A series of allegations of foreign state-backed murder on Canadian soil, deteriorating relations with an Indo-Pacific nation of strategic importance to the West, and a multicultural society with unique characteristics and politics.
This tangled web of issues has caused alarm and elicited rhetoric from different sides, while also raising questions on what course of action our leaders should take in the diplomatic spat between India and Canada.
The Background
Men with turbans are a familiar sight in British Columbia’s farming communities, from the vegetable farms of the Lower Mainland to the orchards of the Okanagan. The long history of Sikhs in Canada has led to their widespread integration at all levels of society, from the agricultural sector to the upper tiers of public office.Within a smaller subsection of the community in Canada there is a movement to carve out an independent Sikh state in northern India called Khalistan. The movement has become somewhat subdued within India over the years, but has been getting more prevalent among the diaspora abroad.
The movement has also been mired in acts of violence. Among the most famous are the 1984 assassination of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in retaliation for the government’s Operation Blue Star that resulted in the killings of Sikh activists, and the 1985 Air India bombing, the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history.
India has accused Canada of being too lenient with the Sikh separatist movement. Canadian leaders have said that while acts of violence are unacceptable, they can’t deny freedoms to those acting legally in Canada.
But the movement’s presence has been more visible thanks to its supporters’ organized efforts, whether it’s about mobilizing the community, fostering government relations, or attracting public support to the cause.
The Allegations
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dropped a bombshell in the House of Commons on Sept. 18, 2023, just as Parliament was resuming after the summer break, saying there is “credible” intelligence that the killing of Canadian citizen and Sikh separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar that summer was linked to the agents of the government of India.Trudeau told the Foreign Interference Commission in Ottawa on Oct. 16 that in the immediate aftermath of Nijjar’s killing, the initial assessment was that it was “gang-related or criminal-related” and that there was no “obvious, immediate international nexus” to it.
But after a “number of South Asian members of Parliament” relayed messages from the community that the murder must be connected to the government of India, he said, he approached Canada’s intelligence agencies.
“We actually asked the intelligence agencies, and it turned out they were doing this anyway,” Trudeau said. “In late July, early August, I was briefed on the fact that there was intelligence from Canada, and possibly from Five Eyes allies, that made it fairly clear, incredibly clear, that India was involved in this.”
Asked at the commission on Oct. 16 if he thinks the “highest levels of the Indian government” were involved in the alleged crimes or whether it was just a few rogue elements, Trudeau said that’s the question his government has been asking the government of India to assist in answering.
The Confrontation
After Canada announced the allegations against India on Oct. 14, the United States was noticeably quiet, with the U.S. State Department saying on Oct. 15 only that it takes the allegations seriously, without commenting further. Washington eventually joined other allies in issuing statements urging India to cooperate in the investigations.MacKay says that in his observation, the response by Canada’s allies has been “rather muted” when compared to past crises.
“Unlike what we have seen in the past, where allies would be quick to rally to Canada’s side, not seeing that this time,” he says. “In the case of the ‘two Michaels’ and [Chinese leader] Xi Jinping, the United States was working quite closely with us behind the scenes, and I think there were others, including the Australians as well as the UK.”
He says this could be because Canada’s allies may be thinking that they have their own important relationship with India that they need to preserve, and may not be supportive of Ottawa’s very public approach to the issue.
MacKay says there are many areas where relations with India are important for Canada as well. This includes trade relations and Canada’s attempts to diversify its markets and to “pivot away from China,” as well as other considerations.
“There’s the economic aspect, but there’s also the important historical and regional relationship where they’re located in the world. Obviously, we are both Commonwealth countries, G20 countries. There is this large diaspora. There is an impact on universities, education exchanges,” he says.
MacKay says it’s very concerning if a country is engaging in criminal activity on Canadian soil—if what Canadian officials have said is proven to be true in the justice system. But he says the key word is “allegedly.”
“This is really a question of our justice system, the rule of law, the presumption of innocence, and the ability to produce evidence. And much of that, I fear, has been overtaken by the politics of this matter,” he says.
He adds that the very public nature in how the matter has been dealt with has been counterproductive.
“If you seek the support of a foreign government, India or any other government, it’s much easier to get that support if you haven’t already stood up in a very public way, under privilege in the House of Commons, and accused them of having been responsible for the murder,” he says.
“It’s kind of like trying to unscramble an egg, to after the fact ask them for their assistance, saying, ‘We think you did it. We’ve said this to the world now, help us prove that you did it.’”
Conrad Winn, political science professor at Carleton University, says sectarian relations are very complex in India. And while the country has a right to maintain its territorial integrity, it wouldn’t have the right to engage in violence on Canadian soil for that purpose, if the allegations are true.
“Most Canadians would be upset by political violence in Canada,” he told The Epoch Times.
Winn says the matter of going so public with the India allegations may have had the intention of distracting public opinion from the issue of the government’s handling of China’s interference efforts. But even then, he says it has the benefit of deterring any further criminal activity if the allegations are true.
Maharaja points out that, when similar allegations arose in the United States, the situation unfolded differently.
Before the DOJ indictment was unsealed, India announced on the same day that it had set up a high-level inquiry into the issue and that it took the allegation seriously.
Part of the reason for the very different response India has afforded to the United States, Maharaja says, is that America is a superpower and countries can’t afford to take an antagonistic stand toward it, while Canada’s approach to foreign policy in recent years has diminished its stance on the world stage.
But the other part of it has been how U.S. authorities have gone about the allegations, he says.
After the public announcement of the allegations last November by law enforcement officials, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Washington takes the issue very seriously and that it had already discussed it with Indian officials in prior weeks.
‘More Principle’
Maharaja says a fundamental problem in Canada is that national politics may often get mired in diaspora-related politics, which could come at the cost of sacrificing broader visions and principles for the country.“Our politics is diaspora-focused,” he said. “A leader is someone who, once they are convinced on one thing, they will stick to it.”
MacKay says the way to avoid falling into such pitfalls is by demanding more accountability from leaders.
“[We should be] injecting more principle and calling out leaders, putting forward greater expectation of accountability for leaders,” he said.
