This article originally appeared in The Hub.
By Alan Kessel, August 5, 2025
There was a serious gap between the framing and the reality of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s announcement last week that Canada plans to recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly this September. Carney framed the matter as a moral stand, and a compassionate response to the human tragedy in Gaza. In fact, it is a major foreign policy mistake—one that rewards terrorism, erodes Canada’s moral standing, threatens relations with key allies, and makes peace less likely.
Worse still, the announcement underscores Carney’s inability to sound credible in explaining Canada’s sudden pivot. For months, he echoed Canada’s traditional position: statehood must be the product of a negotiated settlement. Now, without any change in facts on the ground—except the mounting civilian toll in Gaza—he is abandoning that stance in a bid to look relevant on the international stage. It is a transparent act of political performance, not principled diplomacy.
This war began on Oct. 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a genocidal assault on Israel, murdering more than 1,200 people, including eight Canadians, and taking hundreds of hostages. For Canada, this was another 9/11 moment, echoing the 24 Canadians killed in the Twin Towers. In 2001, Canada stood with the United States in Operation Enduring Freedom, sending a clear message that terrorism brings consequences, not rewards. By announcing recognition of a Palestinian state while Hamas still controls Gaza, Carney is sending the opposite message: terror pays. Hamas, and the group’s many admirers around the world, will take this as a victory—something they could never achieve on the battlefield.
Carney’s soft rhetoric—careful to avoid calling Hamas what it is: a terrorist organization—only reinforces that perception. A prime minister unwilling to name the perpetrators of October 7 cannot credibly claim that Canada’s move is grounded in moral clarity. No credible path to peace can be built on a refusal to confront this fundamental truth.
The decision also makes a mockery of international law. The Montevideo Convention requires a state to have a defined territory, a functioning government, and the capacity for foreign relations. “Palestine” currently has none of these. Gaza is run by Hamas; the West Bank by a divided, corrupt Palestinian Authority. Neither accepts a genuine two-state solution; their vision remains a one-state solution without Jews.
Even Canada’s own recognition plan betrays the fiction: UNRWA will continue to manage Palestinian refugees, proof that this will be statehood in name only. A “country” that depends on a UN refugee agency for basic governance is not a sovereign state—it is a political gesture meant to appease the global gallery. Recognition now would reward terror and undermine the very two-state solution Canada claims to support. And it raises a profound question: if this is Carney’s logic, would Canada also recognize Luhansk and Donetsk in the name of ending the Russia-Ukraine war? If rewarding violent territorial seizure and political extremism is now our foreign policy, where does it stop?
The suffering in Gaza is undeniable, and the images of babies and children caught in war are gut-wrenching. Canada should respond with empathy, but empathy without moral clarity is reckless. Any sustainable peace begins with disempowering those who openly seek Israel’s destruction. Recognition at this stage does the opposite: it emboldens Hamas, undermines moderate Palestinians, and alienates Israel, making negotiations harder, not easier.
Meanwhile, practical humanitarian solutions exist. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation has delivered over 91 million meals to civilians while preventing Hamas from hijacking or commodifying aid. Symbolic recognition and UN theatre will not feed a single child; they will strengthen the very group stealing the food.
Carney’s shift is also steeped in double standards. Canada is preparing to sanction and isolate Israel while:
- Saying little about Sudan’s ongoing genocidal campaign;
- Ignoring the new Syrian government’s massacre of Druze civilians;
- Excusing Egypt for keeping the Rafah crossing largely closed to aid and refugees.
By holding Israel to a unique standard, Carney reveals that his foreign policy is performative, not principled.
In the end, this decision helps no one. Hamas will celebrate. Palestinians will remain trapped in a terror-dominated pseudo-state. Israel will feel betrayed and less likely to compromise. And Canada will look naïve, inconsistent, and disposable on the world stage.
Carney’s gamble is a symbolic indulgence that won’t shorten the war, feed the hungry, or bring peace any closer. The only saving grace is that Canada’s voice in global affairs has become almost irrelevant. Our “principled stand” will be quickly forgotten abroad—though the damage to our credibility will linger.
Carney wanted a statesmanlike moment. Instead, he delivered a gesture of weakness and confusion, signaling that Canada now rewards terror with diplomacy.
It is a blunder that history will remember—if it bothers to notice us at all.
Alan Kessel is a former legal adviser to the Government of Canada and a former deputy high commissioner of Canada to the United Kingdom. He is a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
