Some of us are genuinely working toward peace and bridge-building between faith groups, including Jews and Muslims. Case in point, this week, we discussed the expansion of The Abraham Accords at our annual fundraiser with UAE-based Loay Alshareef and Israel-based Fleur Hassan-Nahoum. Two weeks ago, I spoke on a panel discussion about improving Muslim-Jewish relations alongside my friend Raheel Raza, a Muslim leader.
That sentiment — an effort to help make peace — is strikingly different from the readouts following Prime Minister Mark Carney’s calls with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Isaac Herzog. Contrasted side by side, the readouts reveal more than traditional diplomatic speak. They demonstrate a troubling imbalance of tone, respect, and a lack of moral clarity.
Given the fact Abbas is in his 21st year as president of a four-year elected term, it’s difficult to comprehend how the readout of Canada’s conversation says, “The prime minister welcomed the measures taken by the Palestinian Authority to strengthen accountability, governance, and democratic institutions.” Our government continues to prop up and reinforce a non-democratic, tyrannical regime — although it insisted “Hamas can play no part.”
Israel itself is a staunch and, like others, messy democracy. Democracies should hold allies to high standards. But these days, one wonders who Canada considers more of an ally — the Israelis or the Palestinians? The differences between these two statements are difficult to ignore for its choice of words such as “appalling” and “unacceptable” for Israel and “deep concern” and “opposition to Israeli settlement” for the Palestinians.
The readout about Israel was not an attempt to help build peace in the region. It was not one of an allied partnership. It was an admonishment, as if Canada was entitled on some higher moral plane to do so despite our treatment of our First Nations and rabid antisemitism. Yes, Canada’s readout reaffirmed “Canada’s support for Israel’s security and its right to self-defence.” But this was washed away in the readout with severe rhetoric about the flotilla incident, settlement expansion, and humanitarian issues in Gaza and Lebanon.
How about Canada offering to help constructively? A readout that articulated a bridge-building conversation between leaders would be refreshing: Our prime minister could have offered Israel’s president help to bring the Palestinian Authority closer to peace. In other words, a conversation that demonstrated initiative rather than demonization and a call for “an independent investigation” (over the flotilla incident in which Canadians were shamefully involved) would be refreshing.
Where there is a will there is a way. Canada can serve as a neutral mediator between the Israelis and Palestinians, bringing the two parties together at a meeting in Ottawa. It could demand the Palestinians stop incentivizing its population to commit terrorism. In keeping with our social model of pluralism, Canada can help the Palestinian Authority reform its curriculum to promote co-existence and an acceptance of Israel — the first step to a lasting peace.
