LP_468x60
on-the-record-468x60-white

Iranian protestors attack a government building in Fasa, in southern Iran on Dec. 31, 2025.

In the last two weeks, protests in Iran have grown to such a scale that they are rivalling some of the great uprisings that have characterized the modern history of the revolutionary dictatorship, whose ruling regime appears to be running out of options to restore economic and social stability. So far, this one has not been contained and put down like the others, with state violence and mass prosecution of dissenters. Now, Iran’s rulers are on notice that the United States stands ready to intervene if protesters are killed, a threat made all the more pressing by this weekend’s military action in Venezuela. The National Post takes stock of the current tensions.

Why are people protesting in Iran?

There are many reasons to march against a theocratic dictatorship. Longstanding human rights violations on Iranian citizens play a part, but the proximate cause here seems to be economic. The Iranian currency, the rial, has been falling in value for years against the American dollar, more steeply lately. In 2015, when Iran joined a nuclear accord, rials were trading at 32,000 to the dollar. The currency has basically fallen ever since, reaching a record low in December of almost 1.5 million to the dollar. This depreciation worsens the effects of inflation, which in recent months has run at nearly 50 per cent, and has caused the price of consumer goods to rise.

The rial’s collapse prompted the resignation of the governor of the central bank on Dec. 29. Protesters, who had gathered the day before, marched in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar that day, backed by striking merchants. The protests spread quickly to other major cities in the more densely populated west of the country. Dec. 30 saw widespread closures of shops and schools and intense security operations to control protesters, some of whom were openly denouncing the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei.

With daily protests now in 26 of 31 provinces, the latest reports this week are that 19 protesters and one security official have been killed. A U.S.-based group, Human Rights Activists in Iran, reported nearly 1,000 people have been arrested.

What do foreign leaders think?

“We’re watching it very closely. If they start killing people like they have in the past, I think they’re going to get hit very hard by the United States,” U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. Earlier, he posted on social media: “We are locked and loaded and ready to go.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his government expresses “solidarity with the struggle of the Iranian people.”

An Iranian foreign ministry statement described this as seeking to undermine Iran’s national unity.

In June, Israel fought a 12-day war with Iran backed by the United States, which attacked and severely damaged Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz.

Hasn’t this happened before?

Yes, and it has typically been put down with great force. Three years ago, for example, the death in police custody of Mahsa Amini, 22, who had been arrested for not wearing a hijab, was the spark for the greatest nationwide protest to date in Iran.

Before that, in 2009, the so-called Persian Spring protests followed contested elections. This was regarded as a major threat to the regime and was put down forcefully, with many protesters jailed.

What are Iranian security officials doing now?

On Monday, Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei, the chief justice of Iran and a former prosecutor, said authorities would listen to legitimate criticism about social and economic welfare, but that they would “deal firmly with those who seek to exploit the situation,” and would show rioters “no leniency or appeasement.”

However, several reports describe the regime as on the brink of collapse, and desperate to contain the uprising, fearful that security services could be overwhelmed and abandon the government.

On Sunday, The Times of London cited an intelligence report to report a claim that Iran’s ruler Ayatollah Khamenei has a plan in place to flee for Moscow in the event of regime collapse, modelled on the escape of Syria’s deposed leader Bashar al-Assad.

 Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks in Tehran, Jan. 3, 2026.

Even before they grew to the present scale, however, there was evidence of efforts to suppress these protests and those people who might inspire them.

On Dec. 12, Iranian authorities arrested 2023 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi, 53, a feminist activist against mandatory hijab laws.

A foundation in her name said in a statement that she was arrested “violently” along with other prominent human rights campaigners in Mashhad, an industrial city and pilgrimage destination in the far northeast of Iran, near the Afghanistan and Turkmenistan borders.

They were reportedly taken at a memorial service for Khosrow Alikordi, 46, a human rights lawyer who represented political prisoners, campaigned against the death penalty, and had previously been jailed on propaganda charges.

He was found dead in his office in early December, reportedly by a heart attack but suspected by his family and supporters as murder.

The foundation said Mohammadi is being held in solitary confinement under conditions she herself has suffered and campaigned against, known as “white torture,” a technique of sleep and sensory deprivation in which a person is held indefinitely by themselves in a constantly illuminated all white room.

What does the deposing of Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces in Venezuela do to the equation?

The conflict in Venezuela could deflect global public attention from Iran, if not actually ease diplomatic pressure. But it also serves as a warning that sometimes bluster and belligerence in foreign affairs is actually followed by action.

Iranian officials have recently been making conciliatory gestures to the West. Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi gave a rare interview to The Economist magazine in November, for example, saying Iran is ready to make a “fair and balanced deal…. We are ready for negotiation, but not for dictation.”

Now, Trump has warned Iran that he is ready to strike again, and Venezuela adds a certain credibility to the idea.

 Protesters in the Malekshahi district of Iran’s western Ilam province, on Jan. 4, 2026.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.


U.S. President Donald Trump and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen gather for a group photo before a plenary session of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Heads of State and Government summit in The Hague, on June 25, 2025.

The war of words between U.S. President Donald Trump and the autonomous territory of Greenland continued into the new year, heated up by the recent American incursion into Venezuela to capture its president.

A day after the raid, Katie Miller, wife of Stephen Miller, one of Trump’s top aides, posted on social media a map of Greenland overlaid with the colours of the American flag and the word “SOON.”

Stephen Miller

added Monday

that it was “the formal position of the U.S. government that Greenland should be part of the U.S.”

Asked whether the U.S. would rule out using force to annex it, he replied: “Nobody’s going to fight the U.S. over the future of Greenland.”

Meanwhile, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned that the long-standing NATO alliance would end if Trump

ordered an attack

on Greenland.

“If the U.S. chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops, including NATO and thus the security that has been established since the end of the Second World War,” she said.

Here’s what to know.

When did Trump first set his sights on Greenland?

Trump’s aspirations to obtain Greenland date back to his first presidency. In 2019, he offered (unsuccessfully) to buy the world’s largest island from Denmark. The Danish government responded by pledging to

upgrade military spending

in Greenland to the tune of 1.5 billion Danish crowns (roughly $320 million) for surveillance.

More recently, he has been more bellicose in his musings. In May, Trump said he

could not “rule out”

using military force to annex Greenland, even as he added he was not considering a military attack on Canada to force it to join the Union.

Last month, he reasserted that the U.S. needs Greenland for its national security, and named Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry as

a special envoy

who would “lead the charge.”

“They have a very small population, and … Denmark has spent no money,” Trump said last month of the island, which has a population of 57,000. “They have no military protection,” he added. “They say that Denmark was there 300 years ago or something, with a boat. Well, we were there with boats too, I’m sure. So we’ll have to work it all out.”

What do the Greenlanders and others say?

Greenland’s youngest-ever prime minister, Múte Bourup Egede, said before leaving office last year: “Greenland is ours. We are not for sale and will never be for sale.”

More recently, after the attack on Venezuela, Frederiksen said in a statement: “It is absolutely absurd to say that the United States should take control of Greenland.”

In addition,

a poll a year ago

by Axios found that 85 per cent of the islanders did not want to join the U.S.

European leaders have also sided with Denmark and Greenland in recent days, with U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer saying of Frederiksen: “I stand with her, and she’s right about the future of Greenland.” Germany and France have also confirmed their support.

 The Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base) is pictured in northern Greenland on Oct. 4, 2023.

What does Greenland have that the U.S. wants?

In addition to its mineral wealth, the vast island — three times the size of Texas — occupies a strategic location in the North Atlantic between North America and Europe.

After the Second World War, the U.S. set up and continues to operate Pituffik Space Base, also known as Thule Air Base. A 1951 defence agreement also gives it the right to build and maintain military bases.

“If Russia were to send missiles towards the U.S., the shortest route for nuclear weapons would be via the North Pole and Greenland,” Marc Jacobsen, an associate professor at the Royal Danish Defence College,

told the BBC

last year. “That’s why the Pituffik Space Base is immensely important in defending the U.S.”

