In the days since Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced in the country’s parliament that he was privy to “credible allegations” of links between “agents of the Indian government” and the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, the bilateral relationship has unsurprisingly been on a rapid downward spiral.
New Delhi has denied these allegations. But Trudeau has stayed with his charges, invoking human rights and the rule of law, as he mounts an attack on India on the global stage. Both countries have reduced their diplomatic presence in each other’s territory, and disturbing reports have emerged of racial and xenophobic slurs against migrants and Canadians of Indian origin.
Canada has asked India to cooperate on an investigation into the matter and Delhi has said it would “look into” any “specific information” shared with it. This seeming willingness to at least consider working together to resolve the matter might be something to build on. And yet, it also begs the question: Where’s the evidence, PM Trudeau?
The problem at the heart of the current impasse is this: Ottawa wants to focus on the unproven charges in this case while Delhi is pointing to the larger context of Canada’s unacceptable tolerance for militant separatist groups that have been linked with terrorist attacks in India over decades.
India, like Canada, is a democracy with a constitution that enshrines human rights, including free speech and the rule of law. These principles cannot be used — as Trudeau seems to be doing — as a fig leaf for vote bank politics and to protect criminal and terrorist groups.
For the better part of two decades, Delhi has expressed concerns over the pandering to, and haven for, Khalistani groups in Canada, especially under the rule of the Liberal Party. These groups are a minuscule minority of the Sikh community in Canada.
The impunity they enjoy is perhaps explained by the fact that, by being well-organised and through strategic voting, they are widely believed to have electoral influence in 20-25 constituencies in Canada. Then there’s the support for the minority Liberal Party government from Jagmeet “Jimmy” Dhaliwal’s New Democratic Party: Dhaliwal has openly pro-Khalistan sympathies.
Delhi’s strong reaction to the unsubstantiated accusation is understandable. It must now work to ensure that Ottawa’s diplomatic offensive does not dent India’s growing ties with the Anglosphere and the West. Delhi must make its case, and ensure that its wider concerns are communicated, especially to the English-speaking world. But in the end, it is in both countries’ interest to arrest the slide, and work towards addressing issues in good faith.
