Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Brownstone Institute

Make no mistake, the Israel-Hamas conflict is Canada’s fight too

Published

11 minute read

By Joe Adam George

The threats posed by the ‘new axis of evil’ comprising Russia, China and Iran have now mushroomed into two major conflicts

On October 7, Canadians woke up to images of grisly war crimes committed by Hamas, a listed terrorist entity in Canada, halfway across the world in Israel. Following their deadly and barbaric incursion into the Jewish nation from across the Gaza border, an estimated 1,000 Hamas terrorists methodically mutilated, raped, burned and murdered at least 1,300 Israelis in horrific ways not witnessed since the Holocaust. Still reeling from the surprise attack, Israel formally declared war on Hamas the next day, vowing to ‘wipe them off the face of the Earth’.

With the conflict now into its third week, the events unravelling in the Middle East and, indeed, across the globe, since the deadly morning of October 7 spell grim news for Canada. Still facing global ridicule and isolation after a crisis-laden September during which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau managed to get into a diplomatic spat with India and, inexplicably, honoured a former Nazi unit soldier in the Parliament in the presence of visiting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Israel-Hamas conflict is a headache he could have done without; especially given the complex nature of Jewish and Muslim vote bank politics at home.

As Canada turned inwards amidst culture wars and socio-economic crises in recent years, the threats posed by the ‘new axis of evil’ comprising Russia, China and Iran have now mushroomed into two major conflicts involving our allies, Ukraine and Israel. A third conflict, involving Taiwan, may be on the horizon. These conflicts have once again proven that rogue state and non-state actors cannot be reasoned or negotiated with. Any delusions of grandeur or signs of weakness will only lead to more violence, inevitably targeting innocent civilians.

Regrettably, a large (and stubborn) segment of the Western foreign policy elite continues to believe funding or coddling our ideological foes will somehow make them allies and acquiescent to change. On the contrary, they only hold us in further contempt by using our funds and credulity against us and our national interests. Take Pakistan as an example. Despite showering the terrorist haven with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in international aid, it continued to commit multiple transgressions, including allegedly harboring America’s Enemy No.1 and the late Al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden (who, of course, was shot dead in his Abbottabad, Pakistan compound in 2011).

Fast forward to the Israel-Hamas conflict, it is clear the West hasn’t learned from its past follies. With reports confirming Iran’s role in Hamas’ attacks on Israel, one only needs to look at the deluded Iran nuclear deal and other appeasement policies of the Biden administration and fellow Western democracies to ascertain why Israel now finds itself in the fight of its life. It is also precisely why, this time around, the decades-long conflict feels different; not only because of the unspeakable violence Hamas unleashed on innocent Israelis but because of the Israelis’ resolve to wipe out the terror group. The West, including Canada, are culpable for having played down the existential threat posed the Hamas ‘death cult’ and even funding extremism through donations to controversial entities like the United Nations Relief Works Agency for Palestine and the Near East (UNRWA). We’ve also been far too lax in our own back yards, failing to exercise proper oversight over domestic charities and allowing university campuses to become hotbeds of vicious anti-Western and antisemitic sentiment.

Needless to say, the chickens have finally come home to roost. With five Canadians confirmed killed and another three held hostage by Hamas, it is bewildering and despicable to see fellow Canadians, sympathetic to the pro-Palestine cause, openly celebrate the death and destruction caused by the Hamas attacks.

Never one to disappoint when it comes to diaspora politics, the first inclination of the Trudeau government, faced with a deep fear of confronting an angry Arab mob or jeopardizing the Muslim vote bank, has been to appease and take no action against unauthorized pro-Hamas rallies promoting antisemitism and glorifying terrorism, even going so far as to disrupt antisemitism conferences. But this is the wrong instinct. Enabling support for a proscribed terror group guilty of heinous war crimes cannot be allowed in a country where all members of society are considered equally subject to the rule of law. The inaction of the West is what emboldened Hamas in the first place. It must end now.