How would America actually take control of Greenland?

That’s not clear. An

analysis by Bloomberg

quotes adjunct Professor Rasmus Leander Nielsen of Greenland University, who told local media that Denmark can’t sell the island because its home-rule law of 2009 “clearly states that Greenlanders are their own people.”

The analysis suggests that, shy of military force, the best bet would be for America to wait for the territory to gain independence from Denmark and then approach it directly about annexation.

That is unlikely to happen quickly. There has long been discussion about breaking from Denmark, but in the island’s last election in March, a majority of voters chose parties that backed only a slow move to independence.

How likely is the idea of buying an entire chunk of territory?

There’s much precedent, albeit not recently. America purchased Alaska from the Russian Empire in 1867, and before that, it bought Louisiana from France in 1803.

In the last century, Denmark sold what were then called the Danish West Indies to the U.S., which renamed them the U.S. Virgin Islands. That was in 1917.

How much would it cost?

The U.S.

International Trade Administration

notes that the island’s GDP was about US$3.2 billion in 2021, with some 20 per cent of that coming in the form of an annual grant from Denmark that covers more than half the public budget.

The ITA also notes that “the Greenlandic government seeks to increase revenues by promoting economic diversification and greater development of the fisheries value chain, natural resources, tourism and clean energy.”

For comparison, Alaska cost just US$7.2 million in 1867, worth about US$150 million today. The Virgin Islands were purchased for US$25 million in 1917, or about US$600 million today.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


A sign marking the international border between the United States and Canada at Peace Arch Historical State Park in Blaine, Washington. A Canadian woman faces U.S. charges after allegedly crossing the border between B.C. and Washington through the park and injuring a border agent during her arrest.

A Canadian woman is facing charges in the U.S. after allegedly illegally crossing the border into Washington state and becoming aggressive and violent during her arrest in late December, injuring a U.S. border agent in the process.

In custody at a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facility, the woman allegedly told investigators she was on her way to retrieve her dog from her Washington-based fiancé.

In an FBI affidavit filed in the U.S District Court for the state’s western district and obtained by Seattle ABC affiliate

KIRO 7

, prosecutors say the woman had first attempted to enter the U.S. through the Peace Arch port of entry between Surrey, B.C., and Blaine, Wash., on Dec. 30. She was denied after revealing to CBP officials that she had a marijuana vape pen on her person.

It’s against U.S. law to bring cannabis products in any form across the border, even from Canada, where it is legal, and into Washington, where it’s also legal.

Several hours later, the woman allegedly went to the nearby Peace Arch State Park and crossed the border into a grassy area on the park’s north side.

In the affidavit, investigators noted the park has a deep culvert marking the border, concrete barriers and signs warning that people who cross the international boundary will be arrested and charged.

CBP agents allegedly stopped the woman in the park and called their supervisor for assistance when she became uncooperative, ignoring their repeated commands to stop and shouting obscenities.

According to the affidavit, the supervisor described the woman as “hysterical.”

 Vehicles lined up to enter the U.S. from Canada at the Peace Arch port of entry between Surrey, B.C., and Blaine, Wash.

Investigators allege she resisted when the supervisor tried to place her under arrest for the border violation, refusing commands, tensing up her body and falling to the ground as responding agents attempted to restrain her.

They allege she continued to insult the female supervising agent with gender-based slurs and told other agents she hoped they would “die a painful death.”

Once restrained, the woman allegedly balked at the idea of being placed in a CBP vehicle, forcing the agents to carry her. While doing so, the supervising agent said the woman “went limp,” leading to the agents losing balance and falling.

While still handcuffed on the ground, investigators allege she began kicking her legs, with one kick striking the supervising agent in the face.

According to the affidavit, surveillance video reviewed by the FBI allegedly supports the agents’ version of events.

The woman, whom the supervising agent noted had urinated and defecated on herself during the struggle, was eventually placed in the vehicle.

She allegedly denied intentionally kicking the agent, but acknowledged it may have happened during her arrest. She also allegedly admitted to shouting obscenities.

According to KIRO 7, a U.S. judge found probable cause for charges of assault on a federal officer and improper entry into the U.S. on Jan. 1

According to

The Canadian Press

, she is due back in court later this month.

When contacted for comment, CBP referred National Post to the FBI’s Seattle office. National Post is awaiting a response.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


An Uber sign is displayed inside a car, May 15, 2020, in Chicago.

An Uber driver in the United Kingdom reportedly kicked out a Jewish camper and staff member in the middle of the night after initiating a conversation about Israel and Judaism.

The incident occurred last month, on Dec. 26 around 3:10 a.m., on Ashbourne Rd. in Cheadle, a village just south of Manchester, Staffordshire Police told National Post in an emailed statement. Authorities said they were notified about it by a third party.

The driver “became aggressive with a passenger, a man, and asked the man and a child to get out of a taxi following a conversation about religion,” police said. “Enquiries are ongoing.”

The Jewish Chronicle

identified the passengers of the vehicle as a camper and staff member from Bnei Akiva, an Orthodox Jewish organization dedicated to providing programs for Jewish youth. In a letter shared with the publication, the camp told parents that the driver had initiated a conversation about Judaism and Israel, and “after some time” asked the passengers to “leave the vehicle and left them on the side of the road.”

“They were able to return safely shortly afterwards with support from Bnei Akiva staff,” the letter said.

Uber has faced some criticism from the Jewish community in Canada for incidents involving Canadian Jews within the country and abroad. A

Canadian-Slovakian model told National Post she was kicked out of an Uber

in November because the driver said she did “not drive Jewish people.” In February,

a Jewish couple said an Uber driver refused to take them

home from the airport after he heard them speaking Hebrew. A Canadian-Israeli couple was travelling in the Netherlands in August when they said an Uber driver wouldn’t drive them after they said they were from Israel.

Speaking to National Post in December,

Uber said

it was dedicated to working with the Canadian Jewish community and that the company was “in listening mode.”

Regarding the incident in Cheadle, Uber did not immediately respond to National Post’s request for comment. It told the Jewish Chronicle that the incident described is “unacceptable” and the company’s specialist team is “urgently investigating this matter.”

In the letter, the camp said it was working closely with its security provider, Community Security Trust (CST), and police “to review what happened and to implement additional security measures and procedures” for the rest of the winter holiday camp. On its website, it says the camp ran from Dec. 21 to Dec. 28.

“The safety and wellbeing of our participants remains our highest priority, and we are treating this matter with the utmost seriousness,” the letter said.

Bnei Akiva did not immediately respond to National Post’s request for comment.

A CST spokesperson called the incident “disgraceful,” in a statement to National Post, saying that “a child who had been taken to hospital was thrown out of an Uber on their way back to camp in circumstances that strongly suggest antisemitism was the reason.”

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Toronto MP Chrystia Freeland has been appointed as an economic adviser to Ukraine by its president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has appointed former federal cabinet minister and Toronto Member of Parliament Chrystia Freeland as an adviser on Ukraine’s economic development.

In a message shared to X, Zelenskyy said Feeland “is highly skilled in these matters and has extensive experience in attracting investment and implementing economic transformations.”

“Right now, Ukraine needs to strengthen its internal resilience — both for the sake of Ukraine’s recovery if diplomacy delivers results as swiftly as possible, and to reinforce our defense if, because of delays by our partners, it takes longer to bring this war to an end.”

National Post has contacted Freeland’s office for comment on her appointment.

The former deputy prime minister under former prime minister Justin Trudeau had sought the Liberal leadership last year, but lost to now Prime Minister Mark Carney. He made her minister of transport and internal trade, a post

she resigned from in September

, at which time she also announced she would not seek re-election in the next mandated election, not required until 2029.

