The federal government’s upcoming Indo-Pacific strategy must explicitly recognize and respond to the security threat posed by China in the region, experts say, or Canada risks being seen as irrelevant in a part of the world expected to be a hub economic growth for decades. The Indo-Pacific region, which stretches from North America to the west coast of India, is home to 60 percent of the world’s population and accounts for 60 percent of the world’s gross domestic product. About 60 percent of the world’s maritime trade passes through its oceans, a third of that through the South China Sea, where Beijing has laid sweeping territorial claims. “China needs to be front and center,” Vincent Rigby, who is retiring as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s national security adviser in 2021, said of the Indo-Pacific strategy. “If he doesn’t deal with China, it will just undermine our credibility.” The government has been quietly formulating its Indo-Pacific strategy since 2020. Two sources with knowledge of the strategy said the first draft, drawn up by a team from Global Affairs, made no mention of China. One of the sources added that an external expert advisory group, convened by Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly in June to provide input on the strategy, was engaged in a heated debate over whether China should be considered in the panel’s recommendations. The Globe and Mail is not identifying the sources because they were not authorized to discuss the government’s deliberations. Many of Canada’s major allies, including other G7 countries, have already formulated their own Indo-Pacific strategies. The “Indo-Pacific” concept is a strategic shift, first championed by Japan and embraced by Australia and the United States. The idea is to build common ground between India and neighbors who have growing middle-class populations and a common interest in countering China’s growing influence in the region, and who also fear Beijing’s militarization of the South China Sea. and other ocean trade routes. . The US Indo-Pacific policy, unveiled in February, makes it clear that China is using all its economic, military, technological and diplomatic power to become the dominant player in the region. “From Australia’s economic coercion to the conflict along the Line of Actual Control with India to the growing pressure on Taiwan and its intimidating neighbors in the East and South China Seas, our allies and partners in the region shoulder much of the cost of the PRC. harmful behavior,” the US strategy states. Dominic Barton selected to advise Canada on Indo-Pacific strategy Although the sources said the first draft of Canada’s Indo-Pacific strategy did not directly mention China, they said it occasionally referred obliquely to China. The draft emphasized the importance of widening the circle of potential trading partners in the region and strengthening security and international aid, one of the sources said. This would have the effect of reducing Canada’s dependence on China and increasing its economic and military power. The draft also suggested Ottawa establish a larger diplomatic footprint in the Indo-Pacific and contribute to infrastructure investment, which would be consistent with Western efforts to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative. As part of the initiative, Beijing is pouring $1 trillion into building railways, ports and pipelines from Asia to Africa, part of what critics see as a state-led effort to boost Chinese political influence and expand military reach. of the country. The draft also called for increased spending on international development aid and the fight against climate change, the sources said. The idea of increasing the presence of Canadian naval vessels in the region and Canada taking a more active role in cyber security was also mentioned. The sources said Ms. Jolie wants to downplay Canada’s shift away from China and is determined to mend relations with Beijing after the Meng Wanzhou affair. After the 2018 arrest of Ms. Meng, a senior executive at Chinese technology company Huawei, China jailed Canadians Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig. The episode, which was resolved after the U.S. rejected an extradition request for Ms. Meng and China released Mr. Spavor and Mr. Kovrig, has led Ottawa-Beijing relations to more tense than they were after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Ms. Joly’s Indo-Pacific Advisory Board consists of 14 members. Among them are several pro-China businessmen, including former Liberal cabinet minister Pierre Pettigrew, who is now chairman of the board of the Asia Pacific Foundation, which promotes closer trade ties with China. The panel also includes Dominic Barton, Canada’s former ambassador to Beijing. He stepped down from that role in December to chair mining giant Rio Tinto, which does most of its business in China. One of the sources described the panel’s deliberations on how, in its final report to Ms Jolie, it should deal with China’s growing power and influence. The source said the committee is debating whether these issues should be included at all, let alone recognized as a key problem for the Indo-Pacific region. The source said Mr Barton argued that relations with Beijing could be managed. Janice Gross Stein, one of the advisory committee’s co-chairs, declined to answer questions about the Indo-Pacific strategy, saying the entire committee is currently bound by strict confidentiality rules and none of its members are free to discuss his individual perspectives or the procedures of the institution. Canada’s failure to publicly address Beijing’s threat to the region will be noticed by allies, especially in Washington, experts say. Canada has 27,000 kilometers of coastline along the Pacific Ocean. Peter Jennings, senior fellow and former executive director at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, a Canberra think tank, said Canada was not already considered a serious player in the region. Shown to the fact that Canada was not invited to join the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, an alliance between India, Japan, Australia and the US created in response to Beijing’s increasingly aggressive push to build regional networks and project its military power. Nor has Ottawa been asked to join the AUKUS defense pact, which consists of the US, the UK and Australia. The federal government only learned about the alliance after it was announced. Opinion: Canada unjustifiably absent from another Indo-Pacific initiative Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has rejected AUKUS, saying it is really little more than a deal to sell US nuclear submarine technology to Australia. But AUKUS members are also jointly developing technology to launch and intercept supersonic missiles, which travel five times the speed of sound and can change course mid-flight. And allies are also working together on electronic warfare, which is the use of the electromagnetic spectrum to disrupt enemy operations. Mr. Jennings said Canada is “pretty marginal” in Australia and risks becoming more marginal in Washington if it does not articulate a clear view on China. “If the strategy just comes out with the pap, then … a lot of funds are not going to be impressed with that and start saying, ‘Well, can we trust Canadians working on military technology projects?’ ” said Mr. Jennings. Or, “Is Canada still fully subscribed to information exchanges that we can be sure of?” “ Mr. Rigby, the former national security adviser, worries that Ottawa is being overlooked by players in the Indo-Pacific. Canada was also not invited to join a US-led 14-nation partnership aimed at strengthening economic ties with the Asia-Pacific region and countering China’s rapid advances in the region. Nor was Canada asked to join an economic and political initiative by Australia, Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States to counter China’s creeping occupation of small South Pacific islands. “China’s threat must be recognized. And, working closely with our allies, we must meet this threat,” Mr Rigby said. “We have security interests threatened by China in the Indo-Pacific and at home, so we have to do something.” Stephen Nagy, senior associate professor of politics and international studies at the International Christian University of Japan, said he believes countries in the Indo-Pacific region would like Canada to differentiate itself from the US in its approach. “I think the last thing they want is something that looks like it’s just a copy of a US strategy, because they would like to see Canada as an independent actor that can bring value to the region,” Professor Nagy said. “It needs to be built on an engagement process that recognizes the needs of the region and how those reflect Canadian interests,” including climate change mitigation, he added. Jonathan Berkshire Miller, a senior fellow at the Canada-based Japan Institute of International Affairs, said Canada is becoming increasingly irrelevant in the Indo-Pacific. “We are beyond delay now. We haven’t even thought and this is not a good place to be,” he said. Randolph Munk, Canada’s former envoy to Indonesia, Malaysia and Pakistan, said Canada appears to have a policy of “strategic procrastination” on major geopolitical issues. Even if there is no mention of Beijing’s aggressive behavior in Canada’s Indo-Pacific strategy, he said, the West, including NATO, has already drawn a line in the sand. He noted NATO’s recent shift toward identifying China as a strategic challenge, the G7’s move to spend $600 billion to challenge the Belt and Road Initiative…
