Report Secret Canadian Cabinet Memo Says ‘pro-israel’ Lobby is Exaggerating Effect of Arab Boycott O

A secret Canadian Cabinet memorandum affirms that a working team of the Ministry of External Affairs has informed the government that the “pro-Israel lobby (in Canada) has been exaggerating the effect on Canadian companies of the Arab boycott against Israel.” Furthermore, the memorandum states that “the boycott is an emotional issue and the inclusion of non-commercial contracts is repugnant to many Canadians.” This is believed to be a reference to advertisements appearing in Canadian newspapers placed by Arab companies offering contracts for projects in those countries but specifying that Moslems should apply for jobs in such projects.

The disclosure of this memorandum was made Friday by the Toronto Globe and Mail. There was no indication as to whether the memorandum identified “the pro-Israel lobby.” While there was no immediate comment from government sources on the memorandum as published in the newspaper, Allan MacEachen, Minister of External Affairs, said Friday in a statement in Ottowa that the Cabinet will make a decision by early fall regarding government policy concerning the Arab boycott.

The memorandum, as published by the Toronto daily, also said that “pro-Israel lobbyists have complained that by not taking steps to protect Canadian companies from pressures to include boycott clauses in business contracts with Arab countries, the government is encouraging the boycott.”

Many Canadian Jewish organizations have protested the government’s lack of action on the issue. The report included a list of 119 Canadian firms Blacklisted by the Arab Boycott League because their activities are deemed to support Israel economically or politically.

WARNS AGAINST ISOLATED MOVE

The memorandum, as reported by the newspaper, suggested four approaches the government could take to mitigate the impact of the boycott, but warned that if Canada acted on its own in opposing the boycott without similar stands by other western countries, “too strong a stand would probably provoke the Arab states and seriously undermine Canadian trade and economic activities there.” The memorandum declared, according to the newspaper, that “a boycott policy must be consistent with our policy of balance and objectivity towards the Arab-Israeli dispute.”

The memorandum continued that if the Canadian stand was too strong and was seen by the Arabs as “pro-Zionist,” retaliation could be expected “in view of the Kuwaiti finance minister’s recent statement to the effect that Kuwait was prepared to end all economic dealings with the United States if the United States introduces legislation forbidding American firms from complying with boycott terms. If Kuwait, a relatively moderate supporter of the boycott, is willing to cut all economic ties with the United States, the largest single supplier to the Kuwaiti market and an important customer, one can be reasonably certain they (Kuwait) will take action against Canada.”

Continuing, the memorandum reportedly stated: “If this action is followed by all members of the Arab League and takes the form of a complete embargo of Canada, Canada will stand to lose a multi-million dollar market (approximately $163 million in 1975, alone) and an important source of crude oil (approximately 40 percent of Canada’s oil imports were from the Arab world in 1975). The loss of this market and the loss of this source of oil would probably have serious effects on the Canadian economy in the nature of oil shortages and unemployment.”

The action recommended as the mildest among the four possible approaches the government might take would be forbidding the support of contracts containing provisions discriminating against a racial, religious or ethnic group and reaffirming that in Canada’s economic system, choosing trading partners and contracts is generally the responsibility of individual private firms.

The memorandum, declaring this would “avoid endangering commercial relations with Arab countries” by a stance “less severe than that of the United States,” warned that even such a relatively mild step “might expose Canadian firms to more severe boycott action” than they face at present.