A source close to Freeland told National Post at the time that the outgoing minister was also not planning on finishing her term as the MP for University–Rosedale and would be meeting with the riding association to discuss resignation at her earliest opportunity.

Carney then gave her a parliamentary secretary role as Canada’s special representative for the reconstruction of Ukraine, a diplomatic position that does not come with an office or staff.

A spokesperson for the prime minister’s office told
National Post
her duties will include working with Ukrainian officials on a plan to rebuild its economy, and liaising with Canadian business, academic and labour leaders and the Ukrainian-Canadian community. She will report directly to Carney. 

In November, Freeland, 56, was announced as

the next Warden of Rhodes House and CEO of the Rhodes Trust

by the U.K.-based global educational charity’s trustees. Freeland herself is a Rhodes Scholar, having obtained a master’s degree in Slavonic Studies from the University of Oxford’s St. Antony’s College.

She will reportedly move to Oxford, England, to take on the new position starting this July.

Freeland is of Ukrainian descent on her mother’s side, speaks the native tongue and has long been, even before her time in politics, an advocate for the country and critical of Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin.

According to

Politico

, Freeland will work on a freelance basis in her advisory role with Ukraine.

Zelenskyy’s announcement comes as Carney himself will be in Paris to meet with world leaders on ending the Russia-Ukraine war.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Liberal MPs applaud MP Chris d'Entremont, who crossed the floor from the Conservatives to join the Liberals, Nov. 5, 2025. It might not be hard to spot other possible floor crossing candidates.

When MP Michael Ma

announced in early December that he was switching parties

, pundits’ views on the floor crossing were all over the place.

The only consistency expressed in the media reports was that nobody, including those within his Conservative caucus, had seen the Toronto-area rookie MP’s move to the governing Liberals coming.

But should it have been that much of a surprise?

Amid persistent rumours that at least one more Conservative MP may be close to joining Ma and

Nova Scotia MP Chris d’Entremont

as recent additions to the Liberal caucus, National Post has analyzed the most common characteristics of floor crossers. The conclusion? Perhaps Ma’s decision was more predictable than many thought. And it might even be possible to predict who could be next to defect.

It’s not that there’s anything about Ma as an individual that made him a potential candidate to cross the floor. It’s more that he checks most or all of the key boxes of a potential floor crosser: tending to have a lack of deep roots in his party of origin, no clear path to playing a key role in governing in the short to medium term, a margin of victory of less than five percentage points in the last election, and representing an area with an electoral history that suggests it could easily flip to the Liberal party next election.

With the Liberals winning a minority government in April just three seats shy of a majority and highly motivated to poach opposition MPs to fill the gap, Ma fit the profile of a potential target to a T.

Party switchers may surprise political watchers, but the possible candidates might not be so hard to spot.

Sources in the main federal parties say both the Liberals and Conservatives have made detailed analyses that show which MPs are the highest risk of defection. It’s also a given, sources say, that they’ve developed strategies to deter each possible floor crosser.

Based on the Post’s analysis of the four key characteristics listed above, there are several members of the Conservative caucus that would likely be on both parties’ lists of MPs who fit the key criteria of possible risks for floor crossing.

To be clear: This is not to imply that any of these MPs have considered crossing the floor, held discussions with either party about potentially switching parties, or that they have taken any steps to do so. They simply fit the profile of not having long-term party roots and had a narrow margin of victory in the last election in a riding that has a history of voting Liberal — meaning that, depending on which party brand is stronger, it is possible they fear losing next time if they were to run again as Conservative. Some prime examples in alphabetical order include:

Chak Au, Richmond Centre—Marpole (B.C.).

The rookie MP defeated his Liberal opponent by less than five per cent in a riding that was redistributed and renamed in 2022. The previous riding, Richmond Centre, was a Liberal riding in 2021, but was won by Conservatives in the previous two elections. Au ran provincially for the B.C. NDP in 2017 but lost. He has been rumoured to be a possible floor crosser, but when asked about the possibility, Au said, “There’s no reason for me to change anything.”

Kathy Borrelli, Windsor-Tecumseh-Lakeshore (Ont.).

Another rookie MP, Borrelli won her race by just four votes. Her riding had gone to the Liberals in the previous two elections, with the NDP placing second. Prior to that, the NDP had won the riding in the previous four elections. Recent anti-Liberal social media posts by her husband Paul, a former city councillor who is also involved in local Conservative politics, suggest a jump is less likely.

Sandra Cobena, Newmarket—Aurora (Ont.).

This rookie MP defeated her Liberal rival by less than four per cent in April. The riding was represented by local auto-parts heiress Belinda Stronach who, after winning as a Conservative by a few hundred votes in 2004, crossed less than a year later to the Liberals and was rewarded with a cabinet seat. Stronach won as a Liberal in 2005 and 2006 and the Grits also won this riding in 2015, 2019 and 2021. However, Cobena is an ardent fiscal conservative who criticized Carney on social media as recently as Dec. 30.

Connie Cody, Cambridge (Ont.).

This rookie MP defeated her Liberal opponent by 2.3 per cent. Liberals had won the three previous elections in the riding, where Cody was the losing Conservative candidate in 2021.

Mike Dawson, Miramichi—Grand Lake (N.B.).

The rookie MP won the riding by just one per cent of the vote. Liberals and Conservatives have each won two of the last four elections in this riding. Dawson was a provincial MLA, winning twice as a Progressive Conservative.

Amarjeet Gill, Brampton West (Ont.).

Gill lost two Ontario provincial elections running for the PCs before jumping to federal politics and was the only candidate to defeat a sitting cabinet minister (Kamal Khera) in 2025 when the NDP vote in Canada’s most populous riding collapsed and swung to the Conservatives. But Liberals won the previous two elections in this riding with more than double the Conservative vote. Gill criticized Prime Minister Mark Carney on social media as recently as Dec. 28.

Gabriel Hardy, Montmorency—Charlevoix (Que.).

The rookie MP won the riding earlier this year by less than one per cent of the vote, just ahead of the Bloc Québécois. He was previously a candidate in the 2021 Quebec City municipal elections, but lost. The riding and its predecessor ridings under different names is extremely swingy, having been represented by four different parties over the last 20 years.

Jonathan Rowe, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas (N.L.).

A rookie MP, Rowe won the last election by just 12 votes after a recount (initially, the Liberal candidate was thought to have won). This riding was created in 2013, and was won by the Liberals four times, up until the last election.

Matt Strauss, Kitchener South—Hespeler (Ont.).

A physician and rookie MP who is the first Conservative to represent the riding, which was created in 2015.  Strauss was very critical of Ma’s floor crossing as recently as Dec. 18, noting in a comment on X, “

Elections are predicated on politicians having some basic
integrity
.”

This list, again, does not suggest any of these people would consider crossing to another party. Or that others wouldn’t. d’Entremont, after all, had been a Conservative MP since 2019, served as deputy House speaker, and was formerly a Progressive Conservative MLA in Nova Scotia, but was said to have been irked that his party declined to back him to become Speaker of the House this year.

The point is simply this: history suggests that, despite whatever public justifications that floor crossers make at the time, there are characteristics based mostly around personal advancement and self-preservation that make them somewhat predictable.

Ma, for example, who attended the Conservatives’ Christmas party Dec. 10 — and the Liberals’ holiday soiree a night later, after defecting — should have been seen, according to the above criteria, as a prime candidate to cross.

Other Conservative MPs have some of the key characteristics to qualify for our list, but look particularly unlikely to cross.

 Markham-Unionville MP Michael Ma speaks briefly at the Liberal Party caucus Christmas party hours after crossing the floor from the Conservatives to the Liberals, in Ottawa, on Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025.

