When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says, as he has on three occasions over the last week, that Israel has the “right to defend itself in accordance with international law,” it is both parts of the sentence that seem to matter — both the right and the obligation.
Even if a country’s right to defend itself is unquestionable, the prosecution of that right isn’t immune from scrutiny or criticism. And Canadian political leaders — like leaders across the Western world — are now beginning to grapple with inevitable questions about what comes after the shock and terror of Hamas’s attack on Israel.
The first half of the prime minister’s remarks to the House of Commons on Monday afternoon closely followed the sentiments expressed in a statement issued by his office on Saturday night — but with certain points apparently underlined for emphasis. The “humanitarian situation” in Gaza was said to be not just “dire” but “worsening.” The “unimpeded” access for humanitarian aid and the establishment of a humanitarian corridor was described as “essential” on Saturday but “imperative” on Monday.
Trudeau’s condemnation of Hamas was clear and unequivocal and bracing in its language, and he insisted that the government “fully supports” Israel’s right to defend itself in accordance with international law. But after emphasizing the brutality of Hamas, he also dwelled on the importance of international law.
Canada’s humanitarian aid going to civilians, not Hamas, says Trudeau
Featured VideoPrime Minister Justin Trudeau rose in the House of Commons to offer an update on the Israel-Hamas war and said Canada will commit to providing humanitarian aid to civilians.
“In Gaza, as elsewhere, international law must be upheld by all. This includes humanitarian law. Even wars have rules,” Trudeau said. “The rule of law is what we stand up for here in Parliament, what we advocate through diplomacy and what we will always fight for no matter the circumstance.”
By Tuesday afternoon, Trudeau’s rhetoric was already being put to the test by reports that hundreds of people had died after a missile struck a hospital in Gaza. While Palestinian officials initially blamed Israel, the Israel Defence Force said a rocket fired by Islamic Jihad hit the hospital. Without explicitly blaming either side, Trudeau told reporters the bombing was “horrific and absolutely unacceptable.”
Trudeau’s words on Monday may have spoken to the conflicted views of the Canadian public — conflicted views that would soon be on display.
A crack in the political consensus
“Indeed, Israel does have the right to defend itself in accordance with international law, and it has the right to respond, just as Canadians would respond,” Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre said, rising after Trudeau in the House of Commons. He invoked the American government’s killing of Osama bin Laden as a point of comparison.
But Poilievre also said that “every innocent human life, Palestinian, Israeli, Jewish, Muslim, Christian or otherwise, is of equal, precious value” and that “all of us must do everything in our power to preserve this precious life and minimize the suffering of innocent civilians.” He expressed his party’s support for “safe zones for civilians in Gaza” and a “humanitarian corridor for food, water and medical supplies.”
Featured VideoWith the escalating war between Israel and Hamas, how important is it for Justin Trudeau and Pierre Poilievre to maintain a united front? What’s the state of the NDP and its deal with the Liberals? Plus, what an RCMP investigation into the plan to develop Ontario’s Greenbelt could mean for Doug Ford and his government.
Speaking during a take-note debate on Monday evening, NDP foreign affairs critic Heather McPherson said that “Israel has every right to eradicate Hamas.” But where the other parties are so far adamant only about the need to act in accordance with international law, the NDP has seen enough already to conclude that international law is being violated in Gaza.
“It is a siege with no water, no electricity and no food,” McPherson told the House while delivering the NDP’s response to the prime minister on Monday afternoon. “Entire communities have been destroyed. Entire families have been wiped out.”
The evacuation order issued by Israel to Palestinians in northern Gaza amounted to an “illegal” and “forcible” transfer of a million people, McPherson said. She described what was happening in the Gaza Strip as “collective punishment.” She asked whether Canadian officials had made it clear to their Israeli counterparts that these “clear violations of law” were “unacceptable.”
In his remarks to the House on Monday night, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh made his party’s position clear. “Canada must call for a ceasefire to end the killing of innocent civilians in Gaza immediately,” he said.
This is the first major crack in the Canadian political consensus on Israel’s response to the Hamas attacks of October 7. It almost certainly won’t be the last.
The logic of a ceasefire at this moment is at least debatable. What would happen next? How would Hamas be eradicated? But the New Democrats are not alone in calling for one. Liberal MPs Yasir Naqvi and Iqra Khalid have also advocated for a ceasefire. Liberal MP Arielle Kayabaga has criticized Israel’s evacuation order.
Canadian leaders are not alone in their concerns.
