Canada’s decision on Monday to formally label Yemen’s Ansarallah movement, better known as the Houthis, as a “terrorist entity” under its criminal code has drawn harsh criticism from regional observers who see it as just another example of Western involvement in Middle Eastern affairs. Geopolitical posturing is evident in the contentious decision.
Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc claims in a diplomatically laden statement that the designation “contributes to fighting terrorism globally” and aligns Canada with its traditional Western allies. However, the underlying motivations appear to be far more complex than a straightforward commitment to international security.
By characterizing the Houthis as a just “militant group” producing “unrest in the Middle East,” the Canadian government simply ignores the context of their maritime operations in its charge. In actuality, what Canada refers to as terrorist acts is a reaction to the current humanitarian crisis in Gaza, where Israeli military actions have caused unheard-of levels of suffering among civilians.
The Houthis have been attacking cargo ships with ties to Israel in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, a vital passageway for international maritime trade, since October 7th of last year. Their acts are overtly presented as showing support for Palestinians facing a violent military assault, a detail that is entirely missing from Canada’s antiseptic official narrative.
In a bureaucratic sleight of hand, the Canadian statement tries to make a distinction between the armed political movement Ansarallah and the larger ethnic group-a distinction that rings hollow to those familiar with the complexity of the region’s sociopolitical landscape.
The pledge by Minister LeBlanc to “curtail the spread of these activities” and “counter threats” sounds like it is from the script of the usual hegemonic interventionalists. It bespeaks a profound misunderstanding-or willful ignorance-of the deeply entrenched conflicts and resistance movements that shape Middle Eastern geopolitics.
This designation is less about fighting terrorism than about strategic alignment with the interests of the West-mostly the United States and Israel. In criminalizing the Houthis, the Canadian government de facto criminalizes a resistance movement born from years of exterior military intervention and economic pressure.
The timing is telling: while the international community is focused on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, this is the convenient distraction that attempts to recast the news in its most simplistic form-a tale of terrorism.
The Red Sea—a crucial artery for international maritime trade—has evolved into a platform for this geopolitical drama. Canada’s actions (although well-intentioned) contribute to escalating tensions in a region that is already stretched to its breaking point due to decades of external manipulation and conflict.
While Canadian officials celebrate their “principled” stance, they remain conspicuously silent about the root causes of regional instability: prolonged military occupations, economic sanctions and systematic marginalization of indigenous resistance movements.
This designation reveals more about Canada’s foreign policy approach than it does about the Houthis. It serves as a testament to the ongoing legacy of Western powers viewing the Middle East as a chessboard, where complex human struggles are often reduced to simplistic labels such as “terrorist” and “ally.” However, this reductionist perspective fails to acknowledge the depth and nuance of the situations at hand.
