CANBERRA, Australia — Prime Minister Mark Carney on Tuesday reaffirmed Canada’s support for U.S. And Israeli military actions against Iran, characterizing the decision as a regrettable necessity stemming from decades of failed diplomatic efforts and a perceived threat to international security. Speaking to reporters during a three-country international trip, Carney also suggested the strikes were “inconsistent with international law,” citing a lack of prior consultation with allies, including Canada.
“We support efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security,” Carney stated. He framed the position as a pragmatic response to the realities of the current geopolitical landscape, stating, “Since Canada is taking the world as This proves, not passively waiting for a world we wish to be.”
But, Carney emphasized the decision was made “with regret,” adding that the conflict represents “another example of the failure of the international order,” a theme he previously explored in a speech delivered at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January. He specifically criticized the U.S. And Israel for not engaging with the United Nations or consulting with key allies, including Canada, before launching the attacks on Saturday.
“We were not informed in advance. We were not asked to participate. Prima facia, these actions are inconsistent with international law,” Carney said. He reiterated Canada’s long-held view that Iran’s nuclear ambitions and support for terrorism pose a significant threat to global stability, justifying the limited support for the U.S. And Israeli actions.
“That is not a blank cheque,” Carney clarified, emphasizing that Canada’s support does not equate to participation in the military operation or any expectation of reciprocal benefits. “That is just a straight-up position.”
The Trump administration has offered varying justifications for the military action, initially citing Iran’s nuclear program and missile development as primary concerns. However, officials have yet to present conclusive evidence demonstrating an imminent threat from Iran to its allies in the Middle East or Europe, according to reports. Confusion also remains regarding the potential for retaliatory strikes from either Iran or Israel.
While acknowledging he does not view Iran’s nuclear program as an “imminent threat,” Carney warned that a nuclear-armed Iran would represent “the biggest threat” to international security. He cited the regime’s history of supporting terrorism and the repeated failures of international diplomatic efforts to curb its nuclear ambitions, noting the secretive nature of Iran’s nuclear facilities. “Nobody has a civil nuclear program that’s buried a mile beneath the desert. So that is a threat,” he said.
Carney condemned Iran’s retaliatory strikes against neighboring Gulf nations, which have targeted civilian infrastructure and resulted in casualties. However, he refrained from directly criticizing the U.S. And Israeli strikes, instead calling on “all parties” to “respect the rules of international engagement.”
“Canada calls for a rapid de-escalation of hostilities and is prepared to assist in achieving this goal,” Carney added. “Resolution of this crisis will require commitment to a broader political solution, and diplomatic engagement is essential to avoid a wider and deeper conflict. Innocent civilians must be protected, and all parties must commit to finding enduring agreements to end both nuclear proliferation and terrorist extremism. Canada will pursue this approach with like-minded countries and participants in the conflict.”
Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand, speaking at an event at the Toronto Board of Trade on Tuesday, echoed Carney’s emphasis on pragmatism and the safety of the approximately 100,000 Canadians residing in the region. “The situation is fluid,” she said. “Our understanding is, and was at the time, that the intention [of the U.S.-Israeli strikes] was to address that nuclear threat.”
Anand added, “At the same time, we want a diplomatic resolution.”
