In the annals of international diplomacy, crises often emerge slowly, building like a storm on the horizon. But occasionally, relations between two nations deteriorate in a fiery flash, leaving the world gaping at the scorched ruins of what was once a stable, if not particularly close, partnership. The latest diplomatic skirmish between India and Canada is precisely such an episode. It has been a rapid descent to the nadir, with accusations of state-sponsored assassination and the conspicuous role played by the curious political theater of Justin Trudeau.
The recent expulsion of diplomats by both nations marks a culminating moment in a crisis that has steadily worsened with the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Khalistani activist and Canadian citizen, on Canadian soil in June last year.
Trudeau’s initial allegations in September, that Indian intelligence was involved in Nijjar’s murder, had triggered a firestorm. Trudeau’s fiery claims that India is engaged in “coercive behavior” and “violent acts” raises troubling questions about his approach to global diplomacy and the broader issue of Canada’s domestic handling of pro-Khalistan activism.
New Delhi has long been troubled by Canada’s perceived leniency toward pro-Khalistan elements, with India accusing Trudeau’s government of allowing a safe haven for separatist and extremist voices, largely unchallenged by Canadian authorities.
The Trudeau government’s insistence that India’s actions constitute a fundamental violation of Canadian sovereignty and international law is striking, not only for its sharp rhetoric but also for the sheer magnitude of the claim: that India orchestrated the extrajudicial killing of a Canadian citizen on foreign soil.
Such accusations are marked by sheer absence of compelling, public evidence. India has repeatedly denied any involvement, dismissing Trudeau’s allegations as “preposterous” and accusing Canada of pursuing its diplomats in a smear campaign designed for domestic political consumption.
The current crisis is not without precedent. In fact, tensions between India and Canada have simmered for years, with the Khalistan issue acting as the fault line. Trudeau’s tenure as Prime Minister has seen multiple flashpoints in this regard, often rooted in Canada’s significant Sikh diaspora, which includes both moderate and more extreme voices supportive of Khalistan.
One of the earliest diplomatic contretemps between Trudeau and India occurred in 2018, during Trudeau’s much-hyped official visit to India. Ostensibly a goodwill tour, the trip quickly became mired in controversy after it was revealed that a convicted Khalistani terrorist, Jaspal Atwal, had been invited to a formal dinner hosted by the Canadian High Commissioner. Atwal had been convicted of the attempted assassination of an Indian politician in British Columbia in 1986, and his presence on the guest list sent shockwaves through diplomatic channels.
The Atwal affair was far from the only instance where the Trudeau government found itself at odds with India over Khalistan. Pro-Khalistan rallies in Canadian cities have long vexed India. In 2020, we again raised concerns about the increasing visibility of Khalistan activists in Canada, many of whom openly called for the secession of Punjab from India. Trudeau’s government, however, cavalierly framed these protests as an expression of ‘free speech’, disdaining India’s urgency to view it as an existential issue of national security.
Trudeau’s politics have long been a study in bizarre contrasts. He projects himself as a preening panjandrum of liberal values, a torchbearer for multiculturalism, and a leader with a flair for high-profile grandstanding on the world stage.
Yet, all this show is to pander to his domestic base as Canada’s significant Sikh population, particularly in British Columbia, where pro-Khalistan sentiment is notably vocal. By taking such a hard line against India, Trudeau has been shoring up his political position at home, where he faces growing challenges on multiple fronts. Yet, this high-risk strategy threatens to burn bridges that may not be easily rebuilt.
Compounding the diplomatic friction was the farmers’ protest in India during 2020–2021, which saw significant support from the Sikh diaspora in Canada. Trudeau, in an opportunistic move aimed at placating his constituency, openly commented on the protests, expressing ‘concern’ for the farmers’ right to peaceful protest. New Delhi lashed out at Trudeau’s remarks, calling them “unwarranted” and warning of the potential damage to diplomatic ties.
India under the Modi government has made it clear that the rise of Khalistani activism in Canada as a non-negotiable issue.
What happens next in this bitter saga is anyone’s guess. The expulsion of diplomats is a potent symbolic move, but it may only be the first in a series of escalations that will deepen the divide. India has already taken steps to reduce cooperation with Canada on issues of trade and security, and further economic and political decoupling may follow. For Canada, the costs could be significant. India is a growing power, both economically and geopolitically, and alienating one of the world’s most important emerging markets could be a misstep Trudeau may come to regret.
Comments