Expanding on the core four characteristics listed above, a more comprehensive list of traits to identify potential floor crossers, analysts say, could include elements from the following four clusters:

Electoral factors:

  • Won a very close race in the last election. A narrow constituency win can give an MP more reason to think he or she will have a better chance of holding on to a seat in the next election under a different banner. As with many of these factors, the latest opinion polls are usually paramount in motivating potential floor crossers. For example, Ma, a rookie MP, won Markham—Unionville in April for the first time by 3.6 percentage points after the Liberals had to replace their candidate mid-race.
  • Swing riding. Similar to the explanation above, an MP’s survival instinct may be more likely to intensify if their riding tends to go back and forth from one party to the next. The Liberals won Markham—Unionville in the previous election, in 2021, by almost six percentage points and Liberals have won more often there than Conservatives have.
  • Political culture. Sanjay Jeram, a political scientist at Simon Fraser University, said geography is very important in trying to predict possible floor crossers. Ontario is likely the best place to start looking in the current political landscape, he said, because there are more swing ridings, and crossers are less likely to face an angry, mobilized response than a party switcher in a Conservative heartland like Alberta. Five of the nine Conservative MPs on the Post’s list above are from Ontario.
  • Rookies. First-term MPs are seen as more likely to bolt their parties for one big reason: their pension. MPs are eligible to collect a full, lucrative pension at the age of 65 if they have served in Parliament for six years, which usually means two election wins. That makes rookie MPs highly motivated to do whatever is necessary to win a second election to hit that threshold.

Getting ahead:

  • Promotion: Analysts say floor crossers are almost always opportunists, not idealists trying to better serve their constituents. Sometimes they’re lured (openly or surreptitiously) with promotions, such as a seat at the cabinet table, to make the move. Those promotions sometimes don’t take effect until after the negative attention on the floor crossing has died down.
  • Opposition blues: Sometimes the opportunism is rooted in a desire to simply be on the team with the power. If opposition MPs who want to govern don’t see a likely path because of the party’s poll numbers or another factor, they are more likely to jump. One Conservative source said some of the rookie MPs in the Tory caucus were motivated to run for office because up until early 2025 it looked certain their party would form the next government; they might not feel like waiting on Opposition backbenches till the next election.

On a personal level:

  • Relationship with the leader: If an MP dislikes their party leader or feels disrespected or unappreciated, that could make it more likely the MP will think about switching sides. A poor relationship would also likely make it less likely that the MP would ever play a key role in a future government, so this can hurt their ambitions. Also, MPs are less enthusiastic about fighting political battles and putting in long hours for a leader they don’t get along with.
  • Relationships with the other side: The personal element can work the other way too. A strong relationship with somebody at or near the top of the acquiring party can also make a difference. This may be a rarity, but some reports had Liberal cabinet minister Tim Hodgson, from a neighbouring riding, playing a key role in recruiting Ma. And when David Emerson, previously a key member of the Liberal cabinet, crossed the floor to join the Conservative cabinet shortly after being re-elected in 2006 as a Liberal, the mutual respect between him and then prime minister Stephen Harper was seen as one of the factors.
  • Party roots: A rookie MP such as Ma, who doesn’t have deep roots in the party he ran for, is considered more likely to jump sides, as opposed to an MP who is a long-time loyalist and veteran of years of party battles.
  • Personal history: Conrad Winn, a political science professor at Carleton University in Ottawa, said an MP’s personal history is a critical element in working out if they might switch parties, particularly whether they have a history of betraying colleagues and others.

Policy options:

  • Points of view: Occasionally, floor crossers do cite a fundamental difference with the party or leader on a particular policy, or the party’s broader direction. In 2003, just days after the Progressive Conservatives and Canadian Alliance voted to merge, longtime MP Scott Brison crossed to the Liberals. Unlike many floor crossers, Brison had strong roots in the Conservative party and had once given up his seat so that Progressive Conservative leader Joe Clark could enter the House of Commons. But the Nova Scotia MP was seen as a “red” or moderate Tory in a party that had been rebuilt and whose centre of gravity had shifted to the right. He also said that as a gay man, he left the party in part because of the number of Tory caucus members who were against same-sex marriage.

No matter the motivations,

does an MP or two really make that much difference in the math of who runs the country

and what they do with that power?

Winn said it could help the Liberals in some ways if they get a majority but it’s not such a big deal. “I think the Carney people have bigger challenges than increasing the number of people in their caucus,” he said.

Beyond the preferred optics of holding a majority, however, the country’s two major political parties seem to think it’s important.

Lori Turnbull, a political scientist at Dalhousie University in Halifax, said the addition of a single MP can be important in situations such as the current Parliament, where the Liberals are just short of a majority, because it would mean, among other things, that legislation could be passed more easily. “I don’t think it’s an uneventful thing,” she said.

Ottawa watchers point to the fact that majority governments can control parliamentary committees, where opposition parties can otherwise slow the progress of legislation. Eleven of the Liberal government’s 20 legislative items are currently at second reading or committee consideration, required steps before becoming law.

The math isn’t overly complicated. The Liberals now have 171 seats in the 343-seat House, with the opposition parties combining for 172 (Conservatives: 142, Bloc Québécois: 22, New Democrats: 7, Greens: 1).

But with a bare majority of just one, every single MP has unusual power, with the ability to block legislation if they vote against their party. It also places extra pressure on every single member of the government’s caucus to vote when needed (which is easier these days, with MPs able to do so virtually).

While some parliamentary democracies, such as India, Bangladesh and South Africa, have banned or restricted floor crossing, it’s not uncommon in Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom. That doesn’t mean of course that floor crossers won’t pay a political price from voters.

But should it be allowed?

 Former Conservative MP Belinda Stronach and Prime Minister Paul Martin hold a news conference to announce her defection to the Liberal Party in May 2005.

The main arguments in favour of allowing floor crossing is that it allows elected officials to follow their conscience or respond freely to emerging issues. The flip side is that voters may have supported a candidate in large part because of the party and the platform they said they believed in. Switching parties can also invite political bribes, such as promotions, not to mention opportunism.

Analysts and political veterans agree that floor crossers are almost always motivated mostly by personal gain, usually promotion or political survival, despite their usual claims to doing it to better serve constituents or the country under their new banner.

But it doesn’t always work out well for them in the longer term. Emerson faced heavy flak in his riding and retired from politics after one term with the Tories. Leona Alleslev, a former Air Force officer, joined the Conservatives from the governing Liberals in 2018 in a rare case of switching over policy and going from government to Opposition. She lost her seat a year later.

Stronach’s shocking decision to cross at the last minute to save a Liberal minority government from falling on a confidence vote, renewed calls for laws to prevent changing parties. The NDP requested an investigation of Stronach’s actions and her promotion into cabinet. A month after she joined the Liberals, a Conservative MP tabled a private member’s bill that would have necessitated that a byelection be held within 35 days of an MP switching parties, though it died on the order paper after second reading because of the 2006 election. Similar bills have also been tried, but haven’t gone anywhere.

Perhaps that’s because floor crossing is a longtime tradition in Westminster parliaments. In 1917, more than a century ago, when then Liberal leader Wilfrid Laurier refused to support overseas conscription during the First World War, a number of his MPs left his government to join Robert Borden’s Union government.

Legendary British Prime Minister Winston Churchill was perhaps the ultimate floor crosser. In 1904, he bolted the U.K. Conservatives for the Liberals over free trade and social policy. Twenty years later, he crossed back to the Conservatives as the Liberal party was in free fall.

“Anyone can rat,” the future prime minister said. “But it takes a certain ingenuity to re-rat.”

National Post

stuck@postmedia.com

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Speaking to Congress, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer highlighted three main issues when it comes to Canada: supply management, the Online News Act and the Online Streaming Act.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In 2020, then U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer

described the Canada-U.S.-Mexico free-trade agreement (CUSMA)

as the “new gold standard against which all future trade agreements will be judged,” after the deal he helped put together was passed in the Senate. Six years later, in 2026, CUSMA will be facing scrutiny on its real-world results as the three countries begin renegotiating its terms.

