**
Prime Minister Mark Carney has expressed his support for recent air strikes carried out by the United States and Israel against Iran, but he has done so with a notable sense of regret. While he identifies Tehran as a significant threat to Middle Eastern stability, he has characterised the military actions as a troubling breach of the rules-based international order and potentially a violation of international law. Speaking to the media in Sydney during his Australian visit, Carney’s remarks signal an attempt to clarify Canada’s position amidst escalating tensions in the region.
A Cautious Endorsement
Carney articulated his stance on the air strikes, stating that while he believes they were necessary to counteract Iran’s actions, they regrettably illustrate the ongoing deterioration of the global order that seeks to govern state behaviours. “We do, however, take this position with regret, because the current conflict is another example of the failure of the international order,” he remarked. His comments mark the first public statement since Canada initially voiced its support for the strikes on Saturday.
The Prime Minister highlighted the immediate consequences of these military actions, noting they have sparked a “rapidly spreading conflict and growing threats to civilian life” across the region. As Iran retaliates against Israel and American military bases in the vicinity, Carney has expressed serious concerns about the humanitarian implications of such a conflict.
Calls for Justification Under International Law
Despite his backing for the strikes, Carney underscored the need for both the U.S. and Israel to provide a legal justification for their actions. He stated that these pre-emptive strikes “prima facie, appear to be inconsistent with international law,” suggesting that it is important for legal experts to assess whether the actions meet the necessary criteria under international statutes. “That formal judgment is for others to make,” he added, distancing Canada from direct involvement in the conflict.
In a broader context, Carney’s comments echo sentiments he expressed earlier this year at the World Economic Forum, where he suggested that the global order was increasingly ineffective. He lamented that despite the efforts of international bodies like the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran’s nuclear ambitions persist, and the U.S. and Israel have acted independently without engaging allies, including Canada.
Historical Context and Canada’s Position
Canada’s diplomatic history with Iran has been fraught and increasingly adversarial over the past decade. Under former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, diplomatic ties were severed in 2012, and Justin Trudeau’s administration has continued to criticise Iran’s actions, particularly following the tragic downing of a civilian aircraft in 2020 by Iranian forces, which resulted in the loss of several Canadian lives. In 2024, Canada officially designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist entity, reflecting a hardened stance towards Tehran.
While Carney recognises the gravity of Iran’s past actions, he has made it clear that Canada’s support of the strikes should not be interpreted as a “blank cheque” for further military engagement. He stressed the need for all parties involved to adhere to international humanitarian laws, specifically in protecting civilian populations and infrastructure. “We remind all the belligerents of their responsibilities to protect civilians,” he asserted, calling for de-escalation in the conflict.
Diverging Opinions Within the Liberal Party
The Prime Minister’s position has not gone unchallenged. Former Liberal cabinet minister Lloyd Axworthy has voiced concerns regarding the legality of the strikes, highlighting the absence of UN authorisation—an aspect that contrasts sharply with Canada’s previous refusal to endorse the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 due to similar legal concerns. Liberal MP Will Greaves also raised objections, stating, “Canada cannot endorse the unilateral and illegal use of military force,” and emphasising the need for respect for sovereignty.
In response to the internal dissent within his party, Defence Minister David McGuinty defended the government’s position, noting the breadth of opinion within the Liberal Party is reflective of Canadian society. “There’s room for all kinds of competing views,” he stated, emphasising the importance of ongoing dialogue and debate within the political framework.
Why it Matters
The implications of Carney’s statement resonate far beyond immediate geopolitical concerns; they encapsulate a broader crisis of international governance and the efficacy of existing legal frameworks in addressing state aggression. As the situation in the Middle East continues to evolve, Canada’s position will not only influence its diplomatic relationships but also its standing in the global community. The call for a renewed commitment to international law and humanitarian principles underscores a pivotal moment for Canada as it navigates its role on the world stage amidst growing complexity and conflict.
