Adam Katz: Canada has interests in the Middle East. It’s time Ottawa defined them

Parliament Hill is viewed below a Canada flag in Gatineau, Quebec, Friday, Sept. 18, 2020. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick Photo by Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press files

Article content

In September, Canada’s diplomats will begin their yearly descent to New York for the United Nations General Assembly. As has been the case recently, many of the topics on the docket will concern Israel, the war in Iran and recent developments in the Middle East. Canada’s record at the United Nations raises questions about whether Ottawa has a clear strategy for dealing with the region, or simply responds to the diplomatic pressures of the moment. If recent years are any indication, Ottawa will once again call for peace, restraint and de-escalation.

Article content

Article content

But foreign policy cannot consist of asking everyone to behave better.

Article content

Article content

Article content

The current government wants a seat at the table, a voice in international affairs and a reputation as a country capable of exerting influence beyond our borders. But before that can happen, Canada needs to decide what it actually wants in the Middle East, who its allies are, what threats it considers unacceptable and what kind of international order it intends to defend. Canada clearly understands that the international order is worth defending in Europe. Why should Canada be any less willing to defend it in the Middle East?

Article content

Put simply, Canada needs a better Middle East policy: one based not on reacting to the latest crisis, but on clearly defined Canadian interests and a willingness to act on them.

Article content

That need for a coherent policy is not simply a matter of Canada’s reputation abroad. It is increasingly a matter of what happens at home.

Article content

It is easy for Canadians to think of the Middle East as a distant region whose conflicts have little bearing on daily life at home. But the events of the past three years have demonstrated otherwise, with consequences ranging from higher energy prices, trade disruption and rising radicalization and extremism that has increasingly manifested in Canadian communities.

Article content

Article content

The dramatic rise in antisemitism since October 7 is perhaps the clearest example. Canadian Jews have watched developments thousands of kilometres away reverberate through their own communities, schools and institutions. Students have seen how quickly conflicts abroad are translated into rhetoric, protests and hostility at home. Canadian foreign policy language, therefore, can no longer afford to ignore events occurring abroad as if they don’t have very real consequences at home.

Article content

Article content

If events in the Middle East can so quickly reverberate through Canadian society, then how Canada responds to developments in the region matters. Yet Ottawa’s response often ends where its strategy should begin.

Article content

Canada’s approach to the Middle East increasingly resembles a cycle rather than a coherent strategy. When the United States and Iran went to war in 2026, Ottawa condemned Iranian attacks and called for civilian protection, but also urged all parties to return to negotiations and pursue a diplomatic resolution. When France and Britain moved toward recognizing a Palestinian state in 2025, Canada followed, calling its decision part of a “co-ordinated international effort.” In each case, Canada had a position on the immediate event. What remained less clear was the strategy connecting those positions.