Today, the agreement facilitates roughly US$2 trillion in trade of goods and services across North America annually, and it protects the vast majority (85 per cent plus) of Canadian-U.S. trade from President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

Yet, Trump, whose first administration oversaw the creation of CUSMA, has toyed publicly with the idea of withdrawing from it, saying he will “either let it expire or we’ll maybe work out another deal with Mexico and Canada.” The administration has talked about possibly reaching separate bilateral deals with the two countries.

Most trade experts believe CUSMA will probably survive this year’s talks, but there are doubts.

“I expect it to live on,” said Scott Lincicome, vice president at the Cato Institute’s Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies in Washington, D.C. “But I wouldn’t be shocked if it imploded.”

Current U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Jamieson Greer told Congress last month, following a public consultation period and public hearings on CUSMA with stakeholders, what he thought the review should accomplish.

While Washington would like to see movement on everything from sales of U.S. alcohol to defence procurement when it comes to Canada, Greer highlighted three main issues: Canada’s restricted supply management scheme in dairy, the Online News Act that requires tech giants to pay news organizations for aggregating their content, and the Online Streaming Act, which requires U.S. entertainment companies to promote Canadian programming.

So what is Washington likely to demand, and how far is Ottawa willing to budge?

Milking it

Canada’s supply-management system for dairy controls production and prices and restricts imports to benefit domestic farmers. This means less access for U.S. dairy producers and higher prices for Canadian consumers. The Trump administration wants Canada’s dairy sector opened up to allow more access for U.S. farmers and an end to high tariffs and import quotas.

A

poll in March by the Angus Reid Institute

showed that nearly a third (29 per cent) of Canadians wanted to scrap supply management and another 26 per cent wanted to reduce or suspend it to ease inflationary pressures, while 23 per cent preferred to keep it. The rest were unsure.

But the issue is politically polarizing. Thirty-eight per cent of Bloc Québécois voters, for example, said Canada should keep supply management, while Conservative voters were more skeptical, with only 15 per cent wanting to retain the system.

Critics say the politics of supply management is hostage to

a few powerful electoral ridings, particularly in Quebec

. But Fen Hampson, a politics professor at Carleton University, said, “It’s not just Quebec; it’s also Southwestern Ontario. Whether you’re Liberal or Conservative, given the way our political system is structured, you need these rural ridings if you’re going to form a government.”

“That’s one of the reasons why you see all parties support Canadian farmers,” he added, pointing to historic trends. In June, all parties supported the passage of the Bloc’s Bill C-202 that declares that supply management cannot be negotiated in free-trade talks.

He also pointed out that Washington is not telling Ottawa to get rid of supply management, but that it wants the Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) system, which favours Canadian processors, to be reformed. Canada has allocated much of the TRQ to Canadian importers, who are free to not use it, rather than giving it to American exporters, which

U.S. politicians have said violates the spirit of the tariff-free quotas

.

“There’s no question that we’ve been gaming the system,” Hampson added.

Changing the TRQ system wouldn’t mean changing Bill C-202, he explained. An administrative fix could suffice by granting genuine access to the U.S. under the margins negotiated in 2020 that give U.S. exporters tariff-free access for 3.6 per cent of Canada’s $15-billion dairy market. That’s within the federal government’s power to adjust, Hampson said, and while there will be some squawking from Quebec’s farmers, the changes can be phased in over time to mitigate their concerns.

Lincicome also said Canada is “deservedly vulnerable” on this issue because the out-of-quota tariffs are “very, very high” — taxes on imports beyond the quota range from 200 to over 300 per cent — and are “pretty obviously discriminatory.”

He, like Hampson, said Canada could allow larger in‑quota allocations, rather than dismantling the system.

Christopher Sands, director of the Hopkins Center for Canadian Studies in Washington, said dairy is seen as one of the toughest CUSMA issues to be debated, but that there is no time like the present for reform.

“If I were Ottawa,” Sands said, “I would take this as the opportunity to reform the sector … and move towards a more subsidy-oriented system.”

While it won’t be politically popular, he noted that “if Canada’s ever going to change the system, having the pressure of the Trump administration driving that change might lead to a way of making a reform that would be a reasonable compromise that would be beneficial to Canadians.”

It would also lead to less waste and lower prices, he noted.

Not all Washington voices agree that this is a make‑or‑break issue; some see Trump’s dairy demand as a red herring.

“I think that there’s misplaced importance of this on the American side,” said Andrew Hale, senior policy fellow at the Washington-based Heritage Foundation.

Hale noted that CUSMA‑specific U.S. quotas have not been fully used, so the over‑quota protection has not actually constrained U.S. exports. Besides, he said, “more dairy is produced in the state of Wisconsin than there is in all of Canada,” suggesting the issue is overstated.

“Are we really gonna upend (CUSMA) over milk and cheese?” he said.

Digital taxation

For Hale, the bigger risks to CUSMA are Canada’s digital and media regulations, which he fears could be weaponized by the White House.

To that end, both

the Online News Act (Bill C-18)

and the

Online Streaming Act (Bill C-11)

are in Trump’s crosshairs.

The first aims to force major online platforms to pay Canadian publishers for linking or sharing their content in a bid to support domestic journalism. Google has forged an agreement with the government to pay up, but Meta has instead opted out and blocked news content.

C-11 also imposes requirements on digital platforms, requiring them to help fund Canadian content promotion by paying five per cent of their Canadian revenue into a fund, and forcing them to promote Canadian productions.

Together, these laws mark Ottawa’s attempt to preserve a distinctly cultural news system.

Hale is sympathetic to Ottawa’s efforts, noting that “most Canadians live within 100 miles of the U.S. border” and can easily be “very Americanized” by U.S. media.

Measures that block U.S. news or content, however, are seen as censorship by the White House, which is notably fighting similar efforts in the EU and Britain.

“I would think that the Canadians might want to pull back on this,” said Hale, “given the reaction the U.S. has had to  similar policies and laws coming out of the European Union and the United Kingdom.”

Sands also understands Canada’s point of view and noted that many countries are trying to figure out how to regulate the media in the AI age. But when the Justin Trudeau government

split from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) consensus

approach to deal with taxing internet transactions and large tech firms, he said, “it muddied the waters.”

“It led Canada to be kind of out on its own and therefore vulnerable,” Sands added.

To address the USTR’s concerns, Sands said Canada could pause or slow implementation of the rules, to get them “off the USMCA table,” or propose an approach that more aligns with American preferences.

Hampson sees both digital acts as discriminatory, but instead of repealing them or offering exemptions, he said Canada should offer tax credits or crediting investments in Canadian productions instead.

He also thinks Ottawa should work more closely with its allies to align its policies.

“If you take them on independently, you’re going to get clobbered, and you’re going to be subject to exactly the kind of pressure that we’re seeing right now,” Hampson said.

“We’ve got to change our game. This is a classic collective-action problem, and if we join forces with the Europeans and do it together, it’s much harder for Trump to play the divide-and-conquer game with us.”

The price of survival

All these policies are similar in their protectionism, according to Nathaniel Baum-Snow, an economics professor at the University of Toronto.

“There are some parallels (in digital policies) with supply management and dairy … These acts are making it more costly and more difficult for Canadian consumers to access mostly American digital content,” he said, noting that most consumers would probably appreciate being able to access the products and services for less.

But Lincicome notes the irony in the Trump administration targeting Canadian protectionist policies and claiming to be hard done by them, while maintaining a level of U.S. protectionism the world hasn’t seen in decades.

“They like to find things they don’t like, and then blow those things completely out of proportion … and then, in typical Trumpian fashion, kind of accept a ‘compromise’ that is still somewhat of a win for them, while at the same time maintaining massive new U.S. protectionism,” said Lincicome.

Even with the big CUSMA exemption to the U.S. tariff regime, he noted, “the fact is that tariffs on Canadian imports are higher than they’ve been in 30-plus years.”

“The U.S. will attempt to deflect from that by pointing out things like supply management and intellectual property … while trying to defend its radically protectionist tariff regime.”

