Canada’s Gaza Stance Puts Human Rights Credibility to the Test in 2025 Election
Qasim Khanzada
4-23-2025
 Email
to a friend
 Post
a comment
 Print
Where Canada’s Leaders Stand on Gaza, the ICJ, and Human Rights
As Canadians head toward the 2025 federal election, a defining issue has emerged beyond inflation, housing, or climate change: how Canada positions itself on the global stage when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and international justice. The war in Gaza, now in its second year, has brought about catastrophic civilian loss, mounting accusations of genocide, and multiple international legal interventions. The question facing voters is no longer whether Canada should care — but whether Canada still deserves to be called a human rights leader.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has found that Israel’s occupation and actions in Gaza violate international law, including possible breaches of the Genocide Convention. At the same time, Canada has been urged to uphold its responsibilities under that same international legal framework: not to aid or assist in maintaining an unlawful occupation, and to ensure its foreign policy aligns with the principles of human dignity, accountability, and justice.
For Canada, which prides itself on a “rules-based international order,” this opinion poses a direct challenge. It essentially urges Ottawa to realign policies – from trade to diplomacy – to avoid abetting the occupation (policyalternatives.ca, cjpme.org). Yet Canada’s response has been cautious. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government joined a handful of Western allies in initially opposing the UN resolution that sought the ICJ’s advice and even filed arguments aiming to dissuade the court from rendering an opinion (cjpme.org). The ICJ dismissed those arguments and proceeded anyway (cjpme.org).
When the advisory opinion came out, Canada officially “took note” of it and “called on Israel to respond substantively,” affirming support in principle for the ICJ’s role (canada.ca). But when the UN General Assembly later voted on a follow-up resolution in late 2024 to pressure compliance, Canada chose to abstain (canada.ca).
In explaining its abstention, the government said there were aspects it agreed with — for instance, it does “not recognize permanent Israeli control” over 1967-occupied lands and deems Israeli settlements a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention (canada.ca). Canada emphasized that it “firmly supports the ICJ’s critical role” and acknowledges the humanitarian law obligations of an occupying power (canada.ca). However, Ottawa objected that the resolution blamed only Israel for the conflict while failing to mention Hamas terrorism. It stressed Israel’s legitimate security concerns and its “right to defend itself from terrorism,” making clear Canada wouldn’t support anything seen as one-sided (canada.ca). Canadian diplomats also bristled at language they viewed as aligning with the pro-Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which Canada “firmly opposes” (canada.ca).
These caveats reveal the balance Canada’s leaders have tried to strike — voicing respect for international law and Palestinian rights on paper, yet distancing from any initiative that might isolate or single out Israel. That balancing act is further tested by a bold legal move on the world stage. In late 2023, South Africa filed a groundbreaking case against Israel at the ICJ, accusing it of breaching the Genocide Convention in Gaza (dirco.gov.za). The case – South Africa v. Israel – explicitly charges that Israel’s military campaign in Gaza amounts to genocide against the Palestinian people. South Africa’s legal brief, spanning over 750 pages with voluminous evidence, alleges Israel has shown “intent to commit genocide” through actions like large-scale killings, creating conditions of life aimed at physical destruction, using starvation as a weapon, and defying court-ordered protective measures (dirco.gov.za).
The ICJ, in an initial order in January 2024, indicated provisional measures, effectively instructing Israel to ensure humanitarian access and refrain from actions that could imperil Palestinian civilians — orders which Israel has been accused of ignoring (dirco.gov.za). Fourteen other countries have signaled intent to join this case on South Africa’s side (unric.org), reflecting a growing international chorus seeking judicial accountability for the carnage in Gaza.
So far, Canada has kept its distance from such efforts. Trudeau’s government has not endorsed the genocide case or similar legal proceedings, hewing closer to allies like the United States which staunchly defend Israel on the world stage. Ironically, this comes even after the Canadian Parliament unanimously declared Russia’s atrocities in Ukraine a genocide, underscoring how fraught and politicized the “genocide” label can be depending on the perpetrator. Canada’s hesitation to apply the same unequivocal condemnation to Israel’s actions has not gone unnoticed. Human rights advocates argue this double standard undermines Canada’s credibility. “If Canada wants to wield greater moral authority in international affairs,” a letter from one advocacy group chided, “it should be seen to go above and beyond in aligning itself with the ICJ, rather than defying its advice” (cjpme.org).
As the election nears, the question is whether Canadian leaders will champion the ICJ’s findings or continue walking a diplomatic tightrope between principle and politics.
Party Leaders and Their Positions
Pierre Poilievre – Conservative Party
Pierre Poilievre has taken an unequivocally pro-Israel stance. He has:
•Condemned Hamas’s attacks and affirmed Israel’s right to defend itself.
•Denounced international legal actions against Israel, calling South Africa’s ICJ genocide case a “shameless and dishonest attack.”
•Pledged to cut Canadian funding to UNRWA, citing alleged Hamas ties.
•Rejected calls for ceasefire or arms embargoes on Israel, emphasizing support for Israel’s military actions as legitimate self-defense.
•Emphasized the fight against antisemitism and free expression at home, while defending pro-Palestinian protestors’ right to demonstrate.
Justin Trudeau / Mark Carney – Liberal Party
The Liberals have tried to balance competing interests:
•Trudeau condemned Hamas’s actions while later criticizing Israel’s “catastrophic” humanitarian impact in Gaza.
•Canada abstained from several UN resolutions holding Israel accountable, citing lack of balance.
•Publicly acknowledged Israel’s violations of international law but has not endorsed the ICJ genocide case.
•Maintains funding to UNRWA and calls for humanitarian pauses but avoided the word “genocide.”
•Carney echoed this cautious approach, stating that the term “genocide” shouldn’t be politicized, yet he supports an arms embargo on Israel.
Jagmeet Singh – New Democratic Party
Singh and the NDP have been the most vocal human rights advocates:
•Called for an immediate ceasefire early in the conflict.
•Described Israel’s actions as genocide and backed South Africa’s ICJ case.
•Demanded a two-way arms embargo on Israel and Hamas.
•Advocated for recognizing Palestinian statehood.
•Supports full funding to UNRWA and independent investigations into war crimes.
What’s at Stake
This election will likely be a referendum on what kind of foreign policy Canada wants in an era of moral complexity. The positions of the parties reflect deep divides: between solidarity with longstanding allies like Israel and accountability under international law, between support for universal human rights and domestic political caution.
With the ICJ and ICC cases unfolding, Canada’s next government will help define whether the country continues walking a diplomatic tightrope, or takes a clear stand on human rights — even when that means holding close allies accountable. The Gaza war, and the millions of lives affected by it, have turned Canadian foreign policy into a litmus test for national conscience. In 2025, voters will decide if Canada still has the courage to lead with its values.
Footnotes: Qasim can be reached on: X: @qasimkhanzada qasimkhanzada.substack.com email: qk@qasimkhan.com
|