The NDP may have ripped up its agreement with the Liberals but that has not stopped the radicals in both parties from combining to set government policy.
Liberals on the foreign affairs committee voted alongside allies from the NDP and the Bloc Québécois on Tuesday to study the prospect of Canada recognizing a Palestinian state unilaterally.
Judging by the testimony at the committee, the result of that study is not in doubt and it will recommend that the government breaks with 75 years of diplomatic tradition that has long called for the establishment of a Palestinian state as part of, but not before, a two-state solution.
The motion, which passed by eight votes to four Conservative votes against, was presented by Liberal MP Omar Alghabra, who argued that the proposal marginalizes the terror group Hamas, which rules the Gaza Strip, because Hamas doesn’t want a two-state solution.
His Liberal colleague, Rob Oliphant, said that if we want a two-state solution, there need to be two states.
Oliphant noted the recent evolution in Liberal thinking. “The prime minister has been very clear that recognition of the state of Palestine is to be done at the right time, not necessarily at the last step in the path.”
He said Liberals oppose the position of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israeli government after the Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack to reject the two-state solution, while the Canadian government also recognizes Hamas has not laid down its arms or released the dozens of Israeli hostages it still holds captive.
The NDP’s Heather McPherson said there is no need to study the issue further. “The time is right. The time has been right for a very long time,” she said, before adding she would support the motion regardless of what the study says.
But the Conservative party’s foreign affairs critic, Michael Chong, said the motion imposes no conditions and implies the committee supports the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state.
The idea of recognizing a Palestinian state has a long history. Former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon raised the possibility two decades ago — but only if a Palestinian state agreed to demilitarize and give up claims to a “right of return” to Israel for Palestinians and their descendants.
Liberal MP Anthony Housefather, who has been a vocal critic of his party’s policy in the Middle East, said the committee needs to include conditions in its final report to Parliament.
Chong said the committee has adopted “a radical position” that departs from Canada’s long-standing stance where recognition can only be achieved as part of a negotiated agreement.
He said the move would isolate Canada from its allies and make it the first legislature to advocate for recognition in the G7 and among NATO’s founding members.
“To veer from (Canada’s traditional) path would reward violence and authoritarianism as a path to achieving statehood,” he said.
Chong said the broader picture is a clash between democracies in the Middle East, Eastern Europe and in the South China Sea, and authoritarian states such as Iran, Russia, North Korea and China.
“In that clash, there is no question on which side of the line Canada should stand,” Chong said.
He is right. It is significant that both Russia and China are in favour of Palestinian-state recognition, which should tell us all we need to know about its prospective impact on democracy, the rule of law and human rights in the region.
It is discouraging to watch Canada’s slide towards capriciousness and moral relativism at the hands of the Liberals, aided and abetted by the NDP and the Bloc.
Instead of being a steadfast ally to Israel, the Liberal government has announced new restrictions on the sale of defence equipment to the Jewish state, leading Netanyahu to note that it was unfortunate Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly acted to embargo Israel just as antisemitic riots were spreading across Canada’s cities and campuses.
In March, an NDP motion to unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state was watered down at the 11th hour with language more in line with traditional policy, just as it appeared enough Liberals and NDP MPs were going to change foreign policy on the floor of the House.
That pause in the cause of reason was merely temporary though.
In May, Canada abstained from a vote at the United Nations General Assembly on Palestinian statehood, which was a departure from its traditional stance of voting no.
Canada’s ambassador to the UN, Bob Rae, said the country will recognize a Palestinian state at the time most conducive to peace, adding that doesn’t necessarily mean after a final peace agreement with Israel. That process cannot indefinitely delay the creation of a Palestinian state, he said.
But it is hard to see how such recognition would aid the peace process at the moment. Which borders would Canada recognize? Would it include East Jerusalem? Would we be legitimizing the Fatah government in the West Bank or Hamas in Gaza, or both? Wouldn’t such recognition cement the impression among Palestinians that progress can only be achieved at the end of a gun?
Statehood has long been viewed as an incentive to bring the Palestinians to the table, not something to be handed over pre-emptively.
Even if it were granted, would it hasten progress to (almost) everyone’s desired outcome — the fabled two-state solution? That is unlikely because, as Alghabra noted, Palestinians have been clear their goal is a one-state solution “from the river to the sea.”
It is one thing when the domestic agenda is hijacked by the progressive left, creating a nation of bankrupts, albeit with better teeth and sick-leave coverage.
But it is quite another when the radicals start fashioning their own foreign policy, particularly when it breaks with our allies, tradition and common sense.
Twitter.com/IvisonJ
Get more deep-dive National Post political coverage and analysis in your inbox with the Political Hack newsletter, where Ottawa bureau chief Stuart Thomson and political analyst Tasha Kheiriddin get at what’s really going on behind the scenes on Parliament Hill every Wednesday and Friday, exclusively for subscribers. Sign up here.