Canadian leader also said the US-Israeli attacks on Iran appear to be 'inconsistent with international law'.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said that he could not rule out his country’s military participation in the escalating war in the Middle East, after earlier saying that the US-Israeli strikes on Iran were “inconsistent with international law”.

Speaking alongside Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese in Canberra on Thursday, Carney was asked whether there was a situation in which Canada would get involved.

“One can never categorically rule out participation,” Carney said, noting the question was “hypothetical”.

“We will stand by our allies,” he said, adding that “we will always defend Canadians”.

  • BigJohnnyHines@lemmy.caEnglish
    291·
    2 days ago

    The full quote gives a different impression.

    “You’ve said that Canada will not participate in US military action in Iran. So can you definitively say that will remain the case, even if hostilities broaden, escalate or are prolonged?”

    “You’ve asked a fundamental hypothetical in a conflict that can spread very broadly, todays events or recent events point to that, so one can never categorically rule out participation, we will stand by our allies when it makes sense. There’s a distinction between the offensive actions that were taken and are being taken by the United States and Israel, that were taken by them without consultation with Canada or with other allies, and we are not party to those actions. But we will always defend Canadians, we will always defend and stand by our allies when called upon”

    It’s rare enough for politicians to even give context to their statements and then when they do it gets clipped and simplified into a different meaning. Aljazeera should know better which is pretty disappointing.

    Also, most of you just read headlines which doesn’t do you any favours. There are real things to criticize about Carney, these sort of qualified statements shouldn’t be one of them. If all we do is look for binary no-context answers from our representatives, we’re already doomed.

    • jsqribe@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      6·
      2 days ago

      Appreciate the real info, I was thinking it was unlike him after his great speech about not accepting the new “normal”, will keep it in mind to do more due diligence on these bait style headlines

  • CircaV@lemmy.caEnglish
    141·
    2 days ago

    Misleading headline. Canada will stand up for NATO, if this war ends up affecting NATO allies, and they invoke article 5, Canada’s involved.

    • Archangel1313@lemmy.caEnglish
      174·
      2 days ago

      If Iran attacks another NATO member directly, then article 5 would require that Canada comes to their defense.

      • Jimbel@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        1 day ago

        Ah okay sure. But I guess iran will not really attack turkey, I don’t think they have the capabilities. Maybe a few missiles which will be intercepted. But nothing more. I guess…

      • pilferjinx@piefed.socialEnglish
        7·
        2 days ago

        Article 5 doesn’t force a member to partake in a counter attack, just “such action as it deems necessary”.

        • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.worksOPEnglish
          31·
          2 days ago

          We should be holding onto that and following thru if needed (excluding the USA ofc). If we don’t we could be seen as no better than America … talking the big talk then walking away when shit gets tough.

        • Archangel1313@lemmy.caEnglish
          21·
          2 days ago

          I’m just pointing out that the “possibility” of getting involved in some way, does exist. To what extent, depends on circumstances. Carney is simply stating an obvious fact.

      • CircaV@lemmy.caEnglish
        5·
        2 days ago

        This. It doesn’t mean Canada’s getting involved in this war of aggression as it currently is. But if it expands to involve NATO countries, we will support our allies. The world is basically 1 step away from WWIII.

      • Virtvirt588@lemmy.worldEnglish
        81·
        2 days ago

        Considering all the atrocities and unlawful practice which occurred, the USA should be banished from NATO.

    • Tolc@lemmy.zipEnglish
      114·
      2 days ago

      Because whole Western world is neo colony of USA (except spain maybe)

    • SleeplessCityLights@programming.devEnglish
      91·
      2 days ago

      Read the whole quote. He is too well spoken to not get fucked by sound bytes and out of context quotes. When you say more than “Attack Iran good”, you can easily be quoted out of context.

    • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.worldEnglish
      102·
      2 days ago

      It wasn’t, but it wasn’t about being moral nations with humane people but about keeping the status quo as much as possible whilst slowly divorcing/diversifying from America.

  • unpossum@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    93·
    2 days ago

    If you don’t like this answer, please consider all the times you heard a politician promise something only to renege later. There are of course hypothetical scenarios where Canada would get involved (Iran directly attacking a NATO member other than the US is an example, depending on the scale), but that doesn’t mean that Canada supports the US in starting the war.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      81·
      2 days ago

      Yeah, it was a ridiculous question in the first place. Asking someone to speculate about every single possible future scenario that could ever be imagined is pointless and stupid. Carney gave the only reasonable answer possible under the circumstances.