Prime Minister Mark Carney on Tuesday reaffirmed Canada’s support for U.S. and Israeli efforts to eliminate Iran’s nuclear and terrorist threats, but added it was a position taken “with regret” and suggested the choice to attack Iran was “inconsistent with international law.”
Chatting with reporters in Canberra, Australia, during his three-country international trip, Carney said the growing Middle East conflict “is one other example of the failure of the international order” that he warned about in his widely-watched speech in Davos in January.
“We support efforts to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to stop its regime from further threatening international peace and security,” he said. “Because Canada is taking the world because it is, not passively waiting for a world we want to be.
“We do, nevertheless, take this position with regret because the present conflict is one other example of the failure of the international order,” Carney continued.
He particularly noted the failure of the U.S. and Israel to have interaction with the United Nations or allies “including Canada” before attacking Iran on Saturday.
“We weren’t informed upfront. We weren’t asked to participate. Prima facia, it seems that these actions are inconsistent with international law,” he said.
“We took a position because we view the nuclear threat and the export of terrorism of Iran over many years as certainly one of the best threats to international peace and security. … In that limited sense, we supported that aspect.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the globe, join for breaking news alerts delivered on to you once they occur.
“That just isn’t a blank cheque,” Carney continued. “That just isn’t us participating, that just isn’t us asking for something in exchange for that — none of that’s true. That’s only a straight-up position.”
The Trump administration has offered shifting explanations for launching the war against Iran alongside Israel. While it has cited the regime’s nuclear ambitions and missile program as threats, it has yet to obviously reveal whether Iran was on the verge of attacking its allies within the Middle East or Europe.
U.S. President Donald Trump has openly called for regime change, although those calls have stopped for the reason that weekend, and there was confusion Tuesday over whether Israel or Iran was planning to attack the opposite first.
Carney confirmed he didn’t view Iran’s nuclear program as an “imminent threat,” but said an Iran armed with a nuclear weapon “can be the largest threat” and again cited the regime’s support for terrorism and multiple failed international attempts to finish this system.
“No person has a civil nuclear program that’s buried a mile beneath the desert. So that could be a threat,” he said. “The precise timing of it, the precise aspect of it, I’m not aware of all the data by way of that.”
Although he condemned Iran’s strikes on neighbouring Gulf nations which have hit civilian infrastructure and killed civilians, he didn’t similarly criticize the U.S. and Israeli strikes, as an alternative imploring “all parties” to “respect the principles of international engagement.”
“Canada calls for a rapid de-escalation of hostilities and is ready to help in achieving this goal,” he added.
“Resolution of this crisis would require commitment to a broader political solution, and diplomatic engagement is crucial to avoid a wider and deeper conflict. Innocent civilians have to be protected, and all parties must commit to finding enduring agreements to finish each nuclear proliferation and terrorist extremism. Canada will pursue this approach with like-minded countries and participants within the conflict.”
Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand said during an event on the Toronto Board of Trade earlier Tuesday that Canada’s approach was rooted in “pragmatism” and was focused on the security of the roughly 100,000 Canadians within the region, in addition to protecting civilian lives.
“The situation is fluid,” she said. “Our understanding is, and was on the time, that the intention (of the U.S.-Israeli strikes) was to handle that nuclear threat.
“At the identical time, we would like a diplomatic resolution.”
© 2026 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.