Canada’s military spending has recently faced increased scrutiny, with the United States urging the Trudeau government to meet the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)’s defence spending target of two per cent of their GDP. As one of the lowest spenders on defence among NATO allies, Canada has continuously faced criticism from U.S. officials for its perceived lack of commitment to military investment. In the context of Canada’s pervasive ties to the colonization of Palestine, increased military spending directly furthers Canada’s involvement in violence that contradicts its values of protecting human rights and promoting peace. Paralleling McGill University’s private investments, Canada’s federal budget allocations directly contribute to the ongoing genocide of Palestinians. Without divestment from the Israeli state and its enterprises, Canada and its complicit institutions—including McGill—will remain bloody-handed.
Canada’s complicity in Israel’s terror reflects a broader issue of military expenditures supporting systems of oppression and colonialism. Meeting the spending target would place a large strain on Canada’s budget, especially while the country faces pressing issues such as high living costs and underfunded social programs including healthcare and education. The choice to spend an already exhausted fiscal budget on the deployment of special officers to support Israel’s killing of Palestinians, rather than prioritizing domestic needs, reflects an interest in the propagation of violence abroad over the wellbeing of its own people.
In only three months, Canada exported more military goods to Israel than it has in the past 30 years—and Canadians are calling for their country to stop this funding. This is evident in its colonial military expenditures, its extensive history of genocide against Indigenous peoples, and its legacy of slavery.
Historically, Canada has often relied on the U.S. as a shield from international scrutiny. In return, Canada has supported U.S. interests in the Middle East by endorsing Israel as a key ally. As Canada faces a critical decision now, it must confront its historical shortcomings and decide whether to act in line with its so-called “peacekeeping” reputation, even if that means differentiating itself from its neighbours and allies. This decision is pivotal in defining what Canada truly stands for, as well as encouraging its institutions, such as McGill, to act accordingly. By not succumbing to pressures in meeting the two per cent NATO target, Canada will be taking an active step towards ending its complicity in violence.
Students worldwide have frequently been at the forefront of protests against military funding. In 1985, McGill became the first Canadian institution to divest from South African apartheid—a decision that was monumental in the movement against imperialism in South Africa, with a major impact on federal funding towards the apartheid. Decades later, McGill refuses to do the same with respect to the genocide of Palestinians. The contrast between the university’s explicit condemnation of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its refusal to recognize the war on Gaza as genocide by Israel—instead referring to the humanitarian crisis as a “geopolitical conflict half a world away”—demonstrates its commitment to upholding structures of white supremacy. With the International Criminal Court convicting Israel of their genocidal operations in Palestine and people worldwide criticizing the actions of the state, Canada and McGill continuing to fund genocidal investments cannot be justified by NATO obligations or other external excuses.
Considering recent events like the forceful dismantling of McGill’s Palestine Solidarity Encampment and the administration’s violence against students, it is evident that student action towards divestment is imperative. Given that student tuition funds enforce McGill’s ties to Israel, the university’s decision to solely focus on tuition hikes as a student issue, while ignoring transparency about investment allocations, further illustrates McGill’s disingenuous approach. Universities such as McGill have increasingly been operating as businesses, prioritizing lucrative investments in sectors like weapons manufacturing over the values and welfare of their students.
To implement meaningful change, McGill’s leadership must align their investment practices with ethical standards and engage with student movements, not just in promise but in practice. This will not only compel the Canadian government to acknowledge that one of its leading institutions rejects genocide, but it will also forge a transformative new legacy for the university. Students, particularly incoming freshmen, have a vital role in this process. They should educate themselves about ongoing campus issues, join activism efforts, and ensure their voices are heard in shaping the future of their institution. By staying informed and engaged, students have the power to guide our surrounding institutions toward a future where spending reflects a prioritization of morality over exploitation.