Laws banning such rallies, similar to the one imposed by France, and canceling visas of foreign nationals participating in them must be seriously contemplated here in Canada. Also, in the interest of national security, amendments to the Citizenship Act ought to be made to revoke citizenship of individuals linked to terrorist groups even if it would render them stateless, as is practiced by the UK.

With Canada-based individuals and groups allegedly laundering money on behalf of Hamas and Hezbollah, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) must be directed to conduct regular and independent forensic audits of these entities in partnership with the Five Eyes and other global law enforcement agencies.

The Trudeau government’s awful record of accountability and vetting when it comes to disbursing funds to vile anti-Semites is a key reason why the $10 million Canadian aid promised to Palestinian civilians must be frozen to prevent it ending up in Hamas’ hands.

Other time-critical countermeasures to support Israel and prevent this war from spilling over would be to list the notorious Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization and reimpose the UN sanctions to kneecap Iran’s capability to purchase and supply missiles to its regional terror proxies, including Hamas and Hezbollah.

The West needs to understand that Israel is doing them a favour by eliminating Hamas. Fueled by the widespread (and deplorable) global support for their attacks, we can expect an emboldened Hamas, which recently called for a  global ‘Day of Jihad’, to encourage lone-wolf attacks like the ones that took place in Beijing and Paris. The complete and total destruction of Hamas isn’t just a matter of Israeli security; it’s a matter of global security.

Make no mistake. Just as Hamas took advantage of the distraction created by the political infighting in Israel, the West is highly susceptible to similar attacks given the domestic turbulence in many countries, including Canada. Moreover, as FBI Director Christopher Wray warned Americans, the success of the Hamas attacks is likely to inspire other terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS to call for similar attacks in Western democracies, as seen from this week’s attack in the Belgian capital of Brussels.

Yet, the Trudeau government remains sheltered from the ugly realities of the rest of the world, especially the Global South, and woefully unprepared to protect Canadians from the emerging threats, as seen from the recent blocking of the Conservative opposition’s Bill C-350 to list the IRGC as a terrorist entity in Canada.

While Canada remains a safe haven for terrorists and transnational criminal organizations, Canadian values, interests and national security continue to be severely undermined by vote bank politics, foreign interference, criminal impunity, poor intelligence sharing and defence budget cuts. With the Liberal government prone to sleepwalking into one political disaster after another, the Israel-Hamas conflict ought to serve as a much needed wake-up call for PM Trudeau to prioritize Canada’s foreign policy and national security interests over self-serving vote bank politics. It may already be too late for Canada to avoid Europe’s fate as a hotbed for jihadist terrorism.

If the Liberal government isn’t up for this fight, it’d be in Canadians’ best interests for them to step aside and allow more serious people to take charge.

Joe Adam George is a former foreign policy and national security research intern with the Washington, D.C.-based policy think tank, Hudson Institute, and a communications strategist. He lives in Ottawa

Brownstone Institute

Bizarre Decisions about Nicotine Pouches Lead to the Wrong Products on Shelves

Published on

From the Brownstone Institute

  Roger Bate  

A walk through a dozen convenience stores in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, says a lot about how US nicotine policy actually works. Only about one in eight nicotine-pouch products for sale is legal. The rest are unauthorized—but they’re not all the same. Some are brightly branded, with uncertain ingredients, not approved by any Western regulator, and clearly aimed at impulse buyers. Others—like Sweden’s NOAT—are the opposite: muted, well-made, adult-oriented, and already approved for sale in Europe.

Yet in the United States, NOAT has been told to stop selling. In September 2025, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued the company a warning letter for offering nicotine pouches without marketing authorization. That might make sense if the products were dangerous, but they appear to be among the safest on the market: mild flavors, low nicotine levels, and recyclable paper packaging. In Europe, regulators consider them acceptable. In America, they’re banned. The decision looks, at best, strange—and possibly arbitrary.

What the Market Shows

My October 2025 audit was straightforward. I visited twelve stores and recorded every distinct pouch product visible for sale at the counter. If the item matched one of the twenty ZYN products that the FDA authorized in January, it was counted as legal. Everything else was counted as illegal.

