Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government last week signaled a major shift in Canada's Middle East policy by abstaining from a United Nations General Assembly resolution supporting recognition of Palestine as a full member of the United Nations.
Until last week, Canada had always stood by Israel and its allies, insisting that recognition of a Palestinian state could only come after negotiations on a two-state solution and Palestinian support for Israel's right to exist.
To be clear, Canada stopped short of voting “in favor” of this resolution calling on the UN Security Council to “favorably reconsider” Palestine's application for full UN membership. Ta. The resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority, with 143 member states voting in favor and only nine countries, led by the United States, voting against it. Canada was among the 25 member states that abstained.
But why the sudden change? In the midst of a devastating war caused by brutal attacks on Israeli civilians by the terrorist organization Hamas, is its primary raison d'être still the elimination of Israel? If changing Canada's policy towards a Palestinian state now would not be “retribution” for Hamas' actions, as Israeli officials have accused, then what point is the Trudeau government trying to make? Is it?
“The Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has unacceptably closed the door to all avenues for a two-state solution, and we fundamentally disagree with that,” Prime Minister Trudeau said after the U.N. vote. It added that there is a possibility of leveraging future recognition. Palestine “as a means to promote a two-state solution.”
As if Mr. Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders would act at the behest of Canada and the United Nations. Suggesting that a UN vote could influence the peace process is completely disingenuous and will continue as long as Hamas has a say in the matter, regardless of who is in power in Israel. It is unlikely that this will happen. So what gives?
Since Oct. 7, the Trudeau government has sought to seize support from its own progressive Liberal base and the New Democratic Party members on which it relies for governance, as the increasingly impatient pro-Palestinian movement stokes public resentment. is under relentless pressure to abandon its current Middle East policy. They attacked Israel, occupied university campuses, and chanted anti-Israel rhetoric without ever mentioning Hamas.
It is hard not to see domestic politics as being involved in the Trudeau government's sudden move to abstain from the UN resolution, but no matter how the UN resolution is framed, it is a big piece of propaganda for Hamas. is considered a victory. By emphasizing Netanyahu's obstructionism, the Trudeau government is helping shift responsibility for the massacre in Gaza away from Hamas. In doing so, it is playing into the hands of Israel's cynical enemies at the United Nations.
“We didn't want this war, we chose this war just because our children were being burned alive. Our elderly were being killed. , because there are hostages in the tunnel of terror. And they raped women and conquered villages,” Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid said in a recent New York Times podcast. “And more than that, they are openly saying that if given the chance, they would do it again, and that means Hamas.”
Lapid is clearly not an apologist for Netanyahu's government. He also supports his two-state solution. But he knows there will be no progress towards a Palestinian state until Hamas is gone from Gaza. “Because as long as Hamas is there, as long as Hamas is active, and as long as Hamas controls the territory, the people of Gaza have no future.”
Canada's ambassador to the United Nations, Bob Rae, appears to disagree.
“History shows that organizations that have been described or defined as terrorists have changed,” Wray told CBC's Power & Politics after the U.N. vote. “Today's Hamas, its current existence, what it currently stands for and how it has acted, does not belong to the Palestinian Authority. But people can change.”
Certainly, Canada's Middle East policy cannot be based on the faint hope that Hamas will one day renounce violence and recognize Israel's right to exist. Ray cited the Palestine Liberation Organization, which was once designated as a terrorist organization, as an example. But if Hamas has not moved since his October 7th, who expects it to do so in the future?
The implicit message sent by the 143 countries that voted in favor of the UN resolution calling for Palestine's full membership in the General Assembly is that Hamas does not need to change. In fact, the resolution talks about Hamas and the October 7 attacks as if they had nothing to do with the peace process, even though they, along with Mr. Netanyahu's obstinacy, are a major reason for the prolongation of this terrible war. It is not mentioned as such.
