Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is hoping to beat Liberal leader Mark Carney to become Canada's next prime minister
Pierre Poilievre, a contender to become Canada’s next prime minister, has vowed to purge the country of “IRGC thugs” who, he says, feast on “stolen money from the Iranian people.” If elected on Monday, will he—or can he—deliver?
Poilievre asserted recently that about 700 operatives and affiliates of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which Canada has designated as a terrorist entity, must be tracked down and expelled.
But this was nothing new. He had expressed similar views in many speeches and interviews before. So what is different this time? How could rhetoric translate into action beyond gestural politics, built on a tenuous perception of Canada’s strategic leverage?
Poilievre and his caucus appear to have presumed that IRGC operatives would vanish the moment Canada listed the group.
Last June, when reports broke hours before the announcement, they erupted in a frenzy, lamenting the leak as if operatives were standing by the door moving assets in anticipation. Yet once the dust settled, everyone returned to their routines, leaving the world undisturbed.
With bells tolling for the Liberals after a lost decade, and the Conservatives hoping to be incoming sheriffs, they must face a deeper reality. Tehran’s reach is not a statistic but a network resistant to rhetoric. Something beyond grandstanding is inevitable.
The Myth of 700
First, one must ask: where did the 700 figure originate?
It came from an independent effort by a coalition named Stop IRGC, aimed at identifying those affiliated with the Islamic Republic who settled in Canada through legal channels. While notable, it was not government-backed and lacked security resources for verification. No intelligence assessment, inquiry, or briefing has substantiated it.
Poilievre nonetheless repeated it as fact, reducing complexity to a tally shaped by partisan urgency.
Mahmoudreza Khavari, senior Iranian official in Tehran (left) and Canada
I do not, for a second, believe the IRGC’s presence ends there. Years of inaction have turned lingering suspicion into undeniable reality. Activists, whether living in Canada or passing through, must now calculate their security risks.
Nor did operatives scramble to flee upon the listing. For Tehran’s fortune-brokers, Canada was never an obstacle. Even when the Conservative government had a chance over a decade ago to act against Mahmoud-Reza Khavari—a top Iranian banker who financed the IRGC’s missile program, embezzled billions, and fled to Canada—it turned a blind eye.
The regime and its IRGC presence are the product of sustained drift, allowing influence to fester across levels and seep into corners.
Beyond numbers: a real plan
Poilievre and his allies must recognize that strategy cannot rest on recital. A committed resolve is the only way to dismantle the IRGC’s hold. The Liberals never had one; when superficial action was taken, it collapsed under contradictions, punishing the wrong people.
A two-pronged strategy, I propose, is required to deal with the problem. First, focus on critical entities: IRGC and Basij members, operatives posing as civilians, financial networks, propaganda arms, and regime-linked organizations. Second, avoid actions that unjustly impact innocents.
A real strategy recognizes that IRGC operatives do not arrive in bloodstained green uniforms. They come as businessmen, investors, and tourists, traveling freely from the land they loot to the land where they hoard.
Any action has to hinge on the recognition that the IRGC and the Iranian state are one—indistinguishable in form, inseparable in purpose.
It is alarming that last December, an IRGC-affiliated news agency boasted of a “private sector” bypassing sanctions, especially in Canada. Individuals from a Canadian-registered nonprofit were interviewed on “innovative solutions” to do so.
This same group hosts webinars on exporting oil, gas, and petrochemical products, claiming collaboration with Iran’s Ministry of Industry—whose officials are sanctioned and banned from entering Canada for human rights violations.
Collaboration with entities sustaining the power structure of the Islamic Republic cannot be permitted under the pretense of legitimacy. Targeting the theocracy means little if you enable the institutions that sustain it.
Tehran’s playbook has long capitalized on Canada’s strategic vulnerability. The story is not about mythical figures who once slipped through. It is about a decades-old infiltration campaign that has unsettled our foundations from within.
Has Poilievre assigned the color of his cards before the real test calls?
Poilievre’s true test
If the Conservatives take power, let them not chase ghosts. Let them identify a handful of real, high-profile regime and IRGC operatives, transparently held accountable in full view of the public. That alone would shake Canada’s quiet standing as a sanctuary for tyranny’s enforcers more than any grand arithmetic of slogans.
The duplicity of senior Iranian officials in Canada offers a case study in calculated deceit—silencing hearings, disclaiming crimes, vanishing when accountability nears. Sadly, even rare breakthroughs fade under a Liberal establishment where secrecy lingers and accountability bends.
For any future leadership to set a real precedent, groundwork must begin before power is seized. Not hours before a designation. Not weeks into a mandate.
As a powerful voting bloc, the Iranian-Canadian community appears to be moving towards the Conservatives to turn the page on staged politics. For years, those in charge sold them a political vaudeville called a pie in the sky on Canada’s political Broadway.
If Poilievre plans to peddle another ticket to the same tired show, he should know: not a single seat will be sold. No more.
An Iranian newspaper close to parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibafsaid that the recent explosion at the Rajaei port in southern Iran might be a deliberate act to undermine ongoing negotiations with the United States.
