Yes. Thank you.
I think the challenges raised by these international human rights violations—the ones that have been mentioned by the previous speakers—already set the context for that. Whenever Canada is going to be standing up about these international human rights obligations in the international community and demanding action and demanding that other countries take action on these questions, there will be a credibility deficit.
One of the things I mentioned in that context was the recent initiative around state-to-state arbitrary detention. How can Canada be speaking with a powerful international voice about the question of arbitrary detention when it has the capacity to end the arbitrary detention of Canadian citizens in northeast Syria and, unfortunately, is not taking action?
The same is true, of course, of the other example that I brought up, around a feminist foreign policy. We have a situation here in which some of the acts that Ms. Deif just mentioned could have taken place. We don't know entirely the context, but we do know that the violations they're undergoing right now are ones that include gender-based violence.
How can Canada be on the international stage promoting a feminist foreign policy when the gender-based violence that's being visited upon Canadian citizens in these camps has not been addressed? It is entirely possible for the Government of Canada to address them. This is a real credibility risk on our foreign policy, and it's something I think the subcommittee is squarely in the position to raise.