Prime Minister Mark Carney has declared that Canada now recognizes the State of Palestine, a move dressed up in the lofty rhetoric of "self-determination" and "human rights," as if such platitudes could paper over the blood-soaked realities of the Middle East.
In a statement, which at best can be described as naive, released Sunday, Carney pledged Canada's support for building a "peaceful future" for both Palestine and Israel, invoking the United Nations Charter with the earnestness of a schoolboy reciting a civics lesson. Yet he admitted, with a rare flicker of candor, that this gesture is no magic bullet.
"Recognising the State of Palestine, led by the Palestinian Authority, empowers those who seek peaceful coexistence and the end of Hamas. This in no way legitimizes terrorism, nor is it any reward for it," he insisted, as though words alone could exorcise the specter of Hamas's horrific barbarism.
Let's be clear: this is a decision steeped in the kind of moral confusion that thrives in the air-conditioned halls of Ottawa. Carney would have us believe that this recognition "in no way compromises Canada's steadfast support for the State of Israel," a state whose security, he concedes, hinges on a "comprehensive two-state solution," an offer refused by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas many times over.
Let's be clear: this is a decision steeped in the kind of moral confusion that thrives in the air-conditioned halls of Ottawa. Carney would have us believe that this recognition "in no way compromises Canada's steadfast support for the State of Israel," a state whose security, he concedes, hinges on a "comprehensive two-state solution," an offer refused by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas many times over.
But what is this two-state solution, endlessly invoked like a diplomatic mantra? For years, Canada maintained that recognition of Palestine would come only at the end of negotiations between Palestinian and Israeli leaders. Now, with Hamas's "pervasive threat of terrorism," [read: genocide] Israel's settlements in the West Bank, and what Carney calls "the Israeli government's contribution to the humanitarian disaster in Gaza," that possibility has been "steadily and gravely eroded."
So, Canada’s response is to reward the Palestinian Authority, a body that has repeatedly shown itself incapable of governing without corruption or complicity in violence, with the laurel of statehood. You know the PA--they have a 'pay to slay' policy that rewards jihadis for killing Jews. If they die in the process, their families collect the blood money.
Carney frames this as part of a "co-ordinated international effort" to preserve the two-state dream, joined by the likes of the United Kingdom and Australia, with more expected to follow at the United Nations General Assembly’s 80th session in New York. One can almost hear the clinking of champagne glasses at this display of multilateral virtue.
Carney frames this as part of a "co-ordinated international effort" to preserve the two-state dream, joined by the likes of the United Kingdom and Australia, with more expected to follow at the United Nations General Assembly’s 80th session in New York. One can almost hear the clinking of champagne glasses at this display of multilateral virtue.
Yet the move has provoked predictable outrage. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it a boon to Hamas, the scumcrumpets responsible for the October 7, 2023, atrocities, arguing it complicates ceasefire talks and hostage releases.
Jewish organizations in Canada were no less scathing. The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs correctly condemned the decision as "a reward for the October 7 terror attacks." The Association of Families of Canadian citizens murdered by Hamas spoke of "profound grief and outrage," declaring, "Over 700 days ago our loved ones were slaughtered by Hamas, an organization which still controls Gaza, still holds hostages, and still calls for the destruction of Israel. To reward this climate of terror with recognition is not just reckless; it is a betrayal, and kindizes (sic) the lives of hostages still being held in the tunnels of Gaza." B’nai Brith Canada went further, lamenting that Canada has abandoned its legacy of "standing up for what is principled and just." Richard Robertson, their Director of Research and Advocacy, put it bluntly: "The [Palestinian Authority] has shown, time and again, that it cannot be trusted."
And yet, there are those who applaud this diplomatic sleight of hand. The oxymoronically named Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East hailed it as a "real policy victory," though they predictably called for more. One wonders what more they could want; perhaps a ticker-tape parade for Mahmoud Abbas?
And yet, there are those who applaud this diplomatic sleight of hand. The oxymoronically named Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East hailed it as a "real policy victory," though they predictably called for more. One wonders what more they could want; perhaps a ticker-tape parade for Mahmoud Abbas?
