Some caution Asian engagement is as much about building capacity in Canada as selling goods abroad.

After years of downplaying its interest in the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade talks, Canada recently said it wants to join the club, a move being seen by analysts as a watershed moment in the Harper government's approach to Asian markets.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced the government's interest in the TPP on Nov. 13 while in Hawaii for the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum.

"We are indicating today our formal intention, we're expressing formally our willingness to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership," Mr. Harper was reported as saying. "We will make an application and I am optimistic we will participate in the future."

This came one day after leaders whose countries are already part of the TPP talks announced that they had achieved broad outlines of an agreement that aims to "promote innovation, economic growth and development, and support the creation and retention of jobs."

The countries currently at the table include the United States, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. As well, Japan and Mexico have expressed interest in joining.

"It is a decisive shift in policy, reflecting a clear understanding of the central part that the [Asia-Pacific] region can play on the future of Canada," wrote Joseph Caron, who formerly served as Canada's representative to India, China and Japan, in an email to Embassy.

Mr. Caron said that while the outcome cannot be predicted, the decision places Canada in a regional dynamic where Canada can pursue its trade and political interests and shape developments in its national interest.

Debra Steger, a senior fellow with the Centre for International Governance Innovation and a professor with the University of Ottawa's law faculty, agreed that it was a momentous occasion.

"I think it shows that for both the US and Canada, we have come to realize that the economic engine for the world in the next decade will be in Asia and that that there are tremendous opportunities for us in that region," she said.

"The US is looking to Asia to help the US out of its current economic crisis and Canada also should be looking to Asia for new markets for our resources and other products."

Brian Job, political science professor at the University of British Columbia, said while the TPP is not the be all and end all of regional economics, it is an important forum.

"It's the forum at the moment where the key players are making efforts and attempting to negotiate the next major multilateral economic deal," he said.

"If nothing comes of the TPP, there will be something that follows that will presumably accomplish something and its being part of that conversation that's important."

Only the start?

Meanwhile, Paul Evans, director of the Institute of Asian Research at UBC, said while getting into the TPP negotiations is important and valuable for Canada, it is not yet integrated into a broader Asia strategy that would include energy, security and a refocusing of diplomatic priorities.

Mr. Evans said the last few years have brought about a new awareness on the part of the government that Canada should look at Asia as more than individual countries and consider it as the interaction of economies, regional production and regional institutions.

"It's beginning to think that an involvement with Asian-based institutions will advance Canadian interests in those bilateral relationships that are key to our economy," he said.

But he added more needs to be done. To be taken seriously, nations have to be serious players, he said.

"You've got to do some talking, you have to spend some resources, not just of attending meetings, but doing preparatory work in advance...very rarely now does Canada promote initiatives, those are places where you build credibility and you build expertise."

In addition, Mr. Evans said Canada has to break through in free trade agreements with Asian countries. The government is negotiating foreign investment and protection agreements with China, Indonesia and Vietnam and a free trade agreement with India.

"It takes some attention from Ottawa, some resources as well as a national strategy."

Yuen Pau Woo, president and of the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, also shared Mr. Evan's view that Canada needs a long-term strategic approach to Asia. It's about building capacity in Canada, he said, and this means investing in research, education and skills so that Canadians can operate in Asia on a long-term basis and not simply treat it as a market to sell goods in from a distance.

While the government has been involved in regional groups like the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Canada recently signed a trade and investment understanding with the group), it isn't part of the East Asia Summit, a group that includes countries like India, Japan, Australia and the ASEAN group. Mr. Woo said Canadian officials should also express interest in joining the latter.

He said that while the government has put increased energy and investment into ministerial visits to Asia, this along with its "re-orienting" of issues like the TPP amount to a "catch-up strategy."

"We started late, so we have to work harder to get to where our competitors are," he said.

Will supply management survive?

The government's announcement has also raised questions about Canada's supply management system of dairy and poultry. The policy was previously fingered as the reason why Canada was not entering into the talks.

In April 2010, New Zealand Prime Minister John Key said he didn't want Canada joining the talks because of its supply management system. Canada excluding dairy would be "unacceptable," he said.

Mr. Key recently called out Japan, which said on Nov. 11 it would like to join the talks as well, for its system of supply-side managed agriculture products.

Mr. Evans said if Japan gets in formally, it could be advantageous to Canada.

On Nov. 13, Mr. Harper said Canada has an agricultural sector that as a whole is very healthy—in particular the dairy and poultry sectors.

"That's why we think our policies are valuable. But obviously...we're constantly in trade talks, but I continue to believe that we can advance our interests while at the same time protecting our interests in those various sectors."

Meanwhile, all three federal political opposition parties have voiced concern about what Canada's willingness to join the TPP might mean for supply management.

"Supply management is an extremely important sector for agricultural communities across the country," said NDP Finance critic Peter Julian.

"I'm skeptical on trusting this government on supply management because we've just seen it before with softwood lumber and with the Canadian Wheat Board," he said.

Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz wrote in an email to Embassy that "All countries approach negotiations with a view to protecting their interests. Canada's approach to TPP will not be different in this regard."

"Canada will seek to defend and promote our specific interests in every sector of our economy, including supply management," he continued.