by breaking down interprovincial barriers.

Cleo Paskal, a non-resident senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, focused on strategic geography, warning that China is actively using corruption to undermine the U.S.-aligned Pacific island states of Palau, the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia, which control the critical Central Pacific maritime corridor. She recommended a “block-and-build” approach: help partners block Chinese coercive operations, for example by providing dark vessel detection technology to Palau, and build real resilience through people-to-people work and by sending investigators and lawyers to fight corruption, rather than attending multilateral meetings.

During questions, witnesses disagreed on some points: Nagy argued Canada should prioritize larger partners like Japan and Indonesia over the small Pacific island states, while Paskal countered that the islands’ strategic importance far outweighs their population and that Canada could be a point person there at relatively low cost. On China, Van Assche said Canada should engage pragmatically while guarding against forced labour and overreliance, while Paskal and Nagy emphasized the risks of Chinese coercion and the need to treat Taiwan as an international public good. On the form of the strategy update, Ostwald and Van Assche agreed a written update would be useful for communication and coordination, while Paskal speculated the government might avoid a new document to limit criticism. The committee also discussed the importance of diaspora communities, the role of Japan and South Korea as partners, and the need for stronger domestic legislation on forced labour and foreign influence. No procedural motions or votes were recorded.

AI-generated summary — may contain errors; verify against the official evidence.

Witnesses · 4

Kai Ostwald

Associate Professor, Institute of Asian Research, University of British Columbia, As an Individual

Opening remarks

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank the members of the committee for their invitation. I'm very happy to be here today. I want to open with three observations and draw out a few implications for the review and update of the Indo-Pacific strategy. To begin, the Indo-Pacific strategy as written gets a number of things correct as basic statements of fact. The Indo-Pacific region, Asia, is already the global epicentre of economic dynamism by many measures. If the trends continue as they are, that will only increase in the generation to come. It's also the centre of geopolitical challenges globally, whether that's because of rising powers or, of course, specific security flashpoints. All of these things affect Canadian interests deeply, so I think the call to prioritize attention and resources to position Canada to meet these challenges in the generation ahead is correct. I would add that the U.S. disruptions have accelerated the rationale for many of the elements that the Indo-Pacific strategy calls for. The Indo-Pacific strategy, since its launch, has produced a number of positive outcomes. Canada's presence in the region has increased in a number of ways. One is in the form of…

Full testimony ↗

Ari Van Assche

Full Professor, Department of International Business, HEC Montréal, As an Individual

Opening remarks

Mr. Chair, honourable members, thank you for the invitation to contribute to your review of Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy. I will be giving my introductory remarks in English. I would be pleased to answer your questions in French or English. My central message this afternoon is straightforward. The global geopolitical context has evolved significantly since the strategy's launch in 2022. Today, the resilience of Canada's economy more than ever depends on its ability to reduce overreliance on major economic powers, especially China and the United States, through deliberate and strategic trade diversification. The Indo-Pacific strategy can be a powerful vehicle to help achieve this objective, but it must be deployed more deliberately and more assertively as an instrument of economic statecraft. Let me be clear. This is not to diminish the strategy's early achievements. Over the past four years, Canada has meaningfully strengthened its trade and investment presence in the world's most dynamic economic region through an expanded diplomatic footprint, new trade agreements and deeper political engagements. Notwithstanding these gains, the strategy would benefit from a sharper and…

Stephen R. Nagy

Professor, China Policy Project Lead and Senior Fellow, International Christian University, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, As an Individual

Opening remarks

Thank you very much, Chair. It's a great pleasure to share some ideas with this committee on Canada's Indo-Pacific strategy going forward. I'd like to break down my ideas into four points that focus on Canada's national interests in the Indo-Pacific and five points in terms of our strategic approaches to be able to achieve these national interests. First, in terms of national interests, I think our Prime Minister said it very well. Maybe he quoted me, from one of my earlier papers, but we need to be “at the table, not on the menu” in terms of being on every single agreement within the region. I say that in good humour, but we need to be at that regulatory table for AI development; for technology and energy security; for how we deal with sea lines of communication, defence, regional security and disinformation; as well as for economic security. Second—and I think this is really important—as we think about where Canada should be, we are clearly interested in preventing traditional and non-traditional security issues from emerging. Traditional securities could be a Taiwan contingency, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction on the Korean peninsula or some kind of incident…

Full testimony ↗