In an editorial, Sobh-e No daily said that while the cause of the large blast remains officially undetermined, the timing of the incident alongside nuclear talks and threatening rhetoric from Israel warranted consideration of potential sabotage aimed at derailing diplomatic progress.
"The swift news reporting by foreign media and the creation of rumors regarding the containers that caught fire is the same scenario of disrupting the negotiation atmosphere by the Zionist regime,” read the article.
The newspaper highlighted a prior warning from Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who tweeted two days before the explosion about potential disruptive actions by Israel against the Iran-US nuclear diplomacy. Araghchi had said that Iranian security forces were on high alert for potential sabotage and assassination attempts.
“Considering the political aspects of this incident, the economic sensitivity of this port, and the history of attacks on nuclear facilities, the possibility of sabotage cannot be ignored; just as the possibility of negligence and a natural accident also exists."
Containers burning at Rajaei port, Bandar Abbas (April 2025)
Iran’s foreign ministry said on Monday that any agreement with the US must respect Tehran’s key demands, including the continuation of uranium enrichment inside the country and the effective lifting of sanctions.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told reporters at his weekly press briefing that the upcoming talks — expected to be chaired by Iran’s foreign minister and the US special envoy — follow an understanding reached in Muscat.
Baghaei stressed that Iran’s fundamental negotiating principles remain unchanged. "Entering the details of any negotiation must be within the framework of broad outlines agreed upon by both sides," he said.
"Uranium enrichment inside the country and the effective removal of sanctions are Iran’s red lines and will be pursued with seriousness."
On the ongoing visit of an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) technical team, Baghaei said the discussions would focus purely on technical issues and pending safeguarding matters.
"The visit of the IAEA technical delegation is a continuation of the discussions that took place between the Director General (Grossi) and Iranian officials, and today they will have talks with officials of the Atomic Energy Organization, and it is only technical. The discussion will be about the remaining safeguards issues,” he said.
Following the conclusion of the third round of nuclear talks in Oman on Saturday, Iran's foreign minister said IAEA experts might join the next round of talks on Saturday.
Visiting Tehran earlier in April, IAEA Chief Rafael Grossi said his agency could help achieve a positive outcome in the negotiations.
Last week, speaking at the US-based think tank Council on Foreign Relations, Grossi said Iran has enough enriched uranium to produce several nuclear warheads and could do so within months.
In 2018, Trump withdrew the US from a 2015 nuclear pact between Iran and major world powers, leading Iran to subsequently surpass that deal's uranium enrichment limits and limit the IAEA's oversight.
In February, the IAEA released a report saying the current situation is concerning as Tehran is enriching uranium to up to 60% purity, near weapons grade. Tehran has long denied seeking nuclear weapons.
Baghaei also addressed the role of European nations in the nuclear talks. "We hope the Europeans will play a constructive role," he said, adding that Iran’s continued engagement with neighboring countries and other JCPOA participants signals the Islamic Republic's good will.
When asked about the decision to exclude three European parties of the JCPOA from the talks, Baghaei said, "That was their own choice... Iran stands ready for European nations to play a role in these discussions.”
He criticized US pressure tactics beyond Iran, saying, "The maximum pressure policy is not limited to Iran; it is being pursued against other countries like China and disrupts free trade. It ultimately violates the human rights of individuals subjected to sanctions."
US President Donald Trump has threatened to bomb Iran if it does not agree to a new nuclear deal and on Sunday night, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu said: "We are in close contact with the United States. But I said, one way or the other, Iran will not have nuclear weapons."
Baghaei responded to the threats saying: "Any adventurism against Iran will face a crushing response. Western countries, especially those continuing to support this regime [Israel], must understand they are assisting an entity whose survival depends on crisis."
Baghaei confirmed that the next round of talks is planned for Saturday, warning that the process will not be fast. "Entering technical issues is time-consuming and an inseparable part of negotiations," he said. "We have said that we are serious."
He emphasized that sanctions relief must be comprehensive and includes Tehran’s access to its assets blocked in foreign banks due to US sanctions. "Effective termination of sanctions is a key term that must include a diverse set of commitments. Ensuring free access to Iran’s resources and assets is our right."
Iran and the United States opened a third round of nuclear negotiations in Oman on Saturday.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is leading Iran’s delegation. The US State Department confirmed that Steve Witkoff, the special envoy for nuclear affairs, is heading the American team, alongside Michael Anton, who previously served as National Security Council spokesman during Trump's first term as leading the American technical delegation.
“We’re having very serious meetings, and there are only two options. And one option is not a good option. It’s not a good option at all,” President Donald Trump said Friday, according to Reuters. He added, “I think we’re doing very well with respect to Iran.”
The negotiations follow last weekend’s session in Rome. Iranian officials are said to be willing to return to the technical constraints of the 2015 nuclear deal, including reactivating International Atomic Energy Agency surveillance cameras at nuclear facilities.
Under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Iran was restricted to enriching uranium up to 3.67 percent with a stockpile limit of 300 kilograms.