This hypocritical approach is why the Cato Institute vice president is concerned about next summer’s renegotiation. While the other trade analysts tend to believe that compromises will be made with CUSMA left largely remaining intact, Lincicome said there will be a high cost.

“The president loves tariffs and (his administration is) adamant about keeping them, so the best thing Canada can do is try to pick up some wins here and there and just live to fight another day,” said Lincicome.

“To the extent the Canadian government wants (CUSMA) to live on, (Prime Minister Mark) Carney is going to have to be willing to accept some pretty poisonous terms,” he said.

But after last summer,

when Carney abruptly dumped Canada’s plan for a Digital Services Tax

, seemingly on Trump’s demand, and got nothing in return, Hampson cautioned: “Don’t give concessions until you have to.”

Trade analysts still think a positive outcome from the CUSMA renegotiation is more likely than its demise, even if tough compromises are involved. And while the concessions could be ones Ottawa would have found intolerable a decade ago, Lincicome noted they will likely still be “better than what anybody else in the world is getting” from Trump.

National Post

tmoran@postmedia.com

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.


A clearing on a mountain near Caracas, Venezuela that a group of private intelligence analysts says shows three rows of missile

A stunning U.S. raid to capture Venezuela’s president came after a group of amateur intelligence analysts argued that satellite images reveal a Venezuelan launch site that could send ballistic missiles as far north as Washington, D.C.

There was no indication that the American attack had anything to do with the subject of the group’s claims, which the U.S. military dismissed earlier as “speculative” and one top expert rated as plausible but unproven by the evidence.

Days before the American strike on Venezuela, the private sleuths suggested military developments in Venezuela, with Russian, Chinese and Iranian troops stationed nearby, may have been the real reason for U.S. actions around the South American country – not the controversial targeting of alleged drug-smuggling vessels asserted by U.S. forces.

“I don’t think it has a damn thing to do with the drug boats,” said Lee Wheelbarger, a former U.S. Army technology developer who leads the private military analysists. “I think the drug boats are completely irrelevant. That’s an excuse.”

Meanwhile, separate images show a Cuban airfield with a collection of Russian “Kitchen” missiles designed to destroy warships, claims the same group.

Their findings, including a video compilation of satellite pictures, were presented recently at a meeting of the Toronto-based Mackenzie Institute, a defence-oriented think tank.

A leading expert in the region said the group’s interpretation of the imagery “could be true” given Venezuela’s well-documented military ties with some of the States’ top geopolitical adversaries. But Evan Ellis, a research professor at the U.S. Army War College, said it falls short of proof of a dangerous new threat to the U.S.

“The things they said were plausible and they were consistent with more than 15 years of engagement with China, Russia and Iran,” said Ellis. “(But) not everything that they claimed by showing a satellite image was necessarily proven by that image … It’s not nothing but I don’t regard it as a significant ‘Ah-hah.’”

Even if the Venezuelans do have missile launchers buried in the mountain, the sites could be relatively easily destroyed by bombing the holes closed, said the academic.

Steven McLoud, a spokesman for the U.S. Southern Command, which covers South America, said earlier this week the organization does not comment on “speculative reporting or unverified premises.”

“Our mission remains focused on supporting regional stability, combating illicit activities, and working with our partners to address shared security challenges,” he said.

A Russian lawmaker did recently suggest that Russia may supply its new Oreshnik ballistic missiles to Venezuela, while internal U.S. documents indicate that Nicholas Maduro, the country’s president, requested missiles and other equipment from Russia, China and Iran.

There’s no question Venezuela has close military relations with those countries, as well as Lebanon’s Hezbollah, and that it foments political unrest among its neighbours, said Ellis. A recent Chinese military exercise even involved training to fight in the Caribbean, a new paper of his recounts.

“Venezuela now for literally more than two decades has been one of the biggest strategic challenges to the U.S.,” the professor said. “To me the drugs the U.S. is currently going after are only the tip of the iceberg of a broader, long-time, multi-dimensional threat.”

Regardless of the accuracy of Wheelbarger’s analysis, the images he has collected and his conclusions about them help add an intriguing new dimension to the sudden clash between the U.S. and Venezuela.

President Donald Trump announced early Saturday that a strike on Venezuela had culminated with the capture and extraction of Nicholas Maduro, the country’s president, and his wife.

Before that, an armada of powerful American warships – including an aircraft carrier – patrolled the region as the U.S. destroyed at least 30 boats it insisted were carrying drugs to the States, and killed more than 100 people. The Trump administration said it was protecting Americans from lethal narcotics. Critics have condemned the actions as essentially extra-judicial executions of alleged criminals who would normally face arrest and trial. There has been particular concern about a case where survivors on a destroyed vessel were killed by a second missile attack.

Wheelbarger has been analysing military developments around the world for years, with a particular interest in Russian movements since Moscow’s first incursions into Ukraine in 2014. He says he has worked with Ukrainian forces, an assertion corroborated by a now-retired U.S. Air Force officer.

He presents some of the findings on his KLW online news channels, and says military and intelligence officials from the U.S., Canada and Europe are regular audience members.

For several years he was a “senior technologist” with the U.S. Army, a contractor developing night-vision equipment, communications gear and a system that enabled medics on the battlefield to transmit images back to military hospitals and then receive video instructions on a heads-up display. He was featured in a 1999 edition of the History Channel’s Modern Marvels program, which claimed “Wheelbarger’s electronic creations have extended the eyes and ears of America’s intelligence network.”

He also holds what many would consider fringe political beliefs – including the disproven theory that Barack Obama was not born in the U.S., and that American mainstream media is literally controlled by the Democratic Party. But one former American officer who worked with Wheelbarger in 2011 on chemical-biological-nuclear issues – then stayed in touch with him on a more personal level – suggested his open-source intelligence gathering should not be dismissed too readily.

“There were several times when I was confounded by what he presented to me, and then it blew my mind when I validated it was accurate: ‘Holy crap, OK, cool,’ ” said Michael Torres, a now-retired U.S. Air Force colonel. “One thing I’ve learned is he’s not going to put his word on the line unless he feels he can back it up. He will substantiate everything he has.”

Torres said he has seen pictures of Wheelbarger working with Ukrainian forces at the front.

Wheelbarger said he collects publicly available images from 28 satellites operated by several commercial-satellite companies, including Maxar Technologies, Planet Labs, Airbus Defence and Space, BlackSky, Capella Space, ICEYE, SkyFi, European Space Imaging, Apollo Mapping, Satellite Imaging Corp. and L3Harris Geospatial. He and colleagues also access images from ground cameras – sometimes by hacking into them. He employs another video method he declined to discuss on the record, gleans information from human sources around the world and follows aircraft movements with flight-tracking sites.

To help identify what can look to the untrained eye like undefined blobs on the ground, he’s obtained three-dimensional renderings of various military hardware. Those renderings are then placed over the objects revealed by satellite images to see if they match in shape and size, helping identify the equipment. Other objects – like fighter jets and tanks – are clearly recognizable.

In the video presented in Toronto, he points to images around Caracas that include a Russian base with a string of 94 T-72 and T-74 tanks. But most interesting is a mountain which he says has been all but hollowed out to create a subterranean military complex. An opening cut into the hill can be seen clearly in one image, surrounded by rebar that suggests work to create a massive concrete façade. Nearby, valleys have been filed with “millions of cubic yards” of excavated dirt, says Wheelbarger.

On the side of the mountain is an area cleared of vegetation with what appear to be three parallel, straight lines of holes. Wheelbarger and colleagues insist those are tubes for firing intermediate-range ballistic missiles, based on matching underground launch sites in Iran.

Intermediate-range missiles could reach as far north as the U.S. capital, said Jeff Nyquist, a writer and blogger on geopolitics and Wheelbarger collaborator.

