Controversy erupted in Canada on Monday and Tuesday when a non-binding motion to cease future arms trade with Israel and Foreign Minister Melanie Joly‘s statement that this would become policy.
Joly told the Toronto Star on Tuesday that a weapons ban policy was a “real thing.”
Jewish organizations and Conservative Party politicians have slammed the move as rewarding Hamas and abandoning an ally. Jewish Liberal Party Member of Parliament for Mount Royal Anthony Housefather has told Canadian media that he is “thinking” about his future with the caucus. The New Democratic Party, who submitted the motion, are crowing about victory and forcing the Liberal Party to submit to their demands.
While news about what NDP and pro-Palestinian supporters are inflammatory or exciting, based on what the Liberal Party has said, little has changed. There was already in practice a degree of an arms ‘ban” policy on Israel, and this is just a formalization of a restriction of dubious effect.
In all likelihood, this is not a major policy shift. Still, foreign policy red meat is thrown to the NDP tiger to keep them sated so they won’t turn on the Liberal government’s shaky minority government.
During the debate on the motion, Joly emphasized that Canada had already limited arms trade with Israel. Global Affairs Canada issues permits for military goods and trade.
“In terms of exporting controlled merchandise to Israel, I’d like to reiterate that Canada already has a very strict export permit system, and every request is examined case by case,” said Joly. “Since October 7, we have not approved any permits for lethal products, and given the rapid change in the situation on the ground, we have not approved any permits since January 8.”
If this is to be believed, Canada has not approved new permits for what they deemed “lethal” products for almost half a year, and new permits for “Non-lethal” products have not been approved for almost three months.
There is also the question of whether this policy suspends any permits already approved and trade deals in process.
The opposition motion initially called for Ottawa to “suspend all trade in military goods and technology with Israel and increase efforts to stop the illegal trade of arms, including to Hamas.”
Last-minute amendments
Controversial last-minute amendments by the Liberal party — agreed on with the NDP — changed this to “cease the further authorization and transfer of arms exports to Israel to ensure compliance with Canada’s arms export regime and increase efforts to stop the illegal trade of arms, including to Hamas.”
If the Liberal government’s policy indeed follows the non-binding motion, then the mention of “further” authorization and transfer would mean that it would not suspend permits and transfers already approved. In line with this, Defence Minister Bill Blair told the Star, “There are several existing contracts that are already in place, but this was a going-forward basis, I think that’s how the minister’s looking at it,” and urged those anxious to look at the wording of the entire resolution.
A further look at the motion’s wording was that the cessation was in an effort to “ensure compliance with Canada’s arms export regime.” Canada’s military product export regime is governed by the Export and Import Permits Act and its obligations to the Arms Trade Treaty, which limits Canada’s export of military items if doing so upsets peace and security or facilitates the violation of international law and human rights. If the Canadian government feels that this is not the case with Israel or a certain product, then any new permits that don’t meet this concern could be issued.
Even though whether this policy introduces anything new into Canadian foreign affairs is questionable, the NDP seems to think they have achieved a great victory, with the arms embargo as the crown jewel of the motion.
“Thanks to our NDP motion, Canada is the first G7 country to stop sending weapons to [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu’s extremist government,” said NDP Edmonton Strathcona MP Heather McPherson, who led her party’s push for the motion in the Monday debate.
“The vote is in and we have forced the Liberals to..Stop selling arms to the Israeli government,” said NDP leader Jagmeet Singh.
When the motion was introduced, the focus was not on arms trade but on a much more dramatic call to recognize a Palestinian state.
The Liberal Party has had a minority government since the 2021 federal election and has relied on an NDP confidence-and-supply agreement to continue governing. It is in their interest to keep them happy and at least give them the appearance of being impactful to their progressive base.
Canada has also been wracked with large anti-Israel protests since the October 7 Massacre, with escalating protests targeting Jewish institutions and holy places. Yet Canada also had a strong and activist Jewish community, with prominent Jewish politicians represented in the Liberal, Conservative, and NDP caucuses. Israel is also an ally and a viable economic and diplomatic partner on the world stage.
Throughout the debate, Joly demonstrated how the Liberal Party’s game plan was to try to satisfy both sides. She equated the rise of antisemitism and Islamaphobia in Canada in the wake of the conflict. Yet, recent Toronto hate crime statistics show a minimal increase in anti-Muslim crime, especially when compared to antisemitic crime. Joly assured one side that Canada would restore UNRWA funding while promising it would occur alongside an investigation into the agency and putting stronger wording into the motion.
“We face pressure to pick sides, forced to believe that if we speak up for one, of course, surely we’re against the other,” Joly said during her speech, in a sentence summing up the evasiveness and unclear position that the government has taken.
Even if the ban policy comes into effect on the harshest terms, in 2021, Canada’s military product exports to Israel were worth around $21 million Canadian. Israel’s defense budget is in the billions.
Canada’s ‘arms embargo’ is probably foreign policy theater for domestic audiences, but the show can only go on until the audience either realizes it’s a farce and gets up and leaves or gets upset at the slights and throws tomatoes.
Comments are closed.