المنتدى الدولى للصحافة والإعلام

The International Forum for Journalism and Media expresses its deep concern regarding the position of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on the U.S.–Israeli strikes that targeted Iran on February 28, 2026.

These developments represent a dangerous escalation that risks deepening instability in the region and pushing it toward a broader confrontation with potentially catastrophic consequences. Resorting to military action at a time when diplomatic pathways had not been exhausted — including ongoing mediation efforts through Oman — reflects a choice that expands the cycle of escalation rather than containing it.

We affirm clearly that the Iranian regime is authoritarian and has practiced repression against its people while contributing to the suffering of the Syrian people during years of conflict. However, acknowledging these realities does not grant any party a mandate to bypass the rules of international law. The legitimacy of military action is not based on political characterizations but on strict adherence to international legal frameworks. Choosing force while diplomatic processes remain active undermines prospects for peaceful resolution.

Describing these strikes as “defensive and preventive measures” does not withstand scrutiny under established international legal standards. An attack on a sovereign state outside the scope of lawful self-defense as defined by the United Nations Charter remains legally questionable. These developments raise serious concerns about compliance with Articles 2(3), 2(4), 33, and 51 of the Charter, which oblige states to resolve disputes peacefully and prohibit the use of force except under narrowly defined conditions.

In light of this escalation, a firm stance calling for de-escalation and a return to diplomacy would have been expected. Instead, the Prime Minister’s support for these strikes provided political cover at a time when the international legal order is already fragile and requires strengthening rather than further erosion.

This contradiction becomes more evident in light of statements made by the Prime Minister in Davos, where he emphasized Canada’s commitment to state sovereignty, territorial integrity, human rights protection, and the necessity of subjecting the use of force to the constraints of international law. Preserving Canada’s image as a principled middle power and a credible actor requires consistency in positions, not selective application of standards depending on the identity of the actor involved.

Canada’s historical standing has been associated with support for diplomacy, civilian protection, de-escalation, and strict adherence to international law. Safeguarding this legacy demands clear and balanced positions that place the rule of law above political alliances and short-term considerations.

Accordingly, Canada should reject any approach that seeks regime change in Iran through military means, whether unilaterally or in partnership with the United States. Past decades have shown that externally imposed regime change rarely produces sustainable stability; instead, it often leads to state institutional collapse, rising violence, deepening humanitarian crises, and cross-border repercussions.

Likewise, any path that drags the region — and potentially the world — into broader confrontation at a time of profound international instability must be firmly opposed. In the context of global economic pressures and growing uncertainty, the international community cannot afford renewed expansion of large-scale conflict.

The responsible course today is to reaffirm diplomacy, uphold international law without double standards, and work earnestly to spare the region and the world further division and violence.