Two of the stores told me they had recently received FDA letters and had already removed most illegal stock. The other ten stores were still dominated by unauthorized products—more than 93 percent of what was on display. Across all twelve locations, about 12 percent of products were legal ZYN, and about 88 percent were not.

The illegal share wasn’t uniform. Many of the unauthorized products were clearly high-nicotine imports with flashy names like Loop, Velo, and Zimo. These products may be fine, but some are probably high in contaminants, and a few often with very high nicotine levels. Others were subdued, plainly meant for adult users. NOAT was a good example of that second group: simple packaging, oat-based filler, restrained flavoring, and branding that makes no effort to look “cool.” It’s the kind of product any regulator serious about harm reduction would welcome.

Enforcement Works

To the FDA’s credit, enforcement does make a difference. The two stores that received official letters quickly pulled their illegal stock. That mirrors the agency’s broader efforts this year: new import alerts to detain unauthorized tobacco products at the border (see also Import Alert 98-06), and hundreds of warning letters to retailers, importers, and distributors.

But effective enforcement can’t solve a supply problem. The list of legal nicotine-pouch products is still extremely short—only a narrow range of ZYN items. Adults who want more variety, or stores that want to meet that demand, inevitably turn to gray-market suppliers. The more limited the legal catalog, the more the illegal market thrives.

Why the NOAT Decision Appears Bizarre

The FDA’s own actions make the situation hard to explain. In January 2025, it authorized twenty ZYN products after finding that they contained far fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes and could help adult smokers switch. That was progress. But nine months later, the FDA has approved nothing else—while sending a warning letter to NOAT, arguably the least youth-oriented pouch line in the world.

The outcome is bad for legal sellers and public health. ZYN is legal; a handful of clearly risky, high-nicotine imports continue to circulate; and a mild, adult-market brand that meets European safety and labeling rules is banned. Officially, NOAT’s problem is procedural—it lacks a marketing order. But in practical terms, the FDA is punishing the very design choices it claims to value: simplicity, low appeal to minors, and clean ingredients.

This approach also ignores the differences in actual risk. Studies consistently show that nicotine pouches have far fewer toxins than cigarettes and far less variability than many vapes. The biggest pouch concerns are uneven nicotine levels and occasional traces of tobacco-specific nitrosamines, depending on manufacturing quality. The serious contamination issues—heavy metals and inconsistent dosage—belong mostly to disposable vapes, particularly the flood of unregulated imports from China. Treating all “unauthorized” products as equally bad blurs those distinctions and undermines proportional enforcement.

My small Montgomery County survey suggests a simple formula for improvement.

First, keep enforcement targeted and focused on suppliers, not just clerks. Warning letters clearly change behavior at the store level, but the biggest impact will come from auditing distributors and importers, and stopping bad shipments before they reach retail shelves.

Second, make compliance easy. A single-page list of authorized nicotine-pouch products—currently the twenty approved ZYN items—should be posted in every store and attached to distributor invoices. Point-of-sale systems can block barcodes for anything not on the list, and retailers could affirm, once a year, that they stock only approved items.

Third, widen the legal lane. The FDA launched a pilot program in September 2025 to speed review of new pouch applications. That program should spell out exactly what evidence is needed—chemical data, toxicology, nicotine release rates, and behavioral studies—and make timely decisions. If products like NOAT meet those standards, they should be authorized quickly. Legal competition among adult-oriented brands will crowd out the sketchy imports far faster than enforcement alone.

The Bottom Line

Enforcement matters, and the data show it works—where it happens. But the legal market is too narrow to protect consumers or encourage innovation. The current regime leaves a few ZYN products as lonely legal islands in a sea of gray-market pouches that range from sensible to reckless.

The FDA’s treatment of NOAT stands out as a case study in inconsistency: a quiet, adult-focused brand approved in Europe yet effectively banned in the US, while flashier and riskier options continue to slip through. That’s not a public-health victory; it’s a missed opportunity.

