Meet Jagmeet Singh, A Rising Star In Canadian Politics

by Hugh Fitzgerald

Jagmeet Singh is a Sikh Canadian politician who has been steadily gaining in popularity; he is also, alas, distinctly unsympathetic to Israel. A report on Singh, with his pro-Palestinian views, and his dislike of the Jewish state, is here: “Rising star or dark force? Jagmeet Singh plans to leave his mark on Canada-Israel relations,” by Ami Friedman, Israel Hayom, July 30, 2021:

At first glance, Jagmeet Singh seems like a stylish hipster, cycling to work on his designer bicycle. It is not a complete mistake: Singh is, if not a hipster himself, at least sartorially influenced by the trend, and is very popular among the hipster community. But he does not work at a vintage record store, and he rides one of his six designer bicycles to the Parliament of Canada as leader of the New Democratic Party. There, on a daily basis, he makes Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a leader who himself knows a thing or two about fashion and visibility, seem grey, archaic and disconnected from the values of the new era.

It has been five years since Singh, 42, became a superstar in Canadian politics. It is clear that his mere presence among politicians from the Right and the photogenic prime minister who carries the values of the Center is a game-changer for many.

As can be expected from a typical liberal politician, Singh has very clear views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. As a Sikh and as the first non-white leader of a Canadian political party, Singh has adopted a clear pro-Palestinian agenda. When he was his party’s deputy house leader in Ontario, he was one of the only politicians who didn’t agree to support the decision by the region’s legislators to oppose the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.

The BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanction) movement is designed to cripple Israel economically, by pressuring companies and countries to boycott its goods, by persuading individuals and groups from owning shares in Israeli companies, and by sanctioning non-Israeli companies that do business with the Jewish state. It also calls for a cultural and academic boycott of Israeli institutions and individuals. The BDS works to so undermine the Jewish state that it will be forced to capitulate to Palestinian demands; many believe its ultimate aim is the dismantlement of the Jewish state. The American government, the German government, and many others, have called the BDS, in its essence, “antisemitic.” in its essence. Rajmeet Singh, however, finds nothing wrong with BDS, and he was one of a very few politicians in Ontario who refused to support anti-BDS legislation passed by that province’s parliament.

He explained that, from his perspective, legislating against the BDS movement is a clear infringement on freedom of expression. “Everyone has the right to criticize and to oppose [something],” he proclaimed.

Would Jagmeet Singh then oppose legislation designed to prevent neo-Nazi broadcasts on Canadian television as “a clear infringement on freedom of expression”? Would he support the right of a Canadian branch of the KKK to hold marches through city centers? Would he support the right of ex-Muslims to denounce Islam on the radio, by quoting passages from the Qur’an and hadith? Is Singh really a Free Speech absolutist, or is he not, in fact, in refusing to support the banning of BDS, in essence supporting the policies of a group that, in working to economically and culturally undermine the Jewish state, has been deemed “antisemitic” by the U.S., Germany, the last four Prime Ministers of the U.K., and many others?

He does not hide his lack of affection for Israeli policies. “In 2016 I traveled to the Middle East,” he wrote on Twitter. “I witnessed the technology and development in Israel. I was shocked by the contrast I saw in Palestine.” In another Tweet, he wrote, “I witnessed the presence of the Israeli military occupation in Hebron and the frustrating conditions created by settlements deep in the West Bank,” and called on the UN to bring an end to the settlement enterprise.

He witnessed, and was apparently offended by, the advanced economy of Israel and the “contrast I saw in Palestine.” Did he think what might have explained that difference? The Israelis invest heavily in the development of new technologies of every kind; the Start-Up nation does not only surpass in its innovations the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, but also most every other nation on earth. The Palestinians suffer from both mismanagement and corruption. Palestinian leaders appoint their own relatives and the relatives of their supporters to well-paid government posts; competency is not required. Incompetents govern badly; as a consequence, the Palestinian economy suffers. The corruption is staggering. Two Hamas leaders in Gaza, Khaled Meshaal and Mousa ibn Marzouk, have each amassed fortunes of at least $2.5 billion; in the West Bank, the PA’s President Mahmoud Abbas now boasts a net worth of $400 million. Israel is not to be blamed for this colossal corruption, that helps explain the wretched economic condition of the Palestinians. Nor is Israel to be blamed for the enormous sums the Palestinians devote to war-making: Hamas built hundreds of miles of tunnel networks – the “Metro” — in Gaza, that cost hundreds of millions of dollars; in the West Bank, the PA spends hundreds of millions of dollars a year on payments to terrorists and their families. Both this “Pay-For-Slay Program” by the PA, and Hamas’ tunnel network and huge armory in Gaza, have cost the Palestinians hundreds of millions of dollars each year from aid money that has been diverted, money that could have been used to build up the local economies. Jagmeet Singh saw the difference in the economic development in Israel and in the Palestinian areas, was startled by it but did not think to ask himself what explained those differences; Israel was far more advanced, the Palestinians were clearly behind, and that was the extent of his singularly incurious and resentful inquiry. Perhaps if Israel were not so well run economically, if its culture of innovation were not so pronounced, if its people not so industrious and creative, Jagmeet Singh might soften his antipathy to the Jewish state. Sorry, Jagmeet, Israel no can do.

