OTTAWA — The Canadian government’s approach to arms exports to Israel has come under intense scrutiny in recent months, as parliamentarians, activists, and members of the public question Ottawa’s transparency and the true extent of its restrictions. The debate, which has simmered since early 2024, now boils over amid conflicting reports, government denials, and calls for a full investigation into what, exactly, Canada is sending to the Middle East — and why.
It all began in March 2024, when the Canadian Parliament voted in favour of a non-binding motion to halt new arms permits for Israel. The government responded by announcing a review of export permits and suspending about 30 of them to determine whether they involved lethal uses. But crucially, Ottawa allowed all other military export permits for Israel to continue. In fact, there were 164 such permits used to export military goods to Israel in 2024, and some of them are valid for years to come, according to Global Affairs Canada.
By January 8, 2024, Canada had stopped approving any new permits for Israel, citing human rights concerns. Then-foreign affairs minister Mélanie Joly’s office assured the public that none of the valid permits allowed for the export of "lethal goods" — that is, weapons technology and equipment. Still, the government’s definition of "lethal" has come under fire. Ottawa has said its restrictions exclude "non-lethal" equipment, but critics argue this term is poorly defined and misleading. Project Ploughshares and other advocacy groups warn that Canadian-made components — such as lenses, cameras, and circuit boards — could still be used in Israeli military campaigns in both Gaza and the West Bank, where Canada itself has accused Israel of violating international law.
In June 2024, the government provided Parliament with a list of all existing military export permits to Israel, which mentioned circuit boards well over a hundred times. The ambiguity around what constitutes "non-lethal" equipment has fueled suspicion and concern among activists and lawmakers alike.
The controversy escalated in late July 2025, when pro-Palestinian activists highlighted Israeli Tax Authority customs data that listed imports from Canada as bullets, guns, and other weapons. The data suggested that 175,000 bullets had been sent from Canada to Israel under the customs code for "munitions of war and parts thereof," with three such shipments in 2024. Israeli customs agents also recorded a Canadian shipment categorized as "tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, motorized, whether or not fitted with weapons, and parts of such vehicles."
It took the Canadian government three days to respond. Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand’s office explained that the bullets in question were "paintball-style projectiles" that cannot be used in combat. Nevertheless, Senator Yuen Pau Woo, who was among 32 senators — a third of the Senate — to call for a thorough investigation into Canadian arms exports to Israel, dismissed this explanation as trivializing. He argued that such materials could still be used for training Israeli soldiers. "She missed an opportunity to grasp the gravity of the situation in Gaza," Woo said of Anand’s response, describing it as "very limited, slippery and highly defensive."
The government’s stance is that it has not approved any lethal weapons or munitions for export to Israel since January 2024. "For a year and a half, we have been clear: if an export permit for an item used to protect civilians is requested, it will be approved," Anand’s office stated on August 1, 2025. "Canada has not approved the export of any lethal weapons or munitions to Israel since January 2024, and any such permit that could have allowed such items were suspended and remains inactive today."
Yet, the debate refuses to die down. On August 4, 2025, the Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council released a parliamentary report, dated July 8, 2025, and marked "not to be published." The report, assembled by the Library of Parliament, was said to challenge much of the government’s narrative. It revealed that two arms permits to send goods to Israel were issued in 2024 — both disclosed to Parliament in June 2024 and issued on the very day Ottawa announced it would stop approving new permits. The report also cited $2.3 million in Canadian sales to Israel listed as "bombs, torpedoes, rockets, missiles, other explosive devices and charges and related accessories, components and equipment." The government clarified that these were actually electronic components for Israel’s Iron Dome defense system, which intercepts and destroys incoming rockets.
The language used by government officials has also shifted over time. While Joly and her team spoke about "non-lethal" uses for arms, Anand has avoided that terminology. Critics, including Senator Woo, accuse the government of "prevaricating, with the shift in language and … an effort to try to be legalistic about the government's adherence to its own promise." However, James Fitz-Morris, Anand’s spokesperson, insisted, "The government’s position has not changed. Minister Anand is not reading from a script. She uses different words sometimes to convey the same message or to add clarity, depending on the circumstances and what she is responding to." He emphasized that "the only permits that may be granted are for the items used to defend civilians, such as the Iron Dome, and items that are transiting through Israel as part of the global supply chain such as items whose end-users include Canada and/or NATO allies."
Calls for a complete halt to all military trade with Israel have grown louder, with Senator Woo warning, "She’s digging a deeper hole for herself and for our government, particularly if there are in fact legal consequences around complicity, aiding and abetting war crimes." He added, "We are witnessing, in the memorable words of Amnesty International, a live-streamed genocide. It’s tearing at our souls." Israel, for its part, maintains that it is engaged in an existential war of self-defense and blames Hamas for the high casualty count.
The Canadian government argues that ending all arms exports to Israel would compromise the complex supply chains that Canada and its allies — including the Canadian Armed Forces — rely on. "Any consideration of a two-way arms embargo that would block Israeli-made components from entering Canada would need to take into consideration the impact that would have on Canada, including the (Canadian Armed Forces)," Fitz-Morris wrote.
Public opinion is divided, but a clear majority wants action. In an online survey of 1,522 Canadians conducted by the Angus Reid Institute from July 31 to August 5, 2025, 54% said they want Ottawa to ensure Canada is not selling lethal military equipment to Israel. About one-fifth of respondents said they want the restrictions dropped, while another 27% were unsure or chose not to respond.
As for transparency, the government claims it has provided thousands of pages of documentation to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, which the committee then published on its website. But Senator Woo remains unconvinced. "To play with words, when a genocide is happening before our very eyes … it’s scandalous," he said.
With the issue still unresolved, the debate over Canada’s arms exports to Israel shows no sign of fading. The government’s balancing act — between supply chain realities, international law, and public outrage — continues to be tested as new facts, reports, and accusations emerge.