Canada–Iran Diplomatic Breakdown: Causes and Prospects

Introduction

On September 7, 2012, Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird announced that the country was closing its embassy in Tehran and expelling Iranian diplomats from Ottawa. The move signified a cessation of ties between Canada and Iran, and was the culmination of a steady deterioration in relations between the two countries over the course of the preceding decade. The conflict is rooted in a number of issues, and at present there are significant pragmatic and ideological obstacles between the two nations that make it difficult to foresee a resolution in the near future. This paper outlines the nature of the conflict and the key impediments to its resolution.

History of the Conflict

In general, the relationship between Iran and Western nations has been poor since the Islamic Revolution of 1979 and the subsequent hostage crisis involving American citizens. The outcome of that event was that the United States ceased diplomatic relations with Iran, setting the tone for poor relations between Iran and all major Western nations. Canada, however, maintained relatively good relations with Iran for a long time, even after Britain closed its own embassy in Tehran. Canada became a haven for Iranians who fled the Islamic regime, and a strong Iranian-Canadian community developed over time.

The beginning of the current diplomatic tensions between Iran and Canada can be traced directly to the murder of Canadian-Iranian journalist Zahra Kazemi by Iranian authorities in 2003. Kazemi was arrested and beaten to death, and the Iranian government initially attempted to cover up the murder (De Luce, 2003). Iran's failure to offer a meaningful apology for this crime, and its refusal to prosecute those who gave the orders, has remained a source of grievance in Canada ever since.

The Conservative government of Stephen Harper has been compared to the neoconservative administration of former U.S. President George W. Bush, sharing similar ideological lines. While there are significant differences owing to Canada's generally more liberal political culture, the Harper government shares a hawkish stance toward undemocratic governments such as Iran's, and has also adopted a strongly pro-Israel position in recent years. That pro-Israel stance places it in direct opposition to Iran, as Foreign Minister Baird himself acknowledged when explaining the embassy closure.

Among the reasons Canada cited for severing diplomatic ties was the Islamic Republic's "racist, anti-Semitic rhetoric and incitement to genocide" — phrasing that directly references statements made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calling for the annihilation of Israel, the denial of the Holocaust, and Iran's state support for the violence committed by the Assad government in Syria during that country's 2011–2012 uprising. These statements and events support Canada's contention that Iran represents a direct threat to world peace.

Of particular concern is the combination of anti-Israel rhetoric with Iran's nuclear ambitions. The country began its nuclear program during the Shah's era; after a period of dormancy, the Islamic Republic restarted it. By the mid-2000s, there was widespread fear that Iran was only a year or two away from becoming a nuclear power. Western observers viewed Iran's nuclear ambitions as an existential threat to Israel, given the incendiary statements of Iranian leadership and the dogma-driven character of the country's clerical rulers. Many analysts did not expect moderation to prevail inside Iran, given the climate of religious extremism and the absence of effective checks on extreme behavior within its political system.

Relevant Parties

While the climate that produced the current conflict has distinct Canadian-Iranian elements — particularly surrounding the Kazemi murder — Canada's close allies are also key actors, as is the Assad regime in Syria. None of Canada's closest allies, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Israel, maintain diplomatic representation in Iran. Many, including the United States, have called for Iran to be isolated internationally in response to its policies (BBC, 2012). Canada's support for Israel and its opposition to the Assad regime's brutality positioned it directly against Iranian interests in the Middle East, making an antagonistic posture toward Iran a natural consequence of Canada's broader foreign policy alignments.

Another element of Canada's argument is that Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism that does not respect standard diplomatic conventions, including the protection of foreign diplomats. In addition to the 1979–1980 U.S. hostage crisis and the Kazemi murder, Canada referenced Iran's supply of weapons to Assad in Syria and implied that protests at Western diplomatic facilities in Iran were state-sponsored. Some of these accusations were not fully substantiated by publicly available evidence, but they resonated with other nations that had developed an established antipathy toward the Islamic Republic. The United States, despite losing a key diplomatic channel into Iran through Canada's closure, publicly supported the Canadian move (BBC, 2012).

Conclusion

Ultimately, resolving this conflict will only come with regime change in Iran. When a government that bases policy on something other than religious fanaticism comes to power, the groundwork for dialogue can be laid. Iran also needs a government that respects human rights, rather than one that massacres its own citizens for protesting rigged elections. The violent actions and inflammatory rhetoric are clearly on the Iranian side. This is not a case of two nations with differing worldviews — Canada maintains relations with Cuba, the Gulf States, and other nations with problematic policy elements — but a case in which one nation has publicly announced its intention to commit genocide. Iran is therefore a special case: a country whose present course represents a direct threat to global peace.

That country must take the initiative to bridge the gap and bring the dispute toward resolution, because it is the party with the track record of brutal repression, genocidal incitement, and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Canada occupies the moral high ground. The only viable resolution can come when the Iranian people reclaim their country from those who currently govern it. The fundamental impediment that must be removed is the irrational, theocratic ruling class that controls Iran; genuine resolution awaits a secular, intellectually grounded, and democratically elected government in Tehran.

Works Cited

De Luce, D. (2003). Journalist murdered, Iran admits. The Guardian. Retrieved September 28, 2012, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/jul/17/pressandpublishing.iran

BBC. (2012). Canada closes Iranian embassy and kicks out diplomats. British Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved September 28, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19522744