A pedestrian walks past the closed Palestinian Legislative Council building in Ramallah, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, last week. The Palestinian Authority has delayed elections until next year.ZAIN JAAFAR/AFP/Getty Images
Fifteen months ago, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that his government intended to recognize a Palestinian state, a marked departure from this country’s decades-old position that such recognition could only take place after a negotiated solution with Israel.
Ottawa justified that policy, in part, by citing Israel’s intransigence in working toward a two-state solution in which Palestinians would have their own country, alongside a secure Israel. That quasi-recognition – of a state with no defined border and without full normalization of relations – was undertaken on the basis of commitments from the Palestinian Authority to hold legislative elections this year.
“This intention is predicated on the Palestinian Authority’s commitment to much needed reforms, including commitments by the Palestinian Authority’s President Abbas to fundamentally reform its governance to hold general elections in 2026 in which Hamas can play no part and to demilitarize the Palestinian state,” Mr. Carney said in July, 2025.
Last week, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (on the 22nd year of his four-year term) said that the legislative election scheduled for next month would be delayed until September, 2027. A presidential election slated for early 2027 would also be deferred until next September. The Hamas-aligned Islamic Jihad took part in the discussions about election timing. That fact alone would seem to breach the condition that Hamas play “no part” in the future of a Palestinian state.
Canada, allies press Palestinian Authority to reverse decision on postponing elections
Mr. Abbas made his excuses, as he has repeatedly in cancelling elections over the last 20 years. This time around (as was the case in 2021), he blamed Israel. More likely is that he believes his grip on power is threatened.
So, given all that, what was the response from Canada, Britain, France and Australia, which rushed to give the Palestinian Authority the prize of diplomatic recognition last year?
Stop, before we say stop again (with apologies to Robin Williams). In a joint statement, the four countries said they “deeply regret” Mr. Abbas’s decision and that the delay in elections is “deeply disappointing.” Well, then, the Palestinian Authority, and Hamas, must feel suitably chastened.
In other words, there will be no consequences for the Palestinian Authority having crossed the red line drawn last year. The Liberals perhaps thought themselves clever by saying recognition was “predicated” on an election and other stipulations, rather than such actions being a condition.
Semantics aren’t relevant. What is relevant is the naivete – or if you prefer, disingenuousness – on display last year in extending diplomatic recognition before, rather than after, a comprehensive settlement with Israel. That same naivete, or disingenuousness, was on display in Tuesday’s joint statement, with the four countries implicitly accepting that Israel is somehow to blame for Mr. Abbas’s failure to keep his word.
Palestinian President addresses UN on prerecorded video after visa denied
Of course, it is true that holding an election in Gaza, where Hamas has not been ousted and has not been stripped of its weapons, is not feasible. But the West Bank and East Jerusalem are a different matter.
The four countries do, in their joint statement, call on the Palestinian Authority to fulfill its pledge to hold elections. But they do not say what will happen if their exhortation to stop is ignored again.
The path forward is clear, or at least should be clear. If Mr. Abbas and the Palestinian Authority do not reverse the decision to put off elections, then Canada should reverse its decision to extend diplomatic recognition.
This is necessary for two reasons: to do what can be done to preserve the hope of a peace process leading to two states, and to preserve Canada’s wider diplomatic credibility.
It is obvious Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has no interest in pursuing a negotiated settlement and has played down violence by extremist settlers in the occupied West Bank. The rejection of elections by the Palestinian Authority gives the Netanyahu government, or a less obstructionist successor, all the excuse it needs to avoid any diplomatic engagement or any crackdown on settler violence.
Beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, however, there is a wider reason for Ottawa to take action. Canada’s word must carry weight; Mr. Carney’s word must carry weight.
If the Palestinian Authority is allowed to ignore its commitments, and Canada simply expresses its regret – sorry, deep regret – then why should any future commitment, by the PA or anyone else, ever be honoured?