The past 24 hours have reinforced a concerning pattern in Canadian foreign policy. Israel’s precise strike against Iran’s nuclear program—an operation with significant implications for global security—has been met with an underwhelming response from the Carney government.
While allies like France have rightly acknowledged the strategic necessity of Israel’s actions, Canada’s foreign affairs minister, Anita Anand, issued a statement urging “all parties” to de-escalate—as if Israel and Iran were moral equals in this conflict. This reflexive even-handedness is not just diplomatically awkward; it reflects a deeper moral confusion in Canada’s approach to international affairs in the Trudeau and now Carney eras.
Israel’s strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities wasn’t an act of aggression but a defensive move. For years, the International Atomic Energy Agency and Western intelligence services have documented Iran’s systematic progress toward a nuclear weapon—enriching uranium far beyond civilian needs, developing delivery systems, and openly threatening Israel’s annihilation.
Remember, this is also a regime that murders its own citizens, fires pellet guns into the faces of women protesting for basic rights, and holds Canadian dual nationals hostage. Yet Canada’s response treats Israel’s preemptive action as merely another “escalation” in a bilateral dispute, rather than what it manifestly is: a long overdue move against a growing nuclear threat to the security and safety of the entire world.
This, by the way, stands in stark contrast to Canada’s unambiguous support for Ukraine. When Ukrainian forces recently struck deep into Russian territory to degrade Putin’s war machine, Canadian officials applauded their courage. There were no calls for “de-escalation” or hand-wringing about “both sides.” In this case, the moral framework was clear: Ukraine is a democracy fighting for survival against a ruthless regime bent on conquest and domination.
Yet when Israel, another democracy facing existential threats, acts to neutralize a nuclear-arming theocracy, Canada suddenly rediscovers the virtues of neutrality. The inconsistency is glaring—and telling.
As painful as it is to say, this ambivalence isn’t accidental. The Trudeau and now Carney governments have increasingly framed Israel through a lens of moral equivalence, particularly since the Gaza conflict began. Some of this stems from the progressive Left’s “oppressor-victim” worldview, which reflexively casts Israel as the aggressor regardless of context.
But there’s also a more pragmatic calculation at work: domestic politics. The Liberal Party’s electoral fortunes increasingly depend on urban ridings with large Muslim and Arab-Canadian populations, where anti-Israel sentiment runs high. The result is a foreign policy that offers private reassurances to Jewish communities while maintaining public equivocation to appease other constituencies.
Such political maneuvering might work in domestic debates, but it damages Canada’s global standing. Our allies recognize that Israel’s strike serves Western interests by delaying (and possibly thwarting) Iran’s nuclear ambitions. By distancing itself, Canada risks becoming an outlier in the alliances we seek to lead—a irony highlighted by Prime Minister Carney’s commendable pledge to meet NATO’s defence spending target. What’s the purpose of military investment if we lack the conviction to stand with allies against clear threats?
Foreign policy doesn’t always require complex analysis. Sometimes the choice is straightforward: Israel is a liberal democracy and long-standing ally; Iran’s regime is a theocratic menace pursuing weapons to spread terror. Canada should welcome actions that hinder Tehran’s nuclear program, just as we support Ukraine’s strikes on Russian bases. Nuance has its place—but not when dealing with regimes that chant “Death to America” and “Death to Israel” while racing toward the bomb.
The coming days will test whether Canada’s leadership can move beyond the moral ambiguity of the Trudeau era. If we aspire to be more than a middle power with middling convictions, we must recognize that some conflicts aren’t between equivalent sides—they are between civilization and its enemies. Israel’s strike was a victory for the former. Canada should have the courage to say so.
Generative AI assisted in the production of this article.