The image of the Cuban airfield shows several cigar-shaped objects at the end of a runway, what the analysts say are Kitchen missiles. That’s the Western term for Russian weapons that travel at almost five times the speed of sound and can destroy naval ships. They’re fired from aircraft – usually the Tu-22 bomber. Those are not seen in the images but Wheelbarger said the jets could be disassembled and smuggled into Cuba on larger cargo planes.

Ellis of the Army War College said Venezuela’s military ties with U.S. rivals are longstanding and well known. Russia sold the country $12 billion in defence goods beginning in 2006, including a fleet of Sukhoi-30 fighter jets, helicopters, numerous S-300 anti-aircraft missiles and armoured vehicles. Moscow’s warships have made appearances, including last year when a Canadian frigate and surveillance helicopter joined two American ships to shadow a Russian fleet that visited Cuba and Venezuela.

China has supplied at least 27 of its K-8 fighters, Ellis said, as well as radars and other equipment. Iran sold Venezuela several of its fast-attack boats, trained Venezuelan special forces members and has collaborated on making drones.

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.


Moshe Weitzman, left, one of the first EMIs to respond after the October 7 attacks, is filmed by Igal Hecht, who released his October 7 documentary
The Killing Roads online for free in hopes of cutting through misinformation and denialism over the 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel.

TEL AVIV – Former IDF spokesman Alon Penzel is embarking on a Canada-wide speaking tour in coming weeks. He exhales deeply when asked why: he felt he had to, given the level of Oct. 7 denialism, minimalization and ignorance two years into the Gaza war.

“To speak up for those whose voice was taken,” he says; those who were murdered “but also to those tortured, raped, wounded, held hostage, abused; to the victims’ families and the massacre’s survivors, who want their story and the truth out, but some of them are still too traumatized, mentally unprepared, to share these stories themselves.”

When Penzel spoke June 2 last year at Radboud University in Nijmegen, Netherlands, protesters broke windows, threatened him with bodily harm, and denied Hamas’s atrocities, screaming “lies,” and insisting there were no women raped. Harry Pettit, assistant professor of geography at Radboud, posted on social media that Penzel was a “terrorist,” said Israel was committing a “holocaust,” and that the school “should refuse to normalize platforming Zionists.”

Penzel authored “Testimonies Without Boundaries, Israel: October 7th 2023,” released just five months after the Hamas-led massacre, containing 50 first-hand accounts of the horrors.

The effort to record the brutality was a fight against

a tide of revision and propaganda

 that continues to muddy the historical record, and erode global understanding, he explained over coffee in Tel Aviv.

“I documented the atrocities and wrote the book because already on October 7, I immediately foresaw the worldwide denial that we would face. I realized the urgency for documentation. I knew something must be created so that what happened would be commemorated for generations to come — and so I did,” he told the Post.

StandWithUs

will be organizing the speaking tour, according to Penzel, that will combine campuses and community events.

The world seems oddly inclined to accept the Hamas narrative, which delegitimizes the Gaza war and has successfully delegitimized Israel as a result, according to interviews with several writers, filmmakers, politicians and activists.

Penzel’s was the first compilation of its kind after the attacks, has since been translated into nine languages, and was used as research material for the Dinah Project – the U.K.-backed comprehensive study on October 7 sex crimes.

In the past 18 months, Penzel has spoken to tens of thousands of people in 16 countries, addressing the U.K. House of Lords and university campuses as well as journalists, diplomats and others.

“The reason I decided to write the book in the most unfiltered, graphic and unapologetic way possible, without censoring any of the atrocities’ details, as challenging as it is for the reader, was to shock the international community. To wake them up. To make them comprehend the extent of the cruelty, the evil, the inhumanity,” said Penzel, who worked for the IDF’s Unit for Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), which coordinates civilian and humanitarian affairs in the Palestinian territories.

His pain is compounded by the shock of watching much of the world taking at face value what comes from Hamas-supportive information sources, leaving Jews and Israelis outraged and heartbroken.

“A lot of what Hamas was doing was recorded. So it’s not like you can deny it, even though a lot of people around the world are trying to deny that this even happened,” said member of Knesset Shelly Tal Meron, of the centrist Yesh Atid party, reflecting the collective disbelief that, despite a flood of evidence, denialism and disinformation has gained traction.

“What we’re seeing around the world, all the demonstrations, all this chanting of ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,’ I think that people basically don’t understand that means no state of Israel,” she said. “They have no idea which river and which sea. They don’t even know where we are on the globe. So a lot of people are watching TikToks of 30 seconds, and they’re sure that they’re experts on Israeli history.”

Minimization, willful ignorance and apathy on organizational levels have only emboldened the denialism, she said. As acting chair of the Knesset Committee on the Status of Women and Gender Equality, she wrote more than 100 letters to human rights organizations and women’s organizations in the weeks following Oct. 7, asking them to condemn sexual assault as a weapon of war.

“It’s not the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. It’s not right or left. It’s simply the moral thing to do, to say that this is wrong. Nobody responded. Not one,” she told the Post, in a meeting facilitated by the Jerusalem Press Club, in Tel Aviv.

Yet on a political level, she’s found some success. Alongside France’s minister for gender equality, they’ve built a coalition of other leaders around the world, to acknowledge sexual assault as a weapon of war — “not only Israel, Yazidi women, Ukrainian women, Druze women that just suffered this in Syria and many other conflict areas.”

Certain countries that ordinarily would not have normalization with Israel agreed to join the committee (she would not specify which).

 Documentary filmmaker Igal Hecht.

Igal Hecht, who released his Oct. 7 documentary film The Killing Roads online for free in hopes of cutting through misinformation, said “the further we get from the 7th, the easier it is for people to change the narrative. If you can deny what happened on the 7th, then it’s much easier to demonize and blood libel Israel.”

In Canada, many try to “blur the lines,” the Toronto filmmaker said, with “our state-funded broadcaster and mainstream media disregarding the 7th, glossing over it, to look at it like a footnote.”

That helps remove any context to Israel’s response, said Hecht, an Israeli-Canadian documentary filmmaker.

Hecht also said that colleagues in his industry “outright minimized the rape of Israeli women” and some even denied the rapes occurred at all. Other colleagues told him that there’s no proof Hamas was responsible for Oct. 7, he said.

***

Filmmaker Chris Atkins’ plane had lifted off from Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport on Oct. 7, 2023, moments after Hamas attacked Israel, and he recalls being “horrified” as the news beamed into his phone.

He felt the urge to act. Simultaneously his friend, Egyptian-born human rights advocate Majed el-Shafie, had the same urge, hiring a cameraman in Israel to begin documenting the atrocities.

El-Shafie reached Atkins – both are Christian – to help sew together the footage, when the two agreed they had to continue the work together. It was the beginning of the documentary Dying To Live, screened for the first time in Toronto, in November 2024.

The film, which incorporates October 7 archival footage, takes viewers through areas devastated by violence, including kibbutzim and the site of the Nova music festival, as El Shafie conducts interviews with survivors, victims’ families and those affected by the attacks.

In one segment, El-Shafie had a frank discussion with a Palestinian man, who “justified the attacks, diminished the attacks,” he told the Post.

For Atkins, the denialism hit home.

“I actually have family members who either don’t believe October 7 happened, or that it was an inside job planned by Netanyahu,” he told the Post. “I’ve met others with similar and worse beliefs. It’s put a strain on my family, and I’ve lost friends over this. It’s also interesting that these people refuse to watch our film.”

Adam Hummel, meanwhile, published “Essays from Afar: 700 Days of the Diaspora Experience Since October 7,” a book of collected writings from his “Catch” Substack, putting together two years of weekly commentary.

Much like Penzel, Hecht, Tal Meron and Atkins, he’s concerned that few sources get the war story straight, and as such, the untruths contribute to denialism.

The report from the UN Commission of Inquiry in September alleging there was “genocide” perpetrated by Israel, for example, “is an unfortunately misguided piece of fiction,” said the Toronto lawyer.