If the goal is to help adult smokers move to lower-risk products while keeping youth use low, the path forward is clear: enforce smartly, make compliance easy, and give good products a fair shot. Right now, we’re doing the first part well—but failing at the second and third. It’s time to fix that.

Author

Roger Bate

Roger Bate is a Brownstone Fellow, Senior Fellow at the International Center for Law and Economics (Jan 2023-present), Board member of Africa Fighting Malaria (September 2000-present), and Fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs (January 2000-present).

Continue Reading

Addictions

The War on Commonsense Nicotine Regulation

Published on

From the Brownstone Institute

Roger Bate  Roger Bate 

Cigarettes kill nearly half a million Americans each year. Everyone knows it, including the Food and Drug Administration. Yet while the most lethal nicotine product remains on sale in every gas station, the FDA continues to block or delay far safer alternatives.

Nicotine pouches—small, smokeless packets tucked under the lip—deliver nicotine without burning tobacco. They eliminate the tar, carbon monoxide, and carcinogens that make cigarettes so deadly. The logic of harm reduction couldn’t be clearer: if smokers can get nicotine without smoke, millions of lives could be saved.

Sweden has already proven the point. Through widespread use of snus and nicotine pouches, the country has cut daily smoking to about 5 percent, the lowest rate in Europe. Lung-cancer deaths are less than half the continental average. This “Swedish Experience” shows that when adults are given safer options, they switch voluntarily—no prohibition required.

In the United States, however, the FDA’s tobacco division has turned this logic on its head. Since Congress gave it sweeping authority in 2009, the agency has demanded that every new product undergo a Premarket Tobacco Product Application, or PMTA, proving it is “appropriate for the protection of public health.” That sounds reasonable until you see how the process works.

Manufacturers must spend millions on speculative modeling about how their products might affect every segment of society—smokers, nonsmokers, youth, and future generations—before they can even reach the market. Unsurprisingly, almost all PMTAs have been denied or shelved. Reduced-risk products sit in limbo while Marlboros and Newports remain untouched.

Only this January did the agency relent slightly, authorizing 20 ZYN nicotine-pouch products made by Swedish Match, now owned by Philip Morris. The FDA admitted the obvious: “The data show that these specific products are appropriate for the protection of public health.” The toxic-chemical levels were far lower than in cigarettes, and adult smokers were more likely to switch than teens were to start.

The decision should have been a turning point. Instead, it exposed the double standard. Other pouch makers—especially smaller firms from Sweden and the US, such as NOAT—remain locked out of the legal market even when their products meet the same technical standards.

The FDA’s inaction has created a black market dominated by unregulated imports, many from China. According to my own research, roughly 85 percent of pouches now sold in convenience stores are technically illegal.

The agency claims that this heavy-handed approach protects kids. But youth pouch use in the US remains very low—about 1.5 percent of high-school students according to the latest National Youth Tobacco Survey—while nearly 30 million American adults still smoke. Denying safer products to millions of addicted adults because a tiny fraction of teens might experiment is the opposite of public-health logic.

There’s a better path. The FDA should base its decisions on science, not fear. If a product dramatically reduces exposure to harmful chemicals, meets strict packaging and marketing standards, and enforces Tobacco 21 age verification, it should be allowed on the market. Population-level effects can be monitored afterward through real-world data on switching and youth use. That’s how drug and vaccine regulation already works.

Sweden’s evidence shows the results of a pragmatic approach: a near-smoke-free society achieved through consumer choice, not coercion. The FDA’s own approval of ZYN proves that such products can meet its legal standard for protecting public health. The next step is consistency—apply the same rules to everyone.

Combustion, not nicotine, is the killer. Until the FDA acts on that simple truth, it will keep protecting the cigarette industry it was supposed to regulate.

Author

Roger Bate

Roger Bate is a Brownstone Fellow, Senior Fellow at the International Center for Law and Economics (Jan 2023-present), Board member of Africa Fighting Malaria (September 2000-present), and Fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs (January 2000-present).

Continue Reading

Trending

X