Prime Minister Trudeau: is Canada a fake ally and fair-weather friend of Israel?

Canada’s Prime Minister has done it again.In a statement issued on May 16 concerning the Gaza war initiated and sustained by Hamas, the Prime Minister of Canada said:

Canada deplores and is gravely concerned by the violence in the Gaza Strip that has led to a tragic loss of life and injured countless people. We are appalled that Dr. Tarek Loubani, a Canadian citizen, is among the wounded – along with so many unarmed people, including civilians, members of the media, first responders, and children.        

We are doing everything we can to assist Dr. Loubani and his family, and to determine how a Canadian citizen came to be injured.           

We are engaging with Israeli officials to get to the bottom of these events.  Reported use of excessive force and live ammunition is inexcusable.               

It is imperative we establish the facts of what is happening in Gaza. Canada calls for an immediate independent investigation to thoroughly examine the facts on the ground – including any incitement, violence, and the excessive use of force.                                               

Canada stands ready to assist in such an endeavour. We will work closely with our international partners and through international institutions to address this serious situation.

The Conservative Party of Canada in power was a true ally and friend of Israel. Now in opposition, the leader of the party Andrew Scheer objecting to Trudeau position issued the following statement:     

In condemning the Israeli forces, Justin Trudeau ignores the role that the terrorist organization Hamas has played in inciting these clashes. In responding to these events with nothing but criticism of Israel, Justin Trudeau has failed Canadians on the international stage once again.

Coming from Canada, where the Trudeau government and its Minister of Foreign Affairs repeatedly claimed to be allies and friends of Israel, the Prime Minister’s statement is rich. This is not how a true ally behaves and a genuine friend communicates. If anything, this is how a fake ally and a fair weather friend behaves.

If Trudeau was truly an ally and a friend, he would have picked up the phone, called Netanyahu and discuss the situation at the Gaza border and upon receiving the sad news about Dr. Loubani, he would have phoned him again and formally requested a prompt and thorough investigation into the matter and a copy of the report submitted by the investigators, before opening his mouth in the first place.

How can he be appalled by the injuries sustained by a Canadian citizen in a war zone without knowing the precise matrix of facts which resulted in the said injuries?

This question reminds me of the late Daniel Moynihan, the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N who once said: You are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts.

And that is precisely what the Prime Minister did. He gratuitously referred to the “’reported’ use of excessive force and live ammunitionand ex-cathedra determined this to be “inexcusable.”  Reported by whom? Having regard to all the facts and circumstances, as they exist on the ground, of which the Prime Minister is clearly not cognizant, what is his factual basis to justify his unqualified acceptance of the reported existence of excessive force or to reach the conclusion that the use of live ammunition is inexcusable?

The person who utters these words is the head of a government that is utterly incapable of stemming the ever increasing number of unarmed persons entering the country as illegal immigrants and fake refugees, and has great difficulty to expel those who are so ordered, including a fair number of persons considered to be a threat to national security and therefore to the security of the country’s citizens and inhabitants.

And how would the Prime Minister propose to do if a commensurate number of such persons carrying grenades, firearms, machine guns, various types of bombs and other explosives along the southern border, under the direction of a terrorist organisation like Hamas and led by its army, planned and decided to rush across the border, to mass murder its citizens, destroy farms, towns and cities of all sizes? Serve them with lollipops? Proclaim the arrival of these hordes to be another victory for his mindless brand of multiculturalism with which he is obsessed?  Or, affirm, as he does with sickening regularity, the moronic sophistry that “diversity is our strength”?  Or would he, assuming he is allowed to remain Prime Minister in such circumstances simply order the army, police forces and border guards and anyone and everyone who owns a firearm or can get one to shoot the bastards, preferably before they cross the border?

To date, Dr. Loubani’s case raised great many more questions than the very limited number of facts which he volunteered.

According to the news reported in the (Toronto) Globe and Mail on May 17th, the doctor informed the interviewer that he was in Gaza as part of a medical team funded by South African based Shuttleworth Foundation that is field testing 3-D-printed medical tourniquets.