Carney's July announcement promised recognition contingent on the Palestinian Authority meeting certain conditions, including an election in 2026 from which Hamas would be barred. Senior officials, hiding behind anonymity, claim the PA has "doubled down" on these commitments. But forgive the skepticism: the Palestinian Authority, led by the Fatah party, controls only parts of the West Bank, while Hamas rules Gaza with an iron fist, having violently expelled Fatah in 2007. Hamas's response to this diplomatic charade? A flat declaration that it "will not recognize Israel." How consistent and very reassuring.
The broader international context only deepens the absurdity. More than 145 countries already recognize Palestine, and France, Belgium, and Portugal are poised to join the chorus at the UN. This is symbolism masquerading as statecraft, a gesture that will likely provoke the Trump administration, which has already shown its displeasure. President Trump, responding to Carney's initial announcement in July, warned that Canada's move could jeopardize trade deals, promptly slapping 35 percent tariffs on Canadian goods (mercifully, those compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement are exempt). The U.S. also vetoed a UN Security Council resolution last week demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and hostage releases, citing its failure to sufficiently condemn Hamas. Meanwhile, after Rubio revoked visas for Abbas and 80 other Palestinian officials, the UN General Assembly allowed Abbas to address them by video—a fitting metaphor for a leadership that exists more in rhetoric than reality.
Carney's government insists it has been in "regular communication" with Israeli diplomats, though the Prime Minister has never spoken with Benjamin Netanyahu, whose government remains adamantly opposed to a two-state solution.
The broader international context only deepens the absurdity. More than 145 countries already recognize Palestine, and France, Belgium, and Portugal are poised to join the chorus at the UN. This is symbolism masquerading as statecraft, a gesture that will likely provoke the Trump administration, which has already shown its displeasure. President Trump, responding to Carney's initial announcement in July, warned that Canada's move could jeopardize trade deals, promptly slapping 35 percent tariffs on Canadian goods (mercifully, those compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement are exempt). The U.S. also vetoed a UN Security Council resolution last week demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and hostage releases, citing its failure to sufficiently condemn Hamas. Meanwhile, after Rubio revoked visas for Abbas and 80 other Palestinian officials, the UN General Assembly allowed Abbas to address them by video—a fitting metaphor for a leadership that exists more in rhetoric than reality.
Carney's government insists it has been in "regular communication" with Israeli diplomats, though the Prime Minister has never spoken with Benjamin Netanyahu, whose government remains adamantly opposed to a two-state solution.
Perhaps they couldn't find a time slot between Netanyahu's battles against Hamas and Hezbollah. The Conservative Party of Canada, sensing a political opening, dismissed Carney's move as a distraction from domestic woes, reaffirming their support for "Israel’s right to exist and defend itself, living next to a future demilitarized, terror-free, democratic and peaceful Palestinian State." A noble sentiment, but one wonders how such a state could emerge from the current morass.
In the end, Carney's decision is a triumph of bull pucks over substance, a nod to the progressive pieties of the international community while ignoring the grim realities on the ground. It is the kind of move that feels good in the moment but risks emboldening those who thrive on chaos. As the families of Hamas's victims so poignantly said, "By recognizing a Palestinian state today, Prime Minister Carney emboldens Hamas, legitimizes their barbarism, and sends a devastating message to terror victims everywhere: that their suffering can be brushed aside for political theatre."
In the end, Carney's decision is a triumph of bull pucks over substance, a nod to the progressive pieties of the international community while ignoring the grim realities on the ground. It is the kind of move that feels good in the moment but risks emboldening those who thrive on chaos. As the families of Hamas's victims so poignantly said, "By recognizing a Palestinian state today, Prime Minister Carney emboldens Hamas, legitimizes their barbarism, and sends a devastating message to terror victims everywhere: that their suffering can be brushed aside for political theatre."
One could not put it better. Canada, once a beacon of moral clarity, now seems content to play the fool in the theater of global diplomacy. It's a good thing that President Trump is keeping the tariff in place with Canada.
Am Yisrael Chai!
If you like my blog and want to Buy Me A Coffee, I wouldn't stop you--it supports my work and I really appreciate it.
Tweet
To have a “state” doesn’t there have to be land? Whose is giving the Palestinian state land? Canada? France? Who?
ReplyDeleteExcellent question. One might ask, who has the authority to give them that status?
Delete