Following Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the accord in 2018, Iran expanded enrichment to 60 percent and accumulated more than 8,000 kilograms of uranium, while maintaining that its program remains civilian in nature.
An Iranian official participating in the negotiations told Reuters that "the only remaining point of disagreement in the general discussions and mutual understanding is the missile issue."
According to the official, Iran's position — that it would not exceed the obligations outlined in the 2015 deal and related resolution — means it would "only refrain from building missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads as a gesture of goodwill."
Both negotiating teams arrived in Muscat on Friday. Araghchi and Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi later attended the Muscat International Book Fair, where Araghchi’s Arabic-language book The Power of Negotiation was unveiled.
Witkoff traveled to Oman after meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow.
Iranian state media reported the talks were initially scheduled for one day but may be extended depending on technical progress.
The outcome could shape whether Iran steps back toward nuclear restrictions or deepens a confrontation already straining regional security.
Iran’s political and religious establishment is closing ranks to defend Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s backing of renewed negotiations with the United States, with clerics and hardliners urging the public to view flexibility as a continuation of revolutionary goals.
Khamenei on Thursday invoked a historic concession by Shia Islam’s second Imam, Hasan ibn Ali, who signed a controversial peace treaty with Mu'awiya in 661 CE. Without directly mentioning the ongoing US nuclear talks, he said the treaty was temporary and necessary to safeguard Islam’s future.
The allusion mirrors Khamenei’s 2013 justification for the 2015 nuclear deal, when he framed negotiations as an act of “heroic flexibility.” His tone marks a significant shift from February, when he denounced engagement with the United States as “unwise and dishonorable.”
Analyst Hamed Moafagh Behrouzi, in an article published Saturday by the IRGC-linked Fars News Agency, interpreted Khamenei’s recent remarks as a reaffirmation of the Islamic Republic’s unwavering path, warning against simplistic readings of tactical shifts.
He wrote that evolving methods should not be mistaken for a change in objectives, adding, “The Islamic system is exactly on the same divine path.”
Mohammad-Javad Larijani, a senior Iranian political figure, praised the decision to open talks through Omani mediation.
He called the move “shrewd” in an interview with the IRGC-linked Tasnim News Agency, saying, “Diplomacy is, in fact, at the service of the country's security, military, defense, political, economic, and cultural objectives.”
Clerics during Friday prayers echoed the recalibration. Sermons widely broadcast across Iranian media stressed the need for accurate understanding of global conditions.
Tehran’s interim Friday prayers leader Mohammad-Hassan Aboutorabi-Fard said “Without the slightest doubt, the negotiations began from a position of dignity and power.”
Further endorsement appeared in a commentary by the hardline Kayhan newspaper, which operates under Khamenei’s supervision. The article described the apparent contradiction between opposing direct US talks and later allowing indirect negotiations as “two sides of a battlefield and part of real negotiation tactics.”
“Khamenei at the time did not regard negotiations as honorable or wise but, with steadfastness like Imam Ali’s, forced new conditions upon the enemy,” added the daily.
According to Kayhan, Khamenei “humiliated Trump” by imposing and cementing several strategic frameworks, then allowed indirect talks to “disarm the American president from using any pretext to claim Iranian nuclear military activity.”
Hardline reactions, however, have not been uniformly supportive. Some ultra-conservative figures have voiced frustration, accusing sections of the establishment of weakening the Islamic Republic's position.
In further comments Thursday, Khamenei appeared to address internal dissent, warning, “Our loose lips, our failure to help, our needless protests ... can sometimes have an impact. One must be very careful.”
Commentators noted that while Khamenei’s authority remains unchallengeable, dissatisfaction lingers among hardliners. “He is trying to warn and to provide a rationale (for his decisions) to his radical supporters,” US-based analyst Ali Afshari told Iran International TV.
Mostafa Pourmohammadi, a veteran conservative and former minister, separately defended Khamenei’s decision on Friday, likening negotiations to a real estate bargaining process where success depends on patience and strategy.
Taken together, the coordinated messaging from political insiders, clerics, and IRGC-linked outlets signals a broader effort to shield Khamenei’s shift from criticism.
The United States urged Syria’s interim authorities to prevent Iran and its allied groups from exploiting the country’s territory, while Iran accused Washington of worsening Syrians' suffering through sanctions, during a UN Security Council meeting on Friday.
"We will hold Syrian interim authorities accountable for the following steps to fully renounce and suppress terrorism, adopt a policy of non-aggression to neighboring states, exclude foreign terrorist fighters from any official roles, prevent Iran and its proxies from exploiting Syrian territory," said Dorothy Shea, the Deputy US representative to the United Nations in New York.
Iran’s representative Amir Saeid Iravani, in turn, said US sanctions were worsening the suffering of Syrians and hampering reconstruction.
Iran supports free elections and the formation of an inclusive government in Syria, Iravani added, calling for the immediate withdrawal of all foreign forces from Syria.
The Iranian envoy also warned that the presence of foreign forces undermines the country’s sovereignty and delays peace efforts.