Leadership requires a focus on pragmatic decision-making that prioritizes national interests. Critics argue that the Canadian government is jeopardizing its own interests with its current Middle East policy. Recently, Mark Carney stated he would honor the International Criminal Court's (ICC) arrest warrant if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visits Canada. This statement has raised concerns about its implications for Canada’s diplomatic relations, particularly with the United States, amid ongoing trade tensions.

The remarks from Carney, who is a prominent figure in Canadian politics, are seen as unnecessary and potentially harmful. As Canada faces a serious trade war, maintaining strategic cooperation with the U.S. is crucial, especially as major companies like Stellantis shift operations south of the border. Critics argue that Carney's stance could undermine Canada’s credibility with its most important ally.

There is a call for a more mature and pragmatic approach to foreign policy that aligns with Canada’s historical role in promoting regional peace. The current government, in power for less than a year, is accused of disrupting this constructive role. Observers note that if Canada wishes to maintain its influence in Middle Eastern affairs, it must adopt a more thoughtful strategy that balances its relationships with both Israel and Palestinian territories.

A recent poll suggests that Netanyahu is likely to win the next election, which could further complicate Canada’s diplomatic position. Critics emphasize that Canada should avoid alienating itself from Israel, a long-standing ally, while also continuing its aid programs in Palestinian areas. They argue that Carney's support for the ICC warrants could make him unwelcome in the region.

The ICC's jurisdiction over Israel is contested, as Israel signed but did not ratify the Rome Statute. Critics assert that the ICC cannot prosecute a functioning democracy with a robust judicial system, like Israel. Furthermore, they argue that the ICC can only act on behalf of recognized states, and according to international law, there is no recognized “State of Palestine.”

In a statement from 2024, the ICC indicated that it considers the actions of Netanyahu and his defense minister within its jurisdiction, despite Israel's non-acceptance of the court's authority. Critics argue that Canada’s current stance appears to selectively target Israel, potentially aligning the country with groups that oppose democratic values.

The situation has raised ethical and policy concerns, with critics urging the government to reaffirm its commitment to democracy and freedom. They call for Carney to retract his statement regarding the ICC warrant and to focus on productive relations with both Israel and the United States. The ongoing debate highlights the complexities of Canada’s foreign policy and its implications for national and international relations.