Pierre Fitzgibbon is taken to task more often than not by opposition parties, who accuse him of being ready to sacrifice everything for economic development, as well as being absolutely impermeable to the notion of public ethics.
Thursday, the solidarity deputy for Saint-Henri–Sainte-Anne, Guillaume Cliche-Rivard, admitted his surprise to discover what looked very much like scruples in the face of his government’s persistence in opening an office in Tel Aviv, then that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is taking on the appearance of an apocalypse.
Mr. Fitzgibbon claims the authorship of the “very good idea” of a representation in Israel, but he has the good sense to recognize that the moment is poorly chosen, taking care to add that this decision does not depend on him. Perhaps it would be necessary to resurrect for his benefit the Ministry of Foreign Trade, which one of his predecessors as invasive as himself, Bernard Landry, had once wrested from his colleague in Intergovernmental Affairs, which included international relations, Jacques-Yvan Morin .
Two weeks ago, it was astonishing to hear the current holder of what has become the Ministry of International Relations and La Francophonie, Martine Biron, declare that “things have been placed [et que] the economy has recovered” in the region. As long as the security of the chosen director, Alik Hakobyan, and his family is assured, he will be able to settle in Tel Aviv during the summer.
***
How could she say that “things fell into place”? This former journalist should listen to the news. Such an assertion was simply grotesque, at a time when deaths are increasing at a staggering rate in the Gaza Strip, an entire people is threatened with famine and a massive intervention by the Israeli army in Rafah risks turning into in slaughter.
Since the beginning, the comments relating to this file made by Mme Biron leaves us perplexed, to say the least, and demonstrates an insensitivity that is increasingly embarrassing, if not revolting. In his mind, the opening of an office in the middle of a conflict does not constitute “in any way” a position, since the decision had been taken before it broke out and its role would be essentially economic rather than diplomatic.
Last March, she declared several times that Mr. Hakobyan was working from Montreal, even though he had been in Israel for several weeks. Obviously, she was aware of the discomfort. She then defended herself by arguing that her installation, in the premises of the Canadian embassy, was not definitive, but it would soon be.
No one denies that, under normal circumstances, Israel would be a place from which Quebec could develop fruitful business relations, but the circumstances are anything but normal. Mme Would Biron also find it acceptable to reopen, in the middle of the war in Ukraine, the office in Moscow that the Couillard government had closed after three years for budgetary reasons? Isolated as he is currently, Vladimir Putin would surely be willing to do something in Quebec.
***
This week, the minister was asked if the Tel Aviv office could “accompany” arms companies wishing to do business with Israel. “I don’t know, it’s not for me to know that,” she replied.
Sorry, but she should know it and oppose it, at the very least deplore it. After all, even Joe Biden, who cannot be suspected of being hostile towards Israel, is threatening to suspend certain arms deliveries.
Someone understood that Mme Biron had got his feet wet again. His office therefore clarified that the export of military equipment is the responsibility of the federal government. In short, as usual, it would be Ottawa’s fault.
Pierre Fitzgibbon still had to try to correct the message. No question for Investissement Québec of putting money into an arms company, he said. Well, that wasn’t the question asked of his colleague, but he did his best to make things right. Who would have thought it, we might regret his possible departure!
The title of the international relations policy presented in 2019 by Ms.me Biron, Nadine Girault, could very well be Prime Minister Legault’s mantra: Quebec. Proud and in business all over the world. “Quebec is making a resolutely economic shift in its international relations, by better using the tools of influence diplomacy and economic diplomacy. We will gain in prosperity,” we could read.
There is no moral consideration that could also inspire Quebec’s international action, even if its influence is very limited. For example, the promotion of peace in the world or the protection of oppressed peoples.
It is the politics of money above all, totally dehumanized, that Mme Biron applies it to the letter.