Well, according to the information posted by the Foundation on its website about the names of the researchers and the nature of their respective projects funded by it during the year 2017, there is no indication that Dr. Loubani is part of a research team or that the team itself is funded.

The doctor stated that he was about 25 meters from the so-called “protesters” when he was shot. Surely, the material issue here is not his distance from the protesters but from the border fence. How far back from the fence was he located when he got shot? And taking his statement at face value, then how far back from the security fence were the so-called protesters? What exactly were the protestors doing before he got shot at?

What time did the good doctor reach his field position on the day he was shot? How many field positions did he occupy the day in question? Why and how were the field position(s) identified? How long was the good doctor in that field position on the day in question?

He said he was standing with orange vested para-medics. How many medics does the field test require? How many medics were with him? Why were he and the para- medics just standing? What were the medics standing with him doing when he was shot?

Did any of the other para-medics standing with him get shot? If one or more of them were shot, what was he or each of them doing when   he or they were shot?

What was the specific purpose of the test? Why the testing was conducted on grounds that were situated in a war zone? Was the test conducted on injured persons in the field on the day he was shot or on the preceding days? If so, how many persons were so treated? How long does it take to conduct a field test?  Were these tests successful?

Surely, the field test could have been conducted at a safer location. Why was it not? If the sole purpose of being at that spot was to conduct the test, by an abundance of caution, the doctor could have contacted the Israeli Embassy in Canada or the Israeli military authorities through the Canadian Embassy in Israel to make the necessary arrangements in order to conduct the test safely. Why did he not do so?

In the alternative, he could have used a large sign of a suitable size to inform the military at the front line what he was doing there? At all events, surely, the test could have been conducted in the emergency section of a field or regular hospital where the shortage of emergency doctors has been described as being “acute”. Why was it not?

Did Dr. Loubani choose the medics that were to accompany him or were they simply assigned to him?  Did he know that the para-medic that assisted him and was subsequently killed was a member of the Hamas terrorist group, employed by the Hamas Interior Ministry and referred to as a “Holy Warrior”?

Instead, wilfully ignorant of what has been written and published  in Arab sources who accused Hamas  of creating and aggravating  the horrible situation; ignorant of the actual facts and circumstances that led to the Loubani incident,  the Prime Minister  then proceeded  to accuse and condemn Israel by implication, for all the injuries and fatalities. Then throwing logic to the wind, he blamed Israel for the injuries sustained by non-armed people “including civilians and children”. What on earth were unarmed civilians in the harm’s way doing protesting in the midst of the war zone? Why on earth, would mothers bring their children to a war zone where, ironically enough, the Palestinians committed violence not only across the fence but also on their side of the fence? As to members of the media, as we all know  by now, members of the media are not what they seem or claim to be as illustrated by the case of  the only member of the media who was killed turned out to be on Hamas’s payroll doing Hamas’ work and G-d only knows what else during the mayhem.

As to the first responders or para-medics, the fact that they may be dressed as first responders does not necessarily make them first responders. Until, their true identities are known, silence is the better part of discretion.

But then again, clearly the Prime Minister does not seem to care for the true and full facts that risk of confusing him while he is eagerly on his way to international stardom by blaming Israel and demanding an international investigation, and, while at it, offering Canada’s services as the genuine goody-goody- two-shoes of the international scene.

The question  that now needs to be addressed is: In the light of the high standards of  ethical conduct adopted and the loyalty shown by all the Canadian Prime Ministers to date vis-a vis  the countries that are Canada’s close allies and good friends, why did Trudeau choose to behave in a manner wholly unbecoming a Canadian Prime Minister?

About the Author
Doğan Akman was born and schooled in Istanbul, Turkey. Upon his graduation from Lycee St. Michel, he immigrated to Canada with his family. In Canada, he taught university in sociology-criminology and social welfare policy and published some articles in criminology journals After a stint as a Judge of the Provincial Court (criminal and family divisions) of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, he joined the Federal Department of Justice working first as a Crown prosecutor, and then switching to civil litigation and specialising in aboriginal law. Since his retirement he has published articles in Sephardic Horizons and e-Sefarad and in an anthology edited by Rifat Bali titled This is My New Homeland and published in Istanbul.
Related Topics
Related Posts
Comments