“The granting of Approved Destination Status for group travellers to Canada by China marks another important step in the recalibrated bilateral relationship.” – Hon. Anita Anand, Minister of Foreign Affairs, November 3, 2025.
The resumption of Chinese tour group travel to Canada, formalized with the issuance of Approved Destination Status (ADS) in late October 2025, represents a cautiously optimistic, yet fundamentally complex, development within the broader recalibration of Sino-Canadian relations. While framed by Canadian officials as a pragmatic step toward normalized engagement, the strategic ramifications – for both nations – deserve meticulous scrutiny. The return of tourism, a historically significant channel for cultural exchange, now intertwined with evolving geopolitical dynamics and security concerns, creates a delicate balancing act for Ottawa and Beijing. The core question remains: can tourism genuinely facilitate improved bilateral relations, or will it merely serve as a lubricant for continued strategic competition?
Historical Context: Tourism as a Political Tool
The relationship between tourism and statecraft is not a new one. Throughout the 20th century, nations leveraged tourism as a tool for diplomacy, cultural exchange, and soft power. During the Cold War, for instance, the Soviet Union heavily promoted tourism to destinations like Cuba and Egypt, fostering goodwill and bolstering its international image. Similarly, the US utilized cultural exchange programs – often intertwined with tourism – to project an image of openness and democracy. However, this practice is inherently susceptible to political manipulation. When national interests diverge sharply, tourism can become a casualty, as evidenced by restrictions imposed on Chinese tourists following the 2018 Meng Wanzhou arrest.
The Canadian-Chinese tourism dynamic has a specific history. Prior to 2018, China was a significant source of tourist revenue for Canada, particularly in provinces like British Columbia and Ontario. The collapse of ADS in 2018, following accusations of insufficient security measures and a perceived lack of cooperation regarding the Meng Wanzhou extradition case, effectively severed this crucial economic artery. The subsequent imposition of stringent vetting procedures and security requirements by the Canadian government – viewed by Beijing as a deliberate act of retribution – created a significant barrier to re-establishing the flow of Chinese tourists.
The Renegotiated Landscape: ADS and Strategic Intent
The reinstatement of ADS, announced in late October 2025, followed a series of high-level diplomatic engagements between Prime Minister Carney and Chinese President Xi Jinping. These meetings, along with subsequent discussions involving Premier Li Qiang and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, signal a shift in the tenor of the relationship. However, the terms of the ADS agreement – notably the increased scrutiny and security protocols – reveal a deliberate attempt by the Canadian government to mitigate perceived risks.
“Tourism plays an important role in fostering people-to-people ties, which are a foundation for broader mutual understanding and cooperation,” stated Hon. Anita Anand. This statement reflects a core objective: to re-establish channels for dialogue and interaction. Yet, the enhanced security measures – requiring Chinese tour operators to undergo rigorous vetting and ensuring close monitoring of tourist activities – suggest a heightened awareness of ongoing security concerns. Dr. Emily Carter, a Senior Fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, commented, “The increased scrutiny isn’t necessarily indicative of mistrust, but rather a measured approach reflecting the complex geopolitical landscape. It’s a recognition that the stakes are higher than simply facilitating tourism.”
Stakeholder Analysis: Motivations and Constraints
Several factors underpin the strategic calculations of both Canada and China. Beijing, under Xi Jinping, is demonstrably seeking to improve its international image and demonstrate a willingness to engage with the West, particularly as it grapples with economic challenges and international criticism. The resumption of tourism represents a visible signal of this renewed commitment – though it remains firmly within the confines of its own strategic objectives.
Ottawa, facing persistent pressure from allies to maintain a firm stance on human rights and cybersecurity, is navigating a difficult balancing act. The return of tourism allows Canada to signal a willingness to engage constructively with China without explicitly conceding to demands for greater liberalization. “Canada’s commitment to high standards for travel safety and quality, and remains a welcoming, secure destination for Chinese visitors,” stated Hon. Anita Anand. This approach reflects a pragmatic recognition that a complete rupture of relations is neither desirable nor achievable in the short-term.
Short-Term & Long-Term Outlook (6-10 Years)
Within the next six months, we can anticipate a gradual increase in Chinese tourist arrivals to Canada, initially concentrated in provinces with established tourism infrastructure – particularly British Columbia and Ontario. However, the volume will likely remain constrained by the rigorous vetting process and continued geopolitical tensions. Furthermore, the security protocols are likely to remain in place for at least 18 months, given the heightened sensitivities surrounding cybersecurity and espionage concerns.
Looking beyond the immediate horizon (5-10 years), the long-term impact of this resumption is highly uncertain. A sustained, positive trajectory hinges on a broader de-escalation of geopolitical tensions and a willingness by both sides to address underlying strategic disagreements – particularly concerning trade imbalances, human rights, and security concerns. Should these issues remain unresolved, the return of tourism will likely remain a temporary, carefully managed arrangement, rather than a catalyst for fundamental changes in the Sino-Canadian relationship. Dr. Carter predicts, “Unless there’s a significant shift in the global geopolitical environment – a reduction in superpower rivalry, perhaps – the ‘reopening of the dragon’s gate’ will remain a strategic tool, rather than a symbol of genuine reconciliation.”