The example and lesson of 9/11
When U.S. President Joe Biden spoke from the White House last Tuesday, he said he had just told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that “if the United States experienced what Israel is experiencing, our response would be swift, decisive, and overwhelming.” But he said they also discussed “how democracies like Israel and the United States are stronger and more secure when we act according to the rule of law.”
“Terrorists purposefully target civilians, kill them,” Biden said. “We uphold the laws of war. It matters. There’s a difference.”
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken put it most succinctly this weekend: “The way that Israel does this matters.”
American politicians should understand that well. As the New York Times editorial board suggested, American leaders may have important lessons to impart.
In the wake of Hamas’s attack, as Israelis and outside commentators groped for words to convey the enormity of the tragedy, comparisons were drawn to the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001.
But the example of 9/11 is also a reminder of all the ways a country can undermine itself in responding to a national trauma — from the officially authorized use of torture and rendition to the calamitous invasion of Iraq.
The world may have stood in solidarity with the United States after Sept. 11, but countries were under no obligation to support everything the American government did in response to that attack — and what the American government did in the name of the “war on terror” raised very real questions for other leaders. A previous generation of Canadian leaders learned that first-hand.
Canada supported the invasion of Afghanistan, but Jean Chretien’s decision to stay out of the Iraq war is one of the most important decisions in the history of Canadian foreign policy. Stephen Harper was trailed for years by his public support for that war. Jack Layton was roundly mocked for suggesting in 2006 that Canada and other countries pursue a negotiated solution with the Taliban — however premature, the former NDP leader was at least not wrong about how that war would end.
No historical comparison is perfect. But recent experience makes the case both for standing firmly by an ally in its hour of need and for standing solidly by one’s principles and values.
And if those two things ever come into conflict, political leaders must make difficult, even brave, decisions.
HALIFAX – Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston says it’s “disgraceful and demeaning” that a Halifax-area school would request that service members not wear military uniforms to its Remembrance Day ceremony.
Houston’s comments were part of a chorus of criticism levelled at the school — Sackville Heights Elementary — whose administration decided to back away from the plan after the outcry.
A November newsletter from the school in Middle Sackville, N.S., invited Armed Forces members to attend its ceremony but asked that all attendees arrive in civilian attire to “maintain a welcoming environment for all.”
Houston, who is currently running for re-election, accused the school’s leaders of “disgracing themselves while demeaning the people who protect our country” in a post on the social media platform X Thursday night.
“If the people behind this decision had a shred of the courage that our veterans have, this cowardly and insulting idea would have been rejected immediately,” Houston’s post read. There were also several calls for resignations within the school’s administration attached to Houston’s post.
In an email to families Thursday night, the school’s principal, Rachael Webster, apologized and welcomed military family members to attend “in the attire that makes them most comfortable.”
“I recognize this request has caused harm and I am deeply sorry,” Webster’s email read, adding later that the school has the “utmost respect for what the uniform represents.”
Webster said the initial request was out of concern for some students who come from countries experiencing conflict and who she said expressed discomfort with images of war, including military uniforms.
Her email said any students who have concerns about seeing Armed Forces members in uniform can be accommodated in a way that makes them feel safe, but she provided no further details in the message.
Webster did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
At a news conference Friday, Houston said he’s glad the initial request was reversed but said he is still concerned.
“I can’t actually fathom how a decision like that was made,” Houston told reporters Friday, adding that he grew up moving between military bases around the country while his father was in the Armed Forces.
“My story of growing up in a military family is not unique in our province. The tradition of service is something so many of us share,” he said.
“Saying ‘lest we forget’ is a solemn promise to the fallen. It’s our commitment to those that continue to serve and our commitment that we will pass on our respects to the next generation.”
Liberal Leader Zach Churchill also said he’s happy with the school’s decision to allow uniformed Armed Forces members to attend the ceremony, but he said he didn’t think it was fair to question the intentions of those behind the original decision.
“We need to have them (uniforms) on display at Remembrance Day,” he said. “Not only are we celebrating (veterans) … we’re also commemorating our dead who gave the greatest sacrifice for our country and for the freedoms we have.”
NDP Leader Claudia Chender said that while Remembrance Day is an important occasion to honour veterans and current service members’ sacrifices, she said she hopes Houston wasn’t taking advantage of the decision to “play politics with this solemn occasion for his own political gain.”
“I hope Tim Houston reached out to the principal of the school before making a public statement,” she said in a statement.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 8, 2024.
REGINA – Saskatchewan Opposition NDP Leader Carla Beck says she wants to prove to residents her party is the government in waiting as she heads into the incoming legislative session.