Around two months ago, Singh called on the Canadian federal government to block arms sales to Israel, in light of Operation Guardian of the Walls, for the purpose of what he calls “creating pressure” on Israel to work in humane ways to end the conflict.”

Operation Guardian of the Walls was started by Hamas when, on May 10, it suddenly launched hundreds of rockets into Israeli cities, including seven rockets that landed in Jerusalem. Yet Singh blamed Israel for the war. What “humane ways to end the conflict” did Israel need to be pressured to find? From the first day of the war, Israel was trying to end the conflict quickly, and humanely, by destroying the rocket warehouses, the rocket launchers, the terror tunnel network, the Hamas command-and-control centers, all the while trying to minimize civilian casualties by sending warnings to civilians, by telephoning, leafletting, and the “knock-on-the-roof” technique. The minute Hamas stopped hurling rockets at Israel, the Israelis called an end to hostilities; Israel needed no lessons in “humane ways to end the conflict” from the likes of Jagmeet Singh in Ottawa.

In a speech he gave in the House of Commons, Jagmeet Singh accused the Canadian government of “arming one side of the conflict,” and said that “it is undermining the peace process and it is supporting [the] illegal occupation.”

Is it really Jagmeet Singh’s view that the government of Canada should be berated for not “arming” Hamas, a recognized terror group? Is Ottawa undermining the peace process by not helping Hamas, the terror group that rejects completely the so-called “peace process” and in its Charter calls for the total destruction of the Jewish state? Does Jagmeet Singh regard Israel and the terror group Hamas as morally equivalent? And why shouldn’t Canada sell arms to Israel, a fellow Western democracy, that is under constant assault from terror groups – Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad – and from Iran, that mortal threat to Israel, that is bending all of its efforts to complete a nuclear program that will, Tehran hopes, someday allow it to wipe out the Jewish state?

Canada, which sells to Israel such a small amount – less than $15 million worth – of military equipment, is not thereby “undermining the peace process.” The so-called “peace process” has been undermined by the Palestinians themselves, who have rejected every peace offer made to them. Yassir Arafat famously walked out on a proposal made in 2000 by Prime Minister Ehud Barak to give up 92% of the West Bank, with an equivalent amount taken from Israel itself to become part of the future Palestinian state; in addition that state would include East Jerusalem, while the Old City would be shared. Mahmoud Abbas similarly rejected in 2008 an even more generous offer from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, proposing that Israel retain 6.3 percent of the West Bank in order to keep control of major Jewish settlements, while compensating the Palestinians with Israeli land equivalent to 5.8 percent of the West Bank, along with a link to the Gaza Strip. Olmert also offered to withdraw from Arab neighborhoods of east Jerusalem and place the Old City — home to Jerusalem’s most sensitive holy sites — under international control. Like Arafat eight years before, Mahmoud Abbas walked out.

What “peace process” does Jagmeet Singh have in mind? Hasn’t he read the outrageous list of fifteen demands made by Mahmoud Abbas that have to be met before the PA will agree to enter into negotiations? These include such things as banning all Jewish visitors from the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism. There is no “peace process” not because of Israel, which has made no “demands” to re-enter such negotiations, but because of the PA’s intransigence.

Early in the Israeli operation in Gaza, Singh criticized Trudeau, saying, “Will the prime minister commit to stopping the sale of arms to Israel while they are violating international human rights?” Trudeau didn’t respond but said that the government is following the situation in the region “with concern,” and condemned rocket attacks on Israeli cities.

What “international human rights” was Israel “violating” in the Gaza war? It was Hamas that started the war, Hamas that launched rockets indiscriminately into Israeli cities. It was Hamas that deliberately stored weapons in, and launched rockets from, civilian buildings such as schools, hospitals, apartment buildings, and mosques. It was Israel that made every effort to minimize civilian casualties, in some cases calling off air attacks when Israeli pilots at the last minute detected the presence of children too close to the target, Israel through telephone calls, leafletting, and the “knock-on-the-roof” technique, warned civilians to leave buildings or areas about to be hit. The “violation of human rights” was committed by the Palestinians, who endangered Israeli civilians by firing not at military targets but at Israeli cities and towns, and who endangered their own civilians by hiding weapons within, and launching rockets from, civilian buildings; it was the Palestinians who in both ways “violated international human rights.”

According to figures published in Canada, in 2019 the state sold $13.7 million worth of military and technological equipment to Israel. Singh spoke of this during May’s hostilities and claimed that it was proof that the violence in the Middle East also trickles over to Canadian politicians.

It’s unclear what Jagmeet Singh meant by this comment. Did he mean that this tiny sale of military equipment to Israel – the paltry sum of $13.7 million in military and technological equipment — could affect the views of Canadian politicians, making them more pro-Israel? I remain puzzled by his reported remarks.

First published in Jihad Watch.