“I often say that if Israel wanted to kill all the Palestinians, this war would have been over on Oct. 8, 2023. They do not, however; which is why 900-plus Israeli soldiers have been killed over the last two years, because Israel has gone above and beyond to protect the lives of innocent Palestinians in Gaza, who have been put in the line of fire because of their own leaders.”

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our newsletters here.


People hold Canadian flags at an citizenship ceremony in Toronto.

An immigrant pharmacist whose Canadian citizenship was revoked in November 2024, a decade after officials first suspected she hadn’t met the requirements, has seen that decision set aside and revocation proceedings permanently stayed by a Federal Court judge who criticized officials for waiting so long to act on the allegations of “false representation, fraud, or knowingly concealing material circumstances.”

Nermine Magdi Ibrahim, who became a Canadian permanent resident in July 2003 and subsequently a Canadian citizen in October 2007, applied to the Federal Court for a judicial review of the revocation proceedings.

Immigration officials were not “concerned about the impact of the delay on (Ibrahim’s) ability to defend her case, nor (her) well-established ties to Canada as reasons for granting her special relief,” Justice Avvy Yao-Yao Go wrote in a recent decision out of Toronto.

“In short, the unfairness with which the applicant was treated, coupled with the unfairness in the proceedings caused by the delay, calls into question the integrity of the justice system if the court allows the proceedings to continue under these circumstances.”

In her citizenship application, Ibrahim “declared 166 days of absences from Canada during her relevant residency period from July 9, 2003 to February 18, 2007,” Go said.

Ibrahim’s “citizenship was initially flagged for investigation in 2014, and the investigation was completed in that same year,” said the judge.

The Canada Border Services Agency had “received a tip about companies operating citizenship fraud schemes with (Ibrahim’s) husband’s name appearing as one of the clients who used these services to simulate his residence in Canada,” said the Federal Court decision, dated Dec. 19.

The CBSA referred this information to the immigration minister at the time for further investigation.

“During its investigation, the case management branch … found (Ibrahim’s) LinkedIn profile which suggested that she was continuously employed as a Medical Delegate with Nestlé Infant Nutrition in Kuwait from June 2002 to June 2009,” Go said.

“On July 23, 2014, an analyst of the Immigration Section at the Canadian Embassy in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates verified her continuous employment with the employer.”

It wasn’t until 2023 when Canadian immigration authorities advised Ibrahim of the potential revocation proceedings and offered her an opportunity to respond.

They argued “that the delay was not unreasonable considering this case was part of a large-scale investigation involving 300 other individuals,” said the decision.

The judge wasn’t buying it: “Based on the record before me, I find that the minister has not provided any justification for the delay,” Go said.

To become a Canadian citizen, permanent residents need to have lived in have lived in Canada for three out of the last five years.

In September 2023, immigration officials wrote to Ibrahim indicating she “may have misrepresented herself during the citizenship process and that (she) may have failed to disclose some of her absences from Canada during the four years immediately before the date of her citizenship application,” said the decision.

She was given 30 days “to make written submissions regarding the length of time she spent in Canada before acquiring citizenship and her ties to Canada since becoming a citizen,” it said.

Ibrahim responded on Sept. 21, 2023, with a one-page letter requesting “more details about alleged absences and stated that she has integrated well into Canadian society as shown in her successfully becoming licensed as a pharmacist, being a partner of two pharmacies, and owning property,” said the decision

“She also argued that the revocation would result in severe hardship and added that all her points can be substantiated with supporting documents upon request.”

On May 9, 2024, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) notified Ibrahim it was revoking her citizenship.

“The notification letter cited (Ibrahim’s) LinkedIn profile listing her employment with Nestlé in Kuwait, the Canadian Embassy’s verification with Nestlé’s Human Resource Department of (her) continuous employment from July 2002 to June 2009, and (her) failure to disclose this information as basis for alleging that (she) may have obtained citizenship by misrepresentation.”

Ibrahim responded on July 4, 2024, indicating “that her LinkedIn Profile is not of a factual nature and does not include any leaves taken.”

She “also explained that she was pregnant with her daughter during the relevant period, and that Nestlé had a relatively flexible maternity leave policy that enabled her to stay in Canada for the duration of her pregnancy and throughout the breastfeeding period until her daughter was two years old.”

Ibrahim “noted it has been over 15 years since the relevant period has elapsed,” said the decision.

She “emphasized that it was not only a matter of intellectual recollection, but of documentary recollection.”

Ibrahim “noted the steps she undertook to obtain information from various institutions including the pharmaceutical company she worked for, her bank and her phone company, but was unable to produce records longer than seven years prior due to these institutions’ policy on record retention,” said the decision.

Ibrahim “submitted supporting documentation, including her daughter’s Ontario birth certificate, her Ontario and Manitoba pharmacist licences, document of prior property ownership, an Ontario Profile Report for the two pharmacies she is a partner in, copies of her driver’s licences containing a residential address in Ontario, as well as her and her daughter’s hospital cards containing the same address.”

Ibrahim also “provided copies of Nestlé’s policies regarding maternity and parental support from 2012 to 2019.”

She argued “that the evidentiary burden in revocation cases rests with the minister who asserts that there was a misrepresentation.”

But in Ibrahim’s case, immigration officials “reversed the onus by requiring (her) to prove that she was a resident in Canada when she has no such obligation.”

By reversing the onus, Ibrahim argued, immigration officials did not make the decision to revoke her Canadian citizenship “based on any evidence of misrepresentation.”

Instead, Canadian immigration officials “made their findings based on the absence of evidence to infer that (Ibrahim) was not residing in Canada during the relevant period.”

Immigration officials didn’t dispute that.

But, they said, “the basis for the (revocation decision) is readily apparent: (Ibrahim) produced minimal evidence to support her residence in Canada.”

Ibrahim was asked for “basic evidence to address (her) alleged day-to-day activities and connections in Canada,” immigration officials said, noting it “was not unreasonable” to expect her to produce “at least some evidence about activities” in Canada.

Officials here wanted proof “such as, involvement in their community, school and medical records, evidence of participation in local activities, sports teams, religious organizations or community events, as examples.”

The judge rejected those submissions and agreed with Ibrahim’s arguments.

Go found immigration officials “erroneously required” Ibrahim “to prove that she was in Canada during the relevant residence period, instead of examining whether the minister has, on a balance of probabilities, established that (she) misrepresented her residency,” said the decision.

The judge found the long delay in dealing with Ibrahim’s case constituted “an abuse of process.”

Ibrahim “demonstrates that she suffered significant prejudice directly stemming from such delay as she is unable to obtain the necessary document to substantiate her residency in Canada during the relevant period, thus undermining her ability to present her case,” Go said.

The judge also found “the integrity of the justice system has been prejudiced as a result,” said the decision.

“The initial reason why (Ibrahim) was flagged for citizenship investigation was due to CBSA’s concern of residency misrepresentation regarding her husband, who has since passed away. There is no evidence that (Ibrahim) herself was implicated in any citizenship fraud scheme. Nevertheless, the IRCC decided to proceed with the misrepresentation allegations based solely on the applicant’s LinkedIn Profile and the CBSA verification that was never shared with” Ibrahim.

“While (Ibrahim) was given some opportunities to respond to the allegations, the IRCC failed to provide her with adequate disclosure, and denied her of an oral hearing where she could counter (an immigration officer’s) findings of credibility,” said the judge.

Sending Ibrahim’s case back to another decision maker for redetermination “would add further delay, and would add to the difficulties that (Ibrahim) may encounter in gathering further evidence,” Go said.

The judge found “the interests favouring a stay of proceedings outweigh the public interest in proceeding with (Ibrahim’s) citizenship revocation process.”

She granted Ibrahim’s application for judicial review.

“The decision to revoke (Ibrahim’s) citizenship is set aside,” Go said.

“The citizenship revocations proceedings relating to the applicant are permanently stayed.”

Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.