Beck held her first caucus meeting with 27 members, nearly double than what she had before the Oct. 28 election but short of the 31 required to form a majority in the 61-seat legislature.
She says her priorities will be health care and cost-of-living issues.
Beck says people need affordability help right now and will press Premier Scott Moe’s Saskatchewan Party government to cut the gas tax and the provincial sales tax on children’s clothing and some grocery items.
Beck’s NDP is Saskatchewan’s largest Opposition in nearly two decades after sweeping Regina and winning all but one seat in Saskatoon.
The Saskatchewan Party won 34 seats, retaining its hold on all of the rural ridings and smaller cities.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 8, 2024.
HALIFAX – Nova Scotia‘s growing population was the subject of debate on Day 12 of the provincial election campaign, with Liberal Leader Zach Churchill arguing immigration levels must be reduced until the province can provide enough housing and health-care services.
Churchill said Thursday a plan by the incumbent Progressive Conservatives to double the province’s population to two million people by the year 2060 is unrealistic and unsustainable.
“That’s a big leap and it’s making life harder for people who live here, (including ) young people looking for a place to live and seniors looking to downsize,” he told a news conference at his campaign headquarters in Halifax.
Anticipating that his call for less immigration might provoke protests from the immigrant community, Churchill was careful to note that he is among the third generation of a family that moved to Nova Scotia from Lebanon.
“I know the value of immigration, the importance of it to our province. We have been built on the backs of an immigrant population. But we just need to do it in a responsible way.”
The Liberal leader said Tim Houston’s Tories, who are seeking a second term in office, have made a mistake by exceeding immigration targets set by the province’s Department of Labour and Immigration. Churchill said a Liberal government would abide by the department’s targets.
In the most recent fiscal year, the government welcomed almost 12,000 immigrants through its nominee program, exceeding the department’s limit by more than 4,000, he said. The numbers aren’t huge, but the increase won’t help ease the province’s shortages in housing and doctors, and the increased strain on its infrastructure, including roads, schools and cellphone networks, Churchill said.
“(The Immigration Department) has done the hard work on this,” he said. “They know where the labour gaps are, and they know what growth is sustainable.”
In response, Houston said his commitment to double the population was a “stretch goal.” And he said the province had long struggled with a declining population before that trend was recently reversed.
“The only immigration that can come into this province at this time is if they are a skilled trade worker or a health-care worker,” Houston said. “The population has grown by two per cent a year, actually quite similar growth to what we experienced under the Liberal government before us.”
Still, Houston said he’s heard Nova Scotians’ concerns about population growth, and he then pivoted to criticize Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for trying to send 6,000 asylum seekers to Nova Scotia, an assertion the federal government has denied.
Churchill said Houston’s claim about asylum seekers was shameful.
“It’s smoke and mirrors,” the Liberal leader said. “He is overshooting his own department’s numbers for sustainable population growth and yet he is trying to blame this on asylum seekers … who aren’t even here.”
In September, federal Immigration Minister Marc Miller said there is no plan to send any asylum seekers to the province without compensation or the consent of the premier. He said the 6,000 number was an “aspirational” figure based on models that reflect each province’s population.
In Halifax, NDP Leader Claudia Chender said it’s clear Nova Scotia needs more doctors, nurses and skilled trades people.
“Immigration has been and always will be a part of the Nova Scotia story, but we need to build as we grow,” Chender said. “This is why we have been pushing the Houston government to build more affordable housing.”
Chender was in a Halifax cafe on Thursday when she promised her party would remove the province’s portion of the harmonized sales tax from all grocery, cellphone and internet bills if elected to govern on Nov. 26. The tax would also be removed from the sale and installation of heat pumps.
“Our focus is on helping people to afford their lives,” Chender told reporters. “We know there are certain things that you can’t live without: food, internet and a phone …. So we know this will have the single biggest impact.”
The party estimates the measure would save the average Nova Scotia family about $1,300 a year.
“That’s a lot more than a one or two per cent HST cut,” Chender said, referring to the Progressive Conservative pledge to reduce the tax by one percentage point and the Liberal promise to trim it by two percentage points.
Elsewhere on the campaign trail, Houston announced that a Progressive Conservative government would make parking free at all Nova Scotia hospitals and health-care centres. The promise was also made by the Liberals in their election platform released Monday.
“Free parking may not seem like a big deal to some, but … the parking, especially for people working at the facilities, can add up to hundreds of dollars,” the premier told a news conference at his campaign headquarters in Halifax.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 7, 2024.