Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney faced intense criticism from international law experts after his government's shifting position on U.S.-Israel military strikes against Iran. Initially offering resolute support for the bombing campaign, Carney's office later backtracked, calling the actions "inconsistent with international law" while maintaining Canada's backing of allied operations.

Legal scholars Mark Kersten and Shane Martínez argued that Carney's original statement ignored fundamental principles of international law, which prohibits military force except under specific UN Charter exceptions. Kersten emphasized that while opposing Iran's oppressive regime is justified, abandoning international law protections when convenient creates dangerous precedents. The government's "maze of contradictions" approach drew particular ire for simultaneously supporting illegal actions while calling for respect of international norms.

The controversy erupted just weeks after Carney's high-profile World Economic Forum speech advocating for a rules-based international order. Critics noted the stark contrast between his Davos rhetoric about defending sovereignty and the government's actual response to the Iran situation. The PM's statement that "one can never categorically rule out participation" alongside expressions of regret for Canada's position has left observers questioning Ottawa